© demetrios vakras
AMAZON = CENSOR
I emailed Amazon to query why this review was removed. Their response was as follows (refer screen-shot):
screen-shot of Amazon's response
one episode of the populist US TV drama "Law & Order, criminal intent",
the character Goran challenged a western Mohammedan
convert to find passages exhorting the committing of violence in the Koran & then claimed such passages did not exist, when they clearly
And, what Amazon have done is to show that such TV-show denials work, even if untrue, because bodies such as Amazon-dot-com aid and abet a wilful deception. My review clearly stated where (some of) the passages that do call for Muslims to kill are to be found in the Koran. Amazon shows clearly and unambiguously that the truth is censored. Whether by bodies such as Amazon, the media, or the government, censorship is undertaken on behalf of all of us. The end result is that these bodies sacrifice innocent victims to terrorism simply so they can show that they are tolerant of other faiths.
|Yours is as dishonest a response as I can have expected. Your claim
that what I wrote as a review was instead a personal opinion is bizarre.
What I state in my review is supported by quotes - which means I am not stating an opinion. Had I made claims without supporting them with evidence (in the form of quotes), then that instead would have made what I wrote an opinion.
However, there is an opinion that I do have: if a book urges the murder of people because they are not of a particular religion then that, in my opinion, is an expression of evil; even if the practitioners of that religion think that because it is a demand made by god then it is automatically good.
My review addresses why this translation by Dawood is superior to other translations .... This too is an opinion.... Though it would be consistent with your writing "We provide our customer reviews section for you to comment on the merits of the book and the author's writing style." it would nonetheless breach your proviso that opinions should not be expressed.
I put it to you that if I had not backed up what I wrote with quotes that you would not have removed my review. My review would have been just another crank rant without basis in fact.
I find your urging that I read your guidelines (which I have not breached) to be deliberately insulting.
What is to me of especial irritation is that I have purchased quite a few books from your organisation in the last year. Had you not posted the review in January 2005, the 30 or so books I bought during the year would never have been bought from your company.
I reiterate what I wrote in my previous message: You are shooting the messenger. Ban all translations of the koran instead!
What I find preposterous is that I have read reviews on your site which are clearly inflammatory, & defamatory, which not only breech your guidelines, but international law as well; for instance reviews on Keith Windschuttle's books. The claims made that he is a racist are defamatory in Australia (as per the precedent set in the victory of Gutnick over the Wall Street Journal). The crux of this judgement was, that since Gutnick is an Australian citizen, what was written on him could be seen in Australia, which made it subject to Australian law... On this precedent Amazon are defaming Windschuttle. That he has not taken action against you is, I suppose his problem. I'd have sued you in a heart-beat.
(ps I host a copy of my review here http://www.vakras.com/islam-is-terrorism.html
. I will be constructing a page on American hypocrisy re censorship which
will include your responses/correspondences.)