“Free Speech Doesn’t Mean Careless Talk” – NARA – 513606 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Islamphobia is being disguised and defended as “Free Speech“. I wonder if the Nazis used the same excuse when they were spewing venom against the Jews.
“Free Speech” is not sacrosanct in America or anywhere else in the world. There are exceptions.
1) In the US, one cannot shout “Fire” in a crowded theater. It is not considered “Free Speech”.
2) In the US, one could not publish the detailed plans to create a Nuclear Bomb. That was banned. (I am not proposing that it should be available (I am just making a point here)
3) While the detials on creating a bomb does exist in the Encyclopdia Britanica, a US citizen was disallowed to put in on the web.
4) In the US for decades the Native Americans, women and African Americans had no right to any speech (even though the First Amendment was in vogue).
5) Anti-Semitism is not considered feee speech and falls under a law unto itself.
Free speech doesn’t mean careless talk^ – NARA – 535383 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
6) hate speech is not considered Free Speech and is punishable under US law
7) Incitement to violence or murder is not considered Free Speech and is punishbale under US Law
8) While deragatory comments against Black, Women, Jews, Handicapped folks, Children may be technically allowed, but no politicians or artist can really make them and survive politcally
9) Pedophilia is not accepted as Free Speech and any communication encouraging it is not covered by the First Amendment
10) In Europe, anyone speaking against the Holocust is gagged. Holocust Denial is not covered under Free speech
11) Flying the Swastika is illegal is most European countries and is not considered Free Speech
12) Almost all European and other countries have Blasphemy Laws–though they are not used to prosecute. The point remins that there are limits to Free speech
13) Bullying in schools in whatever form is not covered under the First Amendment and there are laws against it.
14) Most recently the Frech magazine was prohibited from publishing nude pictures of the Royal family. So there are limits to free speech
Getup Get God (Photo credit: prettywar-stl)
Blasphemy Laws exist in almost all Western countries. In fact when British Muslims tried to invoke the UK Blaspheme Law, the courts there decided that British Balsphemey Laws only protected Chritianity and other religions remained unprotected.
Lets pick a few countries which have been in the news:
Denmark
In Denmark, Paragraph 140 of the penal code is about blasphemy. The paragraph has not been used since 1938 when a Nazi group was convicted for antisemitic propaganda. The hate speech paragraph (266b) is used more frequently. Abolition of the blasphemy clause was proposed in 2004, but failed to gain a majority
In Austria, two sections of the penal code relate to blasphemy:[2]
§ 188 : Vilification of Religious Teachings
§ 189 : Disturbance of Religious Practice
Free Speech Radio News. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Canada
Sections 318, 319, and 320 of the Code forbid hate propaganda.[3] “Hate propaganda” means “any writing, sign or visible representation that advocates or promotes genocide or the communication of which by any person would constitute an offence under section 319.” Section 318 prescribes imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years for anyone who advocates genocide. The Code defines genocide as the destruction of an “identifiable group.” The Code defines an “identifiable group” as “any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.” Section 319 prescribes penalties from a fine to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years for anyone who incites hatred against any identifiable group. Section 320 allows a judge to confiscate publications which appear to be hate propaganda. Under section 319, an accused is not guilty: (a) if he establishes that the statements communicated were true; (b) if, in good faith, the person expressed or attempted to establish by an argument an opinion on a religious subject or an opinion based on a belief in a religious text; (c) if the statements were relevant to any subject of public interest, the discussion of which was for the public benefit, and if on reasonable grounds he believed them to be true; or (d) if, in good faith, he intended to point out, for the purpose of removal, matters producing or tending to produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group in Canada.
Netherlands
The Kingdom of the Netherlands prohibits blasphemy by a provision in its penal code. Article 147 punishes (by up to three months in jail or a fine of the second category (i.e. up to €3,800[34])) anyone who publicly, orally or in writing or depiction, offends religious feelings by scornful blasphemy.[35] Furthermore, article 429bis prohibits displaying blasphemous material at places visible from the public road.[36] The law came into being in the 1930s after the Communist Party called for Christmas to be dropped from the list of state holidays.[37] The last successful conviction under Article 147 took place in the early 1960s when a student newspaper was fined 100 guilders for satirizing the New Testament.[37] The law against blasphemy complements laws against racial discrimination and incitement to violence.
In 1966, the Public Prosecution Service prosecuted Gerard Reve under Article 147. In his novel Nader tot U (Nearer to Thee), Reve describes the narrator’s sexual intercourse with God, who is incarnated in a donkey. The court of first instance convicted Reve. He appealed. In April 1968, an appeal court quashed the conviction.[38][39]
In November 2008, Justice Minister Ernst Hirsch Ballin expressed the country’s coalition government’s intent to repeal Article 147.[38] He said the government would strengthen the legislation against discrimination to prohibit any insult to any group of people.[40] In May 2009, the government decided to leave the law as it is. The decision followed a high court ruling in which a man who had put up a poster that read “stop the tumour that is Islam” was found not guilty of insulting a group of people on the grounds of their religion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law
Massachusetts, Michigan, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Wyoming, and Pennsylvania have laws that make reference to blasphemy.[1] Some US states still have blasphemy laws on the books from the founding days. For example, Chapter 272 of the Massachusetts General Laws — a provision based on a similar colonial era Massachusetts Bay statute enacted in 1697 — states:
Section 36. Whoever willfully blasphemes the holy name of God by denying, cursing or contumeliously reproaching God, His creation, government or final judging of the world, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching or exposing to contempt and ridicule, the holy word of God contained in the holy scriptures shall be punished by imprisonment in jail for not more than one year or by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars, and may also be bound to good behavior.The history of Maryland’s blasphemy statutes suggests that even into the 1930s, the First Amendment was not recognized as preventing states from passing such laws. An 1879 codification of Maryland statutes prohibited blasphemy:
Art. 72, sec. 189. If any person, by writing or speaking, shall blaspheme or curse God, or shall write or utter any profane words of and concerning our Saviour, Jesus Christ, or of and concerning the Trinity, or any of the persons thereof, he shall, on conviction, be fined not more than one hundred dollars, or imprisoned not more than six months, or both fined and imprisoned as aforesaid, at the discretion of the court.
According to the marginalia, this statute was adopted in 1819, and a similar law dates back to 1723. In 1904, the statute was still on the books at Art. 27, sec. 20, unaltered in text. As late as 1939, this statute was still the law of Maryland. But in 1972, in Maryland v. Irving K. West, the Maryland Court of Appeals (the state’s highest court) declared the blasphemy law unconstitutionalPennsylvania enacted a law against blasphemy in 1977. In the fall of 2007, George Kalman sent the completed forms for incorporating a company to the Pennsylvania Department of State. Kalman wanted to incorporate a movie-production company which he called I Choose Hell Productions, LLC. A week later, Kalman received a notice from the Pennsylvania Department of State which informed him that his forms could not be accepted because a business name “may not contain words that constitute blasphemy, profane cursing or swearing or that profane the Lord’s name.” In February 2009, Kalman filed suit to have the provision against blasphemy struck down as unconstitutional.[1] On June 30, 2010, U.S. District Judge Michael M. Bayslon of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, in a 68-page Opinion, ruled in favor of Kalman, finding that the Pennsylvania’s blasphemy statute violated both the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution
Here are examplesof enforecement of Blasphemy Laws in the USA
Didn’t the National Portrait Gallery–heavily funded by the American taxpayer–just pull an item from a privately funded exhibit because it offended some Christians? In early December, an 11-second video clip of ants crawling over a crucified Jesus was removed after complaints by the Catholic League and a comment by then soon-to-be Speaker of the House John Boehner that the video was a misuse of taxpayer money. U.S. Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.) then called for Congress to launch an official investigation into the matter
http://onfaith.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/Barry_Lynn/2011/01/blasphemy_laws_alive_and_well_in_the_us.html
Muslims are saying
a) “Elevate Islamphobia to the same level as Anti-Semitism and give it the same protection”
b) “Consider blasphemy against Prophet Muhammad, Moses, Jesus, David, and against Budha, Krishna and others as hate speech” and do not allow it. This is simple and should be considered as a legal basis to stop the agression against Islam.
Unfortunately Muslims got duped in the game played by CFR. Their membership has been eroding the U S constitution and Bill of Rights from long time consistently.
The latest Global demonstration will be used to throw 1st amendment in the garbage can by U N. Next targets are the American citizen of any color, except Khazars and Ashkenazi, as Terrorist.
Welcome to N W O as proclaimed by Bush Sr. son of German immigrant that financed Nazi and related to British Royal Bloodline (Also German from Windsor Family).
Assalamu-Elekum
You are getting confused about the difference between anti-semetism and what you call islamophibia. Anti Semetism is the denigration of people because they are jews. Dsiputing the content and accurancy of the tenets of the jewish religion is not anti semetism. In the same way, you cannot compare someone disputing that Mohammed was a prophet with anti semetism. You believe he was a prophet. Someone else may not. You may be right. They may be right. To attempt to outlaw them being able to say something that goes against your beliefs is wrong. I may believe that fire comes from dragons. It would be ridiculous for me to attempt to use the law to stop you stating that there is no real historical evidence of the existence of dragons just because the idea that I am wrong offends my beliefs.
There are not blasphemy laws in the US. There are a lot of religious Christians that make a fuss and often manage to get things banned to keep them quiet. This is wrong. Rather than trying to extend this to other religions, we should be trying to reduce it for everyone.
Blasphemy laws are bad. Your beliefs should not be protected by law from people who have different beliefs. What you are asking is that to express a belief as an atheist should not be allowed by law. This is patently ridiculous.
With all due respect, we cannot allow you to decide what is Anti-Semitism, Jews decide that–and they have.
With all due respect, we cannot allow you to decide what is racism. Let Mexicans/Latinos, Jews/Muslims decide that-and they have
With all due respect we cannot allow you to decide what is Islamphobia. Let Muslims decide that.
The Right to Free Speech is not sacrosanct, it has exceptions. Hate speech under the guise of “Free Speech” has to be banned.
In most of Europe denial of the Hocaust is considered Anti-Semitism. There are laws agsint Hocosut denial–despite Voltair’s vociferous pronouncements Alegerians and Arabs (DeGaulle said “Algeria is France and France is Algeria”) had no right to any “Free Speech” or independence (from French colonialism).
Mocking what Muslims consider a prophet–for us it is Islamphobia–it is hate speech, bullying, and therefore not protected under the First Amendment.
One day this will be accepted by the US courts
Muslims make up a certain percentage of the American population 3%-16% Depending on who you believe (Chicago Times says 16%, NYT says 3%). We have rights too. We will defend our rights. We shall overcome, this too shall pass.
Yes but what is the definition of hate speech? Why should your belief that Mohammed is a prophet prevent people that do not believe that he is a prophet from criticising him?
If I believed that Tom Cruise was a prophet, would you be happy with a law preventing you from ever being able to publically criticise him?
Muslims do have rights in America. They also have rights in all the other countries they live in. Why they don’t have is special rights. The right to never have to find something offensive.
How do you create a law preventing blasphemy if there are people of two religions which have completely contradictory beliefs? Who gets protected by law? The larger population? The smaller one? Should they both not be able to practice part of their religions to protect the sensibilities of the other ones?
What about atheists? Are they to be banned from suggesting that god does not exist because it offends religious people? Are religious people to be banned from claiming god does exist for fear of offending atheists?
I’m sure if there is a god up there, he can deal with blasphemy huimself without having to rely on a small group of his followers moaning and rioting.
There are lots of religious beliefs that I find incredibly offensive such as the ritual mutilation of children and ritual slaughter of animals. I have yet to start threatening anyone with death or demanding a law preventing them from doing it though. This is because I am a grown up and have enough confidence in my beliefs to ignore things I don’t like.
Hate Speech is very clearly defined in the case of Anti-Antisemitism. Calling someone a Spic, Kraut, Nigger, and Camel-jock is hate speech.
Holocaust denial is illegal in Europe. What about all the points that you brought up? Obviously there are folks who do not believe in the holocaust–but those rights are ignored.
If you are interested in an intelligent discussion please do not bring up spurious topics and point scoring and dumping on other countries.
Lets not make it more complicated than it is. The game of provoking Muslims under the guise of “free speech”is getting old.Making fun of any prophet (in Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Christianity) as a provocative gesture should be considered Hate Speech.
@ Dougal
Criticizing the Muslim prophet is not the issue, nor your disbelief and Muslims belief in him.
You can state any of his historical event, criticize it, and their would be a rebuttal back and forth.
Like wise I may also criticize Krishna and you may rebut in his defense.
The problem will arise when I make a movie showing Krishna naked with naked 16016 young women / girls in a huge bed.
This is where I have crossed the red line and expect an angry response from you and other Hindus.
The reason I would not commit such an act is due to reason that (Krishna) may have been a prophet as ALLAH has sent 124,000 Prophets to every people, tribe and nations and further more, depicting any body in pictures or other forms are absolutely forbidden. ALLAH destroyed the earlier nations due to their rebellious nature and Blasphemy.
Aad, Samud, Iram in totality. Assyrian Empire, Babylonian Empire, Roman Empire, Persian Empire, but not its people. Like wise ALLAH destroyed the Muslim Empire due to their indulgence in what was forbidden. Nonetheless there is an awakening in the Muslim Countries and the need of having just one ruler instead of 52.
There were no Blasphemies laws during the time of the Final Messenger (pbuh) and / or the first 4 Caliphs. He / they were sent to give the message only by reasons and no compulsion.
Muslims at the current time and moment are under compulsion to renegade from Islam or face death. And they are responding to keep their belief, life and property safe without having too many options for reaction.
The Major attraction of Islam is equality for every human without any prejudices on class system or tribal system or color.
This is the reason that 68,000 non-Muslims reverts to Islam daily including your best known actress Kareena Kapoor. All the negatives TV, Print Media campaign and propaganda has no effect on Islam. People (Muslims) got angry due to love for the Final Messenger (pbuh) just as you would, if I had made a ridiculous movie on Krishna.
This whole episode was staged for Geo-political reason as proven by Dr. Henry Kissinger remark in an interview, “we should expedite this crises into opportunity”.
Assalamu-Elekum
Openly, I have been following the events; it has been a good learning process. Honest to goodness, from satanic verses, an unfortunate attempt to burn the Holy Quran to cartoon and films, the miscreants have kissed the dust by dishing out this dirt, absolutely worst than a wolf whistle. All this could easily be categorized as a multitude of sins.
I believe, Pakistan certainly went in a different manner by celebrating the day as a day of respect for the Holy Prophet (PBUH). Perhaps this is what actually has allowed most of the people to be less than pleased. The other verdict was from Turkey, labeling it as a crime.
Now the after math, an actress of the movie went to court against Google and it was felt as Google is yet to winnow the offensive material from YouTube she might come out with flying colors resulting into abscission of the substance. I had the following questions, could that actress term the verdict as decision from the “Kangaroo Court“? Why Google has partially blocked the movie? Why has not any American Muslim approached to the court neither against the people behind this movie nor versus Google?
On account of media houses, only Al Jazeera did a bit of job by having an interview with the Editor of that Newspaper from France. On CNN, Zakaria asked a few questions from Mr. Rushdie, openly, he is going to play both ends by pronouncing it as “ Rage Machine “. Earlier some one had a cleric from Egypt. BBC had covered it under its usual programme “Have Your Say”. The question is why any media conglomerate didn’t come up with an idea to discuss the issue with the Holy Father.
In the same breath, there were a few good articles from the US academia and a few from the Euro zone. All suggesting to move towards technological / digital research to deal with such, what is being termed at large as “Exceptional Situation “.
Now the demonstrations, particularly in Pakistan. Yes, Bad news travels fast. The dirt did urge the people to put the bee in the bonnet. Yes, it was a pain in the neck; rather still it is, they would keep on baying for blood of those perverts. On account of literacy it would take time when people do learn to have some thing done in fine art. Along side protesters media must not egg upon such events negatively.
Its certainly has been meat and drink to those American miscreants. Yup! YouTube has certainly taken it under the chin. Now the big question; has Pakistan along side any other Muslim country around the globe enacted any such cyber law which could coerce Google that this particular content has violated the local laws and these countries must be as bold as brass. Further, the users must not harden their hearts towards YouTube.
Yup! Freedom of expression has been the drape. On the other side, it would take best will in the world to turn over the leaf. The last Blasphemy case was in 1838; even Blasphemy is included in the List of Sins of Bible.
Akhbar, with all due respect, we can’t have laws that are based on someone’s vague definition of offensive. Laws can’t be based on a definition that changes, and is different from person to person. It is not right to punish someone when the law isn’t clear on what exactly is illegal. Offending someone is not something you can know you have done until the charges are brought up. Blasphemy is basically a crime you can be charged for because the accuser said you did it. But it is not for the accuser to decide that a crime was committed, that is not justice, it is for the law to decide. Laws must be clear in order to be just, and by definition, since they are based on the opinion of the accuser(s), they are not clear.
It is for people to decide for themselves what is offensive to them, but in what is their opinion “offensive” should not be automatically illegal. That is essentially making up a law to punish somebody dynamically. You don’t really know much about US law, only about European and English-style law which is rather backwards, so let’s not even talk about that.
Free speech should have limitations, but only if it directly can cause harm to somebody. Having laws against offending people is just childish and misguided. Freedom from criticism is not a right. People are responsible for their own actions, not other people’s words. Committing violence, and blaming on what some random idiot said is just childish. If you don’t like it, get over it. Be mature. We don’t ignore the rights of people who spout hate speech, we simply ignore them.
Dougal,
In all honesty with sincerity tell why the defamed anti Islam video by the US Copt is freedom of speech;
1. Does it engage in a an academic discussion
2. Does it educate and provide credible information
3. Was it tasteful honouring the sentiment of 1.4 billion
There are limitations to Freedom of Speech and this was not it. It was an attack on the entire Muslim world. Americans supporting this embocile had come into our homes and desecrated something so peronal and close to all of us. It was an insult and “attack” on all of us.
There is not a law in any land across the world if it did not view Islam with prejudice that would recognise that video akin to freedom of speech.
Your insensitivity is reflect of your contempt and hatred towards Muslims reflected in yuor wars and actions enfircing certain peoples desire to create a divided world.
We Muslims welcome a discussion, a debate but honourable with respect. We invite each and every one of you American pro Anti ISlam brigade to invite the Muslims to an international debate and exchange.
You will have the right to exercise your freedom and misjudgement and Muslims would equally have the right to respond in a controlled and respectful environment.
I ask each and every one of you pro anti Islam brigade to come forward and demand to be heard and request an International debate televised the world over.
We Muslims do not deny critique of our faith on the contrary look at History and realsie this we are the only religion that has ask you to question the existence of God and authenticity of Qu’ran in context. Where as the Christian Church denied any critique of the faith we Muslims invited you to question us and engage us.
Today we invite you again, come alone, comoe in tens, come in your thousands and engage the Muslim world in a discussion so that you may dispell a decade long of deliberate lies and defamation to demonise Islam.
Very logical argument
Al Ansar: Please register as a user (for comments) on Rupee News. We would appreciate it!
Vague Laws?
Anti-Semitism is clearly defined. Hate Speech is clearly described. Incitement to violence is on the books. Instigating a riot is illegal. Hate, bigotry and racism is illegal is these United States. The KKK was taken to court and they lost their property and had to file bankruptcy. Muslims ask for dignity for all prophets and religions and hate speech not be allowed.
EVENTS HAVE OVERTAKEN YOUR ARGUMENT: Russia and Brazil have arrested the head of Google in those countries. Google and You-Tube have been sued by the actress who was misled by this bufoon. Capone was not convicted for his mafia and illegal activities. He was put away for life for IRS tax-evasion. The same will happen to this idiot. Koula or whatever his name is scumbag criminal who will find “Muslim Love” while he enjoys his days in jail. If he is ever released he may have difficulty walking
We however support forgiving him and letting him lose.
Aron: Please register as a user (for comments) on Rupee News. We would appreciate it!
“Here are examplesof enforecement of Blasphemy Laws in the USA …
Didn’t the National Portrait Gallery–heavily funded by the American taxpayer–just pull an item from a privately funded exhibit because it offended some Christians? In early December, an 11-second video clip of ants crawling over a crucified Jesus was removed after complaints by the Catholic League and a comment by then soon-to-be Speaker of the House John Boehner that the video was a misuse of taxpayer money. U.S. Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.) then called for Congress to launch an official investigation into the matter”
Taxpayer support for something – i.e. government subsidy – is different from banning it. Incidentally another such work, Piss Christ involving a crucifix embedded in a jar of urine, is back on exhibit at a New York area gallery. There were similar denunciations of this movies by US politicians but there was no subsidy of it. Similarly, like (8) politicians haven’t been speaking very positively of this film.
Valerie Solinas book should have been banned, because she said some very horrible things in it, like that men should be “exterminated”, a lot of things which she should have repented of. That book should not be on this computer for sale.
When the movie “angels and demons” came out, it was opposed by the Vatican. The subject was a direct punch against Christianity. But the movie was screened across Europe and Americas. As if that was not enough, National Geographic went to Israel to investigate the grave of Jesus, to support the theory proposed in the movie. Still that was enough, they published the gospel of Judas, which turned all theories of Christianity upside down. All this was met by a cool head among the Christian masses, no violent demonstration, no loss of lives no destruction of property. When there was no ban on Jesus films, why should there be a ban on Mohammad’s movie ? It is surprising that this simple logic doesn’t enter the head of 1 billion Muslims.
The Muslims fight back the freedom of speech law by stating Halocaust denial laws existing in Europe, which is a completely different topic. Halocaust is a reality. It was to be learned so that it doesn’t be repeated again. Just like the horrors of Hiroshima bombings are shown on TV again and again so that future generations learn the horrors of using atom bombs. Denials of Halocaust not only hurts the sentiments of the Jews, but also poses the danger of repeating again in future. When Schindler’s List was released, many Muslim nations banned the movie. Here you can see the double standard of the Muslims. They protest why Halocaust denial is considered an offence by law in Europe, but at the same time ban pro Halocaust movies in their countries. The then Malaysian PM Mahatir Mohammad said the movie “over glorified” the Jews. This shows the dumb and twisted logic of the Muslims, which now they demand to be applied to the advanced and educated Western nations. This of course will never happen.
The West has banned all Anti-Semetic speech, the Swastika, and even Holocaust denial. Muslims want all material against all prophets or religious figures of major religions to be considered hate-speech
Just because you are not a good Christian, doesn’t mean I have to be a bad Muslim. If you dont protech Jesus, doesn’t mean I have to stop protecting my religious figures.
Its fashionable to jump on the Islamphobic bandwagon–instead of supporting a just cause, you are supporting the bigots.
Here is stuff banned in the UK:
Commercials for a skincare brand featuring pop star Katy Perry and teen sensation Justin Bieber have been banned in the UK by advertising watchdogs.
The TV adverts have been taken off air over claims the British versions of the products do not contain the same ingredients as the American range, which has been endorsed by a number of other stars including Elle Macpherson and Avril Lavigne, reported Daily Mail online.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/katy-perry-justin-bieber-adverts-banned-in-the-uk/977084
Looks like the kettle calling the pot black:
In 1999 Maharashtra government banned the Marathi play ‘Me Nathuram Godse Boltoy” or ‘I am Nathuram Godse Speaking. Distribution of all pornographic materials is banned in India. Heavy Metal band Slayer’s 2006 album Christ Illusion was banned in India after Catholic churches in the country took offense to the artwork of the album and a few song titles and launched a protest against it. The album was taken off shelves and the remaining catalog was burnt by EMI Music India
A book on Shivaji by Queens University professor Jayant Lele was banned because this book raised a question about Shivaji’s father. Also banned was Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India by American scholar James Laine. Laine’s translation of the Sivabharata, entitled The Epic of Shivaji, was also banned.
In Punjab the Bhavsagar Granth was banned by the state government. The Polyester Prince – (ISBN 1-86448-468-3) a biography of the Indian businessman Dhirubhai Ambani was banned
In 2003, the Indian Censor Board banned the film ‘Gulabi Aaina (The Pink Mirror)’, a film on Indian transsexuals produced and directed by Sridhar Rangayan.
In 2004, the documentary Final Solution, which showed the massacre of Muslims was banned
In 2006, seven states (Nagaland, Punjab, Goa, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh) have banned the release or exhibition of the Hollywood movie The Da Vinci Code (and also the book
The Central Board of Film Certification demanded five cuts from the 2011 American film The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo because of some scenes containing nudity. The producers and the director David Fincher finally decided not to release the film in India
Here are the books banned in India
http://www.thedailybeast.com/galleries/2011/04/02/famous-books-banned-in-india.html#viewAll
What happened to M.F Hussian, who simply repeated the paintings that already existed on the temples. He had to leave India.
https://www.google.com/search?q=contribution+of+mf+husain+to+indian+art&start=10&hl=en&client=opera&hs=25x&sa=N&rls=en&channel=suggest&prmd=imvnso&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&ei=pTF_UPKkOcPH0QGfv4DQCw&ved=0CEsQsAQ4Cg&biw=1567&bih=746
Various books, and songs have been banned in Bharat.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-07-13/news-and-interviews/32662590_1_bra-california-dreams-tour-katy-perry
Here is a list of books banned around the world:
Alphabetical list
Title Author Type Reason
The 120 Days of Sodom (1905) De Sade Novel Banned in South Korea in September 2012 as obscene.
About a Silence in Literature Živorad Stojkovi? Essay Banned in Yugoslavia by court order in 1951.[1]
A Feast for the Seaweeds (1983) Haidar Haidar Novel Banned in Egypt and several other Arab states, and even resulted in a belated angry reaction from the clerics of Al-Azhar University upon reprinting in Egypt in the year 2000. The clerics issued a Fatwa banning the novel, and accused Haidar of heresy and offending Islam. Al-Azhar University students staged huge protests against the novel, that eventually led to its confiscation.[2][3][4]
Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland (1865) Lewis Carroll Children’s Novel/Adventure Used to be banned in the province of Hunan, China, beginning in 1931 for its portrayal of anthropomorphized animals acting on the same level of complexity as human beings. The censor General Ho Chien believed that attributing human language to animals was an insult to humans. He feared that the book would teach children to regard humans and animals on the same level, which would be “disastrous.”[5]
All Quiet on the Western Front (1929) Erich Maria Remarque Anti-war novel Banned in Nazi Germany for being demoralizing and insulting to the Wehrmacht.[6]
American Psycho (1991) Bret Easton Ellis Fiction novel Sale and purchase was banned in the Australian State of Queensland. Now available in public libraries and for sale to people 18 years and older. Sale restricted to persons at least 18 years old in the other Australian states.[7]
Angaray (1932) Sajjad Zaheer Progressive short stories Banned in India in 1936 by the British government.[8]
The Anarchist Cookbook (1971) William Powell Instructional Banned in Australia.[9]
Animal Farm (1945) George Orwell Political novella During 1943 – 45, Allied forces found this entire book to be critical of the U.S.S.R., and therefore the text was considered to be too controversial to print during wartime. Publishers were reluctant to print the novel then. A play of Animal Farm was banned in Kenya in 1991, because it criticizes corrupt leaders.[10] In 2002, the novel was banned in the schools of the United Arab Emirates, because it contained text or images that goes against Islamic values, most notably the occurrence of an anthropomorphic, talking pig.[10]
Areopagitica (1644) John Milton Essay Banned in the Kingdom of England for political reasons.[11]
Auf der Universität (1863) Theodor Storm Novel Banned for distribution within the South Korean military as one of 23 books banned there beginning on Aug 1, 2008.
Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism (2008) Ha-Joon Chang Non-Fiction One of 23 books from Aug 1st 2008 Banned for distribution in South Korean military.[12]
The Bible Jewish and Christian Religious text Censored in dozens of countries, both historically and in the current era. Currently, the Bible is banned or greatly restricted in a number of countries[original research?] including North Korea[13] and Eritrea [6]. Sometimes, the ban is on distributing the Bible in certain languages or versions. In 1234, King James I of Aragon ordered the burning of Bibles in the vernacular.[14]
Big River, Big Sea — Untold Stories of 1949 (2009) Lung Ying-tai Non-Fiction It sold over 100,000 copies in Taiwan and 10,000 in Hong Kong in its first month of release, but discussion of her work was banned in mainland China following the book launch.[15]
Black Beauty (1877) Anna Sewell Novel It is a popular misconception that it was banned in South Africa during the apartheid era for having the word “black” in its title.[16]
Borstal Boy (1958) Brendan Behan Autobiographical Novel Banned in Ireland in 1958. The Irish Censorship of Publications Board was not obliged to reveal its reason but it is believed that it was rejected for its critique of Irish republicanism and the Catholic Church, and its depiction of adolescent sexuality. It was banned in Australia and New Zealand shortly after. It was allowed to be published in New Zealand in 1963.[17]
Brave New World (1932) Aldous Huxley Novel Banned in Ireland in 1932, allegedly because of references of sexual promiscuity.[18] Banned in Australia from 1932 to 1937.[19]
Burger’s Daughter (1979) Nadine Gordimer Novel Banned in South Africa in July, 1979 for going against the government’s racial policies; the ban was reversed in October of the same year.[10]
Candide (1759) Voltaire Novel Seized by US Customs in 1930 for obscenity.[20]
The Canterbury Tales (late 14th century) Geoffrey Chaucer Story Collection Banned from the U.S. mail under the Federal Anti-Obscenity Act (Comstock Law) of 1873, which banned the sending or receiving of works containing “obscene,” “filthy,” or “inappropriate” material.[20]
Catch-22 (1961) Joseph Heller Novel Banned in several states: in 1972, it was banned in Srongsville, Ohio (overturned in 1976); in 1974, it was banned in Dallas, Texas, and in 1979 it was banned in Snoqualmie, Washington.[21][why?]
The Country Girls (1960) Edna O’Brien Novel Banned by Ireland’s censorship board in 1960 for its explicit sexual content.[22][23]
Curved River (1963) Živojin Pavlovi? story collection In 1963 in Yugoslavia withdrawn by the publisher (Nolit) at request of SDB officials.[24]
The Da Vinci Code (2003) Dan Brown Novel Banned in Lebanon after Catholic leaders deemed it offensive to Christianity. (See Inaccuracies in The Da Vinci Code.)[25]
The Dark (1965) John McGahern Novel Banned in Ireland for obscenity.[26]
The Death of Lorca (1971) Ian Gibson Biography, True crime Banned briefly in Spain.[27]
The Decameron (1350–1353) Giovanni Boccaccio Allegory Banned from the U.S. mail under the Federal Anti-Obscenity Act (Comstock Law) of 1873, which banned the sending or receiving of works containing “obscene,” “filthy,” or “inappropriate” material.[20]
The Diary of Anne Frank (1947) Anne Frank Biography Banned in Lebanon for “portray[ing] Jews, Israel or Zionism favorably”.[28]
The Truth About Muhammad (2006) Robert Spencer Nonfiction The government of Pakistan confiscated all copies of the book and banned it on 20 December 2006 citing “objectionable material” as the cause.[29] Spencer responded that the book does not assert anything that is not readily verifiable in the sources he provides.[30]
Dictionary of Modern Serbo-Croatian Language Miloš Moskovljevi? dictionary Banned in Yugoslavia by court order in 1966, at request of Mirko Tepavac, because “some definitions can cause disturbance among citizens”.[24]
Doctor Zhivago (1957) Boris Pasternak Novel Banned within the U.S.S.R until 1988 for its brief negative portrayal on the Bolsheviks, and criticism of Stalinism.
Droll Stories (1832–37) Honoré de Balzac Banned for obscene material of a sexual nature in Canada in 1914 and Ireland in 1953, the ban was lifted in Ireland in 1967.[31][32]
The Devil’s Discus (1964) Rayne Kruger Banned in Thailand in 2006[33]
El Señor Presidente (1946) Miguel Ángel Asturias Novel Banned in Guatemala because it went against the ruling political leaders.[34]
Ecstasy and Me (1966) Hedy Lamarr Autobiography Banned in Australia from 1967 until 1973.[35]
Fanny Hill or Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure (1748) John Cleland Novel Banned in the U.S.A. in 1821 for obscenity, then again in 1963. This was the last book ever banned in the U.S.A.[6] See also Memoirs v. Massachusetts.
Freemason Or Dajjal(2007) Kamran Rad Nonfiction Banned in the Pakistan in 2007 by the government of Pakistan or Publisher and still banned.
The Federal Mafia (1992) Irwin Schiff Nonfiction An injunction was issued by a U.S. District Court in Nevada under 26 U.S.C. § 7408 against Irwin Schiff and associates Cynthia Neun and Lawrence Cohen, against the sale of this book by those persons as the court found that the information it contains is fraudulent[36]
Frankenstein (1818) Mary Shelley Novel Banned in apartheid South Africa in 1955 for containing “obscene” or “indecent” material.[20]
The Fugitive (Perburuan) (1950) Pramoedya Ananta Toer Novel Banned in Indonesia in 1950, for containing “subversive” material, including an attempt to promote Marxist-Leninist thought and other Communist theories. As of 2006, the ban is still in effect.[10]
The First Circle (1968) Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn Novel After Nikita Khrushchev was removed from power in 1964, all current and future works by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn were banned in the Soviet Union. This work details the lives of scientists forced to work in a Stalinist research center.[37]
The Global Trap (1996) Hans-Peter Martin and Harold Schumann Nonfiction Banned for distribution within the South Korean military as one of 23 books banned there beginning on August 2008.
Polsko-angielsko-niemiecki Glosariusz regionalny Województwa Opolskiego[38] (The Polish-English-German Glossary of the Regional Terminology of the Province of Opole) (2004) Tomasz Kamusella Reference work Its run of 2000 copies was destroyed on the order of the Self-Governmental Regional Authority (Urz?d Marsza?kowski) of the Province of Opole, Poland, because in the overview of the history of the region the reference, apart from giving the Polish and Soviet view according to which the new Polish-German border was recognized in 1945 at the Potsdam Conference, also included the view propounded by the Western Allies and West Germany, namely, that the border was finally and fully recognized in light of international law only when the German-Polish Border Treaty (1990) was ratified in 1992. Deputy President Ryszard Galla publically appealed for burning all the copies of the glossary.[39] The regional authority also ordered the National Library of Poland not to lend its two copies of the reference.[40] The library made them accessible to readers only in 2012, after the regionally authority, shamed by the press, withdrew this extrajudicial ban. [41]
The Grapes of Wrath (1939) John Steinbeck Novel Was temporarily banned in many places in the US. In the region of California in which it was partially set, it was banned for its alleged unflattering portrayal of area residents.[42]
Green Eggs and Ham (1960) Dr. Seuss Novel In 1965, the children’s novel was temporarily banned in the People’s Republic of China for its portrayal of early Marxism. The ban was lifted in 1991, following Seuss’ death.[43]
Great Soul: Mahatma Gandhi and His Struggle With India (2011) Joseph Lelyveld Biography Is currently banned in Gujarat, a state in western India, for suggesting that Mahatma Gandhi had a homosexual relationship. Gujarat’s state assembly voted unanimously in favour of the ban in April, 2011.[44]
The Gulag Archipelago (1973) Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn Nonfiction Banned in the Soviet Union because it went against the image the Soviet Government tried to project of itself and its policies.[45] However available to public in the Soviet Union since at least the 1980s. In 2009, the Education Ministry of Russia added The Gulag Archipelago to the curriculum for high-school students.[46]
How to make disposable silencers (1984) Desert and Eliezer Flores How to An example of a class of books banned in Australia that “promote, incite or instruct in matters of crime or violence”.[47][48]
Howl (1955) Allen Ginsberg Poem Copies of the first edition seized by San Francisco Customs for obscenity in March 1957; after trial, obscenity charges were dismissed.[49]
The Hoax of the Twentieth Century Arthur Butz Non-fiction Classified as “hate literature” in Canada with Royal Canadian Mounted Police destroying copies as recently as 1995.[50]
Islam – A Concept of Political World Invasion (2003) R. V. Bhasin Political Ideology Banned in Maharashtra, India in 2007, after its publishing on grounds that it promotes communal disharmony between Hindus and Muslims.[51][52]
July’s People (1981) Nadine Gordimer Novel Banned during the Apartheid-era in South Africa.[53] July’s People is now included in the South African school curriculum.[54]
Jinnah: India-Partition-Independence (2009) Jaswant Singh Biography Temporarily banned in Gujarat, India in August 2009.[55] The ban was overturned by the Gujarat High Court in December 2009.[56]
Jinnah of Pakistan (1982) Stanley Wolpert Biography Banned in Pakistan for recounting Jinnah’s taste for wine and pork.[57]
Jæger – i krig med eliten (2009) Thomas Rathsack Autobiography The Danish military tried to ban the book September 2009 for national security reasons; a court rejected the ban as the book was already leaked in the press and on the Internet.[58]
The Jungle (1906) Upton Sinclair Novel In 1956, it was banned in East Germany for its incompatibility with Communism.[16]
The King Never Smiles (2006) Paul M. Handley Biography Banned in Thailand for its criticism of King Bhumibol Adulyadej.[59]
Lady Chatterley’s Lover (1928) D. H. Lawrence Novel Temporarily banned in the United States and the United Kingdom for violation of obscenity laws; both bans were lifted in 1959 and 1960, respectively.[32]
Banned in Australia from 1929 to 1965.[60][61]
Lajja (1993) Taslima Nasrin Novel Banned in Bangladesh,[62][63] and a few states of India.
Lethal Marriage Nick Pron True Crime Written by a newspaper reporter this book allegedly contains inaccuracies, additionally, complaints were received by the St. Catharines library board from the mother of a victim that led to the book being removed from all public library branches in the city.[50] As recently as 1999 this book was still unavailable to public library patrons in St. Catherines.[50]
Little Black Sambo (1899) Helen Bannerman Children’s Book Banned in Japan (1988–2005) to quell “political threats to boycott Japanese cultural exports”, although the pictures were not those of the original version.[64]
Lolita (1955) Vladimir Nabokov Novel French officials banned it for being “obscene,” as did the United Kingdom, Argentina, New Zealand (uncensored 1964) and South Africa.[65]
Banned in Canada in 1958, though the ban was later lifted.[66]
The Lonely Girl (1962) Edna O’Brien Novel Banned in Ireland in 1962 after Archbishop John Charles McQuaid complained personally to Justice Minister Charles Haughey that it “was particularly bad”.[23]
The Lottery (1948) Shirley Jackson Short Story Banned in South Africa during Apartheid.[67]
Lysistrata (411 BC) Aristophanes Script Banned in 1967 in Greece because of its anti-war message.[20]
Madame Bovary (1856) Gustave Flaubert Novel Flaubert’s novel was banned and he was prosecuted for “offenses against public morals”.[68]
Mein Kampf (1925) Adolf Hitler Political ideology Banned in some European nations and the Russian Federation as extremist.[69]
In Germany, the copyright of the book is claimed by the Free State of Bavaria and Bavarian authorities try to prevent any re-printing. It is legal to own or distribute existing copies.
In Austria, the Verbotsgesetz 1947 prohibits the printing of the book. It is illegal to own or distribute existing copies.[70] The law (§ 3 d.) states that, “Whoever publicly or before several people, through the printing of disseminated writings or illustrations to one of under § 1 or § 3 prohibited acts requests, strives or seeks to induce others, especially for the purpose of glorifying or advertising the aims of the Nazi Party, its institutions or measures, provided that it does not constitute a serious criminal offense, will be punished with imprisonment from five to ten years, or up to twenty years for offenders who themselves or their actions are deemed especially dangerous.”
The Meritorious Price of Our Redemption (1650) William Pynchon Religious ideology The first book banned in the New World (1650.) Pynchon, a prominent leader of the Massachusetts Bay Colony who, in 1636, founded the City of Springfield, Massachusetts beside the Connecticut River, wrote this explicit criticism of Puritanism, published in London in 1650. That year, several copies made their way back to the New World. Pynchon, who resided in Springfield, was unaware that his book suffered the New World’s first book burning on the Boston Common. Accused of heresy by the Massachusetts General Court, Pynchon quietly transferred ownership of the Connecticut River Valley’s largest land-holdings to his son, and then suffered indignities as he left the New World for England. Trivia: firsts work banned in Boston.[71]
My Secret Life “Walter” (pseudonym) Novel Erotic novel purporting to chronicle the wild private sex life of a Victorian gentleman.
The Metamorphosis (1915) Franz Kafka Novel Banned in Nazi Germany.[citation needed]
A Message to Man and Humanity Aleksandar Cvetkovi? Banned in Yugoslavia by court order in 1967 for “false and wicked claims, and enemy propaganda that supports pro-Chinese politics”.[24]
Mirror of the Polish Crown (1618) Sebastian Miczy?ski Anti-Semitic pamphlet Because this pamphlet published in 1618 was one of the causes of the anti-Jewish riots in Cracow, it was banned by Sigismund III Vasa.[72]
Moll Flanders or The Fortunes and Misfortunes of the Famous Moll Flanders (1722) Daniel Defoe Novel Banned from the U.S. mail under the Federal Anti-Obscenity Act (Comstock Law) of 1873, which banned the sending or receiving of works containing “obscene,” “filthy,” or “inappropriate” material[73]
The Mountain Wreath (1847) Petar II Petrovi?-Njegoš Drama in verse Banned in Bosnian schools by Carlos Westendorp.[74]
Military Inc.: Inside Pakistan’s Military Economy (2007) Ayesha Siddiqa Novel Banned by the government of Pakistan for a short because of to political content.[citation needed]
Naked Lunch (1959) William S. Burroughs Novel Banned by Boston courts in 1962 for obscenity, but that decision was reversed in 1966 by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.[75]
Nari (1992) Humayun Azad Criticism Banned in Bangladesh, from November 19, 1995 to March 7, 2000) because the book analyzes religious doctrine.
New Class (1957) Milovan ?ilas Banned in Yugoslavia by court order in 1957; author sentenced for enemy propaganda to seven years in prison, prolonged to 13 years in 1962.[24]
The Nickel-Plated-Feet Gang During the Occupation Successors of Louis Forton (1879–1934) comic book Banned in Yugoslavia by court order in 1945.[1]
Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949) George Orwell Novel Banned by the Soviet Union in 1950, as Stalin understood that it was a satire based on his leadership. It was nearly banned by U.S.A. and UK in the early 1960s during the Cuban Missile Crisis. It was not until 1990 that the U.S.S.R. legalised the book and it was re-released after editing.[76]
Noli Me Tangere (novel) (1887) José_Rizal Novel This novel and its sequel, El filibusterismo(1891) were banned in some parts of the Philippines because of their portrayal of corruption and abuse by the country’s former Spanish government and clergy. The book resulted to the Philippine Revolution of 1896. The ban was lifted years thereafter.
Notre ami le roi (1993) Gilles Perrault Biography of Hassan II of Morocco Banned in Morocco. This book is a biography of King Hassan and examines cases of torture, killing and political imprisonment said to have been carried out by the Moroccan Government.[77]
Not Without My Daughter (1991) Betty Mahmoody Novel Banned in Iran. It is a real life story of an American citizen’s escape along with her daughter from the clutches of her husband in Iran. It created furor in Iran for showing the general conditions there in bad light as well as for being critical of Iranian customs.[citation needed]
Nine Hours To Rama (1962) Stanley Wolpert Novel Banned in India. It exposes persons responsible for security lapses that led to Mohandas Gandhi’s assassination.[78]
The Naked and the Dead (1948) Norman Mailer Novel Banned in Canada in 1949 for “obscenity.”[79]
On Fierce Wound – Fierce Herb Ratko Zaki? Withdrawn from sales and destroyed after the decision of the Municipal Committee of the League of Communists of Kraljevo in Kraljevo, Yugoslavia in 1967.[24]
On the Origins and Perpetual Use of the Legislative Powers of the Apostolic Kings of Hungary in Matters Ecclesiastical. (1764) Adam F. Kollár Legal-political Banned in the Papal States for arguments against the political role of the Roman Catholic Church.[80] Original title: De Originibus et Usu perpetuo.
One Day of Life (1980) Manlio Argueta Novel Banned by El Salvador for its portrayal of human rights violations.[81]
One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich (1962) Alexander Solzhenitsyn Novel Banned from publication in the Soviet Union in 1964.[10]
Operation Dark Heart (2010) Army Reserve Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer Memoir In September 2010 the U.S. Department of Defense overrode the Army’s January approval for publication. The DoD then purchased and destroyed all 9,500 first edition copies citing concerns that it contained classified information which could damage the integrity of U.S. National Security. The publisher, St. Martin’s Press,[82] in conjunction with the DoD created a censored second edition; which contains blackened out words, lines, paragraphs, and even portions of the index.[83]
The Peaceful Pill Handbook (2007) Philip Nitschke and Fiona Stewart Instructional manual on euthanasia Initially banned in New Zealand by Office of Film & Literature Classification since it was deemed to be objectionable.[84] In May 2008 an edited version of the book was allowed for sale if sealed and an indication of the censorship classification was displayed. The book was initially restricted in Australia:[85] after review the 2007 edition was banned outright.[48][86][87]
Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1968) Paulo Freire Education—Philosophy text Banned in Arizona schools in 2010[88]
Peyton Place (1956) Grace Metalious Novel Banned in Canada from 1956–1958.[66]
Rangila Rasul (1927) Pt. Chamupati Religious Currently banned in India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh.[89]
Rights of Man (1791) Thomas Paine Political Banned in the U.K and author charged with treason for supporting the French Revolution.[20] Banned in Tsarist Russia after the Decembrist revolt.[90]
Rowena Goes Too Far (1931) H. C. Asterley Fiction Banned in Australia because of customs belief that it “lacked sufficient claim to the literary to excuse the obscenity”[91]
The Satanic Verses (1988) Salman Rushdie Novel Banned in the following countries for alleged blasphemy against Islam: Bangladesh, Egypt, India, Iran, Kenya, Kuwait, Liberia, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, Pakistan, Senegal, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Tanzania and Thailand.[92][93]
Shivaji – Hindu King in Islamic India (2003) James Laine History Banned in Indian state of Maharashtra in 2004 for “promoting social enmity”; ban overturned by state High Court in 2007.[94]
Snorri the Seal (1941) Frithjof Sælen Fable Satirical book banned during the German occupation of Norway.[95]
Soft Target: How the Indian Intelligence Service Penetrated Canada (1989) Zuhair Kashmeri & Brian McAndrew Investigative journalism Banned in India.[96]
The Song of the Red Ruby (1956) Agnar Mykle Novel Banned in Norway in 1957 for its explicit sexual content. The ban was lifted by the Supreme Court in 1958.[citation needed]
Smash and Grab: Annexation of Sikkim (1984) Sunanda Datta-Ray Non-fiction Banned in India. Describes the process of the annexation of the Buddhist kingdom of Sikkim by the Indian government of Indira Gandhi in 1975.[78]
A Spoon on Earth Hyeon Gi-yeong Novel Banned for distribution within the South Korean military as one of 23 books banned there beginning on August 2008.[12][97]
Spycatcher (1985) Peter Wright Autobiography Banned in the U.K 1985–1988 for revealing secrets. Wright was a former MI5 intelligence officer and his book was banned before it was even published in 1987.[98][99]
Storytellers II Boško Novakovi? Story collection Withdrawn from print in Yugoslavia in 1964 because it contained stories by Dragiša Vasi?.[24]
The Stud (1969) Jackie Collins Novel Banned in Australia in 1969.[100]
Suicide mode d’emploi (1982) Claude Guillon Essay This book, reviewing recipes for committing suicide, was the cause of a scandal in France in the 1980s, resulting in the enactment of a law prohibiting provocation to commit suicide and propaganda or advertisement of products, objects or methods for committing suicide.[101] Subsequent reprints were thus illegal. The book was cited by name in the debates of the French National Assembly when examining the bill.[102]
Thalia Arius (AD 250 or 256 – 336) Book/Poem Banned in the Roman Empire in the 330s+ for contradicting Trinitarianism. All of Arius writings were ordered burned and Arius exiled, and presumably assassinated for his writings.[103] Banned by the Catholic Church for the next thousand plus years.[citation needed]
The True Furqan (1999) “Al Saffee” and “Al Mahdee” Religious text Import into India prohibited on the grounds of threatening national security.[104]
Tropic of Cancer (1934) Henry Miller Novel (fictionalized memoir) Banned in the U.S.A in the 1930s until the early 1960s, seized by US Customs for sexually explicit content and vulgarity. The rest of Miller’s work was also banned by the United States.[105] Also banned in South Africa until the late 1980s.[citation needed]
The Turner Diaries (1978) William Luther Pierce Novel Banned in Germany for its Nazi ideology theme and Pierce leadership in the National Alliance. Blamed for a number of crimes allegedly inspired by the novel.[106] Also effectively banned in Canada as recently as 1996 with Canada Customs turning back shipments at the border.[50] Presumably this is because Canada bans the importation of material meeting their definition of “hate propaganda.”[107]
Ulysses (1922) James Joyce Novel Banned in UK until the 1930s.[108] Challenged and temporarily banned in the U.S.A for its sexual content. In 1933 the ban was overturned in United States v. One Book Called Ulysses.[109] Banned in Australia from 1929 to 1937, then restricted to people over the age of 18 from 1941 to 1953.[110]
Uncle Tom’s Cabin (1852) Harriet Beecher Stowe Novel Banned in the Southern United States during the Civil War because of its anti-slavery content. In 1852, Uncle Tom’s Cabin was banned in Russia under the reign of Nicholas I because of the idea of equality it presented, and for its “undermining religious ideals.”[10]
Understanding Islam through Hadis (1982) Ram Swarup Critique of political Islam Banned in India.[111]
United States – Vietnam Relations: 1945–1967 (1971) Robert McNamara and the United States Department of Defense Government Study Also known as the Pentagon Papers. US President Nixon attempted to suspend publication of classified information. The restraint was lifted by the US Supreme Court in a 6–3 decision.[112] See also New York Times Co. v. United States.
Uten en tråd (1966) Jens Bjørneboe Novel Published in 1966, banned in Norway for its explicit sexual content. The ban was later lifted.[citation needed]
Unarmed Victory (1963) Bertrand Russell Banned in India. Contains unflattering details of the 1962 Sino-Indian War.[78]
Various works Shen Congwen (1902–1988) Novels “Denounced by the Communists and Nationalists alike, Mr. Shen saw his writings banned in Taiwan, while mainland [China] publishing houses burned his books and destroyed printing plates for his novels. …. So successful was the effort to erase Mr. Shen’s name from the modern literary record that few younger Chinese today recognize his name, much less the breadth of his work. Only since 1978 has the Chinese Government reissued selections of his writings, although in editions of only a few thousand copies. …. In China, his passing was unreported.”[113]
Watershed ?eda Vukovi? Self-banned by the publisher Nolit in Yugoslavia in 1968.[24]
The Well of Loneliness (1928) Radclyffe Hall Novel Banned in the U.K in 1928 for its lesbian theme, republished in 1949.[114]
What Uncle Sam Really Wants (2002) Noam Chomsky Politics Banned for distribution within the South Korean military as one of 23 books banned there beginning on August 2008.
White Niggers of America (1970) Pierre Vallières Political work Written about Quebec politics and society, was written while the author was in jail. An edition published in France was not allowed into Canada; an edition was published in the U.S. in 1971[50]
The World Is Full of Married Men (1968) Jackie Collins Novel Banned in Australia in 1968.[115]
Year 501: The Conquest Continues (1993) Noam Chomsky Politics Banned for distribution in South Korean military as one of 23 books banned on August 1, 2008.[12]
Zhuan Falun (1993) Li Hongzhi Spiritual Banned in Mainland China[116]
You can’t compare Da Vinci Code in the spineless desecration of the Islamic faith intended incite and hurt Muslims – there is a difference as ever you gloss over.
Muslims have never made such videos candidly dont make such videos about our faith.
Try stopping the holocaust in Kashmir 2 million dead and equally displaced since non Kashmir Hindu occupation from Dogras to the present.
Try stopping genocide in Burma, Palestine and what did you write about Iraqis.
You writing do not represent someone supporting Human Rights having said what you have said about Kashmir and Rohingya Muslims.
We need no lessons from a bigot and zealot of hate like you Sneha / Raj.
Your reply is laws of bans for various reasons that stretches over a long period of time, from 250 AD ! It is too vague to even draw any conclusion from it. Is the ban imposed by the Roman empire a relevant topic ? The empire has disappeared ,the system all have have changed. Is the ban on Uncle Tom’s Cabin due to slavery issues in the civil war days of the US a relevant issue today ? Today neither civil war nor slavery exists in the US.
Bans on political issues are also common A new leader will ban books that support the last leader. This is again completely unrelated to the topic we are discussing here.
Your reasoning that you call upon the ban of all materials that insult all prophets itself is an offence. Calling Lord Krishna as a prophet is an offence to Hindus as the Bhagvad Gita clearly states Him to be our Lord God. There is a proverb in Indonesia ” to throw a wild ball” meaning you utter something you don’t fully understand and which can be interpreted by other parties in any way they like. Similarly Quran referring to the 124.000 prophets but doesn’t mention all their names and place of birth, is “throwing a wild ball” which you have interpreted freely by referring to Lord Krishna and Lord Buddha as prophets. Therefore Hindus and Buddhist would be justified if they call for a ban on Quran, to prevent the entire pantheon of Gods in Hinduism and Confucianism to be converted to Islamic prophets ! Similarly calling Jesus as a prophet is an insult to Christians, despite the knowledge that Christians consider Jesus as a son of god. Here the Quran has gone a step further by citing Jesus as a prophet, that too inferior to Mohammad. If Christians think like Muslims, then Quran should be banned in Europe and the Americas. Muslims should thank the freedom of speech that exist in non Muslim countries in Asia, Europe and America, hence can read the Quran peacefully in those countries.
Double Standards Towards Muslims and Islam The World Over;
Be it India, UK, USA or Europe – The Muslim voice is crushed, ignored and Muslim sentiment is overlooked. We are ignored, we are dishooured be it from a sister taking a bus ride or being stared down on the underground or for forsaking your lunch or break just so you can prayer.
Muslims and Islam are open to critique and rightly so nothing should be without critique and Islam invited a discussion on the very tenants of it’s faith.
However in the manner the Muslim is ridiculed, The ignorant fail to grasp the faith in its true context and the bigots enjoy the media demonisation to spread further hate.
More Muslims have been massacred after World War 2 yet the world stays silence, Muslim have been displaced from their lands but the world stands silenced and the few good men who do challenge the status quo against Muslims are deafly silenced in a sea of prejudice and bigotry.
The Palestinian syndrome is now witnessed for all Muslims, denied their God given rights, our demonisation encouraged by the global media our massacres brushed aside as collateral damage, internal domestic problems, civil wars, revolutions while theor architects enjoy eulogy in mainstream media.
Our histories are slowly being re-told, our legacies being destroyed as seen in Iraq and what happend in Syria, 1000 of years of rich history or glory purposely being eroded. For the young of today the history of Islam begins with the Afghanistan and Iraq war and they grow up knowing us as The enemy, we are the New Soviets.
Hate blogs, posters, literature allowed under the guise of Free Speech. We Muslims are all for free speech but in a dialogue it takes two talk. On the one hand you silence us and on the other you incite and further ridicule us, demonise us and purposely hate us, your only justification is a trial by media or by the lies spread across the Internet. As I said our rich, beautiful and glorious history and achievements hidden and denied to the wider world a Muslim is an uneducated goat herder bewildered by the new changing modern world.
Apply the Nazi demonisation of Jews, horrid scapegoating tactics of that era repeated today as the world descended into economic chaos or the barbaric crusades and the demonisation of Eastern people Muslim, Jew and Christian.
How they ignore International conventions and human rights when the victim is a Muslim even a Western imposed dictator removed without following a rule of law. Regardless of what we thought of Qadaffi or Saddam they did not deserve the barbaric death while the butchers of a minority Muslim Bosnia enjoyed the rights and luxuries under the human rights conventions lost when discussing Muslims.
I applaud the recent artical on PKKH which describes the double standards that exist in the mind and hearts of non Muslims when the accused is a Muslim, who 9/10 has already been charged and tried by Media.
Special Report: Bosnia; Karadzic’s Grace In Genocide Trial
Submitted by Aurangzeb on October 19, 2012 – 12:46 am
as published on Pakistan Ka Khudah Hafiz
The ethnic map of former Yugoslavia shows that Muslims were a dispersed minority in the country, and its balkanization was a matter of contest between its 6 major states and the Muslims had little say in it, yet in what context were they the targeted, and how according to UN estimates 100,000 Muslims and Croats were killed and 2.2 million were displaced, is a question to be answered.
The Yugoslavian wars, from 1990 to 2000, showed humanity how, in the middle of the most civilized Europe, home to thousands of offices of the United Nations and thousands more humanitarian orgs, the most barbaric dehumanization of innocent civilians, can be allowed to systematically take place, in a luxurious space of 10 years, in which the NATO forces and UN humanitarian workers constantly found themselves crippled and incapacitated.
During these 10 horrendous years numerous war crimes were committed by Serbian military and paramilitary forces. The crimes included massacres, ethnic cleansing, systematic rapes and genocide. The Srebrenica Massacre of more than 8,000 Bosnian Muslim men and boys, the mass expulsion of another 25,000–30,000 Bosnian Muslim civilians, in and around the town of Srebrenica, the 1992–1995 Siege of Sarajevo, starving and killing a whole population (official estimates: over 15,000 killed and over 60,000 wounded) .
The ethnic cleansing campaign targeted Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats and included unlawful confinement, murder, rape, sexual assault, torture, beating, robbery and inhumane treatment of civilians; the targeting of political leaders, intellectuals and professionals; the unlawful deportation and transfer of civilians; the unlawful shelling of civilians; the unlawful plunder of property; the destruction of homes and businesses; and the destruction of places of worship.
War rape occurred as a matter of official orders as part of ethnic cleansing against Muslims. The systematic “rape camps” aimed to impregnate the Bosnian and Croatian women, women were kept in confinement until the late stages of their pregnancies. Reportedly, more than 35,000 women and children were held in such Serb-run “rape camps” during the Foca massacre (1992-94) alone, while it is estimated that during the Bosnian War (1992-95) between 20,000 and 50,000 women, mainly Muslim were held in such camps. Apart from this women and girls were gang raped in the streets and in front of their families as per routine.
In short, to cover all the abominable crimes of the central force, especially against their own Muslim minority, and recording of innumerable acts of torture and shame, requires a heart of stone and the conscience of the devil, and to counter with the knowledge that all this happened just 12 years back, only one year before the US/Allies hurled upon Iraq and Afghanistan for humanitarian reasons, is most bewildering. How was the UN/NATO so helpless when atrocious crimes were being committed right under their noses and how it finds such strength now, just one year later; perhaps because in both cases the aim was to target and hurt the Muslims?
In the aftermaths of the balkanization of Yugoslavia, many high officials have been charged for different war crimes but only a small number have been convicted. Many are still on the run, many await their trials to begin and those convicted are just a handful:
Milan Milutinovic, President, Republic of Serbia (1997-2002), acquitted.
Nikola Saainovic, Yugoslav Deputy PM, guilty on all counts, sentence: 22 years prison.
Dragoljub Ojdanic, Chief of General Staff, guilty to two counts, sentence: 15 years in prison.
Nebojsa Pavkovic, commander Third Army, guilty on all counts, sentence: 22 years prison.
Vladimir Lazarevic, commander Pristina Corps, guilty of two counts, sentence: 15 years prison.
Sreten Lukic, Chief of Staff, Serbian police, guilty on all counts, sentence: 22 years prison.
All these sentences clearly show the light-handedness with which the courts handled these cases, giving single sentences to those who killed in the multiples (compare this with the multilple sentences given to Afia Siddique for attempted murder).
Slobodan Miloševi?, President of Serbia, 1989 to 1997 and President of Yugoslavia, 1997 to 2000, was arrested in March 2001 and faced trial for a lavish 5 years, never being actually convicted, only dying in prison. Ratko Mladic responsible for the Siege of Sarajevo and Srebrenica massacre and Goran Hadzic responsible for mass force transfers and exterminations, have only recently been apprehended captured by Serbian authorities.
According to the final report of the United Nations Commission of Experts:
All parties involved in the conflict have committed «grave breaches» of the Geneva Conventions and other violations of international humanitarian law. These violations include the killing of civilians, rape torture, and the deliberate destruction of civilian property, including cultural and religious property, such as churches and mosques. But, there are significant qualitative differences. Most of the violations were committed by Serbs against Bosnian Muslims.
Radovan Karadzic Trial
In the wake of all this bestiality, when we hear Radovan Karadzic, President of Republika Srpska, within Bosnia/Herzegovina, guilty of the Siege and Massacre of Bosnian and Serbian Muslims, on our TV screens, delivering his desired version of the cases, in the comfort-zone of a lavish trial, that has started its hearing after 4 years of his capture, only to see him more confident and satisfied, tears up the heart.
It tears us because we remember, 9 years back, in 2003, another tyrant, Saddam Hussein was captured and hanged within 3 years, after a closed-door domestic trial, conducted by Ra’id Juhi, a 33 year old, appointed by Paul Bremer, while the outside world saw only caricatures of the court proceedings. The court charged him for crimes committed against residents of Dujailin, in 1982, following a failed assassination attempt against him. Specific charges included the murder of 148 people, torture of women and children and the illegal arrest of 399 others. Not that Saddam was a good guy, but because he was a Muslim, he was portrayed as the cruelest man on earth, and bashed day and night on international media for years, as a despicable disease that the US heroically smashed under their feet; only to train the Muslims of the world of what their real worth is.
And it tears us to hear, the man against whom, extensive footage of evidence is publically available, the witnesses of whose crime are present right outside his court-room, who has not killed 148 but in uncountable thousands and he has not had women and children tortured, he had them enslaved and gang-raped for full 10 years. And this person says to the world today that:
“I am mild man, a tolerant man… instead of being accused of the events in our war, I should be rewarded for all the good things I have done…. I did everything humanly possible to avoid the war. … I succeeded in reducing the suffering of all civilians…. some of the worst atrocities of the war, including two deadly shelling attacks on a Sarajevo marketplace in 1994 and 1995, were ‘orchestrated’ to turn public opinion against Serbs…”
UN prosecutors have charged Karadzic with being the “supreme commander” of an ethnic cleansing campaign of Muslims and Croats in the 1992-95 Bosnian war in which 100,000 people were killed and 2.2 million displaced. He has charges of not 11 killings (like the ones Saddam had done), but of 11 genocides over him, yet the Hague finds patience and grace to hear him in a playful amusement, while he out-wits his audience; and this too after the luxury to wait for him to end a self-assumed year-long boycott to the trial; a trial that has started after 8 years of him being ‘on the run’ and 4 other years in captivity. Why does humanity not need him to be convicted and hanged immediately? Why are we confronting the many possibilities by virtue of which his butchery could be considered something ‘good’ by any means? Why does he have the opportunity to use the many loop-holes the judicial-system has to his will and benefit?
Humanity that has come to the zenith of its progress today, today it has gathered the expertise and infrastructure which allows it to show the vilest through a glass of shining ‘good’; and through this zenith Karadzic is calling upon ignorant humanity to learn from his ‘mild and tolerant nature’. He is actually going to attempt to malign the Muslim minority again, and he is basing his case on the allegation that the scattered minority of Muslims had imperialistic ambitions, he says:
”I will defend that nation of ours and their cause that is just and holy. We have a good case. We have good evidence and proof.”
”They had an Islamist goal. They wanted 100 per cent power as it was in the days of the Ottoman Empire. There were fundamental goals changing the destiny of a whole region,” he said. “They want Islamic fundamentalism and wanted it from 1991 to 1995.”
And the International Court in Hague listens, and the international media speculates about the outcomes of the trial and the Muslims of the world confront their TV screens with loathe and terror; at the wake of an international system of positive discrimination for the favored race, the Christian-White and a foul prejudice against a disapproved Muslim-Light.
Your discussion is circular.
You don’t see that “free speech” is not universal, nor is it omnipotent.
You rejoice at any desecration of Islamic icons and don’t want to respect them.
The Quran never mention any Hindu. In fact some of the Muslim ruler had given protection to Hindus as “people of the book”.
Since you fail to see any reality, and continue to repeat yourself–From my side this discussion is closed. You can continue to argue with your own self under different names.