Saturday, August 04, 2007

Save the Book   [Stanley Kurtz]

The Alms for Jihad case, the larger issue of libel tourism, and the courageous and extremely important struggle of Rachel Ehrenfeld are slowly but surely attracting more attention on the blogosphere. Despite that, the more I look into this issue, the more I’m convinced that this interconnected set of conflicts is receiving too little attention–especially from the mainstream media.

Unfortunately, I’m going to be traveling for a few days, so it will be hard for me to stay on top of things. But let me provide some material for consideration. If you want to understand the stakes in the Ehrenfeld and Alms for Jihad affairs, you need to read, "‘Libel tourism and the war on terror,’" "Libel Wars," and "Important Legal Precedent for Every American Writer." You can get further background by following the links in my earlier Corner posts here, here, here, and here.

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.

Above all, we need mainstream media coverage. But that will only happen, if at all, after further discussion on the blogosphere. And as noted, we also need to know much more about what effect, if any, the suits and settlements of the past may be having on media coverage in the present. And we need to encourage financial support for Ehrenfeld.

08/04 11:39 PMShare