What's new

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

Secretary of State Antony Blinken condemned Iran on Sunday for inciting violence against Salman Rushdie, who was stabbed multiple times on Friday while preparing to give a lecture in New York.

"While law enforcement officials continue to investigate the attack, I am reminded of the pernicious forces that seek to undermine these rights, including through hate speech and incitement to violence," Blinken said in a statement.

"Specifically, Iranian state institutions have incited violence against Rushdie for generations, and state-affiliated media recently gloated about the attempt on his life. This is despicable."

FoxNews
 
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.

You can buy Men Kampf on Amazon.

TPOTEOZ was exposed as a forgery a hundred years ago. If you really want to read it you can download a copy off white supremacy sites. It’s still in widespread circulation. Or read any number of intellectual critiques of it, available in bookstores.
 
Last edited:
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.

Have you actually read the book? You are being called out basically because you went on to claim it to be a great piece of writing while having not read the book.
 
Have you actually read the book? You are being called out basically because you went on to claim it to be a great piece of writing while having not read the book.

Have you read it [MENTION=135038]Major[/MENTION]?
 
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

Yep. A dull and overlong book
 
Have you read it [MENTION=135038]Major[/MENTION]?

i have not, which is why i cant pass any judgements on the writing even before reading it. To claim it to be a greate piece of writing or bad piece of writing is not possible even without reading it. Plus, hoshiar has a reputation of giving hateful comments on the forum even before knowing the whole story on certain topics here.

However what i have read is the few abstracts of ibn ishaqs biography on the prophet. And the story that satanic verses tells is something ibn ishaq already mentions and which became an issue that future biography writers of the prophet had to omit certain information which they even admit to doing. And many people dont know this.

The weird thing is, ibn ishaq was the first and most earliest person to write the biography of the prophet.
 
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).

But the magnitude of the terrorist activities committed by people claiming to be muslims or in the name od islam is signifianctly greater than any other religion (since WWII). Surely, you cannot compare 9/11, 7/7 and many other atrocities to the ones committed by other religious groups.
 
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 did try to read the book. It was definitely not one of his best works. Midnight children and another one (that I can't recall the name of), amazing pieces of literature.
 
i have not, which is why i cant pass any judgements on the writing even before reading it. To claim it to be a greate piece of writing or bad piece of writing is not possible even without reading it. Plus, hoshiar has a reputation of giving hateful comments on the forum even before knowing the whole story on certain topics here.

However what i have read is the few abstracts of ibn ishaqs biography on the prophet. And the story that satanic verses tells is something ibn ishaq already mentions and which became an issue that future biography writers of the prophet had to omit certain information which they even admit to doing. And many people dont know this.

The weird thing is, ibn ishaq was the first and most earliest person to write the biography of the prophet.

Interesting, thank you.
 
Sir Salman Rushdie brought a stabbing attack that left him with "life-changing" injuries on himself, Iran has said.

The foreign ministry said on Monday that "Salman Rushdie and his supporters are to blame for what happened to him".

Its spokesperson, Nasser Kanaani, said: "Freedom of speech does not justify Salman Rushdie's insults upon religion and offence of its sanctities."

Iran has no other information about Sir Salman's attacker except what has appeared in media, Mr Kanaani said.

The author, 75, was attacked on stage before giving an address in New York state on Friday. He was airlifted to hospital where he underwent hours of surgery and was taken off a ventilator on Saturday.

The suspect, Hadi Matar, 24, has denied attempted murder.

Sir Salman spent nearly a decade in hiding after the publication in 1988 of his work The Satanic Verses, which some Muslims consider to be blasphemous.

A fatwa, or religious edict, calling on Muslims to kill him was issued by Ayatollah Khomeini, the Iranian leader, a year later.

The religious leader never read Sir Salman's book, it was reported.

Khomeini's successor said later in 1989 that the fatwa had been fired like a "bullet" that would "one day sooner or later hit the target."

Although such edicts can be revoked, Ayatollah Khamenei confirmed it was still in effect as recently as 2017.

SKY
 
Have you actually read the book? You are being called out basically because you went on to claim it to be a great piece of writing while having not read the book.

Yes I have read the book. End to end 3 times.
Also read midnight children. Why else will I call it a good book? There should be some common sense before asking such questions.

So what is there to call out??
I have read it, enjoyed it and this abhorrent, cowardly attack on Rushdie needs to be condemned. I don’t see that happening here.
 
Yes I have read the book. End to end 3 times.
Also read midnight children. Why else will I call it a good book? There should be some common sense before asking such questions.

So what is there to call out??
I have read it, enjoyed it and this abhorrent, cowardly attack on Rushdie needs to be condemned. I don’t see that happening here.

Plz do give a summary on santanic verses than. What does the book discusses and is it offensive to muslims or not. You have read 3 times so would love to hear
 
Yes I have read the book. End to end 3 times.
Also read midnight children. Why else will I call it a good book? There should be some common sense before asking such questions.

So what is there to call out??
I have read it, enjoyed it and this abhorrent, cowardly attack on Rushdie needs to be condemned. I don’t see that happening here.

You only read what you want pal.

Rushdie’s unprovoked attack on Islam 3 decades ago also needs to be condemned. Instead we are being told to toughen up and not read it if we don’t like it.

I hope Rushdie a speedy recovery and I also hope his attacker receives swift justice.
 
Plz do give a summary on santanic verses than. What does the book discusses and is it offensive to muslims or not. You have read 3 times so would love to hear

Why should I do that ?

I don’t think I need to explain myself to anyone for reading a book, that too a fictional one.

I liked Sacred Games as well, which you could say shows some dark parts of Hinduism, but again fictional
Also like watching Family Guy and South Park which mock religion.
Don’t give two hoots about who is offended or not as long as I am reading or watching it in my personal space.
 
You only read what you want pal.

Rushdie’s unprovoked attack on Islam 3 decades ago also needs to be condemned. Instead we are being told to toughen up and not read it if we don’t like it.

I hope Rushdie a speedy recovery and I also hope his attacker receives swift justice.

Wouldn't it be more correct to say "Rushdie's unprovoked attack on the feelings of some Muslims who have not read him but got upset because some beardy who has not read him either told them to" ?
 
I did try to read the book. It was definitely not one of his best works. Midnight children and another one (that I can't recall the name of), amazing pieces of literature.

The other one might have been Shame, a blistering diatribe against Pakistan, although funny in parts. I read that and Midnight's Children, and also the Satanic Verses before it all blew up. Rushdie made a career from having a chip on his shoulder, not that surprised he got ditched by two wives, always struck me as a somewhat bitter person.
 
Why should I do that ?

I don’t think I need to explain myself to anyone for reading a book, that too a fictional one.

I liked Sacred Games as well, which you could say shows some dark parts of Hinduism, but again fictional
Also like watching Family Guy and South Park which mock religion.
Don’t give two hoots about who is offended or not as long as I am reading or watching it in my personal space.

Reading the book is not the issue. Everyone is free to read and watch whatever they want. And no where did i indicated that I have an issue with anyone reading what they want.

The issue is that you claim it to be a good piece of work when you have most probably not read it. Thus, making that statement shows your hate for a particular group

For a guy who says he read it 3 times, mustering up a 5-6 line summary would had not been that difficult.
 
Wouldn't it be more correct to say "Rushdie's unprovoked attack on the feelings of some Muslims who have not read him but got upset because some beardy who has not read him either told them to" ?

Well that’s a racist generalisation insulting the intelligence of intellectual Muslims who have read him and are deeply offended by his audacity to experiment with metaphors and analogies
 
You can buy Men Kampf on Amazon.

TPOTEOZ was exposed as a forgery a hundred years ago. If you really want to read it you can download a copy off white supremacy sites. It’s still in widespread circulation. Or read any number of intellectual critiques of it, available in bookstores.

If TPOTEOZ has forgery (which I don't think is the case), why is it banned though? What are they afraid of?

Shouldn't they allow it because of free speech?

If Satanic Verses is allowed, why not this book?
 
Last edited:
Reading the book is not the issue. Everyone is free to read and watch whatever they want. And no where did i indicated that I have an issue with anyone reading what they want.

The issue is that you claim it to be a good piece of work when you have most probably not read it. Thus, making that statement shows your hate for a particular group

For a guy who says he read it 3 times, mustering up a 5-6 line summary would had not been that difficult.

You don't deserve to get that summary from me nor I am bound to provide it to you.

Why, because it is not the problem you have reading a book by me, the problem you have is the idea of free speech and criticism of something you don't want to think off.

I have read 100s of books and among those this is also one of my favourite ones, like many others.
 
You only read what you want pal.

Rushdie’s unprovoked attack on Islam 3 decades ago also needs to be condemned. Instead we are being told to toughen up and not read it if we don’t like it.

I hope Rushdie a speedy recovery and I also hope his attacker receives swift justice.

Off-course I will do that. It's a damn book, like millions of another ones.
 
You don't deserve to get that summary from me nor I am bound to provide it to you.

Why, because it is not the problem you have reading a book by me, the problem you have is the idea of free speech and criticism of something you don't want to think off.

I have read 100s of books and among those this is also one of my favourite ones, like many others.

I dont have issue with free speech and never had issues with criticism regarding anyone. Plz do read the first 2-3 pages of this thread where i have said twice that critics will exists of the Holy Prophet and I accept that.

You still are making up stuff.

My issue is that you claim something to be good without even having tasted it. Anyways i asked you for a summary but you cant give one. I will rest it there.
 
I dont have issue with free speech and never had issues with criticism regarding anyone. Plz do read the first 2-3 pages of this thread where i have said twice that critics will exists of the Holy Prophet and I accept that.

You still are making up stuff.

My issue is that you claim something to be good without even having tasted it. Anyways i asked you for a summary but you cant give one. I will rest it there.

Why should i provide you one ? Who are you ?
I don't care what you think right as you are someone random on internet.

I like reading books on fiction and Sacred Games, Midnight Children and Satanic Verses are some of my favourite books.
 
Well that’s a racist generalisation insulting the intelligence of intellectual Muslims who have read him and are deeply offended by his audacity to experiment with metaphors and analogies

Racism my foot. Islam isn't a race as you well know. And I wear a beard. And I said "some Muslims" so it isn't a generalisation.

I would be interested to know how many Muslims offended by the idea of this book actually bothered to read it. I bet Khomeini didn't.
 
Racism my foot. Islam isn't a race as you well know. And I wear a beard. And I said "some Muslims" so it isn't a generalisation.

I would be interested to know how many Muslims offended by the idea of this book actually bothered to read it. I bet Khomeini didn't.

So what are you suggesting? There should be mass tutorials run by Islamic scholars who understand literature to contextualise this book to the masses of Muslims who are offended by it in order for it to remain on book shelves? Will all schools of Islamic thought agree with one, universally agreed interpretation of the book in an Islamic context? A lot of people here have great, fancy ideas but do not realise the impracticality of them.
 
If Jews are considered a race, then so to Islam, Sikhism, Hinduism, Christians etc are a race, and remember the majority of Jews are not even from Isreal!

Of course, Jews are not a race, let me explain how laughable the claim is, Ivanka Trump married Kushnar, so she is now a practising Jew, what, she changed her race by changing her belief? No, this is not how it works.

Do not let Zionist propaganda divide humanity with its hypocrisy and hatred!
 
Why should i provide you one ? Who are you ?
I don't care what you think right as you are someone random on internet.

I like reading books on fiction and Sacred Games, Midnight Children and Satanic Verses are some of my favourite books.

Midnight's Children I can get, but what was it you liked about The Satanic Verses? Not many people liked it, even his fans usually describe it as a difficult read. Unless you hate Islam as Rushdie does I don't think there's much enjoyment in it. But then I may have just answered my own question.
 
Why should i provide you one ? Who are you ?
I don't care what you think right as you are someone random on internet.

I like reading books on fiction and Sacred Games, Midnight Children and Satanic Verses are some of my favourite books.

Exactly i am someone on the internet just like you. Which is why its easy to pretend you did something and write it here. No one would verify it....

This is why i asked for a summary of a book that you read 3 times mate.

You have a history of being anti pakistani and anti muslim here
 
Midnight's Children I can get, but what was it you liked about The Satanic Verses? Not many people liked it, even his fans usually describe it as a difficult read. Unless you hate Islam as Rushdie does I don't think there's much enjoyment in it. But then I may have just answered my own question.

Did you find out for yourself what’s so offensive about it?

Because I don’t think most people who issues fatwas against Rushdie don’t seem them as being part of any book club or reading an English novel types.

I am 99% sure that neither has the attacker read it. He was also offended just like you but he went to the extreme.

I tried to read a couple of pages online but I didn’t get it and got bored. I am assuming you need to be 100% familiar with Islam to understand the context of this book which I am not.

It’s a weird scenario most people who read it don’t know enough about Islam probably and the ones who are offended and want to kill haven’t read it.

Amidst all this some brainwashed zombie just attacked a popular author bringing about even more islamophobia.
 
Did you find out for yourself what’s so offensive about it?

Because I don’t think most people who issues fatwas against Rushdie don’t seem them as being part of any book club or reading an English novel types.

I am 99% sure that neither has the attacker read it. He was also offended just like you but he went to the extreme.

I tried to read a couple of pages online but I didn’t get it and got bored. I am assuming you need to be 100% familiar with Islam to understand the context of this book which I am not.

It’s a weird scenario most people who read it don’t know enough about Islam probably and the ones who are offended and want to kill haven’t read it.

Amidst all this some brainwashed zombie just attacked a popular author bringing about even more islamophobia.

Yes I actually read the book so I do know what was offensive about it. It was basically a mockery of the Prophet's PBUH life story. It was done with a "fictional" character called Mahound, but this was just Rusdhie's way of having his fun and claiming it wasn't based on reality at all. He was probably giggling all the time when he sat down to write it. Anyway it has caused him a lot of subsequent stress and now a life threatening injury, but at least he's a champion for free speech.
 
The zionists live rent free in your head

Welcome to the forum, hopefully in time you may the learn ability to debate SalimBhai. :sachin

Back on topic.

Its good he didnt die, the overrated Islamaphobic nutjob would have been martyr.

Interesting the attacker has been charged with murder, not terrorism.
 
So what are you suggesting? There should be mass tutorials run by Islamic scholars who understand literature to contextualise this book to the masses of Muslims who are offended by it in order for it to remain on book shelves? Will all schools of Islamic thought agree with one, universally agreed interpretation of the book in an Islamic context? A lot of people here have great, fancy ideas but do not realise the impracticality of them.

Or get if off the shelves by peaceful protest. Someone further up the thread said organise on a community level and pressure the libraries and bookstores into not stocking it.
 
Or get if off the shelves by peaceful protest. Someone further up the thread said organise on a community level and pressure the libraries and bookstores into not stocking it.

Hundreds of books are written against/abusing Islam.

Its not up to Muslims to boycott or beg.

Abuse a Gay person - Homophobia
Abuse a Black person - Racism.
Abuse Islam - Freedom of speech.

Islamaphobes are idiots, lack intelligence.

Its wrong to kill, its clear in Islam. But just as black man or gay man would be happy Klu Klux member or Nazi member dying, Muslims will not be sad if or when he dies.
 
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.
But Britain did send armies to fight the Muslims, ie the Crusaders. So none of this selective use of history please. (I did mention the Crusaders in my post, a fact you conveniently ignored)
 
But Britain did send armies to fight the Muslims, ie the Crusaders. So none of this selective use of history please. (I did mention the Crusaders in my post, a fact you conveniently ignored)

We dont need to go back to the Crusades.

Bush and Blair openly said God told them to attack Iraq. This was done in the name of Christianity, destroying a nation, killing a million.

Andrew Breviks manifesto stated his Christian beliefs and him being a hero of this faith. There are many others too.

Hindus have killed because a man is walking a cow.

Sikhs killed because someone offended them and their temple.

People of any background or faith can kill people after being offended.

Only some with little intelligence would suggest its a Muslim problem.
 
We dont need to go back to the Crusades.

Bush and Blair openly said God told them to attack Iraq. This was done in the name of Christianity, destroying a nation, killing a million.

Andrew Breviks manifesto stated his Christian beliefs and him being a hero of this faith. There are many others too.

Hindus have killed because a man is walking a cow.

Sikhs killed because someone offended them and their temple.

People of any background or faith can kill people after being offended.

Only some with little intelligence would suggest its a Muslim problem.

These people have selective memory loss or are just extremely ignorant / driven by xenophobic narratives, how can they forget Air India Flight 182?
 
These people have selective memory loss or are just extremely ignorant / driven by xenophobic narratives, how can they forget Air India Flight 182?

Hard to decode.

Imo either brainwashed or have their own agenda against Muslims.

After the attack , Sunak calls for sanctions on Iran lol. I wouldnt be surprised if this was some sort of false flag.
 
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.
ME getting upset? You must be kidding! Had you bothered to read, and most importantly, understand my original post, instead of arbitrarily picking bits and pieces out of it, you'll have noted that I never took any interest whatsoever, in one way or the other, in regards to The Satanic Verses, or Rushdie, or all the hullabaloo that resulted from it at the time. I've never read the book, nor extracts from it. I couldn't care less who Rushdie is/was.

By the same token, I couldn't care less about this stabbing incident that took place, or who did it, or why.

However, I do take interest when internet warriors talk about vigilantism, or circumventing the law and judicial processes.

In that regard, as currently the law stands, an individual is innocent, no matter how much evidence there appears to be against him/her, until that individual either pleads guilty, or is found guilty in a court of law.

Furthermore, I merely pointed out some of the reasons why individuals plead not guilty even though they eventually are found guilty by a court and subsequently sentenced.

But you, for reasons unknown, have a problem with that.

From the sounds of it, you'd prefer those accused to be automatically deemed guilty until/unless they are found to be not guilty by a court.

Fine, I respect that. So why not come out and say it, and advocate for the law to be changed as such?



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.

Unfortunately for you, currently the law says otherwise. From the sounds of it, you'd have been an ardent supporter of vigilantism in days gone by. :))
 
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.
What a load of tosh. Satanic verses was published in 1988. And there was plenty of Islamophobia around long before then...
 
We dont need to go back to the Crusades.

Bush and Blair openly said God told them to attack Iraq. This was done in the name of Christianity, destroying a nation, killing a million.

Andrew Breviks manifesto stated his Christian beliefs and him being a hero of this faith. There are many others too.

Hindus have killed because a man is walking a cow.

Sikhs killed because someone offended them and their temple.

People of any background or faith can kill people after being offended.

Only some with little intelligence would suggest its a Muslim problem.

Spot on. Every war waged by the West has its agenda underpinned by the JC alliance. The only difference between the crusaders on their horses with swords and now is modern crusaders have missiles and sanctions.
 
Spot on. Every war waged by the West has its agenda underpinned by the JC alliance. The only difference between the crusaders on their horses with swords and now is modern crusaders have missiles and sanctions.

Yes their weapons have changed but their violence never will.

Lets not also forget Jews in Israel. People think Muslims shouldn't be offended but never think why are Jews offended if someone is living in a land......they are offended because their holy book says something. Their offence then evolves into land theft and murder.

You have a extremist religious nation which stops any free speech of criticism but they are supported by billions in military aid, political backing while ignoring them crimes.

Muslims overall in % terms are way way less extreme than Israeli Jews.
 
Yes their weapons have changed but their violence never will.

Lets not also forget Jews in Israel. People think Muslims shouldn't be offended but never think why are Jews offended if someone is living in a land......they are offended because their holy book says something. Their offence then evolves into land theft and murder.

You have a extremist religious nation which stops any free speech of criticism but they are supported by billions in military aid, political backing while ignoring them crimes.

Muslims overall in % terms are way way less extreme than Israeli Jews.

Deny the Jewish history of WW2 and you are sent to prison in 14 Western nations. Forget freedom of speech, freedom of thought doesn't even exist, all because it causes offence to Jews.

Buy hey, Muslims are fair game under the guise of FOS in the West.

I'm telling you, FOS only applies to the agenda of the JC alliance and Rushdie is a paid shill of this alliance.

Want a knighthood? Insult Islam. Want votes? Call for the bombing an Islamic nation. Want to become US President? Kneel at AIPAC.
 
What it was like asking for Salman Rushdie’s work in a Pakistan bookshop ?

Written by Anonymous

As an aspiring writer I loved many exiled authors, from Márquez to Kundera, but with Rushdie the stakes were raised

It was more than a decade ago when I was introduced to the work of Salman Rushdie, thanks to the recommendation of a writer in my homeland of Pakistan. As an aspiring writer myself, I was always told that to become really good, you have to “read, read and read”. Yet I often found I had already read the authors who were recommended to me, easily available as their works were in my country.

But when a writer insisted I must read Rushdie, the stakes were raised. I loved many writers living in exile, from Márquez to Kundera. But Rushdie was the first writer for me who had caused so much anger in the Muslim world and enraged some fanatics.

That his books were banned in my country and the mere mention of his name was thought to be a sin only increased my curiosity. As I was to discover, just getting hold of a copy of one of his works, let alone reading the texts, had become an illicit pleasure for many young people of my generation.

To access his books, someone recommended visiting a specific bookstore in Pakistan. In a hair-raising exchange that felt as though I were looking to buy illegal drugs, I went and whispered into the bookseller’s ear that I needed the books of Rushdie.

The bookseller responded that he would get me all the author’s books but each would cost at least 20,000 rupees (£75). The cost of The Satanic Verses would be triple, given the risk he was taking by selling it; in effect, the vendor said, a death sentence if caught.

I could not afford the cost, so I ended up reading Rushdie online. Then, during a foreign trip, I was finally able to buy hard copies.

On my way back to Pakistan, trying to wrap his books in my luggage so no one could discover them, I felt as if I was smuggling explosives. I asked myself: what if they catch me with his books? Will I be sentenced to life imprisonment? Anything can happen here; it is Pakistan, I murmured to myself.

But I didn’t have The Satanic Verses with me, and did not actually like the book. I am sure most of the fanatics who wished him dead have not actually read him. Certainly not his entire works – be it Midnight’s Children or Haroun and the Sea of Stories. Or his underrated masterpiece Shame, which I especially enjoyed and felt spoke so well about everything that is wrong with Pakistan.

Rushdie talks about arrests for the mere guilt of knowing a “wrong” person. He wrote down the story of a poet friend who spent many months in jail for “social reasons”. He writes: “That is to say he knew somebody who knew somebody who was the wife of the second cousin by marriage of the step-uncle of somebody who might or might not have shared a flat with someone who was running guns to the guerrillas in Baluchistan. You can get anywhere in Pakistan if you know people, even into the jail.”

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/aug/14/satanic-verses-pakistan-bookshop-what-happened

Well feeling a bit like this Anonymous writer on guardian here...
 
But Britain did send armies to fight the Muslims, ie the Crusaders. So none of this selective use of history please. (I did mention the Crusaders in my post, a fact you conveniently ignored)

A thousand years ago? I bet 99% of modern Britons couldn’t tell you who led any of the Crusades. It wasn’t even called Britain in those days, and the Kings spoke French. That’s why I ignored your point.
 
What a load of tosh. Satanic verses was published in 1988. And there was plenty of Islamophobia around long before then...

I don’t think there was. There was racism but Muslims were not singled out. Everything changed on 9/11.
 
You are living in cuckoo land. Read clash of civilizations by Sam Huntington and when it was written.

I live in Britain, and remember a time before Islamophobia.

Huntington wasn’t exclusively writing about the Islamic world but of several civilisations. He was an academic, not the man on the number nine bus.

While there has been a rise in Arab nationalism since 1970, and The War on Terror arguably began with the assassination of Anwar Sadat - most Britons were unaware of this until 9/11. If you asked them who “the enemy” was they would say USSR, or after it fell that UK had no enemies. They would not have said that Islam was the enemy. Most wouldn’t be able to tell you what Islam even is.
 
What it was like asking for Salman Rushdie’s work in a Pakistan bookshop ?

Written by Anonymous

As an aspiring writer I loved many exiled authors, from Márquez to Kundera, but with Rushdie the stakes were raised

It was more than a decade ago when I was introduced to the work of Salman Rushdie, thanks to the recommendation of a writer in my homeland of Pakistan. As an aspiring writer myself, I was always told that to become really good, you have to “read, read and read”. Yet I often found I had already read the authors who were recommended to me, easily available as their works were in my country.

But when a writer insisted I must read Rushdie, the stakes were raised. I loved many writers living in exile, from Márquez to Kundera. But Rushdie was the first writer for me who had caused so much anger in the Muslim world and enraged some fanatics.

That his books were banned in my country and the mere mention of his name was thought to be a sin only increased my curiosity. As I was to discover, just getting hold of a copy of one of his works, let alone reading the texts, had become an illicit pleasure for many young people of my generation.

To access his books, someone recommended visiting a specific bookstore in Pakistan. In a hair-raising exchange that felt as though I were looking to buy illegal drugs, I went and whispered into the bookseller’s ear that I needed the books of Rushdie.

The bookseller responded that he would get me all the author’s books but each would cost at least 20,000 rupees (£75). The cost of The Satanic Verses would be triple, given the risk he was taking by selling it; in effect, the vendor said, a death sentence if caught.

I could not afford the cost, so I ended up reading Rushdie online. Then, during a foreign trip, I was finally able to buy hard copies.

On my way back to Pakistan, trying to wrap his books in my luggage so no one could discover them, I felt as if I was smuggling explosives. I asked myself: what if they catch me with his books? Will I be sentenced to life imprisonment? Anything can happen here; it is Pakistan, I murmured to myself.

But I didn’t have The Satanic Verses with me, and did not actually like the book. I am sure most of the fanatics who wished him dead have not actually read him. Certainly not his entire works – be it Midnight’s Children or Haroun and the Sea of Stories. Or his underrated masterpiece Shame, which I especially enjoyed and felt spoke so well about everything that is wrong with Pakistan.

Rushdie talks about arrests for the mere guilt of knowing a “wrong” person. He wrote down the story of a poet friend who spent many months in jail for “social reasons”. He writes: “That is to say he knew somebody who knew somebody who was the wife of the second cousin by marriage of the step-uncle of somebody who might or might not have shared a flat with someone who was running guns to the guerrillas in Baluchistan. You can get anywhere in Pakistan if you know people, even into the jail.”

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/aug/14/satanic-verses-pakistan-bookshop-what-happened

Well feeling a bit like this Anonymous writer on guardian here...

It's anonymous. For all we know it may well have been written by someone like you, probably flying the same flag as well.
 
Santanic verses is back on top charts on Amazon........
 
Santanic verses is back on top charts on Amazon........

Excellent. More people will read it, be disgusted or confused, then explore Islam to see what all the fuss was about and convert. It is God's will Inshallah.
 
Excellent. More people will read it, be disgusted or confused, then explore Islam to see what all the fuss was about and convert. It is God's will Inshallah.

If so than why arnt the likes of [MENTION=152959]hoshiarpurexpress[/MENTION] enlighten if we have to believe him that he actually read it
 
Excellent. More people will read it, be disgusted or confused, then explore Islam to see what all the fuss was about and convert. It is God's will Inshallah.

No its not excellent.

The same money that will be used to waste time on this drivel could be spent helping the poor in this world.
 
If so than why arnt the likes of [MENTION=152959]hoshiarpurexpress[/MENTION] enlighten if we have to believe him that he actually read it

Because not everyone is destined to be enlightened, that is the message of the Quran itself is it not?
 
Santanic verses is back on top charts on Amazon........

More people will read it and understand how people like [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] have no clue how Muslims feel about this atrocious piece of re-imagining/ reconstructing and corrupting history.
 
If so than why arnt the likes of [MENTION=152959]hoshiarpurexpress[/MENTION] enlighten if we have to believe him that he actually read it

For me any so called book is not a source of enlightenment, rather a source of knowledge and a different perspective. Learn to enjoy the difference as the world is not monotheistic, nor am I.
 
For me any so called book is not a source of enlightenment, rather a source of knowledge and a different perspective. Learn to enjoy the difference as the world is not monotheistic, nor am I.

As long as it’s not based on lies. Satanic Verses doesn’t provide a perspective based on historical/theological accuracy
 
As long as it’s not based on lies. Satanic Verses doesn’t provide a perspective based on historical/theological accuracy

but look at the source of Santanic verses. Santanic verses and the biography of prophet that we read has the same source which is ibne Ishaq. Only difference is while we find Ibne Ishaqs chronology to be accurate but not the content, Santanic verses finds the content to be relevent.

So there this issue on why we have picked and choose
 
Cuz he clearly hasn’t even read lol. You have guessed this too haha h

What is this weird flex among you and [MENTION=135038]Major[/MENTION] about what someone has read or not. All because I enjoyed reading a book and praised it...

I wonder why such kind of rigid mindset exists where you just are not able to digest a simple fact that I can read and enjoy what I want to and praise the author/book.

It is a fantastic book.. do read it if you guys can get over your inflexibility and ability to grasp simple concept, that world has multiple faiths and multiple viewpoints.
 
JK Rowling is not going to let this slide!

Scotland police launched on Sunday an investigation against a report of an online threat made to Harry Potter author JK Rowling on Twitter after she tweeted condemning the stabbing of fellow author Salman Rushdie.

Rowling had taken to Twitter on Friday and written in response to the news of Rushdie’s stabbing, “Feeling very sick right now. Let him be ok.”

The account that threatened Rowling was of a man who had Karachi, Pakistan in his bio and the handle MeerAsifAziz1 who had been very vocal in support of the person who stabbed Rushdie. His account has been suspended ever since his threatening tweet.

More on Images - https://images.dawn.com/news/1190666/

#JKRowling #salmanrushdie
 
but look at the source of Santanic verses. Santanic verses and the biography of prophet that we read has the same source which is ibne Ishaq. Only difference is while we find Ibne Ishaqs chronology to be accurate but not the content, Santanic verses finds the content to be relevent.

So there this issue on why we have picked and choose

You need to provide UNDENIABLE proof that the so called incident of the Satanic verses took place in the exact way that it is narrated according to the orient. By undeniable, you must be able with to produce a chain of narration that is undoubtedly linking the incident to the Prophet s.a and is universally accepted to have taken place by all sects or Islam and all schools of thought in Islamic jurisprudence.

If you do provide such a narration of the undeniable standard of authenticity, then it would question the entire, core belief and the fabric of Islam and the Quran, which is supposed to be a book completely revealed to the Prophet s.a without the interference of no person or unrecognised source. I am 1000% sure that a narration of this level of authenticity cannot be provided by Non-Muslim scholar, historians or even by questioning Muslim scholars.
 
You need to provide UNDENIABLE proof that the so called incident of the Satanic verses took place in the exact way that it is narrated according to the orient. By undeniable, you must be able with to produce a chain of narration that is undoubtedly linking the incident to the Prophet s.a and is universally accepted to have taken place by all sects or Islam and all schools of thought in Islamic jurisprudence.

If you do provide such a narration of the undeniable standard of authenticity, then it would question the entire, core belief and the fabric of Islam and the Quran, which is supposed to be a book completely revealed to the Prophet s.a without the interference of no person or unrecognised source. I am 1000% sure that a narration of this level of authenticity cannot be provided by Non-Muslim scholar, historians or even by questioning Muslim scholars.

Furthermore

I challenge the likes of [MENTION=152959]hoshiarpurexpress[/MENTION] who loves this book and has read it 3 times to provide an undeniable source that proves the premise of Rushdie’s rewriting of early Islamic history to be based on factuality rather than fiction.

Also, [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] to provide undeniable proof that Rushdie was fully entitled to use FOS in critiquing a religion as revered as Islam and by devaluing the honour of key Islamic figures with scandalous descriptions of their biography.

Someone here said that ‘the glove did not fit’ OJ, hence he had to be acquitted. I argue that if the incident is incorrect, if it never happened in the first place then how can we all say it is ok to use it for the sake of art/literature and hurt the sentiments of Muslims???
 
More people will read it and understand how people like [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] have no clue how Muslims feel about this atrocious piece of re-imagining/ reconstructing and corrupting history.
More likely get bored with the book
and scratch their heads as to how anyone could take offence.

I understand the concept of blasphemy. There was a time when I even felt religious terror. But I purged myself of it.

I believe that Khomeini’s reaction to this man’s book is disproportionate. If he hadn’t issued his fatwa I think Muslim would not have noticed.
 
Also, [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] to provide undeniable proof that Rushdie was fully entitled to use FOS in critiquing a religion as revered as Islam and by devaluing the honour of key Islamic figures with scandalous descriptions of their biography.


You want me to explain England & Wales freedom of speech law?

It’s in the Human Rights Act 1998 Article 10.

1 Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.

Blasphemy law was still on the statute books when Rushdie published his book, and Muslims petitioned the government to prosecute Rushdie, but a House of Lords select committee ruled that blasphemy law only applies to Christianity.

If you don’t like the law, campaign to get it changed.
 
Uk does NOT have freedom of speech law, UK has freedom of expression law. BIG difference.

Can we please stop the propaganda.
 
You want me to explain England & Wales freedom of speech law?

It’s in the Human Rights Act 1998 Article 10.

1 Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.

Blasphemy law was still on the statute books when Rushdie published his book, and Muslims petitioned the government to prosecute Rushdie, but a House of Lords select committee ruled that blasphemy law only applies to Christianity.

If you don’t like the law, campaign to get it changed.

Stop waffling around the law and it’s inadequate effectiveness and come to the point that I am asking you to come to. You believe this novel is a work of art and is inoffensive, or it should not have offended the way it did. So let’s stick to the core thesis of the book (The satanic verses) and prove the authenticity of the incident. Or do you admit that this work of art is based on a complete fabrication? If so, is it fair to use descriptive rewriting and reimagining of Islamic history based on a fabrication? That too in the name of art?
 
You need to provide UNDENIABLE proof that the so called incident of the Satanic verses took place in the exact way that it is narrated according to the orient. By undeniable, you must be able with to produce a chain of narration that is undoubtedly linking the incident to the Prophet s.a and is universally accepted to have taken place by all sects or Islam and all schools of thought in Islamic jurisprudence.

If you do provide such a narration of the undeniable standard of authenticity, then it would question the entire, core belief and the fabric of Islam and the Quran, which is supposed to be a book completely revealed to the Prophet s.a without the interference of no person or unrecognised source. I am 1000% sure that a narration of this level of authenticity cannot be provided by Non-Muslim scholar, historians or even by questioning Muslim scholars.

The incident was narrated in Ibne Ishaq's Seerat an nabawi. He is the closest to the timeline of Prophet PBUH and should be regarded as the most authentic source on the life of the Prophet PBUH.
Either you accept it or reject it completely. No pick and choose.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The incident was narrated in Ibne Ishaq's Seerat an nabawi. He is the closest to the timeline of Prophet and should be regarded as the most authentic source on the life of the Prophet.
Either you accept it or reject it completely. No pick and choose.

Alright. So Billions of Muslims are knowingly accepting a narration that suggests Satan interferes in the revelation sent to The Prophet s.a? (May God forbid). Please share this ‘Authentic’ narration that is universally accepted by the opponents of Islam and if those opponents of Islam accept every one of Ibne-Ishaq’s narrations. Or do they simply pick and choose what suits them?
 
Alright. So Billions of Muslims are knowingly accepting a narration that suggests Satan interferes in the revelation sent to The Prophet s.a? (May God forbid). Please share this ‘Authentic’ narration that is universally accepted by the opponents of Islam and if those opponents of Islam accept every one of Ibne-Ishaq’s narrations. Or do they simply pick and choose what suits them?

I don't know what the big issue is. Jibril AS corrects it right away. The Prophet PBUH is only a man who can make mistakes and in this case, it was not his fault.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stop waffling around the law and it’s inadequate effectiveness and come to the point that I am asking you to come to.

You asked a question and I gave a specific answer with no waffle. That you do not like that answer doesn't make it incorrect in statute law.

You believe this novel is a work of art and is inoffensive, or it should not have offended the way it did. So let’s stick to the core thesis of the book (The satanic verses) and prove the authenticity of the incident. Or do you admit that this work of art is based on a complete fabrication? If so, is it fair to use descriptive rewriting and reimagining of Islamic history based on a fabrication? That too in the name of art?

You didn't ask me that. You asked me how Rushdie is fully entitled to use FOS in critiquing a religion as revered as Islam and by devaluing the honour of key Islamic figures with scandalous descriptions of their biography and I demonstrated to you specifically how he is so entitled. If you don't like the law, campaign to change it rather than wasting time shouting into the void here.

I don't know whether it is a work of art or not. That book is not important to me.
 
Rushdie's Satanic verses is not important even though liberals protect the book under FOS, but Mein Kempf is proper important but not protected by FOS.

Go figure. The propaganda is strong.
 
I have to call Rushdie a one trick pony. People who love SV do so because they hate Islam; not because the book is good.
 
I have to call Rushdie a one trick pony. People who love SV do so because they hate Islam; not because the book is good.

The majority who support Rushdie have not even read SV. Case in point, this thread.

If Rushdie hates Islam, yet is fine with identifying himself using an Islamic name.

Pathetic hypocrisy by Rushdie and Liberals.
 
What is this weird flex among you and [MENTION=135038]Major[/MENTION] about what someone has read or not. All because I enjoyed reading a book and praised it...

I wonder why such kind of rigid mindset exists where you just are not able to digest a simple fact that I can read and enjoy what I want to and praise the author/book.

It is a fantastic book.. do read it if you guys can get over your inflexibility and ability to grasp simple concept, that world has multiple faiths and multiple viewpoints.

I’ve actually read it and Midnights children for school in Germany.

And I’ve read literary critics write their opinion on it.

So to see you come and say that Midnights Children and Satanic verses are both similar level of books is a telltale sign that you actually haven’t read it because no literary critic, contemporary author has ever put them at the same level. And it’s not an opinion thing. You can have an opinion that Mohan Bagan is same level of Real Madrid in football but that’s just not gonna fly and same is the difference between Midnights children and Satanic verses

There’s nothing to grasp here except that you clearly haven’t read the book.
 
Back
Top