Yale University Press bans controversial cartoons of Muhammad in new book about controversial cartoons of Muhammad.

I don't expect anyone to read this ridiculously long post. I'm just ranting. This is from The New York Times, with a fresh coat of Whitening for Hot Air....

It’s not all that surprising that Yale University Press would be wary of reprinting notoriously controversial cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in a forthcoming book.

Actually, it is surprising. And it's funny. When I was in the literary retail racket, I didn't hesitate to sell Rushdie's "Satanic Verses" or "American Psycho" by Brett Easton Ellis, or to host autographings by the Roe vs Wade lawyer, all despite some threats. You hire a security guard, and go on with your job.

Full Disclosure: I'm not proud of it, but I also sold a lot of Danielle Steel novels.

After all, when the 12 caricatures were first published by a Danish newspaper a few years ago and reprinted by other European publications, Muslims all over the world angrily protested, calling the images — which included one in which Muhammad wore a turban in the shape of a bomb — blasphemous.

That makes it sound like an immediate cause and effect relationship. It wasn't until a group of outrage-mongers produced a drawing of Big Mo's face on the body of a pig, several months after the initial publication of the cartoons, that the "Muslims all over the world angrily protested".

In the Middle East and Africa some rioted, burning and vandalizing embassies; others demanded a boycott of Danish goods; a few nations recalled their ambassadors from Denmark. In the end at least 200 people were killed.

That's what happens when you spread ink on paper to make satirical comments about all-powerful beings who can't take up for themselves.

So Yale University and Yale University Press consulted two dozen authorities, including diplomats and experts on Islam and counterterrorism, and the recommendation was unanimous:

Let's get real here....Is there ANY doubt in your mind what that group is going to recommend?

The book, “The Cartoons That Shook the World,” should not include the 12 Danish drawings that originally appeared in September 2005.

This is like writing a book about pencil sharpeners, but being told that you can't mention, you know, those devices with rotating blades that, you know what I'm talking about? they, like, fit on the end of wooden writing instruments, and you rotate them so that, you know, it gives them a fine point?

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 what we now call academic freedom. It's why they get tenure. It's why people who work in that environment have jobs for life. So they don't have to worry about offending people who think their god(s) can't take up for themselves.

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.

I can't wait to open this book and dive into the Politically Correct Sensitivityspeak that Yale is going to dump into the preface. Can't wait. Will reprint it here.

John Donatich, the director of Yale University Press, said by telephone that the decision was difficult, but the recommendation to withdraw the images, including the historical ones of Muhammad, was “overwhelming and unanimous.” 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.

John Donatich can be described in words also, but I'll refrain. Notice the weasel words "could" and "interpreted".

He noted that he had been involved in publishing other controversial books — like “The King Never Smiles” by Paul M. Handley, a recent unauthorized biography of Thailand’s current monarch — and “I’ve never blinked.” But, he said, “when it came between that and blood on my hands, there was no question.”

A lot of great work has been produced in dangerous circumstances. Tom Paine - Common Sense. William Tyndale - The English Bible. John Bunyan - Pilgrim's Progress. Voltaire scratching out plays in the Bastille.

The line ends with John Donatich.

Reza Aslan, a religion scholar and the author of “No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam,” is a fan of the book but decided to withdraw his supportive blurb that was to appear in the book after Yale University Press dropped the pictures. The book is “a definitive account of the entire controversy,” he said, “but to not include the actual cartoons is to me, frankly, idiotic.” In Mr. Aslan’s view no danger remains. “The controversy has died out now, anyone who wants to see them can see them,” he said of the cartoons, noting that he has written and lectured extensively about the incident and shown the cartoons without any negative reaction. He added that none of the violence occurred in the United States: “There were people who were annoyed, and what kind of publishing house doesn’t publish something that annoys some people?”

Most academic writing is so dense and burdened with so much jargon that it really doesn't annoy anyone. No one finishes it who doesn't already agree with it.

“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.”

True. My younger brother is a history professor, and recently published a book through an academic press. He's got an interesting story to tell, he's a great writer, but the dang book costs $78.00. Not much chance of a global audience there.

Mr. Donatich said that the images were still provoking unrest as recently as last year when the Danish police arrested three men suspected of trying to kill the artist who drew the cartoon depicting Muhammad’s turban as a bomb. He quoted one of the experts consulted by Yale — Ibrahim Gambari, special adviser to the secretary general of the United Nations and the former foreign minister of Nigeria — as concluding: “You can count on violence if any illustration of the prophet is published. It will cause riots, I predict, from Indonesia to Nigeria.”

That swath of real estate from Indonesia to Nigeria doesn't include Yale, does it?

Aside from the disagreement about the images, Ms. Klausen said she was also disturbed by Yale’s insistence that she could read a 14-page summary of the consultants’ recommendations only if she signed a confidentiality agreement that forbade her from talking about them. “I perceive it to be a gag order,” she said, after declining to sign. While she could understand why some of the individuals consulted might prefer to remain unidentified, she said, she did not see why she should be precluded from talking about their conclusions.

I've beaten this dead horse elsewhere, but outside of a Townhall Healthcare meeting, is there any place on earth that stifles Free Speech more than academia? (I really do hate to sound so anti-intellectual, but damn....)

Linda Koch Lorimer, vice president and secretary of Yale University, who had discussed the summary with Ms. Klausen, said on Wednesday that she was merely following the original wishes of the consultants, some of whom subsequently agreed to be identified.

1. We're going to get people from all over the world to tell us what to do in this situation.

2. We're going to keep their recommendations (and identities) a secret.

3. The only way to read their recommendations is to promise that you won't ever, ever, ever discuss their recommendations.

4. Therefore, the 14-page document outlining their recommendations could be whatever the person who typed it wants it to be.

5. Brilliant.

....Other publishers, including The New York Times, chose not to print the cartoons or images of Muhammad when the controversy erupted worldwide in February 2006...

Face Of Muhammad cartoon came from here.