Was Rushdie granted his knighthood (by Blair's government, the queen has no say in who is to be knighted) in order to antagonise the middle east, particularly Iran? Why was the backlash not considered, at a time when relations with Iran have seldom been more strained? Was it a deliberate sabotage of the nuclear negotiations? Would this also work out to bring public favour against Iran even further, after the Iranian media portray the Queen as "the English hag"?
2007-06-23 02:05:42 · 7 answers · asked by Mordent 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Well , to tell you the truth , I've already read some of Rushdi.
Put apart his ideas , I don't think he's really worth it.
It's been surely for some politics.
2007-06-23 02:18:10 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
What Britian desperate replaced into their inner decision and you may say they had all the rigt to make that decision. even with the undeniable fact that, interior the ambience of those days the place fairly some non secular sensitivities exist and with the greater effective tensions, it replaced into not an exceptionally sensible element to do. additionally that's against the diplomatic ettiquette of a rustic. apart from, somebody who's literary accumen is purely that he has ridiculed one faith (and accomplished it continuously and with this sole objective), what variety of literary success or centers does he get known for via this knighthood? Or replaced into it a attractiveness for featuring a distorted photograph of Islam which might justify West's hatred for the religion? His very own present day writers (Roald Dahl to cite one) criticised his writings on the time they have been revealed via calling them mischief and dishonesty to literature.
2016-12-08 17:16:06 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
do you have all of the mitigating circumstances to
draw a conclusion?
does Knighthood..mean anything outside of the UK?
didn't Knights go fight in the Crusades?
Rushdie has certainly taken on Islam..which all anyone has to do is look cross-eyed at them.
and been very brave in doing so.
.as far as Iran?..they are the ones that decided to break treaties..which seems to mean little to anyone..unless they are about GreenHouse gasses.
2007-06-23 02:35:55 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why should we care about antagonizing the middle east ?
Do you really think they care about antogonizing us ?
What does the Knighthood of Salman Rushdie have to do with any country in the mideast ?
Did it effect them in anyway ?
Your trying to give mideast countries way to much power and authority to tell the west, what the west can do in thier own countries, that has no effect on the mideast.
If the mullah's in the mideast, said the west should close down all Christian church's, do you think the west should do that?
So we wouldn't antogonize the middle east ?
2007-06-23 03:43:27 · answer #4 · answered by jeeper_peeper321 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, It's got New World Order written all over it- next stop WWIII.
2007-06-23 04:16:15 · answer #5 · answered by celvin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Everything antagonizes the middle east. We should stop doing everything for fear some idiot over there wont like it.
2007-06-26 06:26:48 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, that is exactly the reason!
2007-06-23 02:10:01 · answer #7 · answered by Monk 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋