Religion & Spirituality3 mins ago
Salman Rushdie To Blame For The Attack On Him…
…says Iran.
//Iran's state broadcaster daily Jaam-e Jam highlighted the news that Rushdie might lose an eye following the attack, saying "an eye of the Satan has been blinded"….. Iran's foreign ministry spokesperson Nasser Kanaani - giving the country's first official reaction - said Tehran "categorically" denied any link, adding "no-one has the right to accuse the Islamic Republic of Iran".
However, he said freedom of speech did not justify Mr Rushdie insulting religion in his writing.
"In this attack, we do not consider anyone other than Salman Rushdie and his supporters worthy of blame and even condemnation," the spokesman said during his weekly press conference in Tehran.
"By insulting the sacred matters of Islam and crossing the red lines of more than 1.5 billion Muslims and all followers of the divine religions, Salman Rushdie has exposed himself to the anger and rage of the people." //
https:/
Anyone still in doubt about motive?
//Iran's state broadcaster daily Jaam-e Jam highlighted the news that Rushdie might lose an eye following the attack, saying "an eye of the Satan has been blinded"….. Iran's foreign ministry spokesperson Nasser Kanaani - giving the country's first official reaction - said Tehran "categorically" denied any link, adding "no-one has the right to accuse the Islamic Republic of Iran".
However, he said freedom of speech did not justify Mr Rushdie insulting religion in his writing.
"In this attack, we do not consider anyone other than Salman Rushdie and his supporters worthy of blame and even condemnation," the spokesman said during his weekly press conference in Tehran.
"By insulting the sacred matters of Islam and crossing the red lines of more than 1.5 billion Muslims and all followers of the divine religions, Salman Rushdie has exposed himself to the anger and rage of the people." //
https:/
Anyone still in doubt about motive?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It's a dreadful book, TTT. Rubbish. Pure fantasy and rotten reading. But it is based on verses that allegedly came from Satan which Muhammad, having mistakenly assumed them to be divine revelation involving other Gods apart from Allah, is said to have added to the Koran. They were subsequently removed - some say they never existed - and Islam prefers not to mention them at all.
There is another theory as to their existence or otherwise, and their purpose, which, in my opinion, is far more likely - but that's another story for another day.
There is another theory as to their existence or otherwise, and their purpose, which, in my opinion, is far more likely - but that's another story for another day.
No idea if the assailant has specified his reasons but if there was anyone one might compare to a devil in this it is the one who committed the assault plus all those who pushed for it, and those who express support for it using poor, invalid excuses as justification. I'm unaware that any of those "Satans" are at risk of losing use of an eye.
If a religion is so insecure, and reacts so immorally to a perceived slight, then it is clearly a religion built on unstable foundations, and so scared of being uncovered as such that they can tolerate nothing that doesn't unquestionable praise it.
In any event, if there is any justice, or if karma is a thing, each and every one of those mentioned above will need to justify their abominable actions and opinions to their deity, regardless what name they call them. They should contemplate how that would likely go, rather than how they'd like it to go.
If a religion is so insecure, and reacts so immorally to a perceived slight, then it is clearly a religion built on unstable foundations, and so scared of being uncovered as such that they can tolerate nothing that doesn't unquestionable praise it.
In any event, if there is any justice, or if karma is a thing, each and every one of those mentioned above will need to justify their abominable actions and opinions to their deity, regardless what name they call them. They should contemplate how that would likely go, rather than how they'd like it to go.
// Freedom of thought is not encouraged within Islam.//
nope
see: https:/
it was then, it is useful to ask why it isnt now
nope
see: https:/
it was then, it is useful to ask why it isnt now
//Did Norman Tebbit, who notoriously attacked Rushdie for being a traitor to his roots, ever recant?//
Don’t know, but there's an interesting article here and some equally worrying opinions on the burning of the book - and some equally worrying realities.
//The then Archbishop of Canterbury Robert Runcie wailed about “the offence” done to the “followers of Islam” while his successor George Carey said that “we must be more tolerant of Muslim anger”. Labour’s Deputy Leader Roy Hattersley, himself a distinguished writer, called for the publication of the paperback to be withdrawn.
Shirley Williams of the Liberal Democrats said the protection for Rushdie was “a waste of taxpayers’ money” and his knighthood was “a mistake” because he had “offended Muslims in a deep and personal way”. //
https:/
Don’t know, but there's an interesting article here and some equally worrying opinions on the burning of the book - and some equally worrying realities.
//The then Archbishop of Canterbury Robert Runcie wailed about “the offence” done to the “followers of Islam” while his successor George Carey said that “we must be more tolerant of Muslim anger”. Labour’s Deputy Leader Roy Hattersley, himself a distinguished writer, called for the publication of the paperback to be withdrawn.
Shirley Williams of the Liberal Democrats said the protection for Rushdie was “a waste of taxpayers’ money” and his knighthood was “a mistake” because he had “offended Muslims in a deep and personal way”. //
https:/
oh good memory
yes the books Midnights Children and Satanic Verses were full of sly little comments about his adopted home ( er England that is! readers) which caused a lot of adverse comment on
ingratitude and rudeness
I think he even managed to be ungracious about his close protection and so when he left..... there was little regret
but that was years ago boys and girls
so long ago you all forgot until 5 mins ago
yes the books Midnights Children and Satanic Verses were full of sly little comments about his adopted home ( er England that is! readers) which caused a lot of adverse comment on
ingratitude and rudeness
I think he even managed to be ungracious about his close protection and so when he left..... there was little regret
but that was years ago boys and girls
so long ago you all forgot until 5 mins ago
usual thing
people who write books may not be nice people
Dickens at one point was er kissing a 19 y old ( she died) in his house along with his complaining dissatisfied ( admirablu unsuited to each other) wife
well blimey she had a bit to complain about ! ( boggle eyed like Judge judy but without the brooklyn accent)
people who write books may not be nice people
Dickens at one point was er kissing a 19 y old ( she died) in his house along with his complaining dissatisfied ( admirablu unsuited to each other) wife
well blimey she had a bit to complain about ! ( boggle eyed like Judge judy but without the brooklyn accent)
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.