Yale Preemptively Censors Self
A classic moment in craven cowardice, as Yale University Press publishes a book on the Mohammed cartoon madness — and deliberately omits the actual cartoons themselves.
A classic moment in craven cowardice, as Yale University Press publishes a book on the Mohammed cartoon madness — and deliberately omits the actual cartoons themselves.
1 | MikeAlv77 Thu, Aug 13, 2009 9:58:33am |
So offending someone is worse than printing the truth… How far the university has fallen…
2 | Ron Bacardi Thu, Aug 13, 2009 9:58:42am |
Just saw this on Dennis Prager’s list of articles to read. Ridiculous.
3 | Kragar Thu, Aug 13, 2009 9:58:45am |
To quote the great philosopher,
“NOT IN THE FACE!”
4 | american sabra Thu, Aug 13, 2009 9:59:21am |
It would be funny if it wasn’t so damn tragic.
“The cartoons are freely available on the Internet and can be accurately described in words, Mr. Donatich said, so reprinting them could be interpreted easily as gratuitous.”
Does Zombie at least get a hat tip in there somewhere?
5 | Honorary Yooper Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:00:11am |
That would seem contradictory IMHO. Would one not want to show the cartoons themselves when discussing them?
7 | Desert Dog Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:00:52am |
Shhh…mention thee not of the Cartoons which cannot be named…
8 | Sharmuta Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:01:23am |
If free speech isn’t honored on the campuses of our universities and colleges, where, pray tell, will it be honored?
9 | Cannadian Club Akbar Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:01:34am |
I bought a Far SideTM calendar with no cartoons. I just call it a calendar.
/
10 | Kragar Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:01:39am |
re: #5 Honorary Yooper
That would seem contradictory IMHO. Would one not want to show the cartoons themselves when discussing them?
It would be safer to beat a wookiee in holo-chess
11 | american sabra Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:02:40am |
Besides, the people who are offended by the images (inasmuch to cause violence over them) are equally offended by the discussion of the images, so who is the author fooling?
12 | Douchecanoe and Ryan Too Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:02:57am |
So this is what passes for thought on America’s supposedly leading university campuses. I’m almost ashamed to be a college graduate.
13 | oh_dude Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:03:00am |
Bigfoot is in my backyard rummaging for berries right now. I’d like to take a few pics and post them for you guys, but that might be a little over the top.
14 | Randall Gross Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:03:09am |
For those few who haven’t already seen the images, the zombie Mohammed image archive
[Link: www.zombietime.com…]
15 | Gus Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:03:56am |
Yale University Press engages in Anthropological censorship.
You have to wonder of course if this raises the value of the authors work if it is taken up by another publisher uncensored.
16 | Charles Johnson Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:03:57am |
The cartoons are posted at LGF on a permanent page here:
[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com…]
17 | subsailor68 Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:04:04am |
In other news, Yale’s new publication of Moby Dick makes no mention of the whale. Professor Figby Dinkbottom noted that “the whale stuff was problematic for us, as we were concerned it might offend minority students.”
The new version weighs in at a hefty sixteen pages.
18 | itellu3times Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:04:29am |
Imagine if you will a picture of Yale, with its head up its ass.
19 | pre-Boomer Marine brat Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:04:44am |
re: #8 Sharmuta
If free speech isn’t honored on the campuses of our universities and colleges, where, pray tell, will it be honored?
The old Free Speech Movement is Sprouled face-down in the dust.
20 | MikeAlv77 Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:04:46am |
re: #16 Charles
The cartoons are posted at LGF on a permanent page here:
[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com…]
I am offended…
/ (not really but hey, why not…)
21 | american sabra Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:05:09am |
re: #17 subsailor68
In other news, Yale’s new publication of Moby Dick makes no mention of the whale. Professor Figby Dinkbottom noted that “the whale stuff was problematic for us, as we were concerned it might offend minority students.”
The new version weighs in at a hefty sixteen pages.
now that’s comedy! lol
22 | Kosh's Shadow Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:05:14am |
re: #17 subsailor68
In other news, Yale’s new publication of Moby Dick makes no mention of the whale. Professor Figby Dinkbottom noted that “the whale stuff was problematic for us, as we were concerned it might offend minority students.”
The new version weighs in at a hefty sixteen pages.
This is the version approved by the “Whale Wars” group.
23 | Randall Gross Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:05:40am |
Yale: bastion of acedemic freedom, free thinking not allowed.
26 | Kosh's Shadow Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:06:20am |
I wonder how many people will actually buy the book now?
I wouldn’t; if I got it without knowing, I’d probably ask to return it because it lacks necessary information.
27 | Charles Johnson Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:06:27am |
One of the most absurd things about this controversy is that the cartoons really are not very offensive at all. The only one that might be considered offensive is the picture of Mohammed with a bomb for a turban. But a couple of them are actually sort of pro-Mohammed.
29 | itellu3times Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:07:21am |
re: #17 subsailor68
In other news, Yale’s new publication of Moby Dick makes no mention of the whale. Professor Figby Dinkbottom noted that “the whale stuff was problematic for us, as we were concerned it might offend minority students.”
The new version weighs in at a hefty sixteen pages.
Did they keep the bit about “Ishmael”?
31 | Desert Dog Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:07:57am |
I can hardly wait to read their articles about re: #18 itellu3times
Imagine if you will a picture of Yale, with its head up its ass.
Not too hard to imagine that
32 | MikeAlv77 Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:08:09am |
re: #27 Charles
One of the most absurd things about this controversy is that the cartoons really are not very offensive at all. The only one that might be considered offensive is the picture of Mohammed with a bomb for a turban. But a couple of them are actually sort of pro-Mohammed.
But Charles, any depiction of the guy pisses them off so it doesn’t matter if its showing him as Superman on top of the world or as a creepy pedophile, they are angry… (even though the second one would be closer to the truth…)
33 | Kosh's Shadow Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:08:12am |
re: #27 Charles
One of the most absurd things about this controversy is that the cartoons really are not very offensive at all. The only one that might be considered offensive is the picture of Mohammed with a bomb for a turban. But a couple of them are actually sort of pro-Mohammed.
There are more making fun of the cartoonists than making fun of Mohammed, IIRC.
34 | Douchecanoe and Ryan Too Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:08:19am |
re: #27 Charles
One of the most absurd things about this controversy is that the cartoons really are not very offensive at all. The only one that might be considered offensive is the picture of Mohammed with a bomb for a turban. But a couple of them are actually sort of pro-Mohammed.
It’s not the offensiveness of the image itself. Muslims take offense to any depiction of Mohammed, because buried somewhere in the arcane rules of their religion, they’re not allowed to have any pictures of their “prophet”. Or some such.
35 | subsailor68 Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:08:36am |
re: #29 itellu3times
Did they keep the bit about “Ishmael”?
LOL! They did, but to make it more diverse, the book now opens with the line: “Call me Shirley.”
;-)
36 | Vicious Babushka Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:08:37am |
re: #27 Charles
One of the most absurd things about this controversy is that the cartoons really are not very offensive at all. The only one that might be considered offensive is the picture of Mohammed with a bomb for a turban. But a couple of them are actually sort of pro-Mohammed.
You are only saying that because you are not a Muslim. You do not understand the hyoo-mee-lee-ay-shum that a true Muslim feels when the Prophet is being ridiculed or even portrayed in an illustration.
/I keel you!
37 | Kragar Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:08:40am |
re: #17 subsailor68
In other news, Yale’s new publication of Moby Dick makes no mention of the whale. Professor Figby Dinkbottom noted that “the whale stuff was problematic for us, as we were concerned it might offend minority students.”
The new version weighs in at a hefty sixteen pages.
The Sound of Music will be presented with all music and reference to Nazis removed so as not to offend certain members of the audience. Please enjoy your 7 minutes.
38 | Kragar Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:08:58am |
39 | Gus Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:09:32am |
Other books from YUP:
Sin and Censorship
The Catholic Church and the Motion Picture Industry
What Johnny Shouldn`t Read
Textbook Censorship in America
Ideology and Inquisition
The World of the Censors in Early Mexico
40 | vxbush Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:09:52am |
re: #37 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
The Sound of Music will be presented with all music and reference to Nazis removed so as not to offend certain members of the audience. Please enjoy your 7 minutes.
To be followed by a cleansed version of The Producers, which will run 3 minutes.
41 | Kosh's Shadow Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:10:05am |
re: #35 subsailor68
LOL! They did, but to make it more diverse, the book now opens with the line: “Call me Shirley.”
;-)
Who says “Hello, sailor”?
42 | Vicious Babushka Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:10:38am |
re: #40 vxbush
To be followed by a cleansed version of The Producers, which will run 3 minutes.
You can have my DVD of “Blazing Saddles” when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
43 | american sabra Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:10:39am |
It’s worth it to read the NYT article that Hot Air links to describing the book and the decision. But keep your hat on because your head is likely to explode.
My question is, without the cartoons, what is this book about that couldn’t be said in 2 paragraphs?
44 | dwells38 Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:10:43am |
Yes lets hammer home the point that violence and threats gets things done.
You see if you offend an intolerant and violent person and they hurt you or someone else because of the offending thing why then the blood is on YOUR hands.
No wonder the anti-abortion religious extremists are more and more starting to think about similar tactics and not just isolated nut-jobs.
45 | Kosh's Shadow Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:11:16am |
re: #34 thedopefishlives
It’s not the offensiveness of the image itself. Muslims take offense to any depiction of Mohammed, because buried somewhere in the arcane rules of their religion, they’re not allowed to have any pictures of their “prophet”. Or some such.
You forgot to say PBUH(*) after referring to the Prophet!
*Pork and Bacon Upon Him
46 | MikeAlv77 Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:11:18am |
re: #42 Alouette
You can have my DVD of “Blazing Saddles” when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
Ah… The Classics… Love that movie and they could amost never make it today…
47 | subsailor68 Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:11:26am |
re: #37 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
The Sound of Music will be presented with all music and reference to Nazis removed so as not to offend certain members of the audience. Please enjoy your 7 minutes.
Now that’s funny! They did leave in my favorite song though: “How do you successfully counsel a pubescent female of the species named Maria?”
48 | Douchecanoe and Ryan Too Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:11:32am |
re: #43 american sabra
My question is, without the cartoons, what is this book about that couldn’t be said in 2 paragraphs?
This is wacademia at it’s finest. They could ramble on for hours about the most inane topics.
49 | Randall Gross Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:12:22am |
re: #34 thedopefishlives
It’s not the offensiveness of the image itself. Muslims take offense to any depiction of Mohammed, because buried somewhere in the arcane rules of their religion, they’re not allowed to have any pictures of their “prophet”. Or some such.
That’s only true of certain fundamentalist sects. If you go to Zombie’s archives you will see articles about that, here’s one.
50 | itellu3times Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:12:24am |
re: #35 subsailor68
LOL! They did, but to make it more diverse, the book now opens with the line: “Call me Shirley.”
;-)
It’s now about the captain’s obsession with fat chicks - fat white chicks.
51 | Mostly sane, most of the time. Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:12:37am |
Next, we will discuss geography in a book without maps, and anatomy in a book without diagrams. (Can’t see anyone nekkid, and frankly, being without your skin is as nekkid as it gets.)
52 | Vicious Babushka Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:12:40am |
re: #37 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
The Sound of Music will be presented with all music and reference to Nazis removed so as not to offend certain members of the audience. Please enjoy your 7 minutes.
They will redo “West Side Story” and remove all references to Puerto Ricans and Italians.
53 | Desert Dog Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:13:06am |
re: #39 Gus 802
Other books from YUP:
Sin and Censorship
The Catholic Church and the Motion Picture IndustryWhat Johnny Shouldn`t Read
Textbook Censorship in AmericaIdeology and Inquisition
The World of the Censors in Early Mexico
Brave defenders of censorship when it suits them…cowardly PC infused girlie-men when actual censorship rears it’s ugly head.
Are they afraid of the “backlash” from the RageBoys of the world, or are their collective politically correct heads stuffed so far up their cultural sensitive bums that they cannot see the forest through all them trees? Wow.
54 | itellu3times Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:13:40am |
re: #51 EmmmieG
Next, we will discuss geography in a book without maps, and anatomy in a book without diagrams. (Can’t see anyone nekkid, and frankly, being without your skin is as nekkid as it gets.)
Maps without Israel.
55 | american sabra Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:13:44am |
re: #50 itellu3times
It’s now about the captain’s obsession with fat chicks - fat white chicks.
hey, don’t knock it till ya tried it.
56 | pre-Boomer Marine brat Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:13:52am |
re: #48 thedopefishlives
This is wacademia at it’s finest. They could ramble on for hours about the most inane topics.
To quote Groucho Marx freely:
… “Who is buried in the tomb of the grants?”
57 | StillAMarine Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:13:57am |
This is par for the course as far as US and Canadian universities are concerned. They are less interested in research and education than they are in maintaining their stiff necked political correctness. The left has thoroughly infiltrated our education system as well as the news media.
Because these people see themselves as an enlightened few who know better than the rest of us, I see their influence as a real threat to our freedom.
58 | Syrah Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:14:00am |
re: #8 Sharmuta
If free speech isn’t honored on the campuses of our universities and colleges, where, pray tell, will it be honored?
“If free speech isn’t honored on the campuses of our universities and colleges,” is there mission then education or indoctrination?
59 | Gus Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:14:10am |
More from YUP:
Law’s Promise, Law’s Expression
Visions of Power in the Politics of Race, Gender, and Religion
Kenneth L. Karst
Chosen as an “Outstanding” book on the subject of human rights in North America for 1995 by The Gustavus Myers Center for the study of Bigotry and Human Rights in North America
The conservative “social issues agenda” is targeted to voters who have felt left out, even threatened, by the successes of the civil rights movement, the women’s movement, and the gay rights movement. The agenda centers on the expressive capacities of law and promises a cultural counterrevolution. It evokes visions of an earlier social order in which most citizens who were black or female or gay stayed “in their place”—and the place was a subordinate one. In this lively and provocative book, a constitutional law scholar argues eloquently that most of the social issues agenda for law violates the constitutional principle of equal citizenship.
60 | anotherindyfilmguy Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:14:14am |
It is Cowardice in no uncertain terms. Keep this sort of thing in mind when the self appointed “elites” try to tell us how to live our lives-they can’t stand even the mildest of possible threats of violence but would tell all how to live. A person not willing to endure hardship, even potential hardships for that which they believe in lack a moral compass, IMO, and should be ignored at the least and generally resisted lest they mold you or your children into cowardly copies of themselves.
61 | Spider Mensch Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:14:15am |
re: #36 Alouette
You are only saying that because you are not a Muslim. You do not understand the hyoo-mee-lee-ay-shum that a true Muslim feels when the Prophet is being ridiculed or even portrayed in an illustration.
/I keel you!
62 | Creeping Eruption Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:14:20am |
Wondering who the biggest donors are to Yales endowment
63 | vxbush Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:14:41am |
It’s more of a shame that these academics are worried about potential death when they publish such works. They aren’t overseas and yet they are worried about a backlash against them personally.
Or:
Is it that Yale can’t stand the thought of money going elsewhere? Do the Saudis have any big money at Yale?
64 | Kosh's Shadow Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:14:47am |
re: #50 itellu3times
It’s now about the captain’s obsession with fat chicks - fat white chicks.
Does this mean that instead of getting blubber, they get chicken fat?
65 | Creeping Eruption Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:15:17am |
67 | Kragar Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:15:45am |
Movie fun fact on “The Sound of Music”
When the film was released in South Korea, it did so much business that some theaters were showing it four and five times a day. One theater owner in Seoul tried to figure out a way to be able to show it even more often, in order to bring in more customers. So he cut out all the musical numbers.
69 | Kosh's Shadow Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:16:05am |
re: #55 american sabra
hey, don’t knock it till ya tried it.
If we’re talking about fat chicks, then we have to play:
70 | Sharmuta Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:16:35am |
re: #48 thedopefishlives
This is wacademia at it’s finest. They could ramble on for hours about the most inane topics.
So can drunks. This is more about fear of exercising our rights than any issues with academia. People back down to threats of violence and therefore don’t speak their minds. All these people worked up about the government infringing on our rights- what about the ones we’re eroding ourselves?
71 | Gus Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:16:52am |
re: #53 Desert Dog
Brave defenders of censorship when it suits them…cowardly PC infused girlie-men when actual censorship rears it’s ugly head.
Are they afraid of the “backlash” from the RageBoys of the world, or are their collective politically correct heads stuffed so far up their cultural sensitive bums that they cannot see the forest through all them trees? Wow.
You can almost say that they are following a liberal social agenda. This of course is typical behavior on the part of the easily offended academic world. That easily offended if it tramples on whom they see as the “disenfranchised.”
72 | Creeping Eruption Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:17:08am |
re: #51 EmmmieG
Next, we will discuss geography in a book without maps, and anatomy in a book without diagrams. (Can’t see anyone nekkid, and frankly, being without your skin is as nekkid as it gets.)
Skeleton in Tale Med School now in Hajib?
73 | debutaunt Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:17:32am |
re: #16 Charles
Everything sounds like an Onion sarc page.
74 | Desert Dog Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:17:33am |
re: #50 itellu3times
It’s now about the captain’s obsession with fat chicks - fat white chicks.
They would not censor that…but they would change the Capt’s obsession to “Gravitationally Challenged Women of Fair complexion”
75 | Kragar Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:17:39am |
re: #52 Alouette
They will redo “West Side Story” and remove all references to Puerto Ricans and Italians.
Robin Hood will portray the desperate struggle of a community organizer versus a evil conservative exploiting the people to fund an illegal war overseas.
78 | american sabra Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:18:46am |
re: #60 anotherindyfilmguy
It is Cowardice in no uncertain terms. Keep this sort of thing in mind when the self appointed “elites” try to tell us how to live our lives-they can’t stand even the mildest of possible threats of violence but would tell all how to live. A person not willing to endure hardship, even potential hardships for that which they believe in lack a moral compass, IMO, and should be ignored at the least and generally resisted lest they mold you or your children into cowardly copies of themselves.
Oh please. Even Bush went to Yale. Smart doesn’t equal elitist. Lots of idiots are elitists too and lots of people went to Ivy League schools that came up from nothing.
Personally, I want people running this country who are SMART, but that certainly doesn’t mean they have to fall into this kind of PC bullcrap.
79 | Kenneth Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:18:47am |
re: #34 thedopefishlives
It’s not the offensiveness of the image itself. Muslims take offense to any depiction of Mohammed, because buried somewhere in the arcane rules of their religion, they’re not allowed to have any pictures of their “prophet”. Or some such.
Except that Shia Muslims do have pictures of Mohamed, Hussein & Ali. The rule is not so absolute as reported.
80 | Douchecanoe and Ryan Too Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:19:44am |
re: #79 Kenneth
Except that Shia Muslims do have pictures of Mohamed, Hussein & Ali. The rule is not so absolute as reported.
As was mentioned to me upthread. My apologies. It seems like a common canard that gets thrown out there whenever someone brings up the Dreaded Cartoons of Blasphemy (tm), though.
81 | Kragar Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:19:45am |
82 | spudly Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:20:01am |
LOL, the book itself becomes a microcosm of the original controversy. It doesn’t even need words. Read book title and blurb. Open book and find no cartoons. Close book and marvel at her cowardice.
83 | american sabra Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:20:03am |
re: #69 Kosh’s Shadow
If we’re talking about fat chicks, then we have to play:
Ooo good pick. It’s an ipod fav!
84 | anotherindyfilmguy Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:20:18am |
re: #78 american sabra
I never said Bush, or any other graduate from there is a coward. The people who self censored themselves however are.
85 | Kenneth Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:20:53am |
86 | debutaunt Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:21:19am |
re: #52 Alouette
They will redo “West Side Story” and remove all references to Puerto Ricans and Italians.
What else does frickin’ rhyme with?
87 | Creeping Eruption Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:22:03am |
I think I shall now try for an advanced degree from Yale. I will write a thesis of course, and defend it. I just won’t let anyone see what I write and the committee will not be able to question me on my conclusions - all in the interests of safety. I will publish my thesis, but not make it available. I do not want to offend anyone.///./
88 | american sabra Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:22:28am |
re: #75 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
Robin Hood will portray the desperate struggle of a community organizer versus a evil conservative exploiting the people to fund an illegal war overseas.
That’s not half bad, but what happens when they show him in green tights and a feather in his pointy cap? A little light in the mocassins maybe?
89 | Sharmuta Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:22:30am |
re: #58 Syrah
“If free speech isn’t honored on the campuses of our universities and colleges,” is there mission then education or indoctrination?
It’s more troubling to me the school would stop their own free speech more than if they had they tried to stop students. That would be obvious, but this is much more subtle. The mohammed cartoons themselves were supposed to be an exercise in free speech, yet the institutions our Founders envisioned as helping to protect that right are undermining it themselves not by stopping it, but by abdicating it. Those cartoons represent all that we hold dear- the right to say what other people disagree with- and yet a university won’t give it proper coverage in a book. What a sad day.
90 | anotherindyfilmguy Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:23:17am |
re: #79 Kenneth
The “Rules for Islam” are subject to interpretation by any Imam on any given day and, like any large set of rules etc, can be interpreted to suit the whim of the interpreter.
91 | reloadingisnotahobby Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:23:19am |
Yale fight song…
” Speak softly and swing a wet noodle”!
…Yeah ! Win!!
92 | Gus Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:23:39am |
Here’s their description:
The Cartoons That Shook the World
Jytte Klausen
On September 30, 2005, the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published twelve cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. Five months later, thousands of Muslims inundated the newspaper with outpourings of anger and grief by phone, email, and fax; from Asia to Europe Muslims took to the streets in protest. This book is the first comprehensive investigation of the conflict that aroused impassioned debates around the world on freedom of expression, blasphemy, and the nature of modern Islam.
Jytte Klausen interviewed politicians in the Middle East, Muslim leaders in Europe, the Danish editors and cartoonists, and the Danish imam who started the controversy. Following the winding trail of protests across the world, she deconstructs the arguments and motives that drove the escalation of the increasingly globalized conflict. She concludes that the Muslim reaction to the cartoons was not—as was commonly assumed—a spontaneous emotional reaction arising out of the clash of Western and Islamic civilizations. Rather it was orchestrated, first by those with vested interests in elections in Denmark and Egypt, and later by Islamic extremists seeking to destabilize governments in Pakistan, Lebanon, Libya, and Nigeria. Klausen shows how the cartoon crisis was, therefore, ultimately a political conflict rather than a colossal cultural misunderstanding.
93 | vxbush Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:23:55am |
Hmm. I don’t suppose this has anything to do with it, but it’s interesting, none the less…
Saudi woman selected for Yale World Fellow Program”..Yale University selected Muna AbuSulayman, general secretary of the charitable foundation of Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal, as a world fellow for 2009. The Yale World Fellow Program seeks to build a network of global decision makers who have a fundamental, mutual understanding born of common experience and information. The model naturally fosters collaboration and a commitment to shared success..”
94 | Noam Sayin' Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:24:35am |
The real funny thing is, they went ahead and published it.
96 | doppelganglander Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:25:08am |
The author is not too thrilled about this.
The book’s author, Jytte Klausen, a Danish-born professor of politics at Brandeis University, in Waltham, Mass., reluctantly accepted Yale University Press’s decision not to publish the cartoons. But she was disturbed by the withdrawal of the other representations of Muhammad. All of those images are widely available, Ms. Klausen said by telephone, adding that “Muslim friends, leaders and activists thought that the incident was misunderstood, so the cartoons needed to be reprinted so we could have a discussion about it.” The book is due out in November.
So, what does the book actually say?
Ms. Klausen, who is also the author of “The Islamic Challenge: Politics and Religion in Western Europe,” argued that the cartoon protests were not spontaneous but rather orchestrated demonstrations by extremists in Denmark and Egypt who were trying to influence elections there and by others hoping to destabilize governments in Pakistan, Lebanon, Libya and Nigeria. The cartoons, she maintained, were a pretext, a way to mobilize dissent in the Muslim world.
97 | american sabra Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:25:29am |
re: #87 Creeping Eruption
I think I shall now try for an advanced degree from Yale. I will write a thesis of course, and defend it. I just won’t let anyone see what I write and the committee will not be able to question me on my conclusions - all in the interests of safety. I will publish my thesis, but not make it available. I do not want to offend anyone.///./
What you need to do is publish a book with JUST the pictures and no text! How about that?
98 | vxbush Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:26:12am |
Interesting; connect my last post with this one from 2006 and ask: is Yale courting Saudi money, instead? They got left out in 2006 from Saudi Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal’s generosity to several US universities. Perhaps that stung, and they are trying to change that.
Speculation only on my part. I have no idea.
99 | Desert Dog Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:26:29am |
re: #97 american sabra
What you need to do is publish a book with JUST the pictures and no text! How about that?
Pop up pictures? I love those!
100 | justabill Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:26:38am |
re: #52 Alouette
They will redo “West Side Story” and remove all references to Puerto Ricans and Italians.
Since at the time Italy wasn’t united, you could call it “Romeo and Juliette”.
101 | reloadingisnotahobby Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:26:42am |
What would Playboy or Penthouse be with out the Pics!!?
Sheeesh!
103 | american sabra Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:26:59am |
104 | Creeping Eruption Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:27:08am |
105 | pingjockey Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:27:10am |
re: #98 vxbush
Greedy bastards, very plausible scenario.
107 | Douchecanoe and Ryan Too Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:27:15am |
re: #101 reloadingisnotahobby
What would Playboy or Penthouse be with out the Pics!!?
Sheeesh!
What, you don’t read it for the articles? /
108 | Liechtentrager Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:27:20am |
Screw the cartoons. See what else they left out:
Quote: “What’s more, they suggested that the Yale press also refrain from publishing any other illustrations of the prophet that were to be included, specifically, a drawing for a children’s book; an Ottoman print; and a sketch by the 19th-century artist Gustave Doré of Muhammad being tormented in Hell, an episode from Dante’s “Inferno” that has been depicted by Botticelli, Blake, Rodin and Dalí…”
This is civilizational hara-kiri by way of George Orwell. But par for the course for Yale, which, some years ago, nearly admitted a Taliban ambassador to the United States as a student. See here. They only backtracked when faced with massive alumni protests.
109 | Kragar Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:27:22am |
110 | pre-Boomer Marine brat Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:27:27am |
111 | justabill Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:27:28am |
re: #87 Creeping Eruption
I think I shall now try for an advanced degree from Yale. I will write a thesis of course, and defend it. I just won’t let anyone see what I write and the committee will not be able to question me on my conclusions - all in the interests of safety. I will publish my thesis, but not make it available. I do not want to offend anyone.///./
Let me be the first to call you “Mr President”.
112 | Mad Al-Jaffee Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:27:29am |
113 | Gearhead Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:28:00am |
I thought “This Page Intentionally Left Blank” was kind of an odd title…
114 | reloadingisnotahobby Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:28:40am |
re: #107 thedopefishlives
That and the Adds for SHIT I CAN’T AFFORD!!!
Gaaah!
115 | Creeping Eruption Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:28:41am |
re: #103 american sabra
Amazon is better. Then you get to write a review :)
[Link: www.amazon.com…]
LOL. “Tags customers associated with this product:” “cowardly”
117 | keithgabryelski Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:29:00am |
I would have met Islamic leaders half way:
Hey, here’s a graven image of Muhammad using only ASCII characters:
:-%P%
The first cartoon could be represented as:
O:-%P%
118 | eschew_obfuscation Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:29:11am |
Just upgraded to Firefox 3.0.13 … these pages are loading like lightning!
And, so far, it hasn’t crashed or locked up like Safari and IE8.
120 | Syrah Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:29:37am |
re: #92 Gus 802
Here’s their description:
The Cartoons That Shook the World
Jytte Klausen
The book sounds more fair than we would normally expect from academia.
That it would exclude the images that the book is based on cannot be just a simple oversight. Some of those images, particularly the ones that the Imam shopped around of the man in the pig mask that was not part of the original cartoons is material to the subject.
122 | Desert Dog Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:29:57am |
re: #117 keithgabryelski
I would have met Islamic leaders half way:
Hey, here’s a graven image of Muhammad using only ASCII characters:
Death to the maker of emoticons in the image of our prophet!
/
123 | Kosh's Shadow Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:29:58am |
re: #101 reloadingisnotahobby
What would Playboy or Penthouse be with out the Pics!!?
Sheeesh!
Out of business.
124 | spudly Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:30:14am |
She could well be right that the issue on the Muslim side was ginned-up (should that be djined-up?) for political reasons. But the 2d part of the problem was the cowardice of the west to hold firm to the value of freedom of expression.
Muslim outrage and violence were not in the least bit surprising, the reaction of the press in the West I suppose wasn’t as surprising as it was saddening.
125 | american sabra Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:30:38am |
re: #115 Creeping Eruption
LOL. “Tags customers associated with this product:” “cowardly”
It got an upding from me lol
126 | pre-Boomer Marine brat Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:31:44am |
re: #101 reloadingisnotahobby
What would Playboy or Penthouse be with out the Pics!!?
Sheeesh!
They could become publishers of text massaging.
127 | american sabra Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:31:55am |
re: #117 keithgabryelski
I would have met Islamic leaders half way:
Hey, here’s a graven image of Muhammad using only ASCII characters:
OMG stop!!! My sides are aching!!
128 | Gus Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:33:06am |
re: #120 Syrah
The book sounds more fair than we would normally expect from academia.
That it would exclude the images that the book is based on cannot be just a simple oversight. Some of those images, particularly the ones that the Imam shopped around of the man in the pig mask that was not part of the original cartoons is material to the subject.
Makes me wonder if some of the reasoning behind the censorship is because of her writing. Would they have censored it if was authored from an Islamacist’s perspective?
129 | Kragar Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:33:46am |
re: #117 keithgabryelski
I would have met Islamic leaders half way:
Hey, here’s a graven image of Muhammad using only ASCII characters:
Followed by
~O:%P%>
130 | Kenneth Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:33:53am |
re: #92 Gus 802
Here’s their description:
She concludes that the Muslim reaction to the cartoons was not—as was commonly assumed—a spontaneous emotional reaction arising out of the clash of Western and Islamic civilizations. Rather it was orchestrated, first by those with vested interests in elections in Denmark and Egypt, and later by Islamic extremists seeking to destabilize governments in Pakistan, Lebanon, Libya, and Nigeria. Klausen shows how the cartoon crisis was, therefore, ultimately a political conflict rather than a colossal cultural misunderstanding.
She got that right, Tariq Ramadan and the Muslim Brotherhood orchestrated the whole thing. Of course, anybody who read LGF back then new that already. Those facts were well covered here by Zombie, myself and several others.
131 | Creeping Eruption Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:34:03am |
re: #117 keithgabryelski
I would have met Islamic leaders half way:
Hey, here’s a graven image of Muhammad using only ASCII characters:
*
[channeling Vonnegut’s Breakfast of Champions]
132 | livefreeor die Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:34:32am |
You know, I think we should ban the Harry Potter books. We’re assuming there are no real magical wizards but what if there are and they get offended and decide to kill us all. Better to be safe.
/Can I have a Yale diploma now?
134 | Syrah Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:35:21am |
re: #128 Gus 802
Makes me wonder if some of the reasoning behind the censorship is because of her writing. Would they have censored it if was authored from an Islamacist’s perspective?
That would be interesting to test.
I was a little surprised that the university would publish the book at all from its description. I am half tempted to order a copy.
135 | pingjockey Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:35:32am |
re: #128 Gus 802
I’ll gaurentee you if it had been written by Imam Ali Baba and from an islamist perscpective about the evil cartoons by western running dog imperialists and pointed out that cartoons were blaspemous and evil they would have printed the cartoons!
136 | Mostly sane, most of the time. Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:35:43am |
re: #132 livefreeor die
I think you’re just afraid of you-know-who.
137 | wrenchwench Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:36:22am |
re: #93 vxbush
Hmm. I don’t suppose this has anything to do with it, but it’s interesting, none the less…
re: #98 vxbush
Interesting; connect my last post with this one from 2006 and ask: is Yale courting Saudi money, instead? They got left out in 2006 from Saudi Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal’s generosity to several US universities. Perhaps that stung, and they are trying to change that.
Speculation only on my part. I have no idea.
I think that has a lot to do with it. I’m sure many at Yale would like in on the money. Not all though:
Recalling that 15 of the 19 Sept. 11 perpetrators were Saudis, one might ask why Prince Alwaleed doesn’t use his money to promote Saudi understanding of Christians, Jews and other “infidels” outside rather than “educate kids at Harvard.” When Deborah Solomon of the New York Times asked him precisely that question, he responded, “Obviously, it could be something we are contemplating.”“Could be,” if the prince were truly interested in building bridges to promote peace and understanding. As for Yale, its fortuitous distance from the Alwaleed cash flow is anything but an embarrassment.
138 | livefreeor die Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:36:34am |
139 | Mostly sane, most of the time. Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:37:40am |
140 | livefreeor die Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:37:44am |
Instead of the Bulldog, Yale’s new mascot is the Lapdog.
142 | American Sabra Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:38:39am |
re: #84 anotherindyfilmguy
I never said Bush, or any other graduate from there is a coward. The people who self censored themselves however are.
I agree with your cowardice comment. They (he/she) are indeed cowards, but I wasn’t fond of your comment about elitists telling us what to do. Beck, Rush, et. al. tell people what to do all the time and I wouldn’t call them elitists. Boneheads, yes, but not elitists.
143 | Kragar Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:38:51am |
144 | subsailor68 Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:39:19am |
re: #132 livefreeor die
You know, I think we should ban the Harry Potter books. We’re assuming there are no real magical wizards but what if there are and they get offended and decide to kill us all. Better to be safe.
/Can I have a Yale diploma now?
LOL! I read somewhere that Rowling has decided to write another volume. Harry and the gang transfer from Hogwarts to a multi-cultural inner city school, where a wise, but hip young teacher spars not only with the students, but a crusty old white-haired principal. I think its called “Welcome Back Potter”.
145 | Picayune Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:40:20am |
re: #59 Gus 802
Yep, but that other constitutional law scholar/professor that currently resides at 1600 Penns Avenue argues curtly that even if “most of the social issues agenda for law violates the constitutional principle of equal citizenship”, well, that’s just trumped by “Fairness?” His JD is from Harvard, where all knowledge that’s fit to be taught is, well, sometimes taught, depending on the dictates of current PC.
Welcome to the new world of the absurd. If they can’t take a joke, Phuck’em!
…
Charles, the greater offense was their non-comical reaction that senselessly murdered many around the world. Know them by their deeds.
146 | Kragar Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:40:51am |
re: #144 subsailor68
LOL! I read somewhere that Rowling has decided to write another volume. Harry and the gang transfer from Hogwarts to a multi-cultural inner city school, where a wise, but hip young teacher spars not only with the students, but a crusty old white-haired principal. I think its called “Welcome Back Potter”.
*groan
147 | Czarny_Smok Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:41:04am |
re: #140 livefreeor die
Instead of the Bulldog, Yale’s new mascot is the Lapdog.
Nope, it’s now a Poodle.
148 | subsailor68 Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:41:15am |
149 | Sharmuta Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:41:25am |
re: #132 livefreeor die
You know, I think we should ban the Harry Potter books. We’re assuming there are no real magical wizards but what if there are and they get offended and decide to kill us all. Better to be safe.
/Can I have a Yale diploma now?
What’s interesting is the Potter books have their own little story line about free speech. Those who dare spoke the truth were threatened, punished or even killed by the dark lord and his followers. Freedom of Conscience is a right we should not abdicate ever- and it’s nice there is something popular out there getting this point across to kids albeit subtly.
151 | American Sabra Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:41:51am |
re: #144 subsailor68
LOL! I read somewhere that Rowling has decided to write another volume. Harry and the gang transfer from Hogwarts to a multi-cultural inner city school, where a wise, but hip young teacher spars not only with the students, but a crusty old white-haired principal. I think its called “Welcome Back Potter”.
hehe I was thinking “To Mohammed With Love.”
153 | spudly Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:44:08am |
re: #130 Kenneth
She got that right, Tariq Ramadan and the Muslim Brotherhood orchestrated the whole thing. Of course, anybody who read LGF back then new that already. Those facts were well covered here by Zombie, myself and several others.
Yes, but there were two parts to the crisis, IMO, one f which was the response in the West—an orgy of self-censorship, counter to our underlying support for freedom of expression.
154 | Shiplord Kirel Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:47:16am |
The usual suspects are still whining about Rush Limbaugh’s Nazi comments, pretending holy horror at the LaRouche swastika signs, and (of course) trying to smear all opposition with this.
This stuff is indeed infantile crap, but since when did the pop-left decide it was wrong to call someone a “nazi” or a “fascist?” Together with “Stalinist” these labels are routinely prevalent at even the lowest levels of media-slave lefty culture. For a long time, anyone with a neat haircut and a clean shirt has been a “fascist” to the mumia-cong conformist MOB.
Maybe Limbaugh and his gang can pretend it was all a joke that the rest of us just lack the cool to get, like when the degenerates who produce Family Guy had senior Nazis wearing McCain/Palin buttons. But, hey, they are so cool they can portray dogs having sex with humans and get away with it, so it’s ok for them to use any kind of invective or slander that crosses what passes for their minds.
I don’t like Limbaugh a bit and the LaRouchies are an obnoxious cult, but leftist complainst about their nazi shtick are little more than an attempt to assert a monumentally obvious double-standard.
155 | shortshrift Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:47:32am |
re: #27 Charles
It is the fact of representing the image of Mohammed that is offensive, not whether it is derogatory or approving.
Yale is showing respect for a religion by adhering to one of its tenets. This is even worse that policewomen patrolling in burkahs.
The university is aptly demonstrating how a little learning is a dangerous thing.
156 | zombie Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:47:51am |
re: #4 american sabra
It would be funny if it wasn’t so damn tragic.
Does Zombie at least get a hat tip in there somewhere?
Notice that the N.Y. Times (which also wrote about the Yale cowardice) quite obviously referred to the Mohammed Image Archive when writing the article. On my Dante’s Inferno page, I have rendition’s of Mohammed in Hell by Gustave Doré, Boticelli, William Blake, August Rodin, and Salvador Dali. It is the only place in the world where all these versions have been brought together. Lo and behold, the NY Times writes:
What’s more, they suggested that the Yale press also refrain from publishing any other illustrations of the prophet that were to be included, specifically, a drawing for a children’s book; an Ottoman print; and a sketch by the 19th-century artist Gustave Doré of Muhammad being tormented in Hell, an episode from Dante’s “Inferno” that has been depicted by Botticelli, Blake, Rodin and Dalí.
At least it’s good to know that my Mo site is influencing public discourse. Now that the N.Y. Times has promulgated this info, all their readers are now aware that depicting Mohammed was commonplace even by the great artists, not an outrage.
157 | Kenneth Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:50:52am |
re: #153 spudly
Yes indeed! A shocking number of people in the West knuckled under to the Islamofascists. The Cartoon War was a big victory for them.
158 | Vicious Babushka Thu, Aug 13, 2009 10:51:54am |
159 | Kenneth Thu, Aug 13, 2009 11:06:46am |
A NOAA-led team of scientists has found that the apparent increase in the number of tropical storms and hurricanes since the late 19th and early 20th centuries is likely attributable to improvements in observational tools and analysis techniques that better detect short-lived storms.
160 | rwdflynavy Thu, Aug 13, 2009 11:07:24am |
C’mon,
This would be like publishing a picture of “Piss Christ”. You know those crazy Christian fundies would go nuts rioting again!
//
161 | lostlakehiker Thu, Aug 13, 2009 11:28:45am |
Yale will be made to suffer for having written about the matter. Kaffirs are not supposed to say anything at all about a certain man, who as in Harry Potter stories had best not be named. Their caution will prove to have been insufficient.
Let’s hope nobody buys it. A book about pictures, without pictures, is lame.
162 | quickjustice Thu, Aug 13, 2009 12:12:43pm |
It isn’t just Yale. Not a single newspaper in NYC would publish those pictures except the N.Y. Sun. A swat team was deployed to protect the Sun after that decision.
Our journalists, with precious few exceptions, are cowards. And the First Amendment might as well not exist if U.S. journalists can be so easily intimidated.
163 | docrambo Thu, Aug 13, 2009 12:17:31pm |
Yale University Press’s reputation just sank to a status lower than whale dung. If anyone is interested, comments about this cowardly decision can be made directly to the Director of the Yale University Press at: john.donatich@yale.edu.
164 | SFGoth Thu, Aug 13, 2009 12:26:06pm |
There were never any such cartoons. Yale is just making this up. See for yourself!
165 | Jimmah Thu, Aug 13, 2009 12:51:22pm |
“This is an academic book for an academic audience by an academic press,” he continued. “There is no chance of this book having a global audience, let alone causing a global outcry.” He added, “It’s not just academic cowardice, it is just silly and unnecessary.”
And the Danish newspaper Jyllands Posten had no chance of having a global audience either.
It is disgusting to me that people are put at risk just for offending religious taboos, but I have to add that I think it is understandable to refuse to print the cartoons out of safety concerns - as long as they make it clear that the reason is safety, and don’t try to cover it up with some nonsense about ‘respect’.
166 | American Sabra Thu, Aug 13, 2009 1:28:44pm |
re: #156 zombie
Another feather in your cap! (And Charles too… don’t want to leave him out lol)
I just googled “Botticelli Mohammed” just for giggles. The first 5 or so links were about this book (boy they’re quick) and then zombietime appears.
I’m so turned off by the hypocrisy of not showing the pictures, that I won’t read the book, but I do hope they make the point that the “blasphemy” of showing his photos is a rather modern, extremist viewpoint which previously didn’t exist.
167 | Right Brain Thu, Aug 13, 2009 2:47:42pm |
Once again, Academia has shown its mettle, and it has none.
I especially like the routine “Yale University Press consulted two dozen authorities, including diplomats and experts on Islam… and the recommendation was unanimous”
In other-words it was buried in committee, no one is to blame, we did what we could, it was the “authorities.”
168 | jaunte Thu, Aug 13, 2009 4:20:47pm |
In other news, the State of Missouri will henceforth be known only by its full name, not by previous abbreviations which may have caused offense.
169 | hellosnackbar Fri, Aug 14, 2009 4:31:10am |
Is Yale whoring for petrodollars?
I think we should be told!
170 | MacGiolaPhadraig Fri, Aug 14, 2009 8:08:25am |
The Yale University Press is circling the bowl. I just bought Europe Between the Oceans: 9000 BC-AD 1000 and while the content is excellent, the copy editor must have been a day laborer from Uruguay. Hasn’t a clue where commas belong, screws up metric to english conversions, and leaves in fragments and run-ons. At $45 list, $35 at Amazon, and the Yale name, you’d think maybe someone at the English Dept. would …oh never mind.