Community Magazine November 2009

Somehow, disapproving of another reli- gion has become illegal on the grounds of “inciting hatred and discrimination.” Following the judge’s order, Dutch pros- ecutors filed hate speech charges against Wilders in January of this year. The next month, Wilders was denied entry into England. A similarly sorrowful ordeal was endured by the popular Canadian colum- nist and author Mark Steyn, who writes regularly about the menacing threats of radical Islam. Last year, Steyn, together with the board of Maclean’s magazine, was brought by the Canadian Islamic Congress before several Canadian human rights commissions. The accu- sations had to do with an article Steyn published in Maclean’s entitled, “The Future Belongs to Islam.” The article, which warned of the growing demo- graphic threat of Islam, was viewed as “flagrantly Islamophobic” and as sub- jecting Canada’s Muslim population to “hatred and contempt.” The complaints were dismissed, but the Ontario Human Rights Commission, while claiming it had no jurisdiction to hear the case, conceded that the article in question was “Islamophobic” and accused Steyn of “promoting prejudice.” The case was also brought before Canada’s federal Human Rights Commission (CHRC), which likewise dismissed the complaints. In response, Maclean’s applauded the decision but decried the vulnerability of writers and publishers to this kind of suffocating legal intimidation: “And we continue to have grave concerns about a system of complaint and adjudication that allows a media outlet to be pursued in multiple jurisdictions on the same complaint, brought by the same complainants, sub- jecting it to costs of hundreds of thou- sands of dollars, to say nothing of the inconvenience.” The Islamists and their supporters have succeeded in manipulating two of the free world’s cardinal values to suit their needs: free speech, and mul- ticulturalism. They rely on free speech to unabatedly spew their anti-Western diatribes, and appeal to multicultural- ist sympathies to silence their critics, accusing them of prejudice. The result is free reign for the Islamists to dis- seminate their teachings, while their opponents are forced to keep quiet. The First Islamist Victory “When I tell people that America has already begun to enact Sharia law, they look at me like I’m crazy,” says Ibrahim Haddad, a Lebanese-born professor of Islamic Studies. “But when I ask them to name one major US newspaper that printed the Muhammad cartoons instead of bowing to the Muslim law against such depictions, they pretty much fall silent – because none did.” Haddad points out that while books like the Da Vinci Code – a fictional story about the secret lineage of Yeshu – were regarded by many devout Christians as highly offensive, no major bookstore pulled them off the shelves. In contrast, fic- tional books like the Jewel of Medina , which are not in any way offensive to Muslims, are effectively banned, “as if by an Islamic leader’s religious decree.” Though laws against offending Islam may not be officially legislated in America, Haddad contends that the de facto policy among all US publishers to self-censor these materials out of fear from radicals is virtually indistinguish- able from the Sharia laws on the mat- ter in theocratic Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia. In effectively curtailing Americans’ first amendment rights, “the Islamists have succeeded in beheading the consti- tution,” Haddad concludes in a colorful analogy. “Whether publishers are silenc- ing their writers because of legislation or fear, the result is the same: one of our most precious liberties has already been lost to Islamist intimidation.” Post Script In light of this new reality, it should come as no surprise that the decision to run this piece was made amid extreme hesitation. Having received threats in the past, Community Magazine has instituted additional security measures prior to the publication of this story, including the arming of certain staff members. These precautions notwithstanding, numerous revisions were made to tone down this article somewhat so as not to raise the ire of those who would resort to violence. And like so many other American magazines, the infringement of our free speech rights was palatable as we concluded that the pictures of Muhammad that are discussed in this article dare not be published here, out of fear for the personal safety of our staff. Nov. 19, 2007 Grayson Perry , a Turner Prize winner and former London Times columnist, admitted: “I’ve censored myself. The reason I haven’t gone all out attacking Islamism in my art is because I feel real fear that someone will slit my throat.” Mar. 28, 2008 LiveLeak.com , the British internet site that hosted the Geert Wilders film Fitna , seen by over 3.6 million persons, replaced the film after one day with an explicit cry against censorship: “Following threats to our staff of a very serious nature, and some ill informed reports from certain corners of the British that could directly affect the safety of some staff members, Liveleak has been left with no other choice but to remove Fitna from our servers… This is a sad day for freedom of speech on the net, but we have to place the safety and well being of our staff above all else… We stood for what we believe in, the ability to be heard, but in the end the price was too high.” Apr. 2, 2008 British Broadcasting Corporation was accused by English comedian and writer Ben Elton of giving in to Muslim pressure. He talks of: “the genuine fear that the authorities and the community have about provoking the radical elements of Islam. There’s no doubt about it, the BBC will let vicar gags pass but they would not let imam gags pass.” He said the BBC might pretend that this hesitancy had something to do with moral sensibilities. “But it isn’t. It’s because they’re scared.” Aug. 13, 2009 Yale University Press bowed to pressure in their decision not to print the Mohammad cartoons in a book about the subject. Patricia Cohen provides details in “Yale Press Bans Images of Muhammad in New Book”: Yale University Press consulted two dozen authorities, including diplomats and experts on Islam and counterterrorism, and the recommendation was unanimous: The book, The Cartoons That Shook the World , should not include the 12 Danish drawings that originally appeared in September 2005. What’s more, they suggested that the Yale press also refrain from publishing any other illustrations of the prophet that were to be included. 38 COMMUNITY MAGAZINE