I ask because with what little I can assertain about the playability of the game, it seems to be quite crude (the predicessor games would never have been played if their content were not controversial). I have not played Virtual Jihad. Can a poor execution be an explicit threat? I bring up the school simulations because there are those who want to label all game violence as evil while I think violence can serve a purpose in a work of art.

Yep, I used the “A” word. Not sure this game _is_ art; I am sure I am not the person to decide. I am an avowed libertarian: keep the government the hell out of that sort of decision. Let RPI make whatever decision they need to make (private institution worried about their reputation) but recognize that their buckling before pressure from forces against freedom of expression sets a bad precident.

The “building inspection” that closed the gallery that was displaying the game is another story. There a politician misused his power to silence speech with which he disagreed. Note that while you point at Federal law, the FBI has refused to confirm (or deny) their interest in Wafaa. It is not the place of a local building inspector (or public works director or whatever) to shut down an art exibition because he doesn’t agree with the content. The Secret Service and DHS seem quite capable of evaluating the threat posed by this game.

And BelchSpeak? Take a course in constitutional law.

Bilal chose his own rabble-rousing lifestyle. What you call “tragic” I call just desserts.

Professor Bilal went to prison - in Saddam’s Iraq - for cultural criticism, and its tragic that the same kind of political retribution could be instigated by chickenshit College Republicans here in the Land of the Free.

That and his art has hardly any artistic merit.
But as far as political art against Saddam and now against Bush? Most attention whores are 16-year-old girls, not balding middle-easterners.