2 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Research Armstrong's doctrine before banning

Reader comment on item: John Esposito and Karen Armstrong – Banned in Malaysia

Submitted by Tommy Peters (Malaysia), Jun 28, 2007 at 21:28

Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (Abim), an Islamic NGO in Malaysia has a point in asking for the ban on Karen Armstrong's books to be lifted (The Sun – June 18th 2007).

A year ago I was handed ‘History of God' by a friendly preacher of the local mosque near my home in Kuala Lumpur. Having read it and her other writings, I realized Armstrong was of the Bucaille genre. Maurice Bucaille was, in the 70s, a physician to the Saudi king and in his writings, he softened the hard edges of the Islamic doctrine. His detractors say he was commissioned and amply rewarded to write ‘favourably' about Islam, but that is another issue.

Bucaille and those of his ilk such as Armstrong, offered the ‘infidel's view' of Islam and their views are well received in ‘Wahabbi' and ‘Sufi' institutions of Islamic learning, except curiously, in Malaysia. In particular, they are received well by non-muslims in Malaysia who know very little about the doctrine.

Armstrong's genre shows up with her piece ‘Balancing the Prophet" (April 27th 2007 - Financial Times) in which she reviews Robert Spencer's ‘The Truth About Muhammad' and where she is clearly seen defending the indefensible.

Therefore, having her books banned in Malaysia, while Aaayan Hirsi Ali's ‘The Caged Virgin' and ‘Infidel' are found on the Malaysian bookstore shelves must be quite frustrating for Abim, not to mention the adherents in Malaysia, who now realize that they have a true blue Catholic on their side.

Apparently, to the chagrin of Abim and the adherents, the reviewers in Malaysia are clearly remiss in researching the doctrine of the authors before taking action.

Banning Armstrong was clearly an oversight, as opposed to a thought out action by the Malaysian government. With Armstrong's recent visit to Malaysia, we are expecting the ban on her to be lifted and Aaayan clamped down instead.


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Submitting....

Submit a comment on this item

<< Previous Comment      Next Comment >>

Reader comments (14) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
Karen Armstrong is a wannabe historian [66 words]dhimmi no moreFeb 13, 2008 18:58120158
Don't Give a Toot to the Malaysian Internal Security Ministry [200 words]Marco HiirataFeb 13, 2008 12:51120113
full List of books banned [253 words]Ipnat DrosotFeb 9, 2008 11:48119849
Malaysia looks to be a very dangerous and obscure nation [117 words]YnnatchkahFeb 2, 2008 17:18119469
Malaysia is not yet dangerous [202 words]John BastileFeb 3, 2008 00:59119469
Book ban: The 'two faces' of Islam Hadhari [460 words]Ismail Che YahayaFeb 11, 2008 14:51119469
Dear Messrs. Ynnatchkah & Bastile [680 words]Marco HiirataFeb 13, 2008 21:42119469
nurturing prejudices [157 words]bibliobibuliMar 10, 2008 00:26119469
You replied against prejudices with your own prejudices [547 words]John BastileApr 8, 2008 21:58119469
Well deserved [14 words]VijayFeb 1, 2008 04:39119427
Are you sure they banned a book ? ? ? [211 words]Phil GreendJul 17, 2007 15:32103862
Research Armstrong's doctrine before banning [311 words]Tommy PetersJun 28, 2007 21:28101906
Is there a reason? [38 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
MuslihoonJul 16, 2006 04:1649779
Well deserved [47 words]VijayJul 14, 2006 06:0049621

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Research Armstrong's doctrine before banning by Tommy Peters

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

ADVERTISEMENTS

eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2019 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)