Sierra Faith

The Global War On Terror is on — you just do not hear about it in our Antique Media.

This book, Alms for Jihad, is being pulled from library shelves.

Why?

Here is the grovelling apology from Cambridge University Press.

Stanley Kurtz asks:

The issues at stake include freedom of speech, national sovereignty, the legal and social effects of the Internet, and the war on terror. Several questions present themselves, including: 1) Is mainstream media coverage failing as a direct or indirect outcome of the earlier suits? 2) Did the earlier suits leveled at major newspapers and magazines include specific agreements forbidding future coverage? 3) Are American libraries complying with Cambridge University Press’s letter calling for the withdrawal of Alms for Jihad from their shelves? 4) What, if any, are their legal obligations to comply? 5) Are libraries that chose not to comply in any danger? 5) Why are we not hearing anything more from the American publishing industry about the threat they are under?

That is only a very partial list of questions. But right now I think there is time pressure on the question of the status of Alms for Jihad at various libraries. Within a week it could be too late to save the remaining copies of the book. We need a publicly mounted list of all American libraries containing Alms for Jihad. We need to make public inquiries as to whether the book is being removed or not. We need to know if the books, once removed, are being destroyed. We need to know exactly what is in the letter that Cambridge University Press has sent to American libraries. Does it call for destruction of the book, or merely removal (if destruction, then a campaign to return the books to the shelves will fail). If American libraries have a clear legal right not to comply with the Cambridge letter, and if they can be shown that they are not under any serious threat, they need to be told as much, and quickly.

I was able to order the book, but we will see if Cambridge University Press sends a follow-up email with its regrets — here is my email non-receipt:

From: orders@cup.org
Subject: Confirmation of your online order
Date: August 5, 2007 1:29:31 AM PDT
To: [snip]

This email is to confirm your online order which was received on 05/08/2007. Please note that this does not constitute a receipt.

If you have any queries or problems please e-mail orders@cup.org quoting order reference number [snip] and your account number [snip]

Contents of order

0521857309 Burr/Collins - Alms for Jihad
Qty:1 Price:$30.00 Cost:$30.00

Sales Tax $2.48 (Please note tax values reflected on this confirmation are estimated. Actual tax values will be charged to your credit card based on local requirements)
Delivery charge $6.00

TOTAL COST $38.48

PLEASE NOTE THE ESTIMATED SHIPPING TIMES

For shipments within the USA:
UPS/Ground Shipping - 48 contiguous states (no PO boxes)
7-10 Business Days estimated shipping time

USPS/US Mail - Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, APO, FPO, PO Boxes
10-15 Days estimated shipping time

For shipments to Canada:
CanPar Shipping
14 days estimated shipping time

For shipments to Mexico and Central America:
USPS International Surface Air Lift
15-20 Days estimated shipping time

I also saved the screenshots from the order website for possible future entertainment.

Bryan Preston at HotAir has more including a statement from Bonus Books Publisher Jeffrey A. Stern (as well as a librarian who must fly under the radical radar for fear of career reprisals):

“What happened to freedom of the press?” Stern said. “We’re talking about two very credible American writers here. The very idea that these authors could be silenced in the U.S. by a British court is not only outrageous and fraught with frightening journalistic implications, it’s simply un-American.”

Now we need to help another author who is being threatened for writing a book. Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld has written Funding Evil, Updated: How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It.

More from Bonus Books:

After several copies of the U.S.-released FUNDING EVIL happened to be purchased online by UK buyers, Bin Mahfouz filed suit against Ehrenfeld in Great Britain, where outdated libel laws still put the burden of proof on the defendant. Ehrenfeld was ordered to pay £114, 386.52 in fines and expenses, publish an apology and physically destroy her books. Because she is a U.S. citizen who writes and lives in New York City, Ehrenfeld did not acknowledge the British court. Instead, she filed suit in New York, seeking to block enforcement of the judgment, citing it as contrary to the free speech protections that Americans enjoy. In June, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in her favor, finding that Ehrenfeld’s claim CAN be brought before a U.S. court. The decision was hailed by prominent U.S. civil rights attorney Harvey Silverglate as one of “the most important First Amendment cases” of the last quarter century. As a result, every American-based writer and publisher in similar “libel tourism” situations can now seek a U.S. court decision, requesting that a foreign decision not be enforceable in this country.

In a recent Washington Times editorial about the Ehrenfeld case, scholar and Jihad Watch director Robert Spencer noted the release of a September 13, 2001 note from France’s foreign intelligence agency, the DGSE (General Directorate of External Security). He stated that French news site Geopolitique.com obtained the note in late June, revealing that in 1996, Bin Mahfouz was known to be one of the architects of a banking scheme constructed for the benefit of Osama bin Laden. The report also claims that both U.S. and British intelligence services had knowledge of this. “This is just the latest addition to the mountain of evidence from which Miss Ehrenfeld constructed her case in ‘Funding Evil,’” Spencer writes. “Even if this evidence is all mistaken, the British libel judgment against Ehrenfeld appears all the more fantastic and unjustifiable in light of the fact that French intelligence agents had documents allowing them to come to the same conclusion she did.”

Ehrenfeld, who is also a Member of the Board of Directors of the Committee on the Present Danger (www.fightingterror.org), told the Chronicle of Higher Education on Monday that she finds Cambridge University Press’ decision “despicable,” and that as she understands it, they “caved immediately.” If and when the New York Court of Appeals decides that there is jurisdiction over Bin Mahfouz, Ehrenfeld’s case would proceed on its merits—allowing Ehrenfeld to conduct pre-trial “discovery” of Bin Mahfouz’s financial activities to further confirm the accuracy of her claims against him.

Should we care about any of this?

It’s just a couple of books, right?

Yes, but two books that, if the Saudi Arabian libel tourist Khalid bin Mahfouz has his way, you will not be able to read.

Has it come to this? Wealthy Saudi sheiks get to tell us what we can and cannot read in the USA?

Now, what will Western Civilization do in response to this assault?

To be a bit less melodramatic and a bit more practical, what will you do in response?

Michelle Malkin stands up for critics of jihad.

For my part, I have started with this post and also bought a copy of Funding Evil (and will report what happens with my Alms for Jihad order — or even how long the Cambridge University Press will keep this book description link active since “there is no truth whatsoever in these serious allegations” described in the book they “published in good faith”).

Please spread the word.

UPDATE:

Mark Steyn asks:

How will we lose the war against “radical Islam”?

. . .

We’ve gotten used to one-way multiculturalism: The world accepts that you can’t open an Episcopal or Congregational church in Jeddah or Riyadh, but every week the Saudis can open radical mosques and madrassahs and pro-Saudi think-tanks in London and Toronto and Dearborn, Mich., and Falls Church, Va. And their global reach extends a little further day by day, inch by inch, in the lengthening shadows, as the lights go out one by one around the world.

Suppose you’ve got a manuscript about the Saudis. Where are you going to shop it? Think Cambridge University Press will be publishing anything anytime soon?

This entry was posted on Sunday, August 5th, 2007 at 4:23 am and is filed under Antique Media, Culture, Education, History, Law, National Security, Public Square, Reading. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.