English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Awarding a knighthood to SALMAN RUSHDIE has definitly exasperated muslims.

Assassination calls have been made for both of them.

Do you think its right to award such controversial personalities.

I personally think this can spread violence...what do you say?

2007-06-23 12:28:34 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

Osama a mass murdere... Agreed
for your information more than 40 people were killed due to the SATANIC VERSES by Rushdie

2007-06-23 12:37:27 · update #1

yy4me_simphomania : Those who awarded are well aware of the fact that this award can be very very offensive... thats what we call dirty politics.... If no one should be offended then what do u say about awarding OSAMA ?

2007-06-23 13:41:20 · update #2

EvolvedKW: The power of pen is more lethan than sword... Rushdie might not be involved in direct killing but killing were made due to him... its same either way

2007-06-23 13:46:47 · update #3

yy4me_simphomania : Nobody has the right to not to be offended.... Wasnt the mass killings in IRAQ and Afghanistan a result of someone being offended?
Your rule may be okay with you in particular but you still cant generalize it buddy

2007-06-24 10:23:57 · update #4

15 answers

Muslims won't award anythin' to Devils ; But the Enemies of Terrorism (!) might do so as we all know the United States used to support Al-Qaeda before 1998 ! Yes it can spread viloence ; But that's exactly what they meant by doin' it . what do you think ? What makes Salman Rushdi deserve such an award ? Provokin' muslims n causin' many people die ? There're dirty political purposes behind .
BTW Nice Question . keep on askin' .

2007-06-23 12:58:26 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

How many deaths is Rushdie responsible for? None? That's the difference.

What do you think of people who riot and kill to prove how "peaceful" they are?

Why do some theists think that their beliefs are off limits as far as criticism is concerned?

If you don't like what someone says or writes, you are free to say or write a rebuttal. However, you are not free to silence someone because they hurt your feelings.

By the way, I'm not at all impressed by "royalty," or their silly awards.

(Edit)

Rushdie is not responsible for deaths caused by people rioting and/or killing because their feelings are hurt. To suggest that he is is irrational.

(Edit)

"It is inconceivable that those that awarded the knighthood didn't know it would be offensive..."

Do you mean to suggest that no one can do anything if someone might be offended? Are you serious? So what if they're offended? No one has a right to not be offended.


(Edit)

"EvolvedKW: The power of pen is more lethan than sword... Rushdie might not be involved in direct killing but killing were made due to him... its same either way"

You are using an illogical argument to justify people killing others because they've been "offended." No one has the right to not be offended. No one has the right to kill because they've been offended. They do, however, have a right to speak out against what offends them. That's what speech is all about. If, as you wrote, "The power of pen is more lethan than sword...," why don't those who feel "offended" use the pen? Stop trying to justify outrageous behavior.


"yy4me_simphomania : Those who awarded are well aware of the fact that this award can be very very offensive... thats what we call dirty politics.... If no one should be offended then what do u say about awarding OSAMA ?"

I might think they're idiots, but I wouldn't be offended. If I don't respect someone's intellect, their opinion means nothing to me.

I'll say it again: No one has the right to not be offended.

The world does not revolve around your, or anyone's, religion. You do not deserve to be coddled because your feelings might be hurt. Grow up. Get over it.

2007-06-23 19:39:49 · answer #2 · answered by YY4Me 7 · 1 0

I've actually dipped into some of Salman Rushdie's work and he's a very interesting and intelligent writer. He actually won a Booker Prize for Midnight's Children and it's not surprising at all that he was given a knighthood. There are lots of writers, poets, artists etc. who've been given the same for much lesser achievements.

Living in a free country gives you the right to produce works of art that offend others, providing you're not breaking the law in some way. Muslims are hypersensitive over their religion and need to grow thicker skins.

2007-06-23 22:02:32 · answer #3 · answered by EZSum 3 · 2 1

One big difference between Rushdie and OBL is that Rushdie's offense is writing a book while OBL has killed (and directed the killing of) many, many people. OBL is a criminal, not just a "controversial personality". The response to each of these offenses should not be the same. It is not really appropriate in our civilization to respond with violence for words we don't like.

Besides, OBL has received the endorsement of Muslim governments and Muslim people -remember the Taliban for example? Not to mention the thousands of Palestinian Arabs that cheered 9-11 on TV.

2007-06-23 19:44:26 · answer #4 · answered by biblechick45 3 · 1 0

Salman Rushdie is a writer not a terrorist.

Its none of my business if he got the knighthood.

He didnt get it from Muslims did he? why would the Muslims mind?

As for Osama, I will personally make sure he gets my hate mail if ANYONE saw him fit for knighthood.

2007-06-23 19:32:01 · answer #5 · answered by Antares 6 · 3 0

40 people may or may not have been killed in reference to Rushdie's book, the fact remains however, that he didn't kill them. I find it highly unlikely that many if any, of these irate Muslims have even read the book.

I have always been very anti Israel and sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, but the fact is Muslims do get extremely violent and upset out of all proportion to every perceived slight.

They need to grow up and behave like civilized adults if that is how they wish to be treated.

2007-06-23 20:11:40 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I'm sure that "instigated" was not the word you intended to use, but I'll be dipped if I can figure out what word you did intend to use.

I do not favor pussyfooting around or walking on eggs by us or anyone else for the purpose of avoiding "offending" other people who are ultrasensitive and always searching for insults and slights. We don't have time for that and should not allow our focus to be scattered by manufactured pseudo-controversies. Scroom.

2007-06-23 19:38:05 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

I think this was definitely done to set up further tensions between Islam and the west.
It is inconceivable that those that awarded the knighthood didn't know it would be offensive, and I am offended myself, not because I'm a Muslim, but because it has been done in the name of a country in which I have a stake, as a citizen.

2007-06-23 19:36:10 · answer #8 · answered by hog b 6 · 1 2

Elton John is a night...who cares. Last I heard the Queen of England has no power. She is just a figure of tradition. To me the whole Knighthood thing means nothing.

2007-06-23 19:33:41 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

I think Rushdie was deliberately chosen to antagonise muslims, especially Iranians. His work is not particularly of literary note. And what a fortuitous time to give him his knighthood - when relations with Iran have seldom been more strained, and we have a vast army in the next country itching to get the mounting casualties off the front pages.

2007-06-23 19:32:05 · answer #10 · answered by Mordent 7 · 2 3

fedest.com, questions and answers