Salman Rushdie - Outrage.

Subject: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 09:52 AM

I see that the Muslim world is up in arms over writer Salman Rushdie being awarded a British knighthood. And Muslim countries wonder why many in the West think they are primitive and dangerous. Such an outcry doesn't help their case at all.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: GUEST,Tunesmith
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 09:54 AM

This belongs in the non-music section. Unless Salman is a closet folkie!

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 09:56 AM

It was also ham handed in the extreme with the MIddle East in it's present state of flux, to choose now to make the award. I knew the minute I heard the news, that there would be an outcry from Iran et al.
Giok

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: Folk Form # 1
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 09:56 AM

The Muslim world is having another hissy fit. Gee, what a surprise.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 09:59 AM

Salman Rushdie was up on stage with the Incredible String Band in about 1968 at the RFH.
I think that counts, though I don't think the recognition was for his musical abilities, exactly . . .

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: Midchuck
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 10:15 AM

Not as "ham handed" as ordering him killed for writing something that disagreed with their religion. I hate to say it, John, but I think you're running sort of a double standard here.

Peter.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 10:30 AM

I have to agree with John, Peter. The one doesn't cancel the other. The fatwa was and is outrageous, wrong, ridiculous, stupid, and anything else you'd like to call it. But this doesn't stop this honours move being insensitive, crass, provocative and illogical in today's world.

The two wrongs don't make a right, and a comparison makes no sense, because bad is bad. No double standard, quite the opposite: I condemn both, with the same logic.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 10:35 AM

Oh I agree with you Peter, however I think a little bit of discretion would have been the better part of valour. How are we all going to feel when someone dies in a bomb attack because of this?
It looks like, and probably is, an act of deliberate provocation on the part of the UK government, and as such it is as infantile a reaction as that of the Ayatollah Khomeni in ordering the original fatwah.
Two wrongs never did make a right!
Giok

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: guitar
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 10:55 AM

I'm glad that he was made a sir and the Muslims having a hissie fit, I mean that's just them, you know its our way or no way

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: 282RA
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 10:55 AM

While I don't fault the Muslims for what they do to Americans since we were stupid enough to involve ourselves in their affairs, this "Kill Rushdie" stuff is incredibly idiotic.

They're acting like bad-tempered children. This is why we should never have involved ourselves with these crazy bastards.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: GUEST,Ian cookieless
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:06 AM

Am I understanding some of these arguments right? We should curtail our own literary endeavors and freedom of speech by not honouring a very successful and respected writer whose sophisticated literature and free speech others tried to curtial by an order to murder, just in case those same attempted murderers don't like it? Should we also, in the 1960s, have laid off giving Martin Luther King the Nobel Peace Prize in case the KKK objected? Should I resign from Amnesty International in case terrorists, state murderers and torturers the world over object to me sending letters?

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: Wolfgang
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:10 AM

Rushdie knighthood 'justifies suicide attacks' (link to GUARDIAN article)

Ils sont fous les...

I would appreciate a common unequivocal reaction of the EU.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:11 AM

I suppose that Sir SR got his K for services to literature or something. Objecting to it on other grounds is foolish. I mean, imagine (just imagine for a moment) that Gary Glitter wrote a series of wonderful musical pieces, and then got a K for services to music. Would we object on the grounds that not only he was a convicted paedophile but also that some of his earlier "musical" works were thinly disguised paeans to paedophilia?

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:12 AM

We have been interfering in their lives for quite along time, not surprised they're a bit hacked off with western meddling.
G.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:17 AM

Having read the article linked by Wolfgang, I would just point out that Pakistan is regarded by the west as an ally, in their fight against the Taliban in Afghanistan.
G.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: GUEST,Ian cookieless
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:19 AM

Richard, don't get your point. What non-literary thing is it that Salman is to be blamed for? Or have I missed the point?

If Pakistan's sabre-rattling threat is to be seen as OK, is it also OK for me to track down anyone on this thread who I feel insulted by and kill them? Or invite others to do the same? Do they really think their God is so small that he needs protecting against insults - by death squads?!

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:20 AM

So, Giok, when an Islamic nation does something that upsets us, we are supposed to be understanding and not object, while if we do something they do not approve of, it is our fault, and our responsibility to backpedal?

Sounds as if you do not think that Islamic nations should be treated as "adults" but as immature, ignorant children who are not responsible for their actions. I do not agree with such bigotry about ANYONE.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:25 AM

I agree that the fatwah was a gross over reaction, I am merely pointing out that we do meddle an awful lot in their affairs, and also presume to tell them how they should live their lives.
It is really none of our business what they do in their own country.
Giok

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: GUEST,Ian cookieless
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:29 AM

Threatening to kill a British citizen, none of our business? Is this none of our business?

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:31 AM

I agree with Ian.

George P. said: But this doesn't stop this honours move being insensitive, crass, provocative and illogical in today's world.

Not so. Suspending all such recognition until things settle down in the Middle East surely condemns writers like Rushdie to no acknowledgement of their life's work. That would be silly. There many are people in the Middle East (and other nations with large Muslim populations, such as India, where he is actually FROM) who are not part of the current madness and who still care about these kinds of things. Ignore the "squeaking wheel" for once and give others a chance at enjoying a bit of normalcy.

Stop acting as if this madness that George W. Bush has escalated and Israel has exacerbated to its fullest is ruling the entire Muslim world. It isn't, and many people who aren't terrorists would like to get on with their lives and perhaps some of them who aren't fundamentalist zealots even enjoy his work. Let them.

SRS

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:35 AM

It is really none of THEIR business what WE do in OUR own country.


Must be true, since it is what you said about them...

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:41 AM

Correct Bruce, it works both ways.
However we [the UK] have deliberately provoked an unnecessary piece of unpleasantness, and that is why the Pakistan parliament is voting in the way it is.

G.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: concertina ceol
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:42 AM

Apart from being a fairly obscure author - has anyone read any of his books? - the poor bloke is famous for two things - this dreadful fatwa and "naughty but nice" - which may be a desciption applied to the knighthood perhaps?

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: John Hardly
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:44 AM

On the menu at a fast-seafood resaurant:

Salmon Rushedy.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: heric
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:46 AM

should be a fatwah on you for that joke

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:51 AM

However THEY [the Islamic nations] have deliberately provoked an unnecessary piece of unpleasantness, and that is why the West is acting in the way it is.


If the West were to react the way the Islamic nations have, YOU would certainly be vocal in criticising it- So, why are you giving tacit approval to the Islamic nations reations?

Double standards indicate a failure to view one side or the other as fully human, and responsible.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: John Hardly
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 11:51 AM

I always have the fatwah trimmed off before it leaves the kitchen. Salmon, however, need no trimming.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 12:04 PM

You have to be careful when you insult religious icons...

from 2nd Kings:
"2:23 And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
2:24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them."

attempts at explanation here

I am tired of this sort of attitude...from ANY group. There is a huge difference between being slandered in such a way that it causes demonstrable harm, and merely disliking what others say about you or your beliefs. There are remedies for the former, but pronouncing death sentences for imagined 'insults' is beyond the pale.

I wonder if Rushdie was consulted and if this outcome was debated before the public announcement. Surely *HE* realized there would be a reaction? In a world full of irrationality, one takes one's chances....and sometimes it is worth pushing the envelope to make a point.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 12:24 PM

Bruce, it would appear that you in common with your president and our prime minister, don't subscribe to the old bible proverb, "A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger."
The Bible, Proverbs 15:1.
G

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: Ebbie
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 12:33 PM

John Hardly, I *always* trim the fat off salmon. Truly. Especiazlly off the king.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: John Hardly
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 12:38 PM

hmmm...

...so the fatwah was calling up untrained bears -- right out of the woods -- to kill Rushdie?

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 12:49 PM

Not exactly....Elisha asked GOD to send the bears. Presumably, God made the decision as to the fairness.

The fatwah is assuming the role of GOD and calling on ignorant humans to assume the role of bears. very presumptuous

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 12:49 PM

Islamic extremists have placed an £80,000 bounty on the writer's head.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: concertina ceol
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 12:52 PM

you'd never get the head through passport control with a bounty on it

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: John Hardly
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 12:59 PM

"Not exactly....Elisha asked GOD to send the bears. Presumably, God made the decision as to the fairness.

The fatwah is assuming the role of GOD and calling on ignorant humans to assume the role of bears. very presumptuous "

That's what I was getting at. I might view the Rushdie circumstance differently if what was called for against him required the supernatural to determine the "fairness".

Instead, you compare the two.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: kendall
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 01:00 PM

Giok, by way of balance, they started it all around 700 AD when they invaded North Africa and Spain. They butchered tens of thousands in their zeal to expand Islam.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 01:18 PM

I agree with George - this knighthood was a bloody stupid idea.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 01:25 PM

If I was Salman Rushdie I wouldn't want the knighthood if it was going to cause all this trouble.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 01:32 PM

Mybe it's just me, but when I read some of the above can't help thinking about the story of two social workers that stubled across a battered, bleeding body in the street. Said one," The man who did this....he really needs our help"

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 01:33 PM

Luke 22:36

36 Then He said to them, "But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: M.Ted
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 01:33 PM

Knighthood? Whatever.....

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 01:48 PM

"It's my can of petrol. What rightbhave you to you suggest I shouldn't pour it on that bonfire."

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: Peace
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 01:51 PM

I wonder if it has anything to do with something in the water.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 01:53 PM

Bloody stupid idea agreed. mg

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 01:56 PM

McGrath,

So you agree that the Islamic nations are wrong for threatening Israel and the West? You agree that Iran does NOT have the right to violate international law and build those uranium enrichment olants? You agree that Iran and Syria are wrong for supplying arms to terrorists in Lebanon?

If not, YOU are the one pouring gasoline on the fire.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 02:03 PM

Sorry Bruce, but sometimes you sound the tensy weensyest bit Paranoid!
G.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 02:06 PM

And YOU sound like you do not think that the Islamic nations should be held to the standards YOU hold the Western ones to: Is that because of their racial "inferiority", or do you just think that they are right and we are wrong?

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: Peace
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 02:09 PM

Fundamentalists are arseholes.

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: heric
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 02:09 PM

cultural room-for-improvement-in-some-details maybe

Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jun 07 - 02:12 PM

It is wrong to expect other nations to share our standards, you know little things like democracy?
Not that our version of democracy ios anything to shout about!
G