salmaan rushdie knighted

[CC1981]

Wow...Pakistanis have given Rushdie even more importance than the Brits! Lets see..the Brits called him ' Sir' Salman Rushdie...the Pakistanis are calling him 'World Satan' Salman Rushdie ! Wow...so he is Dr.Evil basically... I wish i could be the #1 evil dood in the world... pretty prestigious ! PS: Who spell-checks their placards ? you'd think that these morons would atleast spell their words or get the grammar correct for the 4-5 words they gonna paint on and parade themselves with...WTF is 'monstrous of the world salman rushdie' really ?

[The Outsider]

What do you disagree with?

It's a work of fiction so one is well within rights to disagree with pretty much everything I would think. The reaction to all this in Pakistan is disappointing but not surprising. For me, the transformation started by Zia in the late 70s to transform Pakistan into a hardcore Islamic state where power is wielded by religious fascists is well and truly complete so expect more of these religious power block nuttiness in the future.

[Guest dada_rocks]

It's a work of fiction so one is well within rights to disagree with pretty much everything I would think. The reaction to all this in Pakistan is disappointing but not surprising. For me, the transformation started by Zia in the late 70s to transform Pakistan into a hardcore Islamic state where power is wielded by religious fascists is well and truly complete so expect more of these religious power block nuttiness in the future.

It's work of a fiction? Unless Ibn Ishq writings are work of fiction. Unless Ibn Ishq who has nothing uncomplimentary to say except this part ( even here he doesn't say it in disparaging terms just gives the account of what purportedly transpired) about socalled great man has some axe to grind, it's very much factual account.

[The Outsider]

:cantstop: Anyone who considers Satanic Verses a historical work is just as deluded as the ones who consider the Quran to be a flawless word from Allah.

[CC1981]

:cantstop: Anyone who considers Satanic Verses a historical work is just as deluded as the ones who consider the Quran to be a flawless word from Allah.

Yup. The madness of this poster deepens...Satanic Verses are facts, follows Fox News for facts....LOL..no wonder he is so racist & disturbed!

[Guest dada_rocks]

:cantstop: Anyone who considers Satanic Verses a historical work is just as deluded as the ones who consider the Quran to be a flawless word from Allah.

Underling theme is historical well now inaccraces of historical text can be put forward while contesting anything. Other than that general glitch with the history-writing the main theme of novel is as historical as any other piece of erstwhile history. Noone claimsthe dramatization weaved in the novel is part pof history but theme most certaionly is. BTW did u notice you are defending the rights of questioning for those who swear by flawlessness of Quran. So one thing is certain I might have rights to question the veracity of historical underpining of the theme of Satanic verse but those folks in Pakistan most certainly can't stake claim to that right. PS: Last time I checked ad-hominem was no credible defence so shun delusional this and that put forward anything substantial u have got.

[beetle]

In response to this a minister of religious affairs justifies suicide attacks ....:haha::haha::haha:

[Gaurav]

I actually didnt get the context of what you had said. But my whole point about this freedom of speech thingy is that these people do not pay attention to the sensitivities that are involved. Eg - The Danish magazine which published pictures of the Prophet Mohammed when it knew that it would cause outrage in the islamic world. People will say -- " What can the danish magazine do if the people from the islamic countries overreact ? " for that i would say -- " if you are so non-bothered about how people from those countries react or hurt, then what is this big fuss about this war on terrorism , freeing the islamic world of all the tyrant rulers and all that crap ? " You mind your own business , let them mind theirs..

Someone gets outraged so I should stop expressing my views? Muslims get outraged and piggy banks are taken away from UK banks. Looks like muslims are masters at getting outraged! Denmark is a country where freedom of speech is a given. The cartoons where very accurate in describing Mo anyway. Btw where is the outrage about the Islamic teaching that clearly calls for violence against kaffirs? Muslims have no leg to stand when it comes to outrage over some harmless cartoons when their own hands are covered in real world violence. Where is the muslim outrage over Dafur? Muslims need to put up or shut the f@k up! It was Denmark not Afghanistan! What the f@k has war on terrorism got to do with Denmark? :whatchutalkingabout Muslims can demonstrate peacefully as much as they want in their own lands. Hell they can get violent as well if they want but if they touch foreign embassies then we have every right to be outraged!

You mind your own business , let them mind theirs..

That contradicts what you said :wink_smile: Danes published cartoons in their own magazines. So it had nothing to do with ME magazines. Long live Salman Rushdie! :cake::hysterical:

[Ram]

Someone gets outraged so I should stop expressing my views? Muslims get outraged and piggy banks are taken away from UK banks. Looks like muslims are masters at getting outraged! Denmark is a country where freedom of speech is a given. The cartoons where very accurate in describing Mo anyway. Btw where is the outrage about the Islamic teaching that clearly calls for violence against kaffirs? Muslims have no leg to stand when it comes to outrage over some harmless cartoons when their own hands are covered in real world violence. Where is the muslim outrage over Dafur? Muslims need to put up or shut the f@k up! It was Denmark not Afghanistan! What the f@k has war on terrorism got to do with Denmark? :whatchutalkingabout Muslims can demonstrate peacefully as much as they want in their own lands. Hell they can get violent as well if they want but if they touch foreign embassies then we have every right to be outraged! That contradicts what you said :wink_smile: Danes published cartoons in their own magazines. So it had nothing to do with ME magazines. Long live Salman Rushdie! :cake::hysterical:

The question isnt here about how the Muslims reacted , but should the magazine have published those photos in the first place at all ? Agreed, there was no need for the reaction to be violent, but at the least the photos would have hurt the sentiments of many devout/peaceful muslims. Did anybody think of that ? And you talk about double standards in the way muslim react to things ? ( with ref to Darfur etc) you gotto be kidding me. The western guys are masters of applying double standards where they choose convenient to them. I can rattle off a long list of things to prove that. And where does Denmark come in the war on terror ? ofcourse they do.. They form the third highest component after U.K and U.S in the internationel security assistance force in Afghanistan.

[Gaurav]

The question isnt here about how the Muslims reacted ' date=' but should the magazine have published those photos in the first place at all ? .[/quote'] Not photos they were cartoons. If cartoons of other religious figures can be published then there is absolutely no reason why Mo's cartoon cannot be published. If muslims are not allowed to publish then they should not. End of discussion. Why do Danes have to live by Islamic rules? It's their country and they can publish whatever the f@k they want. Why should a devout muslims sentiment be hurt by what a kaffir publishes?

Agreed, there was no need for the reaction to be violent, but at the least the photos would have hurt the sentiments of many devout/peaceful muslims. Did anybody think of that ?

Well do those devout muslims think of the hurt they cause by following a bigoted book like Quran? Do they care about my sentiments as an atheist? Should such a hate filled book not be banned in the west? What about SENTIMENTS of people like me and other kaffirs? :devil_smile: :hysterical:

And you talk about double standards in the way muslim react to things ? ( with ref to Darfur etc) you gotto be kidding me. The western guys are masters of applying double standards where they choose convenient to them. I can rattle off a long list of things to prove that.

Never said west was free of double standards. That said I would live in west over any Islamic country.

And where does Denmark come in the war on terror ? ofcourse they do.. They form the third highest component after U.K and U.S in the internationel security assistance force in Afghanistan

They are part of NATO. What I meant was that "War on terror" is Amerika ka baccha.

[Ram]

Not photos they were cartoons. If cartoons of other religious figures can be published then there is absolutely no reason why Mo's cartoon cannot be published. If muslims are not allowed to publish then they should not. End of discussion. Why do Danes have to live by Islamic rules? It's their country and they can publish whatever the f@k they want. Why should a devout muslims sentiment be hurt by what a kaffir publishes?

Nope , who called the danes to live by islamic rules ? Its just basic human courtesy to respect the sensitivites of other peoples. How would a Christian or a hindu feel if i walked upto him and said " The Pope/Shankaracharya is a loser " ? Can i justify my act later saying " Well , who cares what you think about it ? its my right say what i feel anyway" ??

Well do those devout muslims think of the hurt they cause by following a bigoted book like Quran? Do they care about my sentiments as an atheist? Should such a hate filled book not be banned in the west? What about SENTIMENTS of people like me and other kaffirs? :devil_smile: :hysterical:

Again , its not a question of how you feel about it , but rather what was the motivation behind the Danish magzine to do this. I am sure they did this JUST to stir up a controversy and increase their publicituy

Never said west was free of double standards. That said I would live in west over any Islamic country.

Well , if you are actually accepting that there are double standards in the west then why point the accusing finger at the muslim world for the way it treated Darfur ? You have openly expressed anger about the way darfur has been handled. In the same vein , have you ever openly expressed your anger at some of open violation of human rights by some of the western nations ?

They are part of NATO. What I meant was that "War on terror" is Amerika ka baccha.

What do you mean ? NATO isnt in afghanistan to build dams and bridges. Afghanistan is one of the frontiers of the war on terrorism. To actually suggest Denmark is a part of NATO but not a part of the war on terrorism is almost laughable !

[Rajiv]

OK, let me get this right That Jamat Ali, whatever acknowledges Knighthood? Cool

[Gaurav]

Nope ' date=' who called the danes to live by islamic rules ? Its just basic human courtesy to respect the sensitivites of other peoples. How would a Christian or a hindu feel if i walked upto him and said " The Pope/Shankaracharya is a loser " ? Can i justify my act later saying " Well , who cares what you think about it ? its my right say what i feel anyway" ?? [/quote'] No one walked upto muslims and forced them to look at the cartoons. Similar cartoons are common in muslim land against the kaffir. Cartoons of Christian and Hindu holy figures are common in the west. You see west in general has put the Christian religious nut jobs in their place. I am not so sure about USA but in Europe at least Christian nut jobs are in the minority. Regarding

How would a Christian or a hindu feel if i walked upto him and said " The Pope/Shankaracharya is a loser "?

...most sensible people in Europe do think that Pope is a looser. Anyone who protects paedophile priests to "maintain" the good name of the catholic church + bans use of condoms is much more than a looser. Shankaracharya I don't know much about. Was he a man of peace? I think from what little I know he was a peaceful chap. Mo on the other hand was not a peaceful guy so the cartoons were accurate in the way they depicted him. If Shankaracharya was violent then I would have no problem if he got depicted as a psycho.

Again , its not a question of how you feel about it , but rather what was the motivation behind the Danish magzine to do this. I am sure they did this JUST to stir up a controversy and increase their publicituy

So what? :lightbulb:

Well , if you are actually accepting that there are double standards in the west then why point the accusing finger at the muslim world for the way it treated Darfur ?

Because when a muslim gets killed by non-muslim then muslims get outraged but when 100 times more get killed by their own then there is deafening silence. West is looking out for itself shouldn't the muslim world do the same and care about the muslim folks in Dafur? I guess black African muslims are inferior to Arab muslim Africans:thumbs_down:

In the same vein , have you ever openly expressed your anger at some of open violation of human rights by some of the western nations ?

Yes I have online and I still do. Just because I am exposing one double standard does not mean that I have to list all the double standards of the world.

What do you mean ? NATO isnt in afghanistan to build dams and bridges. Afghanistan is one of the frontiers of the war on terrorism. To actually suggest Denmark is a part of NATO but not a part of the war on terrorism is almost laughable !

Umm! I was suggesting that "war on terrors" was an American concept. Countries like Denmark etc are mainly in due to the NATO angle. Most Danes are not Bible thumpers driven by religious ideology. I was against war on Iraq but not against war on Taliban. The reasons are obvious why war against Taliban was worthy. Anyway it has nothing to do with freedom of expression with regards to the cartoons. Basically to sum up my stand---> a religion that gets offended every 2 seconds needs to look at the offence it causes to others before it acts like a cry baby! Don't cry when people highlight the basics facts about your religion. Be that Christianity, Islam OR Hinduism! Call for tolerance from any religion that is full of intolerance rings HOLLOW in my book! Muslims do not want kuffars to see what is in their holy scriptures, because they know how damning it is. So the try to twist it, explain it away that it does not mean what it says. Yeah. Right. Like 9:29 does not mean what it says. No sir, Yeah. Right. EDITED the quotes from ROP!

[Gaurav]

Final word to the muslims- Examine your own f@king double standards before you even DARE to be offended by some other person's WORDS! EDIT kar diya quotes ko maine!

[Dhondy]

GKD, I think we agreed that we are not going to discuss religion on these forums? And there aren't even any Muslims around. You arguing with yourself?

[CC1981]

Similar cartoons are common in muslim land against the kaffir.

Yep. There still exists Islamic painting from the Mameluk/Fatimid Khalifat era (now they are in TUrkey's possession due to Turks ruling over them in the Ottoman period) that show kaffir Gods eating children's heads and basically potraying them in more evil light than hindus potray Ravana.

Shankaracharya I don't know much about. Was he a man of peace?

Shankaracharya's character & lifestyle was no different than that of Buddha,Mahavira, Nagarjuna, etc. Despite all the debates and theological/philosophical disputes between hindus/buddhists/jains, Indian SOCIETY always mandated that the 'great teaches'- be them hindu/buddhist/jain/ajivika or whatever- they lead a life of austerity, moderation, utter benevolence & free from material cravings ( carnal or wealth). The difference between Buddha/Sankaracharya/Mahavira etc. was their take on the universe and its 'laws' but not in their day-to-day conduct (atleast, not significantly). You COULD NOT be considered a Godly man in ancient India if you married a child as an old man or waged wars or whatever. EVEN if you completely give up warfare & whatnot later on in life, the most you could rise to was the status of Ashoka- a great, loved, respected & admirable ruler but still not commanding the same respect or reverence as the buddha-mahavira-shankaracharya types.

[CC1981]

Countries like Denmark etc are mainly in due to the NATO angle.

Errr...Denmark isnt 'in' anything except for making LURPIK butter and ghee. Oh and making a cr@pload of bicycles.

a religion that gets offended every 2 seconds needs to look at the offence it causes to others before it acts like a cry baby! Don't cry when people highlight the basics facts about your religion. Be that Christianity, Islam OR Hinduism!

A religion or cult or whatever has full rights to get offended at what they choose to get offended at. They can get offended every 0.0001 seconds or even stay continously offended. I don't deny them the right to take offence. What i deny them the right to is blow shyte up or bomb shyte or kill people to vent their offended state when all that the people killed/bombed/blown up have done is draw something or write something.

[Ram]

GKD.. The essential single point i am tryin to make here is that most of the violent reactions you see in the islamic world is due to the double standards of the people from the west. As Dhondy , we should probably restrict our discussion on this any further, if its ok with you too...

[CC1981]

the violent reactions you see in the islamic world is due to the double standards of the people from the west.

No..the violent reaction we see from Islam is because the founding father of Islam was a violent man. PERIOD. There is no double standards from the people of the west in this- Christianity is SLATED in our daily newspaper cartoon sections...few days ago, we had a pic of Jesus nailing himself on the cross coz nobody could be @rsed ( parody on the declining christian faith)...what exactly happened ? You dont even know about this, i bet...coz unlike Islam, the rest of the world knows how to live & let live.

[The Outsider]

Yaar, GKD what's the point of putting some verses from the Quran here. Even if we ignore the decision not to get into slandering of a religion or its revered, what is the point? There are hardly any Muslim poster here, certainly none versed with the in and outs of the Quran. Even the ones that are here don't come to these fora to discuss the Quran. Wouldn't it have been a simpler and better idea to commend/condemn Rushdie and commend/condemn the protests depending on your idealogy?