What's new

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

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

Well, he can voice any opinion but American justice system will categorize him as terrorist and probably will send him to Colorado/Gitmo doing life in Solitary confinement. The guy is only 24 and probably will never see day light in his life again. Just sad.
 
Author Salman Rushdie has begun his "road to recovery" but it will be long, his agent says.

Mr Rushdie, 75, was left severely injured after being stabbed on stage while speaking at an event in New York state.

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

The man charged over Friday's attack has pleaded not guilty to attempted murder.

"He's off the ventilator, so the road to recovery has begun," his agent Andrew Wylie said.

"It will be long; the injuries are severe, but his condition is headed in the right direction."

The suspect Hadi Matar, 24, is accused of running onto the stage and stabbing Mr Rushdie at least 10 times in the face, neck and abdomen.

Mr Wylie has said the novelist suffered severed nerves in one arm, damage to his liver, and would likely lose an eye.

Before the attack, Mr Rushdie was about to give a speech about how the US has served as a haven for such writers.

The novelist was forced into hiding for nearly 10 years after The Satanic Verses was published in 1988. Many Muslims reacted with fury to it, arguing that the portrayal of the Prophet Muhammad was a grave insult to their faith.

BBC
 
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.

Donald Rumsfeld
Dick Cheney
George Bush

NEOCONs, who waged war in the ME in the name of Christianity.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/oct/07/iraq.usa

Bush - I was doing God's work!

The difference is right wing Christians just have different methods and they don't need figures like OBL, when they have governments figures like Presidents and PMs. And no, neither Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Libya, Syria had anything to do with 9/11.
 
Donald Rumsfeld
Dick Cheney
George Bush

NEOCONs, who waged war in the ME in the name of Christianity.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/oct/07/iraq.usa

Bush - I was doing God's work!

The difference is right wing Christians just have different methods and they don't need figures like OBL, when they have governments figures like Presidents and PMs. And no, neither Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Libya, Syria had anything to do with 9/11.

Exactly.

America's invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan probably killed more Muslims than all the Muslim terrorist attacks in the world combined.

As a matter of fact, ISIS happened due to America's botched Iraq invasion. There was no ISIS before that.
 
Last edited:
Well, he can voice any opinion but American justice system will categorize him as terrorist and probably will send him to Colorado/Gitmo doing life in Solitary confinement. The guy is only 24 and probably will never see day light in his life again. Just sad.

And rightly deserved as well, no room for such ideology in this country. Good riddance to bad rubbish!
 
Well, he can voice any opinion but American justice system will categorize him as terrorist and probably will send him to Colorado/Gitmo doing life in Solitary confinement. The guy is only 24 and probably will never see day light in his life again. Just sad.

He will get done for attempted murder, not sure how that constitutes as life in prison?
 
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.

There’s no whataboutery. You’re clearly a hack who hasn’t read the books and that’s been exposed.

You never claimed it was an opinion but said it as fact and to lend some credence threw in Midnight’s Children which is actually a great book and has been called as such hy many literary critics and contemporary authors.

From a purely literary perspective, putting the two books at the same level is like saying Zimbabwe and Indian Test teams are similar levels.
 
He will get done for attempted murder, not sure how that constitutes as life in prison?

Yeah. I think he may get 20-30 years. Not life.

There was another guy who tried to do bombing in NY. Nobody died but he got injured. The guy got around 30 years.
 
Exactly.

America's invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan probably killed more Muslims than all the Muslim terrorist attacks in the world combined.

As a matter of fact, ISIS happened due to America's botched Iraq invasion. There was no ISIS before that.

Most Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan were killed by Muslims themselves. They attacked their own fellow country men in suicide attacks and roadside bombs.

America at least targets terrorists and some unfortunate innocents get killed in the process. But the Terrorists directly attack their own fellow Muslims in the name of sectarianism and loyalties.
 
Yeah. I think he may get 20-30 years. Not life.

There was another guy who tried to do bombing in NY. Nobody died but he got injured. The guy got around 30 years.

That guy who bombed WTC Ramzi Yousef got 240 years in prison

Pretty sure this guy will get similar sentence - especially if proven he was in touch with some foreign terror group
 
That guy who bombed WTC Ramzi Yousef got 240 years in prison

Pretty sure this guy will get similar sentence - especially if proven he was in touch with some foreign terror group

I wasn't referring to Ramzi Yousef. It was another guy. It happened 5-10 years ago.

The guy got 20-30 years.
 
That guy who bombed WTC Ramzi Yousef got 240 years in prison

Pretty sure this guy will get similar sentence - especially if proven he was in touch with some foreign terror group

Here it is:

2012 October 17: Mohammad Rezwanul Ahsan Nafis age 21 arrested in plot to bomb the Manhattan office of the Federal Reserve Bank on behalf of "our beloved Sheikh Osama bin Laden". Motive was to destroy the economy and possibly force cancellation of the Presidential election. Suspect who has a student visa is a Bangladeshi national who come to the U.S. to launch a terrorist attack. Arrest was result a joint FBI-New York City police sting operation. Suspect was pulling detonator on disabled 1000-pound van bomb when arrested.[233] On August 9, 2013 Nafis was sentenced to 30 years in prison. Prior to his sentencing Nafis wrote a letter apologizing to the people of America and New York for his actions which he said were caused by personal and family problems and said he is now pro American.[234][235]

The guy got 30 years. Not life.
 
I note there isn’t any Hinduphobia or Sikhophobia.

Both religions are confined to India, and when they do emigrate they are far more easily assimilated into western culture. Islam is somewhat more robust and not so willing to bend. You can understand why there would be no Hinduphobia or Sikhphobia.
 
Sir Salman Rushdie suffered "life-changing" injuries when he was stabbed, but has been "able to say a few words" and retains his "usual feisty and defiant sense of humour", his son has said.

The 75-year-old author was airlifted to hospital and underwent hours of surgery following the attack on stage in Chautauqua, New York state, on Friday.

His son Zafar Rushdie said Sir Salam remained in a "critical condition" but was taken off a ventilator on Saturday.

"Though his life-changing injuries are severe, his usual feisty and defiant sense of humour remains intact," he said in a statement.

Sir Salman was stabbed about 12 times, including in the face and neck, the Chautauqua County District Attorney's Office said.

One of the wounds in the facial area caused a puncture to Sir Salman's eye. Another, to the abdomen, caused a puncture of the author's liver.

There were also stab wounds to the abdomen and chest area.

FULL STATEMENT FROM ZAFAR RUSHDIE

Following the attack on Friday, my father remains in critical condition in hospital receiving extensive ongoing medical treatment.

We are extremely relieved that yesterday he was taken off the ventilator and additional oxygen and he was able to say a few words.

Though his life changing injuries are severe, his usual feisty & defiant sense of humour remains intact.

We are so grateful to all the audience members who bravely leapt to his defence and administered first aid along with the police and doctors who have cared for him and for the outpouring of love and support from around the world.

We ask for continued patience and privacy as the family come together at his bedside to support and help him through this time.

Earlier on Sunday, in an update on his condition, his literary agent, Andrew Wylie, confirmed Sir Salman had been taken off the ventilator, saying: "The road to recovery has begun.

"It will be long; the injuries are severe, but his condition is headed in the right direction."

SKY
 
He will get done for attempted murder, not sure how that constitutes as life in prison?

Attmpted homicide and murder can give you life in United States. Their justice system is not a linient one like here in UK. Remember the 'Shoe Bomber' Richard Reid? Even he couldnt succeed in his plan and failed to kill anyone but is still doing life in ADX florence. I have no doubt this guy will be heading there too.
 
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
Every individual who pleads not guilty and has a trial (and is subsequently found guilty and sentenced) justifies their not guilty plea on the basis that:

* They genuinely believed whatever they did was not a crime
or
* They think they might get away with it by putting sufficient doubt into just a few jury members so as to prevent a guilty verdict being reached (even if only by having the defence succeed with the argument that he/she had mental issues)
or
* Just to have their day in court and be in the limelight for a while longer
or
* any combination of above.

Same applies to this individual. He's facing a lifetime in jail if (and almost certainly) found guilty. Pleading 'guilty' at this stage won't alter that. ie He believes he's got nothing to gain by pleading 'guilty', whilst, currently under the law, he's still 'innocent' until convicted.
 
I note there isn’t any Hinduphobia or Sikhophobia.
Perhaps because the Brits and other Westerners have only ever ruled over the Hundus and Sikhs, and thus have never feared being conquered and ruled over by them, unlike the Muslims who have conquered their lands and ruled over them (with the reverse also being the case). They've never even faced having to treat the Hindus and Sikhs as equals. Not so with the Muslims. Think of the Ottomans, the Moors, and the reasons for the Crusades.
 
Perhaps because the Brits and other Westerners have only ever ruled over the Hundus and Sikhs, and thus have never feared being conquered and ruled over by them, unlike the Muslims who have conquered their lands and ruled over them (with the reverse also being the case). They've never even faced having to treat the Hindus and Sikhs as equals. Not so with the Muslims. Think of the Ottomans, the Moors, and the reasons for the Crusades.

You are going way too back in history, nobody effing cares about it!

The simple reason is because Hindus & Sikhs are well-educated, earn well, assimilate better into local society, are generally not considered as trouble makers/ are not involved in any terrorist plots anywhere. They are pretty much everywhere- even in extremely WASPy suburbs of America & they gel well with the locals. Simple as that.
 
Perhaps because the Brits and other Westerners have only ever ruled over the Hundus and Sikhs, and thus have never feared being conquered and ruled over by them, unlike the Muslims who have conquered their lands and ruled over them (with the reverse also being the case). They've never even faced having to treat the Hindus and Sikhs as equals. Not so with the Muslims. Think of the Ottomans, the Moors, and the reasons for the Crusades.

If it wasn't for the British, Pakistan would be khalistan
 
You are going way too back in history, nobody effing cares about it!

The simple reason is because Hindus & Sikhs are well-educated, earn well, assimilate better into local society, are generally not considered as trouble makers/ are not involved in any terrorist plots anywhere. They are pretty much everywhere- even in extremely WASPy suburbs of America & they gel well with the locals. Simple as that.

But according to some here on this forum that will be being subservient.
 
You are going way too back in history, nobody effing cares about it!

The simple reason is because Hindus & Sikhs are well-educated, earn well, assimilate better into local society, are generally not considered as trouble makers/ are not involved in any terrorist plots anywhere. They are pretty much everywhere- even in extremely WASPy suburbs of America & they gel well with the locals. Simple as that.

Indians often overstay their visas. Sikhs here in Brampton (also in British Columbia) often get involved in fights and crimes.

One Indian couple was recently convicted of financial fraud.

There are good and bad from every group. The notion that all Indians are clean is inaccurate.
 
Last edited:
Every individual who pleads not guilty and has a trial (and is subsequently found guilty and sentenced) justifies their not guilty plea on the basis that:

* They genuinely believed whatever they did was not a crime
or
* They think they might get away with it by putting sufficient doubt into just a few jury members so as to prevent a guilty verdict being reached (even if only by having the defence succeed with the argument that he/she had mental issues)
or
* Just to have their day in court and be in the limelight for a while longer
or
* any combination of above.

Same applies to this individual. He's facing a lifetime in jail if (and almost certainly) found guilty. Pleading 'guilty' at this stage won't alter that. ie He believes he's got nothing to gain by pleading 'guilty', whilst, currently under the law, he's still 'innocent' until convicted.

Its innocent until proven guilty. There is nothing to prove here. He did the crime, a whole lecture hall saw.

The only reason why someone who kills and pleads not guilty is because they fear death. Thats the hypocrisy of life.
 
Its innocent until proven guilty. There is nothing to prove here. He did the crime, a whole lecture hall saw.

The only reason why someone who kills and pleads not guilty is because they fear death. Thats the hypocrisy of life.

You really have no clue do you?

I’m pretty sure this maniac who went to kill Rushdie fully understood that he could die in the process of his attack. This was very much done with the same mindset as someone who is doing a suicide bomb mission.
 
You really have no clue do you?

I’m pretty sure this maniac who went to kill Rushdie fully understood that he could die in the process of his attack. This was very much done with the same mindset as someone who is doing a suicide bomb mission.

than why didn't he kill himself? Why doesnt he kill himself now?

Him pleading not guilty is because he still sees hope and wants to live, simple.

You really think this guy was rational when he was doing an act? No rational person goes onto kill someone, even doing so without actaully reading the book
 
than why didn't he kill himself? Why doesnt he kill himself now?

Him pleading not guilty is because he still sees hope and wants to live, simple.

You really think this guy was rational when he was doing an act? No rational person goes onto kill someone, even doing so without actaully reading the book

Mate what world are you living in? How do you kill yourself under police detention?
 
than why didn't he kill himself? Why doesnt he kill himself now?

Him pleading not guilty is because he still sees hope and wants to live, simple.

Suicide is haram though. That is the likeliest reason why he is not killing himself.
 
Suicide is haram though. That is the likeliest reason why he is not killing himself.

and killing others is not haram?

I wonder if you guys are defending this lunatic or what. Atleast come clean :)
 
and killing others is not haram?

I wonder if you guys are defending this lunatic or what. Atleast come clean :)

No. I have already condemned this act. What he did was counterproductive and is damaging to Islam's image.

I was simply pointing out the prohibition of suicide.
 
Motive(s) and potential state of mind of the accused currently unclear.

We should await clarity of the facts.
 
Mate what world are you living in? How do you kill yourself under police detention?

one third of deaths in jail are through suicide. According to a Reuters study 2000 deaths in jail were because of suicide between 2008 and 2019. They happened in detention
 
and killing others is not haram?

I wonder if you guys are defending this lunatic or what. Atleast come clean :)

They sympathise with him but don't have the guts to admit it. Same guy had no concern for the Indian tailor who got stabbed by 2 x extremists in his shop.
 
Its innocent until proven guilty. There is nothing to prove here. He did the crime, a whole lecture hall saw.

The only reason why someone who kills and pleads not guilty is because they fear death. Thats the hypocrisy of life.
You love to rant meaninglessly.

I wrote "currently under the law, he's still 'innocent' until convicted". Yet you appear to take issue with that by writing "Its innocent until proven guilty". I'm not a lawyer, but from a layman's point of view, surely "being convicted" of a crime is more or less the same as "proven guilty"? Or are you claiming it's not?

As for your comment "There is nothing to prove here. He did the crime, a whole lecture hall saw".
Yes, the whole lecture hall saw it, but you didn't. The judge and jury didn't. And since it's the jury who will ultimately give the judgement of 'guilty' or 'not guilty', the jury first needs to be convinced. That is the whole purpose of a trial. And not a random internet poster claiming 'There is nothing to prove here'.
 
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.

The zionists live rent free in your head
 
Great writer. I only read two of his books, SV and MC. Had a pleasure of meeting him years ago when he was married to t MISS world or Universe. Was a total gentleman. His command of Urdu language came as a surprise to me. Hope he recovers soon.
 
If it wasn't for the British, Pakistan would be khalistan
If it wasn't for the British, there would be no Pakistan, or India. But the Indian subcontinent will still be made up of numerous princely states, most of them ruled by princes and maharajas, with a large chunk of them (the rulers) being Muslims.
 
They sympathise with him but don't have the guts to admit it. Same guy had no concern for the Indian tailor who got stabbed by 2 x extremists in his shop.

I am not having sympathy for the attacker. I have already made that very clear.

Regarding not having concern for the Indian tailor, he was a BJP member. I consider BJP as modern day Nazis. Would you be concerned about Nazis?

I condemned that tailor attack too (despite disliking BJP people).
 
Last edited:
You love to rant meaninglessly.

I wrote "currently under the law, he's still 'innocent' until convicted". Yet you appear to take issue with that by writing "Its innocent until proven guilty". I'm not a lawyer, but from a layman's point of view, surely "being convicted" of a crime is more or less the same as "proven guilty"? Or are you claiming it's not?

As for your comment "There is nothing to prove here. He did the crime, a whole lecture hall saw".
Yes, the whole lecture hall saw it, but you didn't. The judge and jury didn't. And since it's the jury who will ultimately give the judgement of 'guilty' or 'not guilty', the jury first needs to be convinced. That is the whole purpose of a trial. And not a random internet poster claiming 'There is nothing to prove here'.

I dont understand why you getting so upset. Hes guilty end of the story.

Unless you have sympathies for the lunatic just say it, getting upset on the little things makes no sense.

The irony here is many people had labelled Rushdie guilty for blasphemy even though they never read his book and that to on the internet.

As soon as someone tries to kill him, the closet supporters of the criminal are trying to make sure the semantics are correct.

Just because i didnt see and the lunatic pleaded not guilty, we all are suppose to pretend that he might innocent.
 
They sympathise with him but don't have the guts to admit it. Same guy had no concern for the Indian tailor who got stabbed by 2 x extremists in his shop.

This is the thing i find surprising. The justifications that some go too.

If one supports the criminal or thinks he is not guilty than admit it instead of coming up with weak arguments
 
A Sikh gang convicted of slashing a retired Indian general's throat in revenge for a 1984 military offensive has been jailed.

Indian Lt-Gen Kuldeep Singh Brar attackers jailed

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-25316370

The above happened in 2013, in London.

Very easy for some to say lets forget about the past and stand in protest! The gang did not plead guilty at trial either.

I am just pointing out that it’s not just Muslims that hold a grudge; because you can bet your life Kuldeep Singh Brar had a supari on his head too, just like Rushdie.

Funny how the creepy crawlers come out of the woodwork when Muslims are involved.
 
A Sikh gang convicted of slashing a retired Indian general's throat in revenge for a 1984 military offensive has been jailed.

Indian Lt-Gen Kuldeep Singh Brar attackers jailed

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-25316370

The above happened in 2013, in London.

Very easy for some to say lets forget about the past and stand in protest! The gang did not plead guilty at trial either.

I am just pointing out that it’s not just Muslims that hold a grudge; because you can bet your life Kuldeep Singh Brar had a supari on his head too, just like Rushdie.

Funny how the creepy crawlers come out of the woodwork when Muslims are involved.

For a guy who loves to whine about tax payers money, doesnt seem to care that tax money is to be wasted on a criminal who tried to kill someone, failed at it, and wants to plead guilty to save his own sorry life.

If you support this criminal just say it
 
For a guy who loves to whine about tax payers money, doesnt seem to care that tax money is to be wasted on a criminal who tried to kill someone, failed at it, and wants to plead guilty to save his own sorry life.

If you support this criminal just say it


I whine about tax payers money? What planet are you on? I do whine about tax evaders though. Learn the difference.

You can talk, you support criminals in Pakistan.

Seriously, get over it.

Unsurprisingly you have not addressed the crux of my point.

Carry on.
 
Both religions are confined to India, and when they do emigrate they are far more easily assimilated into western culture. Islam is somewhat more robust and not so willing to bend. You can understand why there would be no Hinduphobia or Sikhphobia.

Does that mean Hinduism/Sikhism is more enlightened and share similiar liberal ideals and culture with the West hence the easy assimilation ?

This was also Salman Rushdie's opinion with regard to the difference between India and Pakistan.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps because the Brits and other Westerners have only ever ruled over the Hundus and Sikhs, and thus have never feared being conquered and ruled over by them, unlike the Muslims who have conquered their lands and ruled over them (with the reverse also being the case). They've never even faced having to treat the Hindus and Sikhs as equals. Not so with the Muslims. Think of the Ottomans, the Moors, and the reasons for the Crusades.

We are talking about Britain, not Spain.

The East India Company military did in fact fight the. Punjab kingdom of Maharajah Ranjit Singh.

I think there is no Sikhophobia or Hinduphobia, or Judaophobia or for that matter Buddhistphobia because adherents of those religions did not perpetrate 9/11, 7/7 etc.
 
This is the thing i find surprising. The justifications that some go too.

If one supports the criminal or thinks he is not guilty than admit it instead of coming up with weak arguments

For a guy who loves to whine about tax payers money, doesnt seem to care that tax money is to be wasted on a criminal who tried to kill someone, failed at it, and wants to plead guilty to save his own sorry life.

If you support this criminal just say it

You are not getting a simple point. This is not about supporting this attacker. I don't think anyone here is stupid enough to support this attacker.

It is about calling out misconceptions and double standards.

When a non-Muslim attacks or kills, news fades away quickly. But, if a Muslim does something, it gets magnified.

How much coverage did that Chicago shooter get? He killed 6 people during the Independence Day of USA. There are many other incidents like this (done by mostly non-Muslims).
 
Why is a Bangladeshi so concerned what we call Mughals in India?

Invaders bigots tyrants will be called that only.

Well, Mughals ruled Bangladesh too and I am a fan of them.

BJP seems jealous that they can't be as dominant/efficient as Mughals.
 
Hindus and Sikhs have never attacked Amreeka because Amreeka has never dropped bombs on Hindus and Sikhs in India.

What silly logic from liberals who are wondering why Muslims were involved in 9/11 and 7/7 - when your country is bombed by western forces, repercussions are bound to happen. Read up on Parson’s bombing. The guy said he wanted to blow up a train to avenge his family’s death in Iraq.
 
But according to some here on this forum that will be being subservient.

Subservient would be the wrong term for it, integration for Indians generally means discarding the old culture and adopting western beliefs wholesale. Eventually it will lead to self willed annihilation of Hindu culture in the west, and arguably that is a good thing.

For Muslims it is different. They will adopt most western traits which are beneficial, but draw a line at those which go against Islamic values. I am talking in general terms of course, there will be plenty of Muslims in western countries who will also discard religion altogether.
 
Also, feel free to check the MSM. The headline parroted is “Satanic Verses auther Salman Rushdie attacked”.

The ZMSM are not interested in Rushdie’s previous works or any other works, just the specific Satanic Verses.

The West has banned Mein Kampf in certain countries because it offends Judaism, but they will happily defend Satanic Verses which offends Islam - under ‘Freedom of expression/speech’

Wake up people, this is the JC game!
 
Does that mean Hinduism/Sikhism is more enlightened and share similiar liberal ideals and culture with the West hence the easy assimilation ?

This was also Salman Rushdie's opinion with regard to the difference between India and Pakistan.

No it just means they recognise western values as superior to their own. Nothing wrong with this by the way, although in India itself this seems to be going backwards.
 
No it just means they recognise western values as superior to their own. Nothing wrong with this by the way, although in India itself this seems to be going backwards.

That's an interesting observation. Which are the western values that hindus/sikhs deem superior to their own that Islam rejects ?
 
There is no radicalisation involved here.

Just remember:

Sikhs have not forgotten 1984 massacre.
Indians have not forgotten the British rule.
Jews have not forgotten Hitler.
Hindus have not forgotten Mughal rule.

So why should Muslims forget about the West and its continuous attempts to goad and harm a religion?

When Muslims respond its radicalisation but anyone else then it is justification is it?
 
Last edited:
The ZMSM are not interested in Rushdie’s previous works or any other works, just the specific Satanic Verses.

The West has banned Mein Kampf in certain countries because it offends Judaism, but they will happily defend Satanic Verses which offends Islam - under ‘Freedom of expression/speech’

Wake up people, this is the JC game!

Very good observation.

They banned Protocol of Zion too. It is funny.

If SV is allowed, why not these books? It seems like they want selective freedom of speech.
 
That's an interesting observation. Which are the western values that hindus/sikhs deem superior to their own that Islam rejects ?

See my above reply. I am happy to take it up in another thread, but this isn't really the subject of this thread. We are getting sidetracked.
 
Subservient would be the wrong term for it, integration for Indians generally means discarding the old culture and adopting western beliefs wholesale. Eventually it will lead to self willed annihilation of Hindu culture in the west, and arguably that is a good thing.

For Muslims it is different. They will adopt most western traits which are beneficial, but draw a line at those which go against Islamic values. I am talking in general terms of course, there will be plenty of Muslims in western countries who will also discard religion altogether.

Most Hindus in the West follow their rituals and traditions . There are grand celebrations of Holi , Diwali , Navratri in most US cities. Recently in Austin ( my location ) there was grand ISCKON ceremony. Hindu culture is getting more visibility in the West. Yoga is growing in popularity. There are far more yoga practitioners in the US than in India. Most restaurants in US now had vegetarian food options to cater to Hindu diaspora.

If anything Hindus in the West follow their religion far more rigorously than back in India.

Integration is more about education. Well educated people in general integrate well in any society - irrespective of their religion. In the US the educated Pakistanis / Arabs are far better integrated with American society. Its the ghetto Muslims from places like Queens ( New York ) who do integrate well - bcoz all their life they grew up in very backward ghetto surrounded by people of very backward mindset Just like this guy Hadi Matar

Same reason British Pakistanis are less integrated - they are mostly descendants of less educated blue collar migrants who lived all their lives in ghettos of Bradford / Oldham. Unlike Hindus / Sikhs who hail from more educated backgrounds
 
Most Hindus in the West follow their rituals and traditions . There are grand celebrations of Holi , Diwali , Navratri in most US cities. Recently in Austin ( my location ) there was grand ISCKON ceremony. Hindu culture is getting more visibility in the West. Yoga is growing in popularity. There are far more yoga practitioners in the US than in India. Most restaurants in US now had vegetarian food options to cater to Hindu diaspora.

If anything Hindus in the West follow their religion far more rigorously than back in India.

Integration is more about education. Well educated people in general integrate well in any society - irrespective of their religion. In the US the educated Pakistanis / Arabs are far better integrated with American society. Its the ghetto Muslims from places like Queens ( New York ) who do integrate well - bcoz all their life they grew up in very backward ghetto surrounded by people of very backward mindset Just like this guy Hadi Matar

Same reason British Pakistanis are less integrated - they are mostly descendants of less educated blue collar migrants who lived all their lives in ghettos of Bradford / Oldham. Unlike Hindus / Sikhs who hail from more educated backgrounds

See post #303, I answered a similar post already.
 
If I had to pin the birth of Islamophobia in the West to one incident, it would definitely be the Satanic Verses-Ayatollah affair in 1989. Innocent people were killed and lots of property was damaged, mostly in the UK. Until then, most the western public was blissfully unaware of islamic extremism and were never affected by it. Then 9/11 took the phobia to another level.

It has nothing to do with something that happened 400 years ago like the Ottomans or Crusades as [MENTION=4930]Yossarian[/MENTION] mentioned. I assume he was being tongue-in-cheek. Or maybe not.
 
Hindus and Sikhs have never attacked Amreeka because Amreeka has never dropped bombs on Hindus and Sikhs in India.

What silly logic from liberals who are wondering why Muslims were involved in 9/11 and 7/7 - when your country is bombed by western forces, repercussions are bound to happen. Read up on Parson’s bombing. The guy said he wanted to blow up a train to avenge his family’s death in Iraq.

than what country did Bin laden belong to? As far as i know usa wasnt bombing saudi arabia. Bin laden was banished from his own country, was bin ladden going off bombing saudi arabia too?

Why cant you not admit your support for this guy who tried killing salman Rushdie? Why hide in the closet?
 
OBL was an Amreekan ally, during the 1980s, this is fact, long before you were alive.

Now go play silly games else where, no one is interested in your rants.

how is that a fact? you really do contradict yourself alot

also why not answering the whole post, do you or do you not support the criminal who tried killing rushdie?
 
how is that a fact? you really do contradict yourself alot

You didn't answer my post on Blue-Star retaliation attack above so please stop complaining.

As for OBL, he was described as a freedom fighter by the Western press and governments in the 80s. You can google it if you want - once the Afghan war was over, OBL sapped up the arms and retaliated against the Amreekan forces. Rest is history, and I will not apologise for shattering your laughable myths.

Do not quote me anymore. Your knowledge on this topic is poor to non-existent.
 
Well, Mughals ruled Bangladesh too and I am a fan of them.

BJP seems jealous that they can't be as dominant/efficient as Mughals.

Be their fan. No one is stopping you.

Why tell Indians what they should do.

BJP os not as efficient as Mughals in Tyranny Bigotry and Debauchery.
 
Please keep the discussion on topic - Salman Rushdie.
 
[MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] is making a lot of sense.

I respect all religions and condemn any sadist and hateful remarks against any religion , hence don't resect people like hoshiarpurexpress,
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is no radicalisation involved here.

Just remember:

Sikhs have not forgotten 1984 massacre.
Indians have not forgotten the British rule.
Jews have not forgotten Hitler.
Hindus have not forgotten Mughal rule.

So why should Muslims forget about the West and its continuous attempts to goad and harm a religion?

When Muslims respond its radicalisation but anyone else then it is justification is it?

Big difference

1000 Sikhs were murdered in 1984
British killed and looted India
Hitler killed 6 million Jews
Hindus claim Mughals killed millions ( debatable )

How many people did Salman Rushdie kill ?

The comparison is totally wrong. At least from Western perspective. Its one thing to take revenge for a murder / massacre / genocide. Like Sikhs assassinated Indira Gandhi. Or Jews hanged Adolf Eichmann. Its completely different when you want to kill someone for writing a book or making a movie irrespective of how offensive it is ! In the West you can write offensive books on Jesus Christ without any death threats.

Of course Muslims will claim their religion and prophet's honor is more important than human life. Even Sikhs have similar mentality towards acts of sacrilege
 
Big difference

1000 Sikhs were murdered in 1984
British killed and looted India
Hitler killed 6 million Jews
Hindus claim Mughals killed millions ( debatable )

How many people did Salman Rushdie kill ?

The comparison is totally wrong. At least from Western perspective. Its one thing to take revenge for a murder / massacre / genocide. Like Sikhs assassinated Indira Gandhi. Or Jews hanged Adolf Eichmann. Its completely different when you want to kill someone for writing a book or making a movie irrespective of how offensive it is ! In the West you can write offensive books on Jesus Christ without any death threats.

Of course Muslims will claim their religion and prophet's honor is more important than human life. Even Sikhs have similar mentality towards acts of sacrilege

I was refering to attacks in response to Western bombings of the ME. Like 9/11, 7/7

I bet next you're gonna tell me West didn't kill innocent Muslims in the ME.
 
Salman Rushdie's book Satanic Verses now the number 1 seller on Amazon.

Most of those buyers will struggle to understand the complicated prose and probably lose interest after 2-3 chapters :P

ps : Even Ayatollah Khomeini never read the book. He just read reviews by some Indian writers :P
 
I respect all religions and condemn any sadist and hateful remarks against any religion , hence don't resect people like hoshiarpurexpress,

Who’s asking for your respect lol?

I read a book and liked it. I will read what I want when I want and like/dislike based on my free will.
Don’t care an iota about what anyone thinks.

I despise this abhorrent, shameful and cowardly attack on an acclaimed award winning author.
 
Back
Top