Aug 20 2008
Self-censorship to preempt possible violent reaction by Muslims
Once again we have a case of censorship upon us. It seems that book publishers don’t want to offend Muslims. It matters little that the manuscript has been well received; edited; advances paid for. Books, movies and even simple cartoons depicting the Muslim Muhammad in any way as a mere mortal are forbidden. When Muslims read or watch or view these things, they act like madmen. They take to the streets and riot; they set fires, throw stones, make threats, harm and kill people. Perhaps the Religion of Peace should be made to read these books as punishment.
NEW YORK — A racy, historical novel based on the Prophet Muhammad’s child bride A’isha was supposed to hit book stores in the U.S. Tuesday.
But in a rare case of self-censorship to preempt possible violent reaction by Muslims, one of the world’s largest publishing houses pulled the plug on the book just before its release date.
Sherry Jones, author of The Jewel of Medina, said she received word from Random House Inc. that the book’s release would be “postponed indefinitely.” The decision came after copies of her book were sent to stores, her book tour was scheduled and her work of fiction was accepted by the Book of the Month Club (it was scheduled to be in the August selection).
“My book is a respectful portrayal of Islam, of A’isha, of Muhammad. And anyone who reads it with [an] open mind will come away with an understanding of Islam as a peaceful religion,” said the American author.
Well someone’s open eye has been shut. Hmm. I wonder who?
“We felt an obligation to take these concerns very seriously. We consulted with security experts as well as with scholars of Islam, whom we asked to review the book and offer their assessments of potential reactions,” the release stated.
But Jones questions the 11th-hour balk.
“I’m going to tell you there are no terrorist threats against Random House. There was never received any terrorist threat,” she told FOXNews.com.
“By saying that Muslims will be violent, that they can’t intelligently discuss this book, it’s disrespectful to Muslims,” Jones said. “To me, it feels racist for them to say that someone will try to attack them, that someone will try to go after me.”
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if a Muslim threatened or went after Ms. Jones. Not at all. That’s how they are.
Terrorism expert Steven Emerson head of The Investigative Project on Terrorism said Random House’s decision to scrap the book sets a dangerous precedent for freedom of speech.
“This is one of the most despicable episodes of appeasement,” Emerson told FOXNews.com. “You can intimidate publishing and media to not publish anything critical about Islam, and just by an indirect threat of not being happy about it.”
I agree…this is not good. Setting the standards for the future by means of censorship is wrong. And it could come back to bite us.
5 Responses to “Self-censorship to preempt possible violent reaction by Muslims”
And what’s next? Some book Nancy Pelosi’s not happy about? Or the Kennedy clan? This sets dangerous precedent in so many ways…
Very interesting contrast with the controversy several years ago regarding The Last Temptation of Christ. As I recall, that movie (based on a previous novel) also featured a sexual fantasy regarding the founder of a major religion. That film, like The Jewel of Medina also evoked protests from a number of Christian groups.
However, none of the Christian groups threatened violence against the film maker. The response to these non-violent Christian protests was to accuse them of attempted censorship, and the industry rallied behind the film makers in defense of “free speech” and “artistic expression”, etc.
On the other hand, Random House cravenly abandoned “free speech” and “artistic expression” in the face of criticism from certain followers of “the religion of peace”.
Personally, I think that those groups of Muslims and Christians who protest these perceived blasphemies should heed the advice of Gideon’s father to his townspeople and let God protect His interests (Judges 6:25-31):
Nonetheless, I do find this self-censorship of perceived criticism of Islam concurrently with promotion of attacks on traditional Christian beliefs to represent a disturbing double standard, which has disturbing implications for the future of Western democratic values of free speech and vigorous public debate.
Christianity in the West is considered part of the “establishment”, whereas Islam is the perceived minority religion with grievances. To attack a minority is just not politically correct, but fighting the establishment of which all grievances can be traced back to (in the minds of the liberals), that’s hip and progressive.
That and there aren’t very many Christian groups actively participating in terrorist activities to force compliance with their wishes…
And intend to agree with you CT, that God is a big boy, and He can take care of any slights to Him and His own, I am not necessarily going to do much with my puny mortal self…
Check out what Irshad Manji had to say about the censorship of The Jewel of Medina. It wasn’t a Moslem who objected, but rather an American professor and the University of Texas.
Salman Rushdie, author of The Satanic Verses weighed in too.
Seeing yet another example of worry over whether or not some muslim nutjobs will be offended makes me want to vomit. I have to remind myself what country I grew up in, because it appears to be getting warped in an extreme fashion by those loony folks on the left. Didn’t they learn from the examples of Cuba, the USSR, and China? Idiots. :letsroll: