- Karpal Singh's Death: A picture of grief at the hospital
- Karpal Singh's Death: Tiger of Jelutong’s lust for political trailblazing
- Karpal Singh's Death: "I told him to only go back this morning", says Gobind
- Paloh assemblyman, son injured, wife killed in accident
- Karpal Singh's Death: Bukit Gelugor MP killed in crash, son injured
- S. Korea Ferry Incident: Pix gallery day 2
- Karpal Singh's Death: Tributes pour in
- MH370 Tragedy: Approach may be reviewed if no concrete evidence: Hishammuddin
- Karpal Singh's Death: He was St Xavier's Institution most illustrious son
- Karpal Singh's Death: Lorry driver relates fatal accident
- Plane may be intact on seafloor, says expert
- Karpal Singh's Death: Coffee with less sugar, Karpal's favourite - Shop owner
- Karpal Singh's Death: Karpal's residence filled with mourners
- Karpal Singh's Death: Karpal's body arrives in Penang residence
- MH370 Tragedy: US denies MH370 'cover-up' More
The New Straits Times dated 2nd May 2012 published by us contained at page 6 an article entitled “Observer Under Scrutiny” with a sub-title “Impartiality Questioned: Anti-Islam Australian Lawmaker Comes Under Fire”. The Australian Lawmaker referred to in the article is Mr Nicholas Xenophon.
This article contained, amongst others, the following statement:
1. In a speech made in the Australian Parliament on 17.11.2009, Mr Xenophon was critical of Islam and came out openly in support of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issue.
2. Mr Xenophon is reported to have said in his speech that “What we are seeing is a worldwide pattern of abuse and criminality. On the body of evidence, this is not happening by accident; it is happening by design. Islam is not a religious organisation. It is a criminal organisation that hides behind its so-called religious beliefs.”
3. Mr Xenophon therefore questioned whether Islam deserved any support.
We hereby confirm that we have made a grave error in publishing the statements in the article. We accept that in his speech in the Australian Parliament referred to in the article, Mr Xenophon did not use the word “Islam” and neither did he assert that Islam is not a religious organisation but a criminal organisation hiding behind its religious belief.
For the above reason, we hereby retract all the statements contained in the article against Mr Xenophon and unreservedly and unconditionally apologise to him for any distress or embarrassment caused by the article.
As a further mark of our contrition, we have also removed the article from our online version of the newspaper with immediate effect.