Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Ehsan Jami Succumbs to Government Intimidation

It appears that the government of the Netherlands is loath to face another firestorm like the one brought on by Fitna, and has squeezed Ehsan Jami hard enough to persuade him not to release his planned animated cartoon about the Prophet’s pedophilic marriage to Aisha.

According to Islam Online:

Ehsan Jami cartoonThanks to the intervention of the Dutch government, a second anti-Islam movie will not see the light, at least for now.

“I can confirm that Mr Ehsan Jami has decided not to broadcast his controversial film,” Ayhan Tunja, a member of the Muslim Coordinating Council of the Netherlands, told IslamOnline.net Tuesday, April 1, over the phone.

“He has announced his decision on Dutch television,” he added.

Jami, a former Muslim of Iranian origin, told the Netwrek TV show he has decided not to release his cartoon film, The Life of Muhammad, as expected on April 20.

The film would have reportedly shows a sexually aroused prophet.

A clip from the film aired on a Dutch television channel last week showed a man said to be the prophet in the company of a 9-year-old wife on their way to a mosque to allegedly deflower his bride.

Jami said Justice Minister Ernst Hirsch Ballin has talked to him about repercussions of the film release on social harmony and coexistence in the Netherlands as well as it national interests.

“The minister told Mr Jami he will be responsible for what happens,” said Tunja.

So the government of the Netherlands, the leadership of a sovereign European state, has declared that people who perpetrate violence are not responsible for their behavior. Has it really come to this?

Notice has now been given: cartoonists are to be held responsible for the destructive and murderous behavior of religious zealots.

Total dhimmitude has now arrived in Holland:
- - - - - - - - -
The leaders of the Muslim minority, estimated at nearly one million, welcomed the new development.

“I’m pleased that Mr Jami has decided to listen to the minister’s advise [sic]. It is a wise decision,” said Tunja.

He was particularly thankful for the government for its swift intervention in the issue.

“We were planning a meeting with the justice minister to make it clear that Mr Jami’s film was totally unacceptable and would trigger violence across the world,” the Muslim activists told IOL.

“We are very pleased that the minister acted fast even before our meeting.”

But the rest of us can learn from Mr. Jami’s mistake — unlike Geert Wilders, he allowed snippets of his movie to be revealed in advance. That gave the Dutch government a pretext for censoring him:

“Nobody saw or knew the content of Mr Wilders documentary in advance and that’s why the government could do nothing,” explained the Muslim activist.

“But segments of Mr Jami’s cartoon were shown on TV and that’s why the government was able to complaint that its content was unacceptable,” he added.

And the punchline?

“This is how freedom of expression works in the Netherlands.”

Yes, I suppose it is.

Earlier posts about Ehsan Jami can be found here and here.

Many thanks to VH for the screen cap of Ehsan Jami and his cartoon.

Hat tip: TB.


livfreerdie said...

What would happen if he sold the movie and all rights to someone else, say in the US, and the purchaser released it?


heroyalwhyness said...

livefreerdie - here's hoping you are correct as this defeatist move is worthy of an April Fools response to the foolhardy and shortsighted dhimmi govt.

Henrik R Clausen said...

He should just leak it out the back door and let .. someone post it somewhere on the Internet.

BTW, I think depicting a horny 'prophet' is a bad idea. It _is_ offensive, no matter if the guy is a prophet or not, and gives people a fig leaf to dismiss the movie.

Anyway, it's April 1st, and Jami simply might have decided that pre-launch publicity can get too much.

Bert said...

Indeed, Jami has been a bit too eager to hand one of his drawings around first. The Minister of State (member of the Queens advisory board) Hans van de Broek last week was shown the drawing, got furious and stuttered that if Jami causes any riots or damage, there is noooo way he wil get away with it.
I guess, maybe, the Minister of Jusitice told him if he persists, he is on his own from then on. The Queen allready put her thumb down (see Van de Broek). Not surprising really, in the Dhimmycratic Socialist Monarchy The Netherlands.

Henrik R Clausen said...

.. if Jami causes any riots or damage ..

Hey - what happened to *individual* responsibility? Jamie doesn't tell anyone to riot or blow up stuff.

It's important that he should not be held responsible for what his opponents might do of evil stuff.

Bert said...

@ Hendrik: Indeed, that weird Dutch appeasers-logic: not the criminal causes crime, its the victim that shouldn't have given the opportunity, and now must pay the damage.

Another choice would've been to make a theatre play with that drawing as a poster. A Tunesian Muslim had this one made for his theatre play in Belgium a few years ago.
He survived!

Joanne said...

"Jami, a former Muslim of Iranian origin, told the Netwrek TV show he has decided not to release his cartoon film, The Life of Muhammad, as expected on April 20."

So how does April 21st work for you then?

"@ Hendrik: Indeed, that weird Dutch appeasers-logic:..." by bert

The same logic is used when Muslim men believe they have the right to rape women if they don't cover their heads, wrists, ankles, whatever. Remember, it is the woman's fault she was raped....not doing as she was told....she was warned.

Muslims might as well just come out and say it in plain language, "If you don't do as we tell you; we will kill you all and rape your women." Who is kidding who here!

heroyalwhyness said...

Here's an oldie but goodie that can serve as a substitute for Jami's film until he is ready to release it.

The Islam Comic Book, Mohammed's Believe it or Else!

open a second window to enjoy the song Islam's not for me while absorbing the contents of the comic book.

Unknown said...

The government has probably told Jami that his bodyguards would be withdrawn, if he went on with his plans
They've gotten away with that in Hirsi Ali's case, so Jami would certainly be toast

Anonymous said...

It's just part of the learning curve. Next time anyone has something to say about Islam, release it anonymously and promote it later. As for showing dirty cartoons of the "prophet," why not? I don't understand all this deference to this ridiculous, evil religion. Why do people call that sick freak the "prophet" and concern themselves about how anyone portrays him? I'll watch it and laugh. I'd make something like that myself if I had media skills.

Henrik R Clausen said...

As for showing dirty cartoons of the "prophet," why not?

Personally, I find it offensive.

Will refrain from rioting in the streets though. Am busy anyway :)

Anonymous said...

Make a cartoon of Jesus on the cross, ejaculating onto his tongue-skilled mother. What happens? It gets UTTERLY ignored. Stick it in a state-funded museum and it causes some protest. But how do we get other modern day religions to actually put gasoline in bottles and burn up the cars of normal civilians, or the like? We can't, because history has dragged them all (except Islam) out of the Dark Ages. Even the Pope is calling for Climate Research to be based on hard science, not junk science (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=501316&in_page_id=1811&ito=1490) and the Vatican decreed that Catholics "may believe in evolution" (http://www.bible.ca/cath-new-doctrines.htm).

First, I'd like to point out the the actual artist who put the crucifix in urine caused a stir because the image itself was actually objectively beautiful. If you didn't know the title, there would be no offensiveness. Second, the artist did not make that work to be an offense towards Christianity, in a simple "shocking" sense. It was done for somewhat complex reasons, similar to the more-than-once painted Santa Claus on the cross (being of rather obvious comment on the commercialization and thus cheapening of Christmas as a religious holiday...except the first one in the 90s was painted by a communist atheist).

Second, I'd like to point out that historically old Holy Books in general contain passages akin to those you find in the Koran, for instance about Jesus telling kids to abandon their family, or all manner of justification for genocide etc. The earliest writings, the basis of Hinduism, the Upanishads, for instance says:

"When she has removed her cloths of her impurity and is beautiful, one should approach and invite her. If she should not grant him his desire, he should bribe her. If she still does not grant him his desire, he should hit her with a stick or with his hand, and overcome her...." (Brihad-Aranyaka Upanishad, ~ 700 BC)

Uh, I don't think, unlike in Islam, that wife beating is legal in India.