I thought we had freedom of speech and freedom of the press in this country.

I forgot - we're living under Sharia law!

Anyone know of an address to pester Random House with?

Posted by: tanstaafl at August 6, 2008 8:26 AM

Random (House) Acts of Dhimmitude.

Posted by: MarisolJW at August 6, 2008 8:57 AM

"Says Ms. Spellberg: "I walked through a metal detector to see 'Last Temptation of Christ,'"

Since there were no incidents of violence associated with this movie, either this is not true or the theater was doing this only for publicity.

"I don't have a problem with historical fiction. I do have a problem with the deliberate misinterpretation of history. You can't play with a sacred history and turn it into soft core pornography."

So Ms. Spellberg gives "The Last Temptation" a free pass because it is "historical fiction."? Give me a break!

Given Ms. Spellberg's publishing history, I assume she teaches gender studies at her college. I know only too well how people teaching these "therapeutic studies" think given an incredibly stupid class my wife took last year (American Studies) which consisted mostly of race, class and gender literature. The biggest irony of the class is that even though the class included some radical feminist literature, one of the readings defended an anthropologist who believes that female genital mutilation is OK! Unsurprisingly, the instructor did not know this until my wife brought it up on an internet discussion forum. I wish I could have seen the look on her face as the instructor tried herself in dialectical knots trying to defend her idiotic stance!

In effect, Ms. Jones should have known better than to appeal to someone who teaches gender studies. They are notorious for their double standards against the West.

Posted by: Pavlov's dog at August 6, 2008 9:22 AM

First of all, freedom of speech refers only to governments. Private companies are under absolutely no obligation to support freedom of speech. Secondly, is Random House run by idiots? Couldn't anyone not see this, especially in this day and age. Masses of Muslims poised to attack absolutely everything and no one could see this, especially a book by a Western woman on love and intrigue in Mo's harem? The author has to be an idiot as well. Perhaps roofs should have signs: Do not jump off as you might hurt yourself landing on the ground.

This is not to say that the author should have complete freedom to write what she wants and a publishing company to print it, but crikey! Do they read newspapers?

Posted by: Seymour Paine at August 6, 2008 9:29 AM

Mr. Paine, perhaps you meant to say, 'This is not to say that the author should not have complete freedom to write what she wants and a publishing company to print it...'?

Posted by: Vee at August 6, 2008 9:36 AM

There was a time when publishers were fully cognizant of the truth about Islamic culture and were not afraid to express that truth. Rummaging through a pile of used books some time ago, I came across a swashbuckling paperback novel published in Great Britain in 1946 with the raunchy name of "Sir Naked Blade" by Philip Lindsay. It is based on an incident of a revolt by captured Christian galley slaves led by an English mariner named John Fox in Alexandria 1577. It pulls no punches in describing the degrading nature of Muslim culture - slavery and the harem. It would make a great film, but of course, no one would dare republish such a work in our pusilanimous era.

Posted by: RBLA at August 6, 2008 9:40 AM

"It would make a great film, but of course, no one would dare republish such a work in our pusillanimous era."
-- from a posting above

See Giles Milton's non-fictional "White Gold" about Thomas Pellow, a Cornishman kidnapped by Muslim raiders and taken back, as a slave, to Morocco.

Posted by: Hugh at August 6, 2008 9:45 AM

Satanic Verses was perhaps the last fiction book on the subject. No mas.

Posted by: yankee imp at August 6, 2008 9:51 AM

Says RBLA: "There was a time when publishers were fully cognizant of the truth about Islamic culture and were not afraid to express that truth. Rummaging through a pile of used books some time ago, I came across a swashbuckling paperback novel published in Great Britain in 1946 with the raunchy name of "Sir Naked Blade" by Philip Lindsay. It is based on an incident of a revolt by captured Christian galley slaves led by an English mariner named John Fox in Alexandria 1577. It pulls no punches in describing the degrading nature of Muslim culture - slavery and the harem. It would make a great film, but of course, no one would dare republish such a work in our pusilanimous era."

I am reading White Gold at this moment, and if you're interested, C.S. Lewis did a masterful skewering of Islam and all it's ways in one of the Chronicles of Narnia....The Horse and His Boy: The story of a slave child running away from Calormen. He meets up with Aravis, who is fleeing an arranged marriage. The evil, and somewhat silly red bearded Prince Rabadash wishes to wage war on Narnia because Susan rebuffs his romantic overtures.
I had read the story as a kid, but never saw the Islamic imagery until I recently read it again last year.

Posted by: Jewel Atkins at August 6, 2008 10:05 AM

On April 30, Shahed Amanullah, a guest lecturer in Ms. Spellberg's classes and the editor of a popular Muslim Web site, got a frantic call from her. "She was upset," Mr. Amanullah recalls. He says Ms. Spellberg told him the novel "made fun of Muslims and their history," and asked him to warn Muslims...."
-- from the article above

"Ms. Spellberg" is "Denise Spellberg, an associate professor of Islamic history at the University of Texas in Austin. Ms. Jones put her on the list because she read Ms. Spellberg's book, "'Politics, Gender, and the Islamic Past: The Legacy of 'A'isha Bint Abi Bakr.'"

Forget the parody-of-itself comical fashionableness of academic title and topic --"Politics, Gender, and the Islamic Past: The Legacy of 'A'isha Bint " -- reeking of the time and place -- and focus instead on Ms. Spellberg and her attitude. She's frantic, she's worried, she's so deeply solicitous of Muslim sensibilities that she calls up Mr. Amanullah to warn him in advance, and by the sound of it, may even wish to whip up Muslim opposition to this work of historical fiction.

Ms. Spellberg might have simply expressed her own doubts about its worth, or might have passed on the obvious consideration: we know that Muslims have no conception of free speech as we understand it, and by their atrocious behavior in many cases in Europe, including the diplomatic and economic boycott of Denmark, and the death threats issued against all Danes, unless and until the Danish government "punished" the offending editors at Jyllands-Posten. But apparently she did not do this, or did much more than this: she frantically called Mr. Amanullah to warn him, to give him a heads-up, so that he might already begin organizing the troops, the storm-troops of Muslim intimidation.

She needs to re-read, Ms. Spellberg, in famously self-consciously laid-back defender-of-rights-against-right-wing-Texas-troglodytes Austin, the First Amendment. And those of her colleagues -- or at least those on the faculty, because her immedidate colleagues may well think as she thinks, given how hiring and promotion by and among members of MESA Nostra (google "MESA Nostra" for more, and don't fail to enter the "MESA Nostra Contest") is now conducted all over the Academic Archipelago these unappetizing days.

Her behavior, and the attitudes it reveals, need to be held up for inspection. Inspection, discussion, and ridicule.

Posted by: Hugh at August 6, 2008 10:15 AM

Given this excerpt from the book, I'm ready to say good riddance:

"The novel, for example, includes a scene on the night when Muhammad consummated his marriage with Aisha: "the pain of consummation soon melted away. Muhammad was so gentle. I hardly felt the scorpion's sting. To be in his arms, skin to skin, was the bliss I had longed for all my life."

That by the way is the raping of a nine year old girl. Gentle? Yeah right on.

Now, if someone wishes to record the historical truth of the above in something other than Harelquin romance novel terms, let's talk.

Posted by: johnb at August 6, 2008 10:38 AM

If Ms Spellberg's sensitivities aren't ready for fiction, just imagine her reaction to Sex,Sharia and Women in the History of Islam by Mariwan Halabjee which describes:

". . . how Islam and Sharia law are allegedly used to oppress Muslim women. "I wanted to prove how oppressed women are in Islam and that they have no rights," said Mr. Halabjaee. "My book is based on Islamic sources such as the Holly Quran, Muslim and Bukhari books and many more." Mr. Halabjaee was forced to flee to Norway from Iraqi Kurdistan because the Islamic League of Kurdistan issued a "conditional" fatwa to kill him if he did not repent and apologize for writing his book. The "conditional" nature of the fatal fatwa was uncertain at best. Mr. Halabjaee reported, "the mullahs and scholars said if I go to them and apologize they will give me 80 lashes and then refer me to the fatwa committee to decide if I am to be beheaded. They might forgive me, they might not."

Posted by: heroyalwhyness at August 6, 2008 10:43 AM

I guess the Supreme Court ruling that it isn't child porn unless it involves actual children would somehow apply to this book had Random actually gone through and published this book. Don't know how the law would apply to a person long since dead. If we have any law scholars out there, might be an interesting discussion to have with colleagues. That issue aside, it is still interesting that they bowed to pressure under the guise of muslim sensibilities. Even more telling is that it involves a professor from a middle east department. Not surprising is that the professor was from TU.(in non Texas parlance, that would be University of Texas) If the left want to dhimmi-fy themselves, by all means do so. Then they could go a live in the middle east and rail against the Jews and the West. Wait, are dhimmis allowed to have an opinion under Sharia? Hmmmm..... Just wish they wouldn't try and drag the rest of us with them.

Posted by: Kevin at August 6, 2008 11:05 AM

Yes, that is what I meant. The idiocy of Random House and the bizarre naivete of the writer are just dazzling.

Posted by: Seymour Paine at August 6, 2008 11:08 AM

"See Giles Milton's non-fictional "White Gold" about Thomas Pellow, a Cornishman kidnapped by Muslim raiders and taken back, as a slave, to Morocco."

I may have overstated the case slightly; I'm glad to see that some publishers and authors of fiction remain unintimidated. However, willingness to write such works is much less now than it was 40 or 50 years ago.

Wouldn't it be nice to see contemporary films dealing with the historical record of Islam in an honest way? For decades we have been inundated with Hollywood productions ripping America for its racism, but they have been mute when it comes to the much longer and more horrible historical record of Islam. There are many events in Muslim history that could be honestly dramatized -such as the fall of Constantinople in 1453. Maybe some of Hollywood's minority of conservatives could focus on such projects. Perhaps Mel Gibson could be induced to forego his obsession with Jews for a while and produce something relating to the enslavement and persecution of his fellow Christians at Muslim hands.

Posted by: RBLA at August 6, 2008 11:10 AM

The historical fiction is very likely crap. So what?

Posted by: Hugh at August 6, 2008 11:14 AM

The harems and sex slavery of White Gold is horrific stuff to read. None of the gentleness, skin on skin, dreams being fulfilled crap in this book.

Posted by: Jewel Atkins at August 6, 2008 11:18 AM

"studied scholarly works about Aisha's life, and came to admire her protagonist as a woman of courage."

Aisha grew up to be a violent defender of Islam, even fighting battles (against other Muslims too, what came to be Shiites). If she were alive today, she'd probably be a suicide bomber.Seems like the author isn't much less deluded than the people offended by her writing.

Posted by: DenverRodeo at August 6, 2008 11:44 AM

I wonder when Ms. Jones reverted.

Posted by: aynrandgirl at August 6, 2008 12:51 PM

Let it never be forgotten that Igarashi, the Japanese translator who was murdered in teh Statnic Verses episode, was a lifelong Islamophile. He undertook the translation as part of an equally long career of exposing the Japanese to the wonders and splendors of Arab, Persian and Muslim culture.

Let that aspect never be forgotten because it says everything about the dhimmi who is more a threat than the Muslim, who is only following his or her Koran, Hadith and Prophet:s sunna.

Posted by: tokyobk at August 6, 2008 2:03 PM

Remember Hitoshi Igarashi
by Frans Groenendijk

18 June 2006

Unlike some other people, I do remember that although Salman Rushdie himself was not killed because of the fatwa against him by the despicable Khomeini, several translators of his book "Satanic Verses" were attacked and the Japanese translator of the book was killed.

Until recently I did not know the exact date he was slaughtered or even his name.

He was murdered on July 11.

I would like to make July 11 a day for worldwide vigilance towards the threat of islamofascism. This year it will be 15 years ago that this peaceful islamic scholar was brutally murdered. So 2006 is a good year to start with this day.

Mr Igashari was not an average victim of the islamofascists.

The reason why I looked for Mr Igarashi's name in the first place was in relation with the Danish cartoons. Via Yahoo I found this quote:

"In Beirut, the leader of Lebanon's Shiite Hizbollah said the row would never had occurred if a 17-year-old death edict against British writer Salman Rushdie been carried out."

An outrageous statement indeed but it was not the quote itself but what the news source added that appalled me most: "Rushdie went into hiding and was never attacked."

The extremes of this wishful thinking approach continue to amaze me. He was never attacked?. He lived in hiding for many years, even muslim suggesting to raise the fatwa have been beaten up and lost their jobs and last year the Iran islamofascists declared the death sentence on British author Salman Rushdie is still valid - 16 years after it was issued.

The military organisation, loyal to Iran 's supreme leader, said the order was "irrevocable", on the eve of the anniversary of the 1989 fatwa.

The order was issued after publication of Mr Rushdie's novel "The Satanic Verses", condemned as blasphemous.

Iran 's reformist government has in the past distanced itself from the fatwa.

Without thinking much about the subject I somehow supposed that Mr Igarashi was "just" a translator not objecting to translate this specific book. If Mr Igarashi had been an average guy not thinking too much about the sensibilities of the islamofascists the murder would have been disgusting too. But reading a little on the background of Mr Igarashi the story is so much sadder and more instructive.

According to this source ( http://www.raglanroad.org/weblog/archives/000698.html) he opposed absolute freedom of speech and even somehow justified the fact that Khomeini came up with this act of spreading international terrorism:

"Hitoshi Igarashi was stabbed in the face and arms until he died on Tsukuba University 's campus in Ibaraki on July 11 1991.

Igarashi, 44, the translator of Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses, is believed to have been murdered by an Iranian Shia muslim carrying out the fatwa issued by the Ayatollah Khomeini.

Igarashi, known to be one of Japan's leading young Islamic scholars, a man who had lived in Iran, decided to translate Satanic Verses to act as a mediator between Khomeini (and the Muslim world) and Rushdie.

Igarashi's position was that both sides were right: Khomeini was justified in issuing the fatwa on Rushdie by virtue of his position in the Muslim clerical hierarchy; Rushdie, he argued, could be located in the lineage of mystical Sufi thought, and seen as not anti-Islamic but rather, as an Indian moved to England, more like a writer of the literature of exile, and thus not unlike Muhammad.

Igarashi's translation was not an attempt to force the Muslim world to accept the Western value of freedom of expression in an absolute form. It was a third-party effort to show common, middle ground, in order to end the conflict."

For his search for common ground, a kind of search that is suggested almost everyday now in media and politics in the Netherlands and other western countries as the right approach towards islamofascism, he paid with his life."

Posted by: Hugh at August 6, 2008 3:26 PM

Sherry Jones can self publish her work, thats the route a lot of authors take who can't get or use a major publisher.

That said, its no great loss since Jones who is a Muslim herself wrote it to whitewash Maniac Mo and his raping of a 9 year old girl.

As for Spellberg her response is typical of the leftist, American hating trash that infests our universities and colleges.

Posted by: waltc at August 6, 2008 3:39 PM

WSJ -

"She thinks there is a very real possibility of major danger for the building and staff and widespread violence," Ms. Garrett wrote. "Denise says it is 'a declaration of war . . . explosive stuff . . . a national security issue.' Thinks it will be far more controversial than the satanic verses and the Danish cartoons.

Funny how no other religion would consider a novel on their main players “a declaration of war” but in Islam this is normal, and accepted by Ms. Garrett as normal implicitly. This is one more indication how Islam is NOT a religion, nor is it a ‘religion of peace’ as they coyly tell us kufr. Better this way, make it clear so even the most dull witted will understand Islam is NOT a religion, and deal with its “declaration of war” appropriately. Cartoon riots revisited? Again?

Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at August 6, 2008 3:55 PM

Is it possible Ms Spellberg is upset because Muhammad was portrayed as being too nice and gentle?

How can one really know? Considerate men are something Gender Studies suggest/preach, do not exist. While Islam hates a false depiction of the Prophet.

If there had been Hair pulling and Slapping in place of the nicie nice, would this book get published without the fuss?

Posted by: flowerknife_us at August 6, 2008 5:39 PM

Hugh rightly if wistfully suggests Giles Milton's "White Gold" would make a terrific film.

In that same category must rank Ernle Bradford's "The Great Siege: Malta 1565" which recounts the great victory by a small force of the Knights of St John and the inhabitants of Malta over the full might of the Ottoman navy.

Should play to capacity houses in Istanbul, where, incidentally, I saw queues out on the street a few years back waiting to get into Gibson's "Passion of Christ".

Posted by: MBR at August 6, 2008 7:06 PM

No more Random House books for me!

Posted by: joeblough at August 6, 2008 8:20 PM

From the article:

Starting in 2002, Spokane, Wash., journalist Sherry Jones toiled weekends on a racy historical novel about Aisha, the young wife of the prophet Muhammad. Ms. Jones learned Arabic, studied scholarly works about Aisha's life, and came to admire her protagonist as a woman of courage. When Random House bought her novel last year in a $100,000, two-book deal, she was ecstatic. This past spring, she began plans for an eight-city book tour after the Aug. 12 publication date of "The Jewel of Medina" -- a tale of lust, love and intrigue in the prophet's harem.

"Young wife"?

Please! The "man" that all men should admire was "interested" in a four year old, and THAT MAN got his way with her when she was only nine.

Wife? You've got to be freaking kidding me.

And please, DO NOT tell me this was "the gig" back then.

"Lust and Love"?

Again, what normal man has love, let alone lust for a post toddler?

Remember, "The Prophet" was in his late 40s, early 50s when his "love" for Aisha was sanctioned by the Almighty, yet non existent, Allah.

Let's all cut to the chase and declare Muhammad a creep, pedophile, cult master and maniac.

Male cult masters ALWAYS start with sex, then declare PROFIThood and finally CONTROL.

In this day and age if some man did the same thing as Muhammad, he'd be eliminated from society -- recent news abounds with plenty of examples.

Posted by: Aiken Bryce at August 6, 2008 9:06 PM

Aiken Bryce - your message on YouTube:

Mohammed the Pedophile, youtube video

Posted by: heroyalwhyness at August 6, 2008 9:28 PM

"a $100,000, two-book deal..."
-- from the article above

Okay, what's the other book?

Posted by: Hugh at August 6, 2008 10:40 PM

This is not right. Is there another publisher that can pick this book up?

Heck - I was horribly offended by the DaVinci Code, but I didn't threaten violence or wanted the book pulled.

The Christian solution: Write a book arguing against the thesis of the DaVinci Code.

The Muslim solution: Threaten violence.

Hmmm...

Seriously - how can we make Random House understand that their decision is unacceptable?

Posted by: Monkeywho at August 6, 2008 11:18 PM

Shh. Don't say it out loud, but Random House also publishes Dante's Inferno. If depictions of Mohammad having sex with his wife might set off a storm of violence from certain parties (so dire were the possibilities Random House suspended publishing the work), imagine what those same parties might do if they knew Random House published books depicting Mohammad in hell.

Better buy them quick (RH has about a half a dozen different translations and formats), before RH pulls them from the market.

Posted by: CJ at August 7, 2008 12:04 AM

Ms. Jones now has a number of options open. First, by all means, approach other publishers. There could be more than one that would publish it. With full publicity given to the Moslem threats there could be a "banned-in-Boston" effect that would greatly boost sales. With the right advertising and a judicious selection of reviewers, it could be a best-seller.
Second, she could self-publish. But that would probably mean only a fraction of the sales, since she would be foregoing the publicity apparatus of a real publisher.
Third, she could go to the contemporary version of samizdat: simply post it in a number of places on the internet, and let the websites and blogs run with it.
Fourth, she could re-write it slightly: place it in the 12th or 13th century; make Aisha a young Norman or French girl of noble family accompanying her father or brother on one of the Crusades; and replace Mo with some Saracen prince who is smitten by the child's beauty and vows to make her the centerpiece of his harem.

Posted by: ebonystone at August 7, 2008 12:11 AM

Before this gets out of hand here in the US (or are we already too late?), why don't we start contacting publishers and retail booksellers that we will boycott them unless this stops right now!

Posted by: I_am_me at August 7, 2008 12:33 AM

Hey! You can buy "Sir Naked Blade" in Turkey!

http://arama.gittigidiyor.com/?IS0_210=0&IS1_211=0&ShowCombo=1&TumItemSpecs=1&ara=Tekrar+ara&ara.x=1&ara.y=1&aramabitecek=&aramabitmis=&aramabolge=&aramafiyat1=&aramafiyat2=&aramakategori=k&aramakelime=blade&aramasatici=&aramasira=eda&aramayeni=&search_type=detail&secOzel=1&secili_kriterler=1

Quick.. let them in the EU!! /sarc off

Posted by: Ummah Gummah at August 7, 2008 1:47 AM

Perhaps Regnery would publish the book.

Posted by: MadAggie at August 7, 2008 9:19 AM

MBR

I wrote a letter to one of Australia's major film directors, placing the story of the Great Siege of 1565 under his nose, and begging him to take it and do it justice. Pray that he will!

A Polish group has been working on a film about the Victory At Vienna in 1683. The website looked good. I haven't been able to find out how far along they are.

In the meantime - try poking around on the internet and see if you can find a copy of the classic black and white 1940s Australian film called "Forty Thousand Horsemen" (the climactic scene of which, is the cavalry charge that took Beersheba in 1917). The Australian Film Archives might be able to sell you a dvd. It should lift your spirits.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at August 7, 2008 9:33 AM

To be followed by the biography of the Jewish sex slave who poisoned Mohammad's mutton?

Posted by: profitsbeard at August 7, 2008 6:47 PM

And wouldn't this supressed-by-Random House novel about Mohammad's rape of a 9 year old child be banned as kiddie porn if published?

Posted by: profitsbeard at August 7, 2008 6:58 PM

At first this story reminded me of the hapless lady who allowed her Mahometan students to name a teddy Mohamad, then I saw one poster who mentions that the author has embraced the ROP.

Which reminds me that most of what passes for Muslim high culture are the works of recent converts or people living under Islam before Islam is fully ulemad.

Posted by: stickman at August 7, 2008 7:09 PM

Censorship in all its forms must be rejected. But I'm not sure whether this book does anything for the cause.

this book of fiction does not contribute in any way to educating the wider public to what Islam is all about and things like this are anything but useful in understanding the Islamic threat:

"The novel, for example, includes a scene on the night when Muhammad consummated his marriage with Aisha: "the pain of consummation soon melted away. Muhammad was so gentle. I hardly felt the scorpion's sting. To be in his arms, skin to skin, was the bliss I had longed for all my life."

There is enough fiction out there to fill the worlds oceans. We don't need any more rubbish, but cold hard analysis of Islam as a political system.

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at August 8, 2008 6:19 PM