[Telegraph] Honour 'justifies' suicide attack on Rushdie

Intolerant wackos.

 

My sister met him at a academic dinner and said he was a very strange man. Would not directly address women at the table until they addressed him and basically made a big effort to engage him in conversation.

That being said, the reaction to have people chanting "kill him kill him" in the streets doesn't do much to support the idea that Islam is a religion of peace.

 

Hey Pakistan.

STFU !

Until you can actually control your entire country, you should just keep it to yourself.

DD

 

Anyone else remember Houston on September 10, 2001? Rushdie was in town and the Islamic Society of Greater Houston gathered to protest him being here. They carried signs that said, "DEATH TO RUSHDIE!" Right here...in downtown Houston.

The next day was 9/11. The very same Islamic Society of Greater Houston published some statement that Islam was a religion of peace.

That's regrettable for Muslims, in my opinion.

People are people. And I absolutely, positively know Muslims who are good and peaceful people. No doubt about that. But this event...and the way Muslims, in the East and the West, have responded to Rushdie doesn't communicate well.

 

Thought the book was pretty good.

 

the idea of martyring yourself to off some author that you don't care for is beyond me.

 

Read it, not a bad book. But Rushdie is doing what any smart publisher would do: stick with what sells.

At the end of the day, that's what he's paid to do...

The irony is that the majority of those preaching such an approach would NEVER in a million years sacrifice themselves for that perceived 'honour'. In fact, I doubt any of them actually read any of his books unless they went overseas to the UK or somewhere where they're sold; that's mob mentality at its best, where you're not thinking for yourself.

More irony is the fact that if they look inside their own borders they will see things considered to be FAR more 'offensive' to Islamic values than a non-Muslim publisher from Britain.

I don't remember that, although I don't doubt that some people in the crowd might have carried such signs. On a related note, you should know that while the ISGH might sponsor a protest, they have absolutely no control over what people chant, say or what signs they carry. That's entirely up to the individuals. Either way, ISGH is too concerned about keeping a 'moderate' image that they try to avoid negative publicity related to them in any way, shape or form.

If what you say did in fact happen, it was almost certainly out of their control or against their wishes. Every single e-mail/public announcement they send out in their e-mails/publications EMPHASIZES being respectful and avoiding 'unnecessarily inflammatory' messages or words that would reflect negatively on the community.

Just thought I would clarify, since it doesn't seem like you're too familiar with ISGH general policy regarding these things.

That's more along the line of what ISGH does, I think you're just confused and/or reaching to try and make a point.

So are you officially jumping on the bandwagon of, "every single action by a Muslim reflects on the entire community"?

I expect that simplistic thinking from some other notable posters, but in your case, as Mark Jackson would say, "Come on, MadMax! You're better than that!"

Ah, nice! The usual qualifier. Here comes the but...

Rushdie has written controversial books that offend many Muslims the world over, no doubt. But I think the obsession with him by some (very few, I would argue) Muslims is pretty silly and ridiculous. That being said, there is nothing wrong with arguing against him or disagreeing with him, but that shouldn't include threatening to kill him or issue 'fatwas' against him to that extent. That's beneath anyone.

Again, I know I am pretty much blowing hot air at this point because whatever people want to believe they will and they will subconsciously nitpick 'evidence' to support their prejudices; I reached that conclusion a long time ago. However, it's also important to point out that although Islam is a monotheistic faith, its followers are not monolithic in their beliefs and those beliefs vary so much that many Muslim 'sects' are so far off from what most consider 'mainstream Islam' to the point that most don't consider them to be Muslims. This is pretty evident in different parts of the world today, not just in Iraq.

Anyways, carry on...

 

LOL, what? Salman Rushdie isn't exactly Dan Brown.

 

tiger --

you're creating more out of what i wrote than is there.

i was very clear that i understand people are people...believe me, as a person of faith, i understand entirely how frustrating it is to watch others hijack your faith. or to watch a perception be created about your faith that doesn't resemble anything that you understand of it. geez, i'm the poster boy of that on this message board. i'm not at all suggesting that muslims, as a whole, believe that crap.

i am suggesting it's unfortunate that so many help to create that view in the minds of Americans. the same way it's unfortunate that so many dogmatic "Christians" convince people that Jesus was all about arbitrary rules and regulations, and was judgmental beyond all belief. i can't begin to explain how frustrated or upset i get at that. i can pretend it isn't the perception...but it is...because there's too many people who've sought to make a religion out of following Jesus. and instead i find this tremendous burden to help people understand who I understand Jesus to be.

i thought that was a particularly dark period for Islam. particularly from the view of a Houstonian who saw THAT on 9/10 and then saw THAT on 9/11. and particularly from a Houstonian who knew, as you do, that it was hijacking a faith. we hear of the DEATH TO RUSHDIE type stuff in other countries...we see it on the news on the other side of the world...but to see it in downtown Houston was a bit disturbing. and then in conjunction with the next morning...well...it wasn't good.

 

No, but the controversial topics he tackles -- as well as the reaction he receives -- have helped make him what he is, a household name.

If people start to realize that God -- if you really believe in Him -- is above 'blasphemy' by a mere creature, then we would all be better off. At least that's my view.

I will be the first to admit that many Muslims are easily offended, but that's probably a byproduct of just how 'personal' and central faith is in the lives of many Muslims, I would say more so than any other major faith group.

 

In all honesty, Max, it's the same way on the 'other' side of the fence, as well. Perception, perception, perception...always...trumps...reality.

People have their prejudices, that will never change. How we view the world IS subjective; it's how we 'decipher' the world around us, through our upbringings/personalities/experiences. We can't make decisions entirely independent of that.

Millions of non-American Muslims see America as the embodiment of evil, the "Great Satan" if you will. You can talk to them, try to reason with them, it won't matter much. They have this 'black and white' view of the world; there are no shades of gray. It's that prevalent 'us against them' mentality. If you believe there is one right answer to everything, one good side in every situation, that will be your approach.

Myself? My faith is a factor in my personal life, but I have a far more 'secular' view of the outside world. I don't believe that there is a 'definitive' answer to everything.

 

You don't hear American's yelling out "death to Egypt" very often.

 

The fact he's one of the mosted gifted and talented novelists of the last 100 years is what has made him famous, not his subject matter, at least among the reading public.

He's not writing about muslims just to sell books - he's writes about it because he's an indian muslim.

 

i'm curious if Rushdie or anyone else wrote several books criticizing different religions other than Islam, if there would be death threats on him.

 

Wrong. It's just that being non-violent and introspective is more central to other faiths. Muslims get offended because they see everything as black and white. That view comes from the programming that their beliefs are dictated directly from their god. If that is the case then they can never be wrong. There is never a need to be open to other ideas, in fact that would be blasphemy. It is the opposite of submission. Violence then becomes inevitable. But I think this is true to an extent of all Abrahamic religions. Islam is just the worse in this aspect.

 

what about this shia vs sunni stuff?
all the sectarian violence both claiming they believe in the same guy.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Satanic_Verses_(novel)

Read all the death threats Rushide got I am shocked he alive.
People just get way to obsessed about religion. It is a book the Muslim population needs to get over it. I bet only a few of them have even read it. At least we don't have fawtas against Dan Brown. I think one of the big criticisms that Islam should be taking is its intolerance of ideas. It appears that islam is where the Christians were about 400 years ago.

 

I agree..perception ends up shaping reality. no question about it.

 

Rushdie's work isn't kind to religious extremists of any stripe. The Moor's last sigh spent a lot time caricaturing extreme Hindu nationalists of Bombay and he was actually sued for libel, burned in effigy, etc.