What's new

[VIDEO] Man sentenced for 25 years for stabbing Salman Rushdie [Update post@483]

I personally do not support mob justice or this type of attack. This type of attack is counterproductive and gives Islam a bad name. He should be tried in a court; not attacked by a random guy.

Having said that, Salman Rushdie is an idiot. There is no doubt about it.
 
You remember 9/11 happened in New York (and Washington) right?

And who were the perps of 9/11?

But you are right, security is a big issue at multiple levels-

A) Issuing family immigration visas without vetting socio-political views. Family chain migration is the biggest culprit of bringing such unwarranted elements into the western society.
B) Family/People not reporting persons with extremist views. Often you find the guys had displayed intentions known/ left extremist remarks on social media but nobody reports them.

If these things are tightened up, there will be much better prevention of such events happening.
 
Salman Rushdie said he felt his life was "relatively normal" in an interview conducted just two weeks before he was stabbed on stage in the US.

The award-winning writer is in a critical condition after being attacked at an event on Friday.

He has faced years of death threats for his novel The Satanic Verses, which some Muslims see as blasphemous.

There has been an outpouring of support, with the attack condemned as an assault on freedom of expression.

Mr Rushdie, 75, has been put on a ventilator, is unable to speak, and may lose one eye, his agent said.

BBC
 
Reminder stick to Rushdie and leave world politics out
 
Salman Rushdie attack prompts muted reaction in India and Pakistan

Majority of public figures have chosen not to comment on attempt on Indian-born writer’s life

The literary world and public figures across the globe have expressed shock and outrage after the author Salman Rushdie was attacked at an event in New York.

But in Pakistan, an Islamic republic, there was a deep silence from celebrated writers and politicians following the attack on the author, while in India, where Rushdie was born, it is a bank holiday this weekend. Apart from some liberals expressing horror at the stabbing, reaction has been muted.

The author, whose writing led to death threats from Iran in the 1980s, was stabbed in the neck and torso as he was about to give a lecture in western New York. He remains on a ventilator after being attacked on stage in western New York state on Friday morning and his spokesperson, Andrew Wylie, said that the author may lose an eye following the attack.

Rushdie has been accused of blasphemy in the Islamic world for his book The Satanic Verses.

The book caused huge controversy as some Muslims accused the text of blasphemy and of mocking Islam. This also sparked protests across the UK by British Muslims.

Blasphemy is a hugely sensitive issue in Pakistan, with even unproven allegations provoking mob lynchings and violence.

Salman Taseer, a governor of Punjab, was killed by his security guard in Pakistan’s capital in Islamabad, in 2011. Taseer had called for reforms to the blasphemy legislation and promised to help Asia Bibi, a Christian woman who was accused of blasphemy after an argument with a Muslim woman.

As even talking about Rushdie’s attack can bring condemnation and death threats, many dare not speak out.

Veengas, a journalist and founder of a non-profit news organisation the Rise News, tweeted: “Some are still thinking about whether to tweet on #SalmanRushdie – you call yourself an author, journalist, and activist but have no courage to condemn the violent action. Your silence describes everything. Sane minds won’t encourage violence regardless of who you are.”

The Guardian tried to contact writers and novelists for their reactions, but most did not respond.

Cyril Almeida, a journalist, said in the fog of the Iranian fatwa, many had forgotten that some of the first protests against Rushdie were in Pakistan. But matters have largely been overtaken by the assassination of Salman Taseer.

“The Asia Bibi episode unleashed a wave of bigotry that has swept over society to the point that, today, one of [Pakistan’s] biggest parties in terms of votes polled is a party founded on a single point agenda of having blasphemy laws ferociously enforced. In this environment, few activists or writers dare to speak even in the narrowest and most cautious of ways,” said Almeida.

A few condemned the attack on Rushdie on social media, albeit with caution. Mehr Tarar, a writer, said in a tweet: “Salman Rushdie, excl Satanic Verses, is one of the greatest writers of all time. Attacking someone for his novel – written 33 years ago as an atheist, non-believer in Islam or something else he wrote – makes no sense at all. Our Islam doesn’t allow anyone to be killed for their views.”

More than a hundred people reacted to her tweet. One responded: “I respect you a lot, but don’t indulge in this matter. If I were there, I could have done worse.”

India was the first country to impose a ban on The Satanic Verses in 1988. There has been no statement from the Indian government or the main opposition, the Congress party. The Congress party was in power when the book came out and quickly decided to ban it. Natwar Singh, external affairs minister at the time, defended the ban on Saturday, justifying it as necessary to avoid law and order problems.

“The entire Muslim world is going to flare up. We have a large number of Muslims and apart from that, what the book contains at this time is not acceptable.”

Conservative Muslim groups and clerics were outraged by the book, despite for the most part not having read it, and burned copies as part of street protests, demanding a ban.

Gandhi was accused by the Bharatiya Janata party, which is now in power, of “pandering” to the most regressive elements in Muslim society for the sake of votes, without caring about freedom of expression.

Rushdie, in angry letter to Gandhi, accused him of capitulating to a handful of Indian Muslim politicians and clerics who were “extremists”.

Decades later, the Hindu nationalist BJP is in power and has been accused of marginalising and targeting India’s Muslims and eagerly grabbing opportunities to attack some of them as terrorist sympathisers who will do anything to defend Islam.

As a result, conservative Muslim groups have chosen not to make a statement on the attack on Rushdie, fearing the BJP may round on them for supporting violent acts.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...-in-india-and-pakistan?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
 
the irony of the reaction he generates is that rushdie would have been a nobody fringe author was it not for muslims.
 
Salman Rushdie attack: What we know so far about suspect Hadi Matar

Sir Salman Rushdie's suspected attacker has been charged with attempted second degree murder.

Hadi Matar, 24, was identified by New York police after the attack on Friday.

Police have not established a motive for the stabbing that left the author, 75, seriously injured.

He remains on a ventilator in hospital.

This is what we know of the suspect so far:

Matar is from Fairview, New Jersey, and had bought a pass to the event at the Chautauqua Institution.

Spectator Kathleen Jones said the attacker was dressed in black, with a black mask.

Matar was born in the United States to Lebanese parents who emigrated from Yaroun, a border village in southern Lebanon, Mayor Ali Tehfe told the AP news agency.

He is believed to have been born about a decade after the publication of The Satanic Verses, the book that drew Sir Salman death threats, in 1988.

According to NBC, he was born in California, but had recently moved to New Jersey.

Sources said that Matar also had a fake New Jersey driver's licence on him.

Police and the FBI have cordoned off the area around Matar's home.

The authorities are unsure if Matar had a criminal record, New York State Police Maj Eugene J Staniszewski said.

A backpack believed to have been left by the suspect was rendered safe by sheriff's bomb squad members, and state troopers have requested a search warrant to look inside, Maj Staniszewski said.

According to NBC News, which cited a law enforcement official with direct knowledge of the investigation, a preliminary review of Matar' social media shows he had sympathies for Shia extremism and Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

The IRGC has been labelled a terrorist organisation by the US.

Authorities are looking into those alleged sympathies. However, there are no definitive links between Matar and the IRGC, the law enforcement source told NBC.

The Iran-backed Lebanese armed group Hezbollah has said it had no information on the stabbing and would not comment on it.

A mobile phone messaging app belonging to Matar includes images of Qassem Soleimani, the commander of the IRGC killed in a US drone strike in January 2020.

The phone also reportedly includes an image of an Iraqi extremist sympathetic to the Iranian regime.

Matar's lawyer, Nathaniel Barone, said he was still gathering information and declined to comment.

SKY
 
The man suspected of stabbing Salman Rushdie at an event in the United States on Friday has been charged with attempted murder.

Hadi Matar, 24, has appeared in court and has been remanded without bail, the prosecutor said.

Mr Matar ran onto the stage and attacked Mr Rushdie and an interviewer at the event in western New York state.

The award-winning writer is in a critical condition.

Mr Rushdie, 75, has faced years of death threats for his novel The Satanic Verses, which some Muslims see as blasphemous.

"This is the very early stage of what will invariably be a protracted legal process," District Attorney Jason Schmidt said in a statement.

BBC
 
Most such fanatics don't think how their actions make other believers ashamed. They don't think if the Holy Prophet(SAW who they claim to love so much would have agreed with their actions. I would say that most of these people have probably not even read "The Satanic Verses" themselves instead just follow the anger of others. Islam will again be viciously attacked if Salman Rushdie dies.
 
Personally i Dont support the criticism of religious icons or religion. Religion is people's faith and it shouldn't be made fun of. To each his own. But murder for criticising religion?

You will not leave the comforts of a western country but the countries must accept the islamic limits to their freedom? Why? If Muslims move to a non islamic non muslim majority Western country it is their responsibility to mould themselves as per the ways of the land they are living in.

Have the Western nations asked islamic nations to accept their ways?

Basically you want that islamic nations will have laws as per their religion but non islamic nations now must accept and mould their laws as per muslims? You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

Protest against Rushdie and his books. Kay be even take him to court. Boycott his events or places where he is honoured. But murder? Killings? It cannot be justified. You as a responsible muslim should atleast try to tell people you know how dangerous this violence is.

You said dont poke the bear. What do you think attacks like this are doing? Its poking the natives of the western countries. You think these will not have widespread ramifications?

[MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] is making a lot of sense.
 
the irony of the reaction he generates is that rushdie would have been a nobody fringe author was it not for muslims.

He won the Booker Prize years before writing the book that offended Khomeini.
 
Salman Rushdie was a nobody, that is until his Satanic Verses, and it was the controversy that made him infamous worldwide.

He received the nomination and confirmation for his knighthood by none other than Lord Rothschild , and Tony Blair was PM at the time. Go figure.

Rushdie in nothing without the Satanic Verses, and he was fully supported by the powers to be.

I suggest people pay less attention to liberalism and pay attention to the facts, Rushdie didn’t just offend Khomeini.
 
Rushdie had already won the Booker Prize among other awards for “Midnight’s Children”, and then the French award for Best Foreign Book for “Shame” (about the Bhutto family) which was also shortlisted for a second Booker — and ironically this novel then won an award for great literary merit in, of all places, Iran…

To say that Rushdie was a nobody before/without the publication of Satanic Verses is, I’m sorry to my much respected fellow bros on this occasion, not an informed viewpoint.

(Did writing Satanic Verses make him even more famous, and also for the first time infamous — yes)
 
Rushdie had already won the Booker Prize among other awards for “Midnight’s Children”, and then the French award for Best Foreign Book for “Shame” (about the Bhutto family) which was also shortlisted for a second Booker — and ironically this novel then won an award for great literary merit in, of all places, Iran…

To say that Rushdie was a nobody before/without the publication of Satanic Verses is, I’m sorry to my much respected fellow bros on this occasion, not an informed viewpoint.

(Did writing Satanic Verses make him even more famous, and also for the first time infamous — yes)

You would be surprised to hear that the original satanic verses were bot even by him.

The prophets life has been covered by various sources, todays muslim read ibn hisham version on life of prophet but ibn hisham further took material from ibn ishaq. He took the chronology but omitted some of the contents and admits that in the forward of the book.

It is said that santanic verses were actually foretold by ibn ishaq, he was the one who wrote this story.

The argument that takes place often is that how is it possible ibn hisham considered the chronology of the life of prophet by ibn ishaq to be correct but not the contents.

So the origins of the controversy are from early 700 ad. It died down and many people were not aware of this until rushdie comes along with his book.

Certain muslims that keep a deep knowledge on islam or on the hadith feel that this was a topic that should had stayed died down and Rushdie endes up giving points for ex or non muslims against islam.
 
I hope Salman Rushdie makes it out alive even though I don't agree with the material of his books.

It's about time that Muslims worry about their own business and their connection with Allah (SWT). The Prophet (SAW) was mocked during his lifetime. Yet, he did not respond and in fact refrained from cursing them. If he was alive today, he would never approve of these actions.

All this guy has done is give more publicity to this author and as a result more people will buy his books out of curiosity. This counterproductive extremist behaviour also puts Muslim lives at risk. Those who indulge in these attacks are among the khawarij.

I'm disappointed about the priorities of some posters here who are more concerned about the book than the stabbing itself.

I'm shocked this has happened in US where Muslims are generally far more liberal and better integrated in comparison to their UK and other European counterparts.
 
Last edited:
Hatred towards Rushdie is fine as long as it’s words or boycott.

You said many Indians supported MF Hussain FoS so I think the point posters are making is that then many Muslims are also condemning what’s happened. But it’s stupid to expect Muslims to lionize Rushdie

I don't expect Muslims to lionise anyone especially not Rushdie . Where have I said that?
But in an increasingly globalized world, I think its high time everyone - Muslims, Hindus and anyone else really will have to accept that those who do not share your beliefs will always have the right to criticise and lampoon those beliefs .

I only pointed out the one poster whose post was borderline condoning the violence on Rushdie. Most posters on PP have condemned this act and that's a good thing.
 
The pioneer of apostate-fame who has lived to provoke the billions who follow the a religion. Surprised he's let his guard down like this
 
Why don't the likes of you understand that freedom cannot be defined as per your religious requirement.

You move to the west for better life then accept their ways too.

The likes of me mean nothing. I am not brave or passionate enough to go and avenge the honour of the Prophet s.a through physical means. I will defend it the best way I can through academic discourse. However, the likes of me don’t represent many other Muslims who are ready to sacrifice their everything for the honour of the Prophet s.a. What is the world doing to eradicate those die hard fanatics? Nothing! All they are doing is harvesting them by forcing them to think that they will not mend their ways or attitude towards Muhammad s.a and the hatred will just increase
 
He won the Booker Prize years before writing the book that offended Khomeini.

and none of them has the level of global fame, or infamy as rushdie.

the coverage he recieved globally was orders of magnitude beyond what any other author had achieved in the pre internet age.
 
The likes of me mean nothing. I am not brave or passionate enough to go and avenge the honour of the Prophet s.a through physical means. I will defend it the best way I can through academic discourse. However, the likes of me don’t represent many other Muslims who are ready to sacrifice their everything for the honour of the Prophet s.a. What is the world doing to eradicate those die hard fanatics? Nothing! All they are doing is harvesting them by forcing them to think that they will not mend their ways or attitude towards Muhammad s.a and the hatred will just increase

Likes of you mean a lot.

Forget about world. It may be hard to realize but many posts are simply encouraging those fanatics. How you react to this barbaric act is very important.
 
Last edited:
I hope Salman Rushdie makes it out alive even though I don't agree with the material of his books.

It's about time that Muslims worry about their own business and their connection with Allah (SWT). The Prophet (SAW) was mocked during his lifetime. Yet, he did not respond and in fact refrained from cursing them. If he was alive today, he would never approve of these actions.

All this guy has done is give more publicity to this author and as a result more people will buy his books out of curiosity. This counterproductive extremist behaviour also puts Muslim lives at risk. Those who indulge in these attacks are among the khawarij.

I'm disappointed about the priorities of some posters here who are more concerned about the book than the stabbing itself.

I'm shocked this has happened in US where Muslims are generally far more liberal and better integrated in comparison to their UK and other European counterparts.

+1

Reaction like this is the best way to not encourage nut cases.

Bold part jumped out to me as well. That simply gives more justification to nut cases who are going to take extra step to stab.
 
Last edited:
The likes of me mean nothing. I am not brave or passionate enough to go and avenge the honour of the Prophet s.a through physical means. I will defend it the best way I can through academic discourse. However, the likes of me don’t represent many other Muslims who are ready to sacrifice their everything for the honour of the Prophet s.a. What is the world doing to eradicate those die hard fanatics? Nothing! All they are doing is harvesting them by forcing them to think that they will not mend their ways or attitude towards Muhammad s.a and the hatred will just increase

Why would you think that the Prophet’s honor needs to be avenged simply because somebody wrote a critical book? And what makes you think that anybody is imminently qualified to actually avenge the Prophet’s honor?

The West owes nothing to anybody - they are not required to give up their ideals to appease fanatic immigrants who are alien to their way of life, just like the Islamic world owes nothing to its immigrants. The immigrant Muslims shouldnt force anybody in a foreign land to follow the diktats of our religion. Incidents like these only provide more fodder to individuals to further badmouth the religion as intolerant.
 
The immigrant Muslims shouldnt force anybody in a foreign land to follow the diktats of our religion. Incidents like these only provide more fodder to individuals to further badmouth the religion as intolerant.

Not all Muslims in west are immigrants though. There are many who were born here. There are many Muslims who are native white people.

However, I agree that this type of action is not good for Islam's image and can put Muslims in danger of hate attacks.
 
Salman Rushdie was a nobody, that is until his Satanic Verses, and it was the controversy that made him infamous worldwide.

He received the nomination and confirmation for his knighthood by none other than Lord Rothschild , and Tony Blair was PM at the time. Go figure.

Rushdie in nothing without the Satanic Verses, and he was fully supported by the powers to be.

I suggest people pay less attention to liberalism and pay attention to the facts, Rushdie didn’t just offend Khomeini.

Tnat is simply not true. A simple google search would have shown that and you wouldn’t have needed an ignorant post lacking in facts.

If anything satanic verses took away from his actual skill because his earlier books were actually great
 
Salman Rushdie is off ventilator and able to talk, agent says

Salman Rushdie has been taken off a ventilator and was able to talk on Saturday, his agent has confirmed, as the US president hailed the writer’s courage and voiced horror at the attack on him.

The Indian-born British novelist remains hospitalised with serious injuries, but fellow author Aatish Taseer tweeted on Saturday evening that he was “off the ventilator and talking (and joking)”. Rushdie’s agent, Andrew Wylie, confirmed that information without offering further details.

Earlier on Saturday, Hadi Matar, the man suspected in Friday’s attack at a literary festival in upstate New York, pleaded not guilty to charges of attempted murder and assault at a brief court appearance where he was denied bail.

Joe Biden, the US president, praised Rushdie for “his refusal to be intimidated or silenced” and said the author stood for the essential ideals of truth, courage and resilience. “These are the building blocks of any free and open society. And today, we reaffirm our commitment to those deeply American values in solidarity with Rushdie and all those who stand for freedom of expression,” the president said in a statement. Biden also said he was “shocked and saddened to learn of the vicious attack”.

Rushdie lived in hiding and under police protection for years after late Iranian leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini put out a fatwa in 1989 calling for his death in retribution for Rushdie’s book The Satanic Verses. Many Muslims interpreted the author’s book as blasphemous because it included a character they found insulting to the prophet Muhammad.

Rushdie, 75, was at the Chautauqua Institution to speak about the importance of America’s giving asylum to exiled writers when he was attacked, and said recently that he believed his life was “very normal again”.

On Saturday, district attorney Jason Schmidt alleged that Rushdie’s alleged attacker took steps to purposely put himself in position to harm Rushdie, getting an advance pass to the event where the author was speaking and arriving a day early bearing a fake ID. “This was a targeted, unprovoked, preplanned attack on Mr Rushdie,” Schmidt alleged.

Public defender Nathaniel Barone complained that authorities had taken too long to get Matar in front of a judge while leaving him “hooked up to a bench at the state police barracks”. “He has that constitutional right of presumed innocence,” Barone said.

Matar allegedly rushed on stage and stabbed Rushdie repeatedly before being tackled by spectators, institution staffers and two local law enforcement officers providing security.

Rushdie suffered a damaged liver and severed nerves in an arm and an eye, Wylie said on Friday evening. He was likely to lose the injured eye.

The attack was met with shock and outrage from much of the world, along with tributes and praise for the award-winning author who for more than 30 years has faced death threats for The Satanic Verses.

Authors, activists and government officials cited Rushdie’s courage and longtime advocacy of free speech despite the risks to his own safety. Writer and longtime friend Ian McEwan called Rushdie “an inspirational defender of persecuted writers and journalists across the world”, and actor-author Kal Penn cited him as a role model “for an entire generation of artists, especially many of us in the South Asian diaspora toward whom he’s shown incredible warmth”.

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...is-off-ventilator-and-able-to-talk-agent-says
 
He is an overated writer. He wrote the disgusting Satanic Verses for self publicity, he knew exactly what he was doing. There are some views, Rushdie was encouraged to write this for propaganda against Iran. Rushdie was and is a big fan of Israel. Its nothing to do with great writing, just a vile human being who abused the Prophet of so many openly.

Have you read the book in question, or are you just going by others' descriptions of it? Getting outraged is the easiest emotion to generate, especially if it's to settle a perennial identity crisis.
 
This is actually hilarious and shows that you are just a hack who hasn’t even read the books.

As per most literary experts Satanic Verses is actually not among his great books and actually the controversy has taken the shine away from his genuine great works.

The hilarious part is whataboutery going on here. Satanic Verses is great book in my personal opinion.. I don't care about what anyone thinks tbh.
 
Not all Muslims in west are immigrants though. There are many who were born here. There are many Muslims who are native white people.

However, I agree that this type of action is not good for Islam's image and can put Muslims in danger of hate attacks.

Agreed, I am one of them (US born). But knowing the culture & history of this country, does this give me a right to impose my religion or its requirements on them? What if tomorrow a Saudi born Indian demands that he be allowed into Mecca & Medina - do you think that will be entertained?

As far as I am concerned, the Prophet himself ignored his detractors & that is enough indication to me how this was to be handled. Iran issued a fatwa against Rushdie just to score a political brownie point (they even retracted the fatwa later!), but unfortunate that people still think it is ok to unwarrantedly kill in the name of religion.
 
The hilarious part is whataboutery going on here. Satanic Verses is great book in my personal opinion.. I don't care about what anyone thinks tbh.

Have you even read the book? I wonder with all its Islamic references, how many non-Muslims would even understand the book.
 
I'm happy to say that, by and large, I completely ignored all the controversy around Salman Rushidi / Satanic Verses / The Fatwa at the time it was headline news everywhere.

I've never read the book, or even excerpts from it, or have ever had any interest in doing so, and thus would have no need to be offended by the books contents.

Which brings me to the point of why I'm writing this post:

If a Muslim had never purchased a copy of the book and and therefore never read it, then he'd have no reason to be offended by it's contents.
Why go out of your way to read something that might offend you if you read it?

Which then leads to the question: Why were/are all these people offended by it's contents if they never read the book or excerpts from it?
Who told them to be offended by it?
Other Muslims?
If so, did these other Muslims purchase/read it?
Why?

Or did they get offended because non-Muslims read it, and decided Muslims will be offended by it, and then went and told the Muslims who weren't even aware of the offensive material that the book contained offensive material that would offend them?

Sounds fishy does it not?

Unless of course it was Rushdie and his publishers who wanted the controversy, added passages that were extremely controversial, all with the objective of creating the controversy, and the resulting reaction by the ignorant masses (egged on by the mullah's) in order to create the publicity and sell more copies. And then went about telling their friends in the media to publicise and push this point, and thereby create the desired reaction.

Millions of people only bought the book and read it in order to understand what all the worldwide reaction was about.

Fortunately I was not one of them..
 
I'm happy to say that, by and large, I completely ignored all the controversy around Salman Rushidi / Satanic Verses / The Fatwa at the time it was headline news everywhere.

I've never read the book, or even excerpts from it, or have ever had any interest in doing so, and thus would have no need to be offended by the books contents.

Which brings me to the point of why I'm writing this post:

If a Muslim had never purchased a copy of the book and and therefore never read it, then he'd have no reason to be offended by it's contents.
Why go out of your way to read something that might offend you if you read it?

Which then leads to the question: Why were/are all these people offended by it's contents if they never read the book or excerpts from it?
Who told them to be offended by it?
Other Muslims?
If so, did these other Muslims purchase/read it?
Why?

Or did they get offended because non-Muslims read it, and decided Muslims will be offended by it, and then went and told the Muslims who weren't even aware of the offensive material that the book contained offensive material that would offend them?

Sounds fishy does it not?

Unless of course it was Rushdie and his publishers who wanted the controversy, added passages that were extremely controversial, all with the objective of creating the controversy, and the resulting reaction by the ignorant masses (egged on by the mullah's) in order to create the publicity and sell more copies. And then went about telling their friends in the media to publicise and push this point, and thereby create the desired reaction.

Millions of people only bought the book and read it in order to understand what all the worldwide reaction was about.

Fortunately I was not one of them..

I dont agree with your premise - Rushdie was already very famous even before he wrote this book, he probably didnt need the publicity. Plus this book was completely banned by many nations, so in fact he would have lost customers of this book.

And not to forget, this book brought a lot of misery on his team - so many of his publishers/translators were killed due to their involvement in the publication.

Imo, this was problemly spread by one Muslim reader who read & got offended by it & then ultimately spread it across the globe via word of mouth. Doubt anybody has even actually read this vook.
 
Sounds fishy does it not?.

Why is it fishy .. if muslims can get riled up by danish cartoons or ch. hebdo or youtube movies on prophet Mo, why can't they get upset by books ? Unless you're implying muslims aren't that literate or don't read books ?
 
‘Truth, courage, resilience’: Biden hails Salman Rushdie after attack
President says author stands for ‘essential, universal ideals’ and ‘the ability to share ideas without fear’

A day after Salman Rushdie’s stabbing in western New York, Joe Biden on Saturday issued a statement hailing the author as standing “for essential, universal ideals”.

“Truth. Courage. Resilience. The ability to share ideas without fear,” the president’s statement added about Rushdie, who spent years in hiding after a former leader of Iran put out a call for the writer’s death over one of his novels. “These are the building blocks of any free and open society. And today, we reaffirm our commitment to those deeply American values in solidarity with Rushdie and all those who stand for freedom of expression.”

Biden also said he and Jill Biden offered prayers to Rushdie, and he thanked those who came to the writer’s aid after the stabbing, which left Biden “shocked and saddened”.

Rushdie, 75, was at a literary festival hosted by the Chautauqua Institution to speak about how important it was for the US to give asylum to exiled writers when he was stabbed.

Authorities allege Hadi Matar, 24, of Fairview, New Jersey, rushed on stage and knifed Rushdie repeatedly before being tackled by spectators, institution staffers and police providing security.

Rushdie suffered three stabs wounds to the right front of his neck, another four to his stomach, one each to his right eye and chest, and a cut to his right thigh, the local district attorney, Jason Schmidt, said Saturday.

A helicopter crew flew Rushdie to a hospital in nearby Erie, Pennsylvania. He remained hospitalized on Saturday, with his liver damaged, nerves in his arm severed and at the risk of losing an eye, according to his literary agent.

New York officials have charged Matar with attempted murder as well as assault on a man who was sharing the stage with Rushdie and suffered a relatively small facial wound during the stabbing. Matar has pleaded not guilty and is being held without bail.

Investigators haven’t said why they believe Matar may have wanted to kill Rushdie. But at a preliminary court hearing on Saturday, the local district attorney alluded to the fatwa – or decree – calling for his life that late Iranian leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini put out in 1989.

The fatwa – well before Matar was born – was in retribution for Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses. Many Muslims interpreted the Indian-born author’s book as blasphemous because it included a character they found insulting to the prophet Muhammad, the founder of their faith.

Iran’s government has since tried to distance itself from the fatwa, but with the help of religious extremists, an accompanying bounty was increased in recent years to more than $3m.

Matar’s social media activity reportedly reflects an admiration of Iran’s government as well as Islamic extremism.

Rushdie lived in hiding and under police protection for years after the fatwa. But more recently he had been living openly in New York, which Biden’s statement hailed as “a refusal to be intimidated or silenced”.

Biden – whose administration is trying to re-enter a nuclear deal with Iran – also said Rushdie had demonstrated “insight into humanity with his unmatched sense for story”.

… as you’re joining us today from Canada, we have a small favour to ask. Tens of millions have placed their trust in the Guardian’s fearless journalism since we started publishing 200 years ago, turning to us in moments of crisis, uncertainty, solidarity and hope. More than 1.5 million supporters, from 180 countries, now power us financially – keeping us open to all, and fiercely independent.

Unlike many others, the Guardian has no shareholders and no billionaire owner. Just the determination and passion to deliver high-impact global reporting, always free from commercial or political influence. Reporting like this is vital for democracy, for fairness and to demand better from the powerful.

And we provide all this for free, for everyone to read. We do this because we believe in information equality. Greater numbers of people can keep track of the events shaping our world, understand their impact on people and communities, and become inspired to take meaningful action. Millions can benefit from open access to quality, truthful news, regardless of their ability to pay for it.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...ience-biden-hails-salman-rushdie-after-attack
 
The likes of me mean nothing. I am not brave or passionate enough to go and avenge the honour of the Prophet s.a through physical means.


Wow .. so you think it is 'brave' to avenge the honour of the Prophet through physical means ? Was the Rushdie attacker being brave here ? Normal people would think it is cowardly and evil. You are slowly revealing your colors here mate.
 
I dont agree with your premise - Rushdie was already very famous even before he wrote this book, he probably didnt need the publicity. Plus this book was completely banned by many nations, so in fact he would have lost customers of this book.

And not to forget, this book brought a lot of misery on his team - so many of his publishers/translators were killed due to their involvement in the publication.

Imo, this was problemly spread by one Muslim reader who read & got offended by it & then ultimately spread it across the globe via word of mouth. Doubt anybody has even actually read this vook.
Ah, someone with an agenda. You obviously failed to understand the post.
Doesn't matter.
I would be extremely surprised if you had heard about the 'very famous Rushdie' before the Satanic Verses and it's associated controversy. And probably same goes for the vast majority of the millions who purchased a copy of Satanic Verses.
 
Why is it fishy .. if muslims can get riled up by danish cartoons or ch. hebdo or youtube movies on prophet Mo, why can't they get upset by books ? Unless you're implying muslims aren't that literate or don't read books ?
Do try and understand the gist of the post. By your comment you obviously don't.
 
It seems that Rushdie will make a recovery, which is good news.
 
Leave the religion aside for a moment.

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was a great leader and brilliant general and strategist too.

Will he agree with what just happened?

This attack has just made Rushdie a hero.
 
The likes of me mean nothing. I am not brave or passionate enough to go and avenge the honour of the Prophet s.a through physical means. I will defend it the best way I can through academic discourse. However, the likes of me don’t represent many other Muslims who are ready to sacrifice their everything for the honour of the Prophet s.a. What is the world doing to eradicate those die hard fanatics? Nothing! All they are doing is harvesting them by forcing them to think that they will not mend their ways or attitude towards Muhammad s.a and the hatred will just increase

Do you need to avenge him? The honour of the Prophet (PBUH) is not so filmsy that a book will dent it.

I am not a Muslim, but i respect and appreciate him as a great leader, general and strategiest. And that respect doesn't get hit by some book.

What can the world do? If educated muslims like you take it upon yourself that anytime a person known to you talks about such fanaticism you will tell him that there are beter ways. Only the Muslim society itself can stop this wave of fanatacism and violence. Outsiders cannot do it?

Today those who didn't know about Satanic Verses know that a Muslim tried to kill an Author because of a book. How does that affect the ordinary Muslim?

I apologise if i offend you, i mean no disrespect. This is not about India Pakistan so please don't look at it in that way.
 
Well blow me down, how did that happen?

The Man was over. His fame/infamy was done. Suddenly this guy has made him headlines around the world and a hero of FoE and liberals.

Which publisher published Satanic Verses? How many Muslims have boycotted that publisher?
 
Do try and understand the gist of the post. By your comment you obviously don't.

If the gist of the post is - Rushdie's publishers deliberately got him to insert controversial passages in the book and got their media friends to highlight them so that they get publicity, you have zero evidence for that and is mindless speculation. Spread of the controversy was likely organic just like for the danish cartoons.

But say even if it were true, it is irrelevant .. publishers will always seek publicity for their clients. The onus is on the people who react. Muslims shouldn't have reacted that way. No other religion's adherents would have murdered for the sake of a book. That is what you should focus on.
 
Last edited:
The Man was over. His fame/infamy was done. Suddenly this guy has made him headlines around the world and a hero of FoE and liberals.

Which publisher published Satanic Verses? How many Muslims have boycotted that publisher?

I think you may be missing the bigger picture.
 
In his memoirs, Rushdie blames the journalist Madhu Jain's 1988 review of the book in the India Today magazine for having lit the fire. This review caused the Indian government to ban the book and subsequently lead the Ayatollah to institute a fatwa on the author.

Here is the review, for anyone who is interested -

https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/...-rushdie-the-satanic-verses-797671-1988-09-15

This is a recent article by Madhu Jain reminiscing about that review's fallout -

https://openthemagazine.com/art-culture/remembering-the-deadly-review/
 
Leave the religion aside for a moment.

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was a great leader and brilliant general and strategist too.

Will he agree with what just happened?

This attack has just made Rushdie a hero.

Think depends on who you read/listen to.
 
If the gist of the post is - Rushdie's publishers deliberately got him to insert controversial passages in the book and got their media friends to highlight them so that they get publicity, you have zero evidence for that and is mindless speculation. Spread of the controversy was likely organic just like for the danish cartoons.

But say even if it were true, it is irrelevant .. publishers will always seek publicity for their clients. The onus is on the people who react. Muslims shouldn't have reacted that way. No other religion's adherents would have murdered for the sake of a book. That is what you should focus on.
Thereby conveniently ignoring the first part of the post. Try to digest the post as a whole. Then you'll understand it better.
 
Rushdie was the greatest advocate of free speech, even when it wasn't favourable to him. He defended the release of lollywood smash hit 'International Gorillay'.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">A 1990 Pakistani film depicted Salman Rushdie as a satanic agent of Jews and Hindus out to destroy Islam. He's so evil that he has to be killed by flying Korans. The British refused to certify the film. Rushdie intervened and got the film cleared. <a href="https://t.co/s240sYuEH1">pic.twitter.com/s240sYuEH1</a></p>— Kapil Komireddi (@kapskom) <a href="https://twitter.com/kapskom/status/1558460064641466369?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 13, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Rushdie was the greatest advocate of free speech, even when it wasn't favourable to him. He defended the release of lollywood smash hit 'International Gorillay'.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">A 1990 Pakistani film depicted Salman Rushdie as a satanic agent of Jews and Hindus out to destroy Islam. He's so evil that he has to be killed by flying Korans. The British refused to certify the film. Rushdie intervened and got the film cleared. <a href="https://t.co/s240sYuEH1">pic.twitter.com/s240sYuEH1</a></p>— Kapil Komireddi (@kapskom) <a href="https://twitter.com/kapskom/status/1558460064641466369?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 13, 2022</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.” Oscar Wilde
 
The attacker has pleaded "Not Guilty".

If he was so intent on his belief of wanting Rushdie dead, why is he not accepting responsibility now?
 
The attacker has pleaded "Not Guilty".

If he was so intent on his belief of wanting Rushdie dead, why is he not accepting responsibility now?

Because like all these people, he is a coward - trying to play the system
 
The attacker has pleaded "Not Guilty".

If he was so intent on his belief of wanting Rushdie dead, why is he not accepting responsibility now?

He has pleaded not guilty because he wants a trial and he will want to voice his opinion
 
He has pleaded not guilty because he wants a trial and he will want to voice his opinion

Wouldnt you say that trial would be waste of public money wehn a public defender is given to this killer?

Atleast the guy should be man enough to admit he is guilty of a crime
 
He has pleaded not guilty because he wants a trial and he will want to voice his opinion

Nah I think he's just doing a Mohammad Amir and will delay the inevitable.
 
Wouldnt you say that trial would be waste of public money wehn a public defender is given to this killer?

Atleast the guy should be man enough to admit he is guilty of a crime

It is a waste of public money but so was the state v OJ Simpson. The man was clearly guilty of murder of his wife (as DNA proved it was his blood) yet the law permitted him to plead not guilty and waste millions of dollars of public money on a trial.
 
The attacker has pleaded "Not Guilty".

If he was so intent on his belief of wanting Rushdie dead, why is he not accepting responsibility now?

He is obviously some loser who will claim to have been played, or perhaps even paid to do a botch job of killing Rushdie. It makes a compelling case to be honest.
 
It is a waste of public money but so was the state v OJ Simpson. The man was clearly guilty of murder of his wife (as DNA proved it was his blood) yet the law permitted him to plead not guilty and waste millions of dollars of public money on a trial.

I don’t think he was guilty. The glove didn’t fit. I think he took the rap for someone.
 
The attacker has pleaded "Not Guilty".

If he was so intent on his belief of wanting Rushdie dead, why is he not accepting responsibility now?

Probably thinks he is a soldier waging jihad, not a common criminal.
 
Probably thinks he is a soldier waging jihad, not a common criminal.

He may well believe that, but even a Mafia goon would have finished his victim if he got within striking distance. This guy is either an unhinged individual or a paid incompetent. Perhaps he was promised his family would be looked after if he achieved a certain result.
 
Leave the religion aside for a moment.

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was a great leader and brilliant general and strategist too.

Will he agree with what just happened?

This attack has just made Rushdie a hero.

Spot on.

The “freedom of publishing” movement in the West and amongst Liberals that gathered around Rushdie in the late eighties / early nineties was a thing of the past.

Now look across social media and Rushdie’s cause is rallying & is revived.

This cowardly attack has backfired.
 
Spot on.

The “freedom of publishing” movement in the West and amongst Liberals that gathered around Rushdie in the late eighties / early nineties was a thing of the past.
[MENTION=1842]James[/MENTION] it has been a core value of Western European society for at least 150 years, arguably 400 years.
 
Islam has almost 2-billion followers. About 1 in every 4 humans on this planet is a Muslim.

Out of that huge number, you are bound to get a few violent radicals; that's just statistical probability.

Muslims don't have to feel guilty for one man's action just like Christians don't have to feel guilty for Christchurch shooting or any other atrocity done by a Christian. Every man is responsible for his own actions.
 
Last edited:
[MENTION=1842]James[/MENTION] it has been a core value of Western European society for at least 150 years, arguably 400 years.

Not in the sense that there was a spike of vocal support for it where it became a huge issue in the public eye. Which is what it has just become again.
 
Islam has almost 2-billion followers. About 1 in every 4 humans on this planet is a Muslim.

Out of that huge number, you are bound to get a few violent radicals; that's just statistical probability.

Muslims don't have to feel guilty for one man's action just like Christians don't have to feel guilty for Christchurch shooting or any other atrocity done by a Christian. Every man is responsible for his own actions.

Wrong comparison. Christians dont go out killing people in the name of god or even their religion. Christians dont have the bagage of christian terrorism. Christian dont have a figure like osama bin laden who went on to do killings in the name of christianity post 2000 world.

Muslims have. Muslims have to carry this bagage. And instead of trying to sure that we are peaceful people, we end up going on killing blasphemers.
Ilmuddin is regarded as a hero in our history, quaid e azam is also invoked in it to create creadibility and justification for the killing.

No matter how hard we try to move on, its these few radicals that create more issue for us because that baggage cannot be let go off without the stupid actions of these soo called few.

You know whats even worst? In pakistan this guy who attempted murder is getting praise and support. He is being referred as gazi. On pakistani news media pages where his story is being told people are reacting to it positively and praising the move.

So its just few, few might want to commit the action, but a whole lot of them support the killing.

Salman rushdie's blasphemy wasnt known to the youngsters born after 1998. Now people mentioning about it in news, and we have rushdie back again in limelight and most likely more book sales.

For a community that cries about being targetted for following Islam, we ourselves dont do any good to protray ourselves as peaceful people.

Like it or not, the actions of an islamic terrorist or blasphemer killers will keep on representing us muslims.

Remember, when few afghanis behaved badly at headingly during afg vs pak, and pakistanis here genralized against all afghanis, its the same kind of thing when muslims commit such actions
 
Wrong comparison. Christians dont go out killing people in the name of god or even their religion. Christians dont have the bagage of christian terrorism. Christian dont have a figure like osama bin laden who went on to do killings in the name of christianity post 2000 world.

Muslims have. Muslims have to carry this bagage. And instead of trying to sure that we are peaceful people, we end up going on killing blasphemers.
Ilmuddin is regarded as a hero in our history, quaid e azam is also invoked in it to create creadibility and justification for the killing.

No matter how hard we try to move on, its these few radicals that create more issue for us because that baggage cannot be let go off without the stupid actions of these soo called few.

You know whats even worst? In pakistan this guy who attempted murder is getting praise and support. He is being referred as gazi. On pakistani news media pages where his story is being told people are reacting to it positively and praising the move.

So its just few, few might want to commit the action, but a whole lot of them support the killing.

Salman rushdie's blasphemy wasnt known to the youngsters born after 1998. Now people mentioning about it in news, and we have rushdie back again in limelight and most likely more book sales.

For a community that cries about being targetted for following Islam, we ourselves dont do any good to protray ourselves as peaceful people.

Like it or not, the actions of an islamic terrorist or blasphemer killers will keep on representing us muslims.

Remember, when few afghanis behaved badly at headingly during afg vs pak, and pakistanis here genralized against all afghanis, its the same kind of thing when muslims commit such actions

After Christchurch shooting happened, I have seen far-right people celebrating on social media. They seemed Christians to me.

Israelis were dancing after Al-Aqsa had an arson attack. See: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/hbHptBToLfc.

American invasions (lead by Christian leaders) killed and displaced millions of Muslims. How about Crusades and atrocities of British Empire? Spanish Empire?

Every man is responsible for his own actions. Generalization is not right.
 
Last edited:
Wrong comparison. Christians dont go out killing people in the name of god or even their religion. Christians dont have the bagage of christian terrorism. Christian dont have a figure like osama bin laden who went on to do killings in the name of christianity post 2000 world.

Muslims have. Muslims have to carry this bagage. And instead of trying to sure that we are peaceful people, we end up going on killing blasphemers.
Ilmuddin is regarded as a hero in our history, quaid e azam is also invoked in it to create creadibility and justification for the killing.

No matter how hard we try to move on, its these few radicals that create more issue for us because that baggage cannot be let go off without the stupid actions of these soo called few.

You know whats even worst? In pakistan this guy who attempted murder is getting praise and support. He is being referred as gazi. On pakistani news media pages where his story is being told people are reacting to it positively and praising the move.

So its just few, few might want to commit the action, but a whole lot of them support the killing.

Salman rushdie's blasphemy wasnt known to the youngsters born after 1998. Now people mentioning about it in news, and we have rushdie back again in limelight and most likely more book sales.

For a community that cries about being targetted for following Islam, we ourselves dont do any good to protray ourselves as peaceful people.

Like it or not, the actions of an islamic terrorist or blasphemer killers will keep on representing us muslims.

Remember, when few afghanis behaved badly at headingly during afg vs pak, and pakistanis here genralized against all afghanis, its the same kind of thing when muslims commit such actions


If you recall in the other thread about the the Al Qaeda no 2 Al Zawhiri you insisted on contesting my view that he was raggedy beard cave dweller and carried no threat whatsoever to the west. This guy is either a crazed individual, or part of a dangerous movement which threatens us all. Can you tell us which you believe it is?
 
Islam has almost 2-billion followers. About 1 in every 4 humans on this planet is a Muslim.

Out of that huge number, you are bound to get a few violent radicals; that's just statistical probability.

Muslims don't have to feel guilty for one man's action just like Christians don't have to feel guilty for Christchurch shooting or any other atrocity done by a Christian. Every man is responsible for his own actions.

It depends on the motive.
 
After Christchurch shooting happened, I have seen far-right people celebrating on social media. They seemed Christians to me.

Israelis were dancing after Al-Aqsa had an arson attack. See: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/hbHptBToLfc.

American invasions (lead by Christian leaders) killed and displaced millions of Muslims. How about Crusades and atrocities of British Empire? Spanish Empire?

Every man is responsible for his own actions. Generalization is not right.

I think you missed where i said post 2000. Crusades happen hundreds of years ago and christian world has moved on from theology.

An action of Muslim has repercussions on all muslims
 
If you recall in the other thread about the the Al Qaeda no 2 Al Zawhiri you insisted on contesting my view that he was raggedy beard cave dweller and carried no threat whatsoever to the west. This guy is either a crazed individual, or part of a dangerous movement which threatens us all. Can you tell us which you believe it is?
You misunderstood what i wrote in the post.

What has ayman al zawhiri got to do here?
 
You misunderstood what i wrote in the post.

What has ayman al zawhiri got to do here?

You were the one who mentioned Osama bin Laden in your post which I quoted. What did he have to do with this topic? Do you need me to join the dots for you?
 
You were the one who mentioned Osama bin Laden in your post which I quoted. What did he have to do with this topic? Do you need me to join the dots for you?

As i said, you werent able to comprehend what i said. Read what sweepshot wrote than read what i wrote. I wasnt discussing bin laden i was discussing how the actions of bin laden and islamic terrorism lead to muslims having to deal the consequences. It was more about islamophobia
 
As i said, you werent able to comprehend what i said. Read what sweepshot wrote than read what i wrote. I wasnt discussing bin laden i was discussing how the actions of bin laden and islamic terrorism lead to muslims having to deal the consequences. It was more about islamophobia

So you think Islamophobia is the problem?
 
Back
Top