Blasphemy

THE GRAND DUCHESS. We are so decayed, so out of date, so feeble, so wicked in our own despite, that we have come at last to will our own destruction.
STRAMMFEST. You are uttering blasphemy.
THE GRAND DUCHESS. All great truths begin as blasphemies.

Annajanska, The Bolshevik Empress (1918)
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)
[Project Gutenberg]

News and commentary on free speech cases and blasphemy law apologetics, including articles on the Fallaci affair, the Houellebecq affair, the Kilroy-Silk affair, Blunkett's proposed law to "ban incitement to religious hatred", the Will Collins affair, the murder of Theo van Gogh and the Pope affair. For articles on the Danish cartoon affair, see below.

Note that this collection of articles concentrates on free speech cases in Western countries.

See also:
"Image of Muhammad" - News and commentary on the Danish cartoon affair.

July 2004 - November 2006
June 2002 - June 2004

 

June 2004
"Why I've changed my mind on vilification laws" (Amir Butler, The Age, 2004/06/04)
"The moral decay of Australia" (Peter Costello, The Age, 2004/06/01)

May 2004
"St. James of Compostela" (University of Washington)
"Church to remove Moor-slayer saint" (BBC News, 2004/05/03)

April 2004
"Islamic pride and prejudice" (Aminul Hoque, Independent, 2004/04/12)

April 2004
"The Florentine Boar" (Derby Arboretum)
"The Boar War; Muslims angry at plan to bring back historic statue of wild pig" (Mail on Sunday/CNN Money, 2004/03/21)

January 2004
"In Europe, Is It A Matter of Fear, Or Loathing?" (Robin Shepherd, The Washington Post, 2004/01/25)
"Kilroy-Silk agrees to quit BBC in face-saving deal" (Matt Wells, The Guardian, 2004/01/17)
"The Brian Whitaker rules" (Brian Stephens, The Jerusalem Post, 2004/01/15)
"We are falling under the imam's spell" (Mark Steyn, The Daily Telegraph, 2004/01/13)
"Talk about double standards" (Stephen Pollard, Evening Standard/stephenpollard.net, 2004/01/13)
"Kill-roy! Kill-roy! Kill-roy!" (Richard Littlejohn, The Sun, 2004/01/13)
"Kilroy strikes back" (The Jerusalem Post, 2004/01/11)
"BBC chiefs accused of 'double standards' over TV presenter" (Fiona Govan and Chris Hastings, The Sunday Telegraph, 2004/01/11)
"Kilroy-Silk is right about the Middle East, say Arabs" (Ibrahim Nawar, The Sunday Telegraph, 2004/01/11)
"Kilroy 'regrets' anti-Arab comments" (BBC News, 2004/01/10)
"Freedom of Speech... but only if you don't upset the Guardian reading classes" (Perry de Havilland, samizdata.net, 2004/01/09)
"BBC halts Kilroy for race 'rant'" (BBC News, 2004/01/09)
"Kilroy-Silk investigated for anti-Arab comments" (Brian Whitaker, The Guardian, 2004/01/08)
"We owe Arabs nothing" (Robert Kilroy-Silk, Sunday Express/AEMJ, 2004/01/04)

December 2002
"Italian firebrand takes her fight to the 'Islamo-fascists'" (Sarah Baxter, The Sunday Times, 2002/12/15)

November 2002
"Pro-hunting writer held in cell after race claims" (Neil Tweedie, The Daily Telegraph, 2002/11/20)
"French court rejects popular anti-Islam book ban" (Reuters/alertnet.org, 2002/11/20)

October 2002
"Italian author slams Islam's 'hate' for West" (Tom Carter, The Washington Times, 2002/10/23)
"French author cleared of race hate" (BBC News, 2002/10/22)
"Oriana's Screed" (Rod Dreher, National Review, 2002/10/10)
"Fallaci goes on trial for anti-Muslim book" (Elizabeth Bryant, UPI, 2002/10/09)
"Gagged in Paris" (Salman Rushdie, The Washington Post, 2002/10/02)

September 2002
"Vichy Thought Police" (Michael Radu, FrontPageMagazine, 2002/09/20)
"Calling Islam stupid lands author in court" (Paul Webster, The Guardian, 2002/09/18)
"French author denies racial hatred" (BBC News, 2002/09/17)
"Author on trial over Islam 'insult'" (BBC News, 2002/09/16)

August 2002
"Author sued over Islam 'insult'" (BBC News, 2002/08/22)

June 2002
"Detail of Giovanni da Modena's 1415 fresco..." (artnet)
"'Islamic plot' to destroy cathedral fresco" (Bruce Johnston, The Daily Telegraph, 2002/06/24)
"Effort to ban anti-Islam book fails in France" (The Washington Times/hss.fullerton.edu, 2002/06/22)

 

"Why I've changed my mind on vilification laws" (Amir Butler, The Age, 2004/06/04)
"As someone who once supported their introduction and is a member of one of the minority groups they purport to protect, I can say with some confidence that these laws have served only to undermine the very religious freedoms they intended to protect.":
"The problem is that as long as religions articulate a sense of what is right, they cannot avoid also defining - whether explicitly or implicitly - what is wrong.
If we love God, then it requires us to hate idolatry. If we believe there is such a thing as goodness, then we must also recognise the presence of evil. If we believe our religion is the only way to Heaven, then we must also affirm that all other paths lead to Hell. If we believe our religion is true, then it requires us to believe others are false.
Yet, this is exactly what this law serves to outlaw and curtail: the right of believers of one faith to passionately argue against or warn against the beliefs of another.
It is obvious that criticism of one's religion is likely to offend, but just as Muslims should be entitled to aggressively criticise other faiths, likewise those same faiths should be afforded the right to voice their concerns about Islam.
The idea that such speech - regardless of how wrong-headed or offensive it might appear - must be banned to protect these religious communities is a furphy: discrimination on the basis of religion was already outlawed; incitement to commit violence was already illegal; and slander was already covered by existing legal instruments.
All these anti-vilification laws have achieved is to provide a legalistic weapon by which religious groups can silence their ideological opponents, rather than engaging in debate and discussion."

"The moral decay of Australia" (Peter Costello, The Age, 2004/06/01)
An "edited extract from the Treasurer's address to the National Day of Thanksgiving commemoration service at Scots Church in Melbourne on Saturday night":
"Tolerance under the law is a great part of this tradition. Tolerance does not mean that all views are the same. It does not mean that differing views are equally right. What it means is that where there are differences, no matter how strongly held, different people will respect the right of others to hold them.
I mention this because The Age reported (May 10, 2004) that my appearance at this service has been criticised by the Islamic Council of Victoria. According to the president of that council, by speaking here I could be giving legitimacy to parties that the Islamic Council is suing under Victoria's Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001.
It is not my intention to influence those proceedings. But nor will I be deterred from attending a service of Christian thanksgiving. Since the issue has been raised I will state my view. I do not think we should resolve differences about religious views in our community with lawsuits between the different religions. ...
It is different if a religious leader wants to advocate violence or terrorism. That should be an offence - the offence of inciting violence, or an offence under our terrorism laws. That should be investigated by the law enforcement authorities who are trained to collect evidence and bring proceedings.
But differing views on religion should not be resolved through civil law suits."

"St. James of Compostela"
(University of Washington)
"Santiago de Compostela. The violent image of St. James of Compostela crushing a defeated Moor epitomizes the way Spaniards conceived their religious identity for nearly a thousand years. ... St. James (Santiago), the brother of St. John, had, according to legend, been buried in Spain. In the IXth century his body was providentially discovered at Compostela and the shrine became the most celebrated place of pilgrimage in the whole of Europe. His appearance in battles against the Moors was an established part of the myth of Spanish history."

"Church to remove Moor-slayer saint" (BBC News, 2004/05/03)
"A statue in a Spanish cathedral showing St James slicing the heads off Moorish invaders is to be removed to avoid causing offence to Muslims.
Cathedral authorities in the pilgrim city of Santiago de Compostela, on Spain's north west coast, plan to move the statue to the museum.
Among the reasons for the move is to avoid upsetting the "sensitivities of other ethnic groups".
The statue of St James "the Moor-slayer" is expected to be replaced by one depicting the calmer image of St James "the Pilgrim", by the same 18th century artist, Jose Gambino.
The Saracen-slaying image of St James, or Santiago in Spanish, is a symbol of the fight between Christianity and Islam and the reconquest of Spain from eight centuries of Moorish rule before 1492. ...
Cathedral authorities insist the timing of the decision has nothing to do with the 11 March bombings in Madrid, which an Islamic group is alleged to have carried out." (See also, for example: "The Boar War; Muslims angry at plan to bring back historic statue of wild pig" (Mail on Sunday/CNN Money, 2004/03/21))

"Islamic pride and prejudice" (Aminul Hoque, Independent, 2004/04/12)
Hoque "spent three months gauging the mood of young Muslims on the streets of Britain" for a BBC documentary. He opens the article with this allegation: "The attack on the Twin Towers; the train bombings in Madrid; the discovery of ammonium nitrate: these are just three of the reasons why Islam is being demonised by sections of the British media."
Really? Which sections exactly? But Hoque doesn't bother to give any examples. For Chomsky, "Western anti-Arab racism is so extreme that it often isn't even concealed, because it isn't noticed; it's like the air we breathe." His only example is settler propaganda in Galilee.
He might be right about the air, because I have a hard time coming up with even one example of Western anti-Arabism, at least outside Israel, since 9/11. Perhaps Ann Coulter or Robert Kilroy-Silk qualify, but that's about it. And note that Kilroy-Silk was sacked because of his criticism of Arab regimes.
In fact, though racism and xenophobia certainly still are prevalent in the West, contemporary Western culture is as certainly less afflicted with it than ever in its history.
On the other hand, there are daily outrageous examples of Eastern demonization of the West, "Eastern anti-Western racism", bigotry and extreme xenophobia. A current example is of course the taking of hostages from virtually any foreign country in Iraq:

"But as I walked the streets talking to hundreds of 15- to 30-year-old Muslims for a BBC radio documentary, it became all too apparent that there is a tiny - and I must reiterate, tiny - minority who are taking the religion of Islam to a sinister new level. And this small fringe element, which includes the radical al-Muhajiroun organisation, is making its presence felt more strongly than ever. They openly advocate terror, regard Osama Bin Laden as a "scholar of Islam" and their radical and militant views strike a chord with the impressionable, angry and frustrated youth of East London and other urban centres. ...
Most worryingly, my research opened up my eyes to the fact that people whom I know very well - friends, family, colleagues - possess opinions that are enough to send shivers down the spines of most people. These are ordinary people who have well-paid jobs, are educated and seem very pleasant in conversation.
During a secret al-Muhajiroun conference in Euston that attracted more than 600 men and women, I was greeted with a friendly tap on my shoulder by a close cousin of mine. To see him at this conference, organised by a group who openly support terrorist acts outside of the United Kingdom, was shocking to say the least. He is family-orientated, has a very good job and travels around the world."

(Hat tip: Tim Blair. See also: "Arab countries' attitudes towards Jews, Israel" (Noam Chomsky, zmag, 2001[?]/07/30), "This Is War - We should invade their countries" (Ann Coulter, National Review, 2001/09/13) and "We owe Arabs nothing" (Robert Kilroy-Silk, Sunday Express/AEMJ, 2004/01/04))

"The Florentine Boar"
(Derby Arboretum)
"This sculpture is the most significant of all the Arboretum's sculptures, frequently described in the local press as "One of Derby's best loved works of art" and is fondly remembered by thousands of Derbeians who are eagerly awaiting its promised return."

"The Boar War; Muslims angry at plan to bring back historic statue of wild pig" (Mail on Sunday/CNN Money, 2004/03/21)
"For more than 100 years it stood proudly as the centrepiece of England's oldest public park before being decapitated during a Second World War air raid.
Now a row has broken out after plans to replace Derby's historic Florentine Boar statue were abandoned for fear of offending Muslims, whose religion considers pigs to be 'unclean'.
A replica of the statue, a crouching wild boar, was intended as the jewel in the crown of a Pounds 5 million National Lottery- funded restoration of the city's Arboretum Park.
But councillors have called for the proposal to be scrapped amid sinister warnings that the statue would be vandalised or stolen.
The Florentine Boar statue stood from 1840 until 1942 when it was beheaded by a German bomb. But it was last week branded 'offensive' during a meeting of Derby Council's minority ethnic communities advisory committee.
Councillor Suman Gupta, a Labour representative for Derby's Derwent ward, told the meeting: 'If the statue is put back in the Arboretum, I have been told it will not be there the next day, or at least it won't be in the same condition.
'We should not have the boar because it is offensive to some of the groups in the area.' The park is in an area known for its large Pakistani community." (Hat tip: The Corner.)

"In Europe, Is It A Matter of Fear, Or Loathing?" (Robin Shepherd, The Washington Post, 2004/01/25)
Shepherd on the Kilroy-Silk affair: "As crude as Kilroy's comments were, the virulent reaction to them was far out of proportion to his actual sin. The full text of his remarks reveals that his quarrel was with Arab governments and those religious leaders who use their positions to whip up a frenzy of anti-Western sentiment among their peoples. His phrasing is careless and smacks of generalization. But surely this is small justification for hounding a man out of his job, let alone threatening to jail him. The swiftness of Kilroy's demise points to something more than a simple scrap over political correctness. It's a symptom of a new European reality: surging growth among Muslim populations and establishment nervousness over how to deal with them — a nervousness that threatens to stifle much-needed debate over events in the Middle East and Muslim integration at home." (See also: "Kilroy-Silk agrees to quit BBC in face-saving deal" (Matt Wells, The Guardian, 2004/01/17))

"Kilroy-Silk agrees to quit BBC in face-saving deal" (Matt Wells, The Guardian, 2004/01/17)
Dhimmitude in Londonistan: "The axe fell on Robert Kilroy Silk's 17-year career as the doyen of daytime TV talkshow hosts last night, when the BBC finally secured his resignation for making anti-Arab comments. After a marathon eight-hour meeting, a face-saving deal was reached in which the former Labour MP's production company will continue to make the programme, but he will step down as its presenter.
In a joint statement with the BBC, Kilroy-Silk claimed the decision to quit was his and the BBC said it may work with him again, but the Guardian understands that most BBC executives were determined he should not return." (See also: "Kilroy-Silk investigated for anti-Arab comments" (Brian Whitaker, The Guardian, 2004/01/08). Here's the original Sunday Express column: "We owe Arabs nothing" (Robert Kilroy-Silk, Sunday Express/AEMJ, 2004/01/04), in which it's clearly stated in the very first paragraph that Kilroy-Silk's target is "despotic, barbarous and corrupt Arab states" rather than Arabs per se.)

"The Brian Whitaker rules" (Brian Stephens, The Jerusalem Post, 2004/01/15)
Whitaker vs. Kilroy-Silk: "There was a touching meditation in The Guardian the other day by Brian Whitaker, the paper's Middle East editor, on the subject of racism and stereotypes, racist Arab stereotypes in particular. "People happily write and say racist things about Arabs that they would not dream of saying about blacks and Jews," he says, "and usually they get away with it." ...
So now let's talk about Brian Whitaker's sense of restraint.
According to Whitaker, Israeli setters are best described as "thieves and brigands," who "live on stolen land and have been known to shoot Palestinian neighbors for quietly going about their own business picking olives." As for Palestinian attacks on settlers, these can be excused because settlements are "quasi-military targets." ...
And so on. An archival search of the Guardian's Web site lists 711 of Whitaker's articles. I trolled through the first 240. I did not find a single article about suicide bombings against Israelis, except tangentially. Israeli victims of terror – the murdered, the bereaved, the maimed – escape his notice. ...
His characterization of Israelis is every bit as one-sided and caricatured as Kilroy-Silk's is of Arabs. Indeed, it is infinitely more so. Kilroy-Silk may have written crassly, but what he says is abundantly substantiated by the UN's 2002 Arab Human Development Report, written by a team of Arab scholars led by former Jordanian Deputy Prime Minister Rima Khalaf Hunaidi." (See also: "Another rule for the Arabs" (Brian Whitaker, The Guardian, 2004/01/12))

"We are falling under the imam's spell" (Mark Steyn, The Daily Telegraph, 2004/01/13)
Kilroy III: "But it's not really about Kilroy or Paulin or Jews, or the Saudis beheading men for (alleged) homosexuality, or the inability of the "moderate" Jordanian parliament to ban honour killing, or the fact that (as Jonathan Kay of Canada's National Post memorably put it) if Robert Mugabe walked into an Arab League summit he'd be the most democratically legitimate leader in the room. It's not about any of that: it's about the future of your "multicultural" society.
One reason why the Arab world is in the state it's in is because one cannot raise certain subjects without it impacting severely on one's wellbeing. And if you can't discuss issues, they don't exist. According to Ibrahim Nawar of Arab Press Freedom Watch, in the last two years seven Saudi editors have been fired for criticising government policies. To fire a British talk-show host for criticising Saudi policies is surely over-reaching even for the notoriously super-sensitive Muslim lobby.
But apparently not. "What Robert could do," suggested the CRE's Trevor Phillips helpfully, "is issue a proper apology, not for the fact that people were offended, but for saying this stuff in the first place. Secondly he could learn something about Muslims and Arabs – they gave us maths and medicine – and thirdly he could use some of his vast earnings to support a Muslim charity. Then I would say he has been properly contrite."
Extravagant public contrition. Re-education camp. "Voluntary" surrender of assets. It's not unknown for officials at government agencies to lean on troublemaking citizens in this way, but not usually in functioning democracies." (See also: "Kilroy-Silk 'Trying to Defend the Indefensible', Says Race Equality Chief" (Neville Dean, PA/The Scotsman, 2004/01/11))

"Talk about double standards" (Stephen Pollard, Evening Standard/stephenpollard.net, 2004/01/13)
Kilroy II: "His treatment has instead become a symbol of the hypocrisy which infects our liberal establishment, and of the double standards which govern the way it operates.
There are some countries and people one can condemn with impunity. But lay into others and you should prepare to be visited by the vengeance of polite society.
Attack America as a genocidal empire bent on world domination and you will be lauded for your sagacity. Argue that Americans as a nation are ignorant and brutal and you will merely be demonstrating your civilised values. ...
Clearly the BBC, acting like reservoir of the liberal establishment it is, has no problem when one of its best known cultural commentators calls for Jews to be shot. Pointing out, however, as Mr Kilroy Silk has, that that there is another side to the story is a grotesque offence against a decent world view and grounds for instant action."

"Kill-roy! Kill-roy! Kill-roy!" (Richard Littlejohn, The Sun, 2004/01/13)
Kilroy I: "The BBC has agreed to reinstate Robert Kilroy-Silk after suspending him for describing Arabs as "suicide bombers, limb amputators and women repressors".
But he has had to agree to new producer guidelines designed to prevent him causing offence to anyone. This column sat in on his comeback show. ...
KILROY: ... My next guest is from al-Muhajiroun. What would you like to say to the viewers, sir?
AL-MUH: September 11 2001 was a towering day in history — a mighty blow against the Great Satan. It is the duty of the faithful to rise up and join the jihad. ... Can I just mention that we're holding a recruiting drive in Tipton on Tuesday?
KILROY: Of course you can. I'm from Birmingham, by the way. (Turns to camera). And don't forget, if you're watching at home, if you'd like to make a donation to Hezbollah In Need just ring the number at the bottom of your screen. Our operators are standing by.
(AUDIENCE: Death to Israel!) ...
KILROY: My next guest is a young man, Ali, from Salford. He's just volunteered to go to work in Jerusalem as a suicide bomber. That's an interesting career choice.
ALI: I've always wanted to travel and kill Jews.
(AUDIENCE: Death to Israel! Death to The West!)"

"Kilroy strikes back" (The Jerusalem Post, 2004/01/11)
Kilroy III. Zero tolerance towards prejudiced views? Wouldn't that kind of close down all religions and virtually all media permanently?:
"BBC talk-show host Robert Kilroy-Silk defended his right to free speech after his show was pulled off the air for an anti-Arab column published last week in the Sunday Express.
He criticized the "bullying ethos of political correctness" and defended his right to free speech. ...
In an interview published in this week's Sunday Express, Kilroy-Silk, 61, said he regretted causing offense but said he reserved the right to criticize despotic Middle Eastern regimes.
"That was a perfectly fair, reasonable and justifiable thing to do," he said. "I didn't intend to say that all Arabs are uncivilized because clearly I don't believe that. That's stupid. That's nonsense." ...
The secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, Iqbal Sacranie, said that Kilroy-Silk was "trying to defend the indefensible."
"If anything good has come out of this nasty episode, it is a very powerful message that there should be zero tolerance towards racism and prejudiced views," Sacranie added."

"BBC chiefs accused of 'double standards' over TV presenter" (Fiona Govan and Chris Hastings, The Sunday Telegraph, 2004/01/11)
Kilroy II: "The BBC was accused last night of operating double standards over its suspension of Robert Kilroy-Silk for his comments about Arabs while it continues to use a contributor who has called for Israelis to be killed.
Tom Paulin, the poet and Oxford don, has continued to be a regular contributor to BBC2's Newsnight Review arts programme, despite being quoted in an Egyptian newspaper as saying that Jews living in the Israeli-occupied territories were "Nazis" who should be "shot dead".
Andrew Dismore, the Labour MP, said he found it hard to understand why the BBC had moved against Mr Kilroy-Silk but had not taken any action against Mr Paulin.
"I am not defending anything Mr Kilroy-Silk has said, but I was greatly upset by what Mr Paulin said, and I think the rules should apply to people equally," said Mr Dismore. 'Mr Paulin said awful things about Israel and Jewish people. He should have been kept off BBC screens while his own comments were investigated. I was surprised that that did not happen. It smacks of double standards on the part of the BBC.'" (See also: "Oxford poet 'wants US Jews shot'" (Neil Tweedie, The Daily Telegraph, 2002/04/13))

"Kilroy-Silk is right about the Middle East, say Arabs" (Ibrahim Nawar, The Sunday Telegraph, 2004/01/11)
Kilroy I: Ibrahim Nawar is the Head of the Board of Management of Arab Press Freedom Watch, a "non-profit organisation based in London that works to promote freedom of expression in the Arab world":
"I fully support Robert Kilroy-Silk and salute him as an advocate of freedom of expression. I would like to voice my solidarity with him and with all those who face the censorship of such a basic human right.
I agree with much of what he says about Arab regimes. There is a very long history of oppression in the Arab world, particularly in the states he mentions: Iran, Iraq, Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, as well as in Sudan and Tunisia. ...
I condemn the decision to axe his programme and call for the BBC to reinstate him forthwith. Indeed, the treatment of Mr Kilroy-Silk is very worrying because it indicates that censorship is now taking place in liberal, Western countries like the United Kingdom. These countries should instead be setting an example to the oppressive Arab regimes that violate freedom of expression on a daily basis." (See also: "Kilroy 'regrets' anti-Arab comments" (BBC News, 2004/01/10))

"Kilroy 'regrets' anti-Arab comments" (BBC News, 2004/01/10)
"Television presenter Robert Kilroy-Silk has apologised for a newspaper article in which he made anti-Arab comments.
He said he greatly regretted the offence caused by the Sunday Express article, which was written in April but "republished last weekend in error".
In it, he branded Arabs "suicide bombers, limb amputators, women repressors" and asked what they had given to the world other than oil.
Earlier, the BBC suspended the Kilroy show while it investigates the matter. ...
In a statement, Mr Kilroy-Silk said: "I greatly regret the offence which has been caused by the article published in last weekend's Sunday Express."
"The article contains a couple of obvious factual errors which I also regret."
Mr Kilroy-Silk said the article had not prompted such an outcry the first time it was published, adding it was 'not what I would have said today.'" (See also: "BBC halts Kilroy for race 'rant'" (BBC News, 2004/01/09) and "Kilroy-Silk investigated for anti-Arab comments" (Brian Whitaker, The Guardian, 2004/01/08))

"Freedom of Speech... but only if you don't upset the Guardian reading classes" (Perry de Havilland, samizdata.net, 2004/01/09)
Perry de Havilland on the Kilroy-Silk affair: "I was just interviewed on BBC News 24 to put my views on this affair and I pointed out that whilst I found his remarks full of nasty collectivist generalization, many of the points he made about what passes for civilization in the Arab world are simply facts... people do indeed get their limbs chopped off as punishment in Saudi Arabia, women are indeed second class citizens (if they are even citizens at all), human rights are ghastly across a great swathe of the Middle East, the last time the Muslim world was a hive of innovation was in the 12th Century etc. etc... all these things are simply facts.
Yet my point is not to defend Kilroy-Silk, of whom I am not a particular fan but rather to wonder why it is that Robert Fisk and John Pilger can make equally sweeping and egregiously collectivist statements about Israel and the United States without so much as a murmur from the Guardian reading classes?"

"BBC halts Kilroy for race 'rant'" (BBC News, 2004/01/09)
"The Kilroy programme will be taken off air immediately following comments made by Robert Kilroy-Silk in a newspaper article, the BBC has announced.
The presenter branded Arabs "suicide bombers, limb amputators, women repressors" and asked what they had given to the world other than oil.
The BBC stressed the comments did not reflect its views as a broadcaster.
It said the BBC One programme would be suspended from Monday while it investigated the matter fully." (See also: "Kilroy-Silk investigated for anti-Arab comments" (Brian Whitaker, The Guardian, 2004/01/08))

"Kilroy-Silk investigated for anti-Arab comments" (Brian Whitaker, The Guardian, 2004/01/08)
While anti-American comments are haute rigeour, anti-Arab comments are considered to be completely beyond the pale:
"The chat show host Robert Kilroy-Silk came under fire yesterday for attacking Arabs in a newspaper article at a time when the BBC's other employees are being forbidden to express controversial views in the press.
In a column for the Sunday Express last weekend, headed We owe Arabs nothing, Kilroy-Silk said: "Apart from oil - which was discovered, is produced and is paid for by the west - what do they contribute? Can you think of anything? Anything really useful? Anything really valuable? Something we really need, could not do without? No, nor can I.
"What do they think we feel about them? That we adore them for the way they murdered more than 3,000 civilians on September 11 and then danced in the hot, dusty streets to celebrate the murders? That we admire them for being suicide bombers, limb amputators, women repressors?"
A BBC spokeswoman said last night: "We are looking into how the Sunday Express column which Robert Kilroy-Silk writes in his capacity as a freelance fits with his on-screen work for the BBC." ...
Several organisations complained yesterday that the content of Kilroy-Silk's column was incompatible with his work for the BBC.
Describing him as "a man who positively revels in airing his anti-Arab and anti-Muslim views," the Muslim Council of Britain urged the BBC to 'take the necessary disciplinary action.'" (UPDATE: Here's the column in question: "We owe Arabs nothing" (Robert Kilroy-Silk, Sunday Express/AEMJ, 2004/01/04), in which it's very clear that Kilroy-Silk's target is "despotic, barbarous and corrupt Arab states" rather than Arabs per se.)

"We owe Arabs nothing" (Robert Kilroy-Silk, Sunday Express/AEMJ, 2004/01/04)
"We are told by some of the more hysterical critics of the war on terror that "it is destroying the Arab world". So? Should w e be worried about that? Shouldn't the destruction of the despotic, barbarous and corrupt Arab states and their replacement by democratic governments be a war aim? After all, the Arab countries are not exactly shining examples of civilisation, are they? Few of them make much contribution to the w elfare of the rest of the world. Indeed, apart from oil - which was discovered, is produced and is paid for by the West - what do they contribute? Can you think of anything? Anything really useful? Anything really valuable? Something we really need, could not do without? No, nor can I. Indeed, the Arab countries put together export less than Finland.
We're told that the Arabs loathe us. Really? For liberating the Iraqis? For subsidising the lifestyles of people in Egypt and Jordan, to name but two, for giving them vast amounts of aid? For providing them with science, medicine, technology and all the other benefits of the West? They should go down on their knees and thank God for the munificence of the United States. What do they think we feel about them? That we adore them for the w ay they murdered more than 3,000 civilians on September 11 and then danced in the hot, dusty streets to celebrate the murders?
That we admire them for the cold-blooded killings in Mombasa, Y emen and elsewhere? That we admire them for being suicide bombers, limb-amputators, womenrepressors? I don't think the Arab states should start a debate about what is really loathsome."

"Italian firebrand takes her fight to the 'Islamo-fascists'" (Sarah Baxter, The Sunday Times, 2002/12/15)
"The door to her home in New York is barred and the police pass by every night. In Italy she is accompanied by bodyguards. There is no fatwa against Oriana Fallaci, but in France her opponents have tried to silence her in court.
The fiery Italian, once one of the world’s most uncompromising political interviewers, has stirred anger with The Rage and the Pride, a polemic on Islam and the September 11 attacks. She rarely meets the press herself, but has come out fighting after the failure of last month’s bid to ban her book in France. ...
Her views led the Movement against Racism in France to accuse her of inciting religious hatred. Its attempt to force the publishers to withdraw the book or insert a warning about its contents infuriated Fallaci.
“France guillotined thousands of people and subjugated Europe in the name of liberty, equality and fraternity, yet it wants to forbid my freedom of expression,” she said. ...
The book was meant to be over the top, she insisted. “It’s an invective. I wrote it on the wave of a terrible trauma. If you ask me, do I repent what I have written, the answer is no.”
She condemns rampant anti-Americanism in Europe as suicidal. “America is us,” she writes in her book. “If America collapses, Europe collapses, the whole of the West collapses.”
The next edition of her book will be even more intemperate, she promises. 'I don’t want the burqa. I want to stuff it in their throats.'" (See also: "French court rejects popular anti-Islam book ban" (Reuters/alertnet.org, 2002/11/20))

"Pro-hunting writer held in cell after race claims" (Neil Tweedie, The Daily Telegraph, 2002/11/20)
Where's the outrage against the European vogue for absurd "hate speech" laws? In Sweden, a new law will actually outlaw passages in the Bible and the Quran, as they contain anti-homosexual sentiments. Publishing the Bible in the future would be criminal, as those passages falls within the law. In France, Michel Houellebecq and Oriana Fallaci are put on trial. And now this:
"Robin Page, a columnist for The Telegraph, has been arrested on suspicion of stirring up racial hatred after making a speech at a pro-hunting rally. ...
Mr Page, 61, was detained in a police cell after being interviewed about remarks made by him at a country fair at Frampton-upon-Severn, Glos, on Sept 6. Yesterday, he vehemently denied having made any comment that could be construed as racist during the address, in which he encouraged his audience to attend the Liberty and Livelihood March in London later that month. ...
Mr Page said yesterday: "I urged people to go on the march and I urged that the rural minority be given the same legal protection as other minorities. All I said was that the rural minority should have the same rights as blacks, Muslims and gays. 'What is wrong with that in a multicultural society? I said nothing that could possibly be interpreted as racist.'" (Note: The Swedish law has been criticized by Madeleine Leijonhufvud, a distinguished professor of jurisprudence: "Riksdagen [the Swedish Parliament] has passed a resolution which makes it an open question if it will be possible to publish the Bible and the Quran uncensored in the future. ... As the resolution now stands - dormant until a second, identical resolution is passed after the election - the law forbids continued publishing of the Bible." [my transl.] For the original article in Swedish, see also: "Risk att Bibeln blir stoppad" (Madeleine Leijonhufvud, Dagens Nyheter, 2002/11/05))

"French court rejects popular anti-Islam book ban" (Reuters/alertnet.org, 2002/11/20)
Freedom of speech saved by a formality: "PARIS, Nov 20 (Reuters) - A French court on Wednesday threw out on a formality a bid by anti-racist groups to ban a controversial book by Italian writer Oriana Fallaci criticising Islamic fundamentalism after last year's September 11 attacks.
The book, which has become a top seller in Italy as "La rabbia e l'orgoglio" ("Rage and Pride") and has sold thousands of copies in France since its release in May, has been accused of being racist after a weekly magazine published some extracts.
The book contains a number of provocative statements, such as a claim that Western civilisation is superior to Islamic society and that Muslim immigrants in the West had "multiplied like rats". ...
The court threw out the bid by French anti-racist group Mrap because of a procedural error in the summons destined for Fallaci, 72, who lives in New York and did not appear in court for the duration of the case.
Anti-racist group LICRA and the Human Rights League were also represented in court. The court threw out on the same grounds their bid to fine the book's French publisher, Plon, and force booksellers to sell the tome with a warning attached." (See also: "Fallaci goes on trial for anti-Muslim book" (Elizabeth Bryant, UPI, 2002/10/09))

"Italian author slams Islam's 'hate' for West" (Tom Carter, The Washington Times, 2002/10/23)
"The Islamic world is engaged in a cultural war with the West and the worst is still to come, Italian author Oriana Fallaci told a receptive Washington audience last night. Spinning off a long list of Islamic countries, she told a group of about 80 people: "The hate for the West swells like a fire fed by the wind. The clash between us and them is not a military one. It is a cultural one, a religious one, and the worst is still to come," she continued in what she said was her first public address in more than a decade. Tight security was in place for the speech at the American Enterprise Institute after death threats were issued against her and her attorney as a result of her latest book, "The Rage and the Pride," which contains harsh criticism of Muslims. ... She said last night that critics have attempted to ban the book or have her arrested in France, Belgium, Switzerland and Italy. The 72-year-old author described these efforts as "intellectual terrorism." Miss Fallaci, who lives in New York and is afflicted with cancer, also criticizes Western culture for its loose morals and licentiousness. "Freedom cannot exist without discipline, self-discipline, and rights cannot exist without duties. Those who do not observe their duties do not deserve their rights," she said." (See also: "Fallaci goes on trial for anti-Muslim book" (Elizabeth Bryant, UPI, 2002/10/09))

"French author cleared of race hate" (BBC News, 2002/10/22)
"French writer Michel Houellebecq has been cleared of inciting racial hatred by saying Islam was "the stupidest religion". A panel of three judges in Paris declared that the author was not guilty after he was sued by four Muslim groups. He made the comments in an interview with the literary magazine Lire in 2001. The case was seen as an important battle between free speech and religious conservatism.
Houellebecq, who won the Impac literary prize in May, could have faced up to 18 months in jail or a 70,000 euro (£44,000) fine if found guilty." (See also: "French author denies racial hatred" (BBC News, 2002/09/17))

"Oriana's Screed" (Rod Dreher, National Review, 2002/10/10)
Dreher on Oriana Fallaci's "The Rage and the Pride": "The best way to approach The Rage and the Pride is to imagine its author standing on the blasted heath of the World Trade Center ruins, hurling curses at her enemies like thunderbolts. And who are her enemies? Chiefly Muslims, who in Fallaci's view adhere to a barbaric religion in which there is no important distinction between terrorists and the mainstream. Fallaci has scarcely more regard for contemporary Europeans, who she considers spoiled, decadent, intellectually corrupt, and incapable of perceiving the threat to Western civilization posed by Islam, much less able to defend the West against it. ...
Fallaci is at her best tearing into the "masochists" of Europe, whose sentimental and self-hating worldview "reveres the invaders and slanders the defenders, absolves the delinquents and condemns the victims, weeps for the Taliban and curses the Americans, forgives the Palestinians for every wrong and the Israelis for nothing." ...
Yesterday in Paris, judges took up a motion filed by a coalition of Islamic and anti-racism groups, who are requesting in part that The Rage and the Pride be banned in France under a law intended to curb Holocaust denial. The trial is extremely important to the immediate future of Europe, and how it will deal with the clash of civilizations, which is much more intense there than most Americans can imagine. As a Fallaci lawyer said to her enemies, 'Today the real danger is green [Islamic] fascism - and you want to forbid us to denounce it!'" (See also: "Fallaci goes on trial for anti-Muslim book" (Elizabeth Bryant, UPI, 2002/10/09))

"Fallaci goes on trial for anti-Muslim book" (Elizabeth Bryant, UPI, 2002/10/09)
"A second author Wednesday went to trial in Paris in as many months on charges of inciting racial hatred for a book that has denigrating passages on Islam. The latest case involves "Rage and Pride," a best-selling novel by Italian writer Oriana Fallaci. One plaintiff, the anti-racist group MRAP, wants the book banned from France altogether. Two others, including the Human Rights League, simply want disclaimers that its disparaging passages on Islam don't accurately reflect the Muslim religion. ... "When one finishes reading the book, one recognizes the right to kill any Muslim on the street," argued Hacen Taleb, the lawyer representing MRAP, in a statement to the court. ...
The Fallaci trial echoes another opened last month against controversial French novelist Michel Houellebecq. Like Fallaci, Houllebecq faces charges of "provoking discrimination, hatred or violence" toward a group because of their religion."

"Gagged in Paris" (Salman Rushdie, The Washington Post, 2002/10/02)
Rushdie on "l'affaire Houellebecq": "The accusations against him turn out to be ridiculously slight. Last year, in an interview published in Lire magazine, Houellebecq called Islam "the dumbest religion" and compared the Koran unfavorably with the Bible, which "at least is beautifully written because the Jews have a heck of a literary talent." This generalization may raise one or two non-Muslim hackles: What, all Jews? And are the Christian authors of the New Testament deliberately excluded from this ungainly compliment? But if an individual in a free society no longer has the right to say openly that he prefers one book to another, then that society no longer has the right to call itself free. Presumably any Muslim who said that the Koran was much better than the Bible would then also be guilty of an insult, and absurdity would rule. As to "the dumbest religion," well, it's a point of view. And Houellebecq, in court, made the simple but essential observation that to attack people's ideologies or belief systems is not to attack the people themselves. This is surely one of the foundation principles of an open society." (See also: "French author denies racial hatred" (BBC News, 2002/09/17))

"Vichy Thought Police" (Michael Radu, FrontPageMagazine, 2002/09/20)
Radu on "l'affaire Houellebecq": "One therefore has to pay far more attention to the opinion of Dalil Boubakeur, Rector of the Paris Mosque, who thinks that Houellebecq has "abused, attacked, and insulted" Islam. "Words can kill. Freedom of expression stops at the point it starts hurting." ... Still, he is convinced that any opinion unfavorable to Islam, no matter whether informed or not, and whether or not it comes from a Muslim, is a crime. This is also the opinion - and policy - of Saudi Arabia, where it is against the law for non-Muslims to even live in the country. It also flies in the face of everything Western democracies stand for: freedom of expression and, perhaps more importantly, the individual's freedom of thought. ... With apologies to the American triumphalists of the "democracy is on march throughout the world" school of thought, here is a case of theocracy on the march, on the banks of the Seine." (See also: "French author denies racial hatred" (BBC News, 2002/09/17))

"Calling Islam stupid lands author in court" (Paul Webster, The Guardian, 2002/09/18)
"Michel Houellebecq, whose new novel Platform was released in Britain this month, appeared in a Paris court yesterday charged with inciting religious and racial hatred in an interview about the book, in which he dismissed Islam as "stupid".
The charges, based on a complaint by the Islamic authorities in Lyon and Paris, are being challenged by a group of best-selling authors led by Philippe Sollers and Régine Desforges who have condemned the trail as an attack on freedom of speech.
Mr Houellebecq, who has also written the books Whatever and Atomised and whose eccentric work and lifestyle are the subject of intense literary and social gossip, flew from his tax-haven cottage in western Ireland for the trial.
The charges arise from comments quoted in the magazine Lire that Islam is "the most stupid religion" and that the "badly written" Koran made him fall to the ground in despair. ...
Mr Houellebecq told the judges that he had never despised Muslims but felt contempt for Islam. He said he had been misreported, but added: 'There is no point in asking me general questions because I am always changing my mind.'" (See also: "French author denies racial hatred" (BBC News, 2002/09/17))

"French author denies racial hatred" (BBC News, 2002/09/17)
"A prize-winning French author on trial for calling Islam "the dumbest religion" has denied charges of inciting racial hatred. Michel Houellebecq told a Paris court that his words had been twisted. "I have never displayed the least contempt for Muslims," he said, but added, "I have as much contempt as ever for Islam". ... The controversial writer is being sued by four Islamic organisations over his comments about his book, Platform, in an interview last year with the literary magazine Lire. The novel is also cited in the case being brought by the largest mosques in Paris and Lyon, the National Federation of French Muslims (FNMN) and the World Islamic League. France's Human Rights League has also joined them, saying that Mr Houellebecq's comments amount to "Islamophobia". ... In a written submission, lawyers for the Paris mosque said: "The fact that a famous author can be allowed to proclaim clearly his hatred for Islam in a magazine like Lire constitutes incitement to religious hatred." Dalil Boubakeur from the mosque told the court: 'Islam has been reviled, attacked with hateful words. My community has been humiliated.'" (See also: "Author on trial over Islam 'insult'" (BBC News, 2002/09/16))

"Author on trial over Islam 'insult'" (BBC News, 2002/09/16)
"Prize-winning French novelist Michel Houellebecq is to stand trial on Tuesday on charges of making a racial insult and inciting religious hatred. The controversial writer is being sued by four Islamic organisations in Paris after making "insulting" remarks about the religion in an interview about his latest book. ...
In an interview given last year to the French literary magazine Lire, the author was quoted as saying "the dumbest religion, after all, is Islam". "When you read the Koran, you're shattered. The Bible at least is beautifully written because the Jews have a heck of a literary talent," he told Lire. ...
But the lawyers for the Paris and Lyon mosques said in a statement: 'It is anti-Muslim racism that is at the heart of the trial, not the personality or the provocative tastes of one successful author or another.'" (See also: "Author sued over Islam 'insult'" (BBC News, 2002/08/22))

"Author sued over Islam 'insult'" (BBC News, 2002/08/22)
"Prize-winning French novelist Michel Houellebecq is being sued by four Islamic organisations in Paris after making "insulting" remarks about the religion in an interview about his latest book. The action against Mr Houellebecq, 44, is being launched on 17 September by plaintiffs including Saudi Arabia's World Islamic League and the Mosque of Paris. Dalil Boubakeur, rector of the Paris mosque, said Muslims felt insulted by comments in the novel Plateforme, in which a character admits to a "quiver of glee" every time a "Palestinian terrorist" is killed. ... His latest novel, Plateforme, is said to praise prostitution and has a denouement based on an attack on a tourist resort by suspected Muslim terrorists. But it is an interview with the literary magazine Lire during last year's launch of the book that prompted the legal action. Mr Houellebecq reportedly said in Lire that reading the Koran is "so depressing" and that Islam is "the stupidest religion". ... Mr Boubakeur said such comments flouted laws on religious tolerance and provoked racial hatred. "If I were Jewish I would bring a case for 10 times less than this," he added."

"Detail of Giovanni da Modena's 1415 fresco..."
(artnet)
"Detail of Giovanni da Modena's 1415 fresco in the San Petronio basilica in Bologna, depicting Mohammed in hell, tormented by demons."

"'Islamic plot' to destroy cathedral fresco" (Bruce Johnston, The Daily Telegraph, 2002/06/24)
"Islamic terrorists linked to al-Qa'eda plotted to destroy Bologna's 14th century cathedral because it contained a medieval fresco depicting the Prophet Mohammed in hell.
The plan was foiled by Italian paramilitary police according to the Corriere della Sera newspaper. ...
The cathedral, in the city's central Piazza Maggiore, is dedicated to Bologna's patron saint, San Petronio.
The 15th century Mohammed fresco, in the Bolognini chapel, shows the Prophet being set upon by demons. Four years ago, the chapel was occupied by Islamic immigrants during Ramadan in protest at the fresco, before police intervened.
According to the reports, special branch officers with the paramilitary Carabinieri force first heard of the plan in February. The plotters were said to be linked to Algeria's radical Salafist "Group of Prayer and Combat". ...
From the taped conversations in Milan, the authorities interpreted what they believed to be signs of plans to attack the American embassy in Amsterdam, and concrete plans for a terrorist raid on Bologna cathedral."

"Effort to ban anti-Islam book fails in France" (The Washington Times/hss.fullerton.edu, 2002/06/22)
"PARIS — A French judge yesterday refused an "anti-racism" group's request for an immediate ban on Italian journalist Oriana Fallaci's new book, which argues that the September 11 attacks shows the true face of Islam.
The Movement Against Racism and for Friendship Between Peoples, also known as MRAP, had asked Judge Herve Stephan to ban the book, "Rage and Pride," saying its contents are an incitement to racial hatred.
Judge Stephan said he saw no point in an urgent ban, because the book had already sold 45,000 copies in France since its publication last month and nearly a million copies in Italy. He referred the case to another court, which is scheduled to hear it July 10.
MRAP, which was founded in 1949 and calls itself a democratic organization, also named French publisher Editions Plon in its complaint. Its leader, Mouloud Aounit, insists that the group believes in freedom of expression. He argues that the book is "racist delirium" that "incites racial violence." ...
Miss Fallaci said she reserves the right to sue MRAP for branding her book "racist." She said she has been receiving death threats.
In addition to MRAP, two other anti-racism groups have complained about the book and asked that a disclaimer be included in every French copy instead of a ban.
The judge refused this plea as well."

 

Copyright © Watch 2001-2006.
Copyrights of quoted materials belong to their respective owners.

 

"When people accept futility and the absurd as normal, the culture is decadent. The term is not a slur; it is a technical label."

Jacques Barzun

Articles of the week

"Losing the Enlightenment" (Victor Davis Hanson, OpinionJournal, 2006/11/29)

"Allah’s England?" (Daniel Johnson, Commentary. November 2006)

"'Sex in the Park': The latest doings of the Danish imams" (Henrik Bering, The Weekly Standard, 2006/11/18)

"Narcissism on Stilts" (Harold Evans, New York Sun, 2006/11/16)

"Terrorists are recruiting in our schools, says MI5 boss" (Philip Johnston, The Daily Telegraph, 2006/11/10)

› AOTW Archive



From the archives

Oriana Fallaci, R.I.P.

"The Rage, the Pride and the Doubt" (Oriana Fallaci, The Wall Street Journal, 2003/03/13)

"How the West Was Won and How It Will Be Lost" (Oriana Fallaci, The American Enterprise, from the January/February 2003 issue)

"On Jew-hatred in Europe" (Oriana Fallaci, dennisprager.com, 2002/04/13)

"Anger and Pride" (Oriana Fallaci, dennisprager.com, 2001/12/19)

Weekly archive

2006/12/04 - 2006/12/10
2006/11/27 - 2006/12/03
2006/11/20 - 2006/11/26
2006/11/13 - 2006/11/19
2006/11/06 - 2006/11/12
2006/10/30 - 2006/11/05

› From 2001/09/11 -



Monthly index

December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006

› From September 2001 -



Author index

› Ajami, Fouad - Johnson, Paul
› Kagan, Robert - Ye'or, Bat



Support Watch

Please feel free to donate if you enjoy the daily content and links Watch provides:

Contact Watch

Email:
watch-at-windsofchange.net