Wire services sometimes file stories labeled “odd”; it means something strange or unusual has happened deserving our attention. You read it, shake your head and move on.

Today Al-Watan newspaper carried a report, which I think belongs in this category: “The dean of teachers college in Taif has made a decision to stop publishing the results of some students and deny them any paper work they need. Now of course this only applies to ‘students with long hair and strange haircuts’.”

The vice-dean told the paper that the decision was final and it is in line with the college’s policy of training and preparing teachers who are going to be in charge of younger students. Those teachers should possess good manners and follow Islamic teachings.

Every institution should have its laws and regulations. Nobody can question that, but when these laws are used to force people into following a certain conduct it becomes another matter.

To withhold the results of those students and deny them their paper work at the end of the school year and do it at a time when they want to apply for jobs and admissions in other institutions is nothing short of blackmail. If the students do not follow the rules, then there must be some ways and actions that are appropriate to deal with the situation. However, to take it as an “offense” and use it to blackmail those students is not “educational” — something which the college is supposedly doing. All it does is to teach those students the basics of blackmailing — something they can practice when they become teachers.

Actually, there are many sides to this report. First there is the accusation that those students are violating the Islamic teachings, and then there is a reference to the binding rules of the college, which the students agreed to follow when they sought admission.

Nothing unusual about the first accusation, because we in Saudi Arabia do have a way of labeling as un-Islamic anything we do not like. Some things warrant this characterization but most others do not, and at the end of the day it remains a disputable proposition.

According to the vice-dean, some of those students said that they were following the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) example, as the men during his time sported long hair. The vice-dean dismissed that as a “flimsy excuse”.

Now is it too much if we expect the vice-dean to be consistent in what he says? If he is talking about Islamic teachings, then he should not reject what the students said in their justification. After all they are not crossing the line here. In addition, what this argument reveals is the trap that people fall into when they make religion the basis of their arguments, whether it is about looks or appearances.

What those people miss is that religion is mostly about values. What people wear is mostly left to them and depends on social mores of the day. Apart from prohibiting men from wearing silk and gold, Islam leaves people to deal with their own daily lives so long as decency and modesty is maintained in the matter of dressing.

The only point that the college has on its side is that the rules of the college demand a certain code in personal appearance and they should find a way of making sure it is followed, but how to do that is a tricky question. Using religion to enforce the code is the easiest, but the danger is sometimes this can lead to denial or violation of other’s rights.

This argument goes beyond strange hairstyles and long hair. Some would defend it; others may object to it.

•Art and Politics: During the last few days, British newspapers have been devoting so much space to discuss Tony Blair’s years in 10 Downing Street, his achievements and mistakes. But I want to describe how the arts depict or treat Blair’s legacy. Through the past year, the art world in Britain has dealt with Blair extensively. He was featured in major exhibitions such as The Royal Academy’s summer exhibition, where the drawing “Iraq Triptych” was the center piece drawing a lot of public attention. The painting depicted Blair in the midst of Iraq war horrors and his exit in disgrace from Downing Street.

Playwrights staged a mock trial of Blair for his role in the war, which also was the subject of a TV film, and cartoonists arranged exhibitions on the same subject. It is hard to ignore those events as they show how public opinion is against the war and they demonstrate how public figures are not above criticism.