Iran condemns Britain over Rushdie knighthood

[DanaC]

Salman Rushdie is the author of eight novels and four works of non-fiction, most recently, Step Across This Line: Collected Nonfiction 1992-2002. In 1993 Midnight's Children was judged to be the 'Booker of Bookers', the best novel to have won the Booker Prize in its first 25 years, and he was awarded the Austrian State Prize for European literature. The Moor's Last Sigh won him the Whitbread Prize in 1995, and the European Union's Aristeion Literary Prize in 1996. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature and a Commandeur des Artes et des Lettres.

There really is rather more to Salman Rushdie, than 'blasphemy'.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

These Islamofascist quibblers should shut the hell up and take it like men, not hyenas.

[Rexmons]

Originally Posted by DanaC

There really is rather more to Salman Rushdie, than 'blasphemy'.

I'm sure there was more to Hitler than just "killing Jews" too, but Volkswagen commemorating him on Holocaust Remembrance Day probably wouldn't be too wise.

[Sundae]

Okay. So you have now officially Godwined the thread.
But for the record:

The Satanic Verses is a fantasy about two actors from India traveling on an airplane. After a terrorist bomb blows up the airplane, they fall to Earth and survive. The controversial parts of the book center on just two chapters.

One of the Indian actors apparently is losing his mind. He dreams about God revealing his will to the Prophet Muhammad, who passes on the sacred words to humanity through the Koran, the holy book of Islam. But the novel refers to Muhammad by an insulting name used by Christians in the Middle Ages. As part of the dream sequence, a scribe called "Salman" writes down God's commands that are coming from the lips of Muhammad. The scribe, however, decides to play a trick by changing some of the divine words. Since Muslims hold the Koran as the revealed word of God, they deplored Rushdie for ridiculing it.

The title of the book refers to an old legend retold by Rushdie. According to the legend, some of the Koran's original verses originated with Satan, and Muhammad later deleted them. By repeating this legend, Rushdie offended Muslims by associating the holy Koran with the work of Satan.

One part of the novel probably outraged Muslims the most. It describes people mocking and imitating Muhammad's 12 wives. Muslims revere Muhammad's wives as the "mothers of all believers."

You may already have known this (it's generally understood in Britain but Salman Rushdie is a naturalised Brit, so we may have paid more attention to the details nearly 20 years ago when it was published). I'm willing to accept it upset people. It didn't kill them though.

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by DanaC
There really is rather more to Salman Rushdie, than 'blasphemy'.

I'm sure there was more to Hitler than just "killing Jews" too, but Volkswagen commemorating him on Holocaust Remembrance Day probably wouldn't be too wise.

I think you just blew my mind.

The problem is not that Rushdie wote offensive material. The problem is that lots of people took offense at what Rushdie wrote.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Religious Affairs Minister Mohammad Ejaz ul-Haq had said the honour meant a risk of suicide attacks because Muslims believed Sir Salman had insulted Islam.

That's what I would expect from craven scumbags.

[Rexmons]

Originally Posted by DanaC

I think you just blew my mind.

The problem is not that Rushdie wote offensive material. The problem is that lots of people took offense at what Rushdie wrote.

yea 1.3 billion people. maybe it's not offensive to you but the majority see's it that way.

How about, just don't read it if you don't like it?

[elSicomoro]

That'd be the ideal situation...but look at how up-in-arms people here get over some religious issues. As weird as this may sound, perhaps some folks have too much faith.

[Sundae]

How about, when you post a completely incorrect statement about something and are corrected three times you acknowledge it?

[Rexmons]

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl

How about, when you post a completely incorrect statement about something and are corrected three times you acknowledge it?

who me?

[Sundae]

Originally Posted by Rexmons

who me?

Sorry. I was referring to RK posting twice re British schools refusing to teach about the Holocaust.

[DanaC]

yea 1.3 billion people. maybe it's not offensive to you but the majority see's it that way.

The world's population exceeds 6.5 billion. How does 1.5 billion constitute a majority?

[elSicomoro]

And how can it be argued that the majority of Muslims were actually against it?

Originally Posted by DanaC

I think you just blew my mind.

The problem is not that Rushdie wote offensive material. The problem is that lots of people took offense at what Rushdie wrote.

The problem is that he did not write offensive material.
People who choose to believe in fairy tales do not have a right not to have those tales altered, mocked, looked at in a different light, etc.

Writing those things are not offensive to those who believe something different than what is written, they just believe something different, not what that person wrote. They are separate.
Simple.
Nothing offensive.

If there was proof that the story was true, then one could argue that someone was altering history, etc, but that is a silly argument and I don't even know why I brought it up.. true..LOL!