I see radical islam is up to its familiar ways. Salman Rushdie is being threatened with death (again). This time it is for having the temerity to be granted a knighthood by the Queen.
Four issues here for me.
First, if this is such an insult to muslims, why is it Salman Rushdie being threatened? Why not threaten the person who conferred the honour upon him? Despite widespread allegations of cash for honours in the political sphere, one is almost sure that Rushdie did not ask or pay for this honour. If there is any blame, it should not lie with him. True, effigies of the Queen have been burnt, but if the anger is because this man is being honoured, and if death threats should be made as a result, perhaps the Queen (or the civil servants who draw up these lists) would be the logical target.
Second, has the islamic world been in a deep slumber for the past few years, from which it has only just been awakened by news of the knighthood? They act as though they have been suffering from some collective amnesia, and have only yesterday remembered Rushdie’s ‘grave insult’ to their religion. If Rushdie’s ‘insult’ was so great as to warrant him being killed, I fail to see why honouring him would make him any more deserving of death. So, after the initial fuss, why no loud protests all these years as the ‘infidel’ lived amongst us? Why only start baying loudly when he is knighted? It is a desperate attempt to get cheap publicity, or even worse, to bully the West to conform to islamic values. It is, after all, already a few months since the last islamic ‘outrage’, that involving Pope Benedict and his candid words about islam. About time for another outrage, then.
Third, perhaps, just perhaps, Rushdie’s honour was conferred on him in recognition of his life’s work, and not just for Satanic Verses. Even if we were to accept (which I do not) that insulting islam is such a terrible thing, are these mad mullahs suggesting that one man’s life be judged solely on the basis of one act? That is a very stupid and ignorant way to think.
Fourth, this is not an islamic country; we can honour whomever we choose, in accordance with whatever values we think fit.
June 18th, 2007 at 10:09 pm
I agree Bel, though I can’t help feeling his knighthood is semi-political.
Red rag to a bull, maybe?
June 18th, 2007 at 10:13 pm
I don’t know what all the fuss is about. First the Muslims in Iran awarded Salman Rushdie a fatwa in recognition for his literary work The Satanic Verses, and now they complain when the British award him a Knighthood for his literary work.
June 18th, 2007 at 10:34 pm
How can you blaspheme against a historic pedophile?
June 18th, 2007 at 10:48 pm
I hear that “The Satanic Verses” is a bit of a dull book, and only really sold in numbers so that people could burn it and then to rubber neckers who wanted to see what it was about then wished they hadn’t.
If the Mad mullahs had complained on the grounds that the book was crap, and quite possibly Salman was nothing more that a pretentious author who appeals to the literati I would agree, but in the final analysis we decide who to give our honours to, and they can b*gger off!
June 19th, 2007 at 3:13 am
Whilst I have no particular interest in Sir Salman’s novels I am pleased to see him honoured as his knighthood demonstrates that whilst honouring our own we will not be intimidated or influenced by outside political pressures.
It is of course ludicrous to claim that this honour is “an obvious example of fighting against Islam by high-ranking British officials.” Were this true we would not have seen a 2005 knighthood bestowed by The Queen upon Sir Iqbal Sacranie, Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain, described by The Guardian as the “Most Influential Muslim in the UK”.
Rather than criticise the British government, Iran should congratulate Britain for having recently raised a number of British Muslims to the highest ranks of British Society as members of the House of Lords. These include Lord Ahmed of Rotherham, the first Muslim peer; Lord Patel of Blackburn, leader of the British Hajj Delegation; Baroness Falkner of Margravine; and Baroness Uddin of Bethnal Green. See my blog for more: http://www.bloggingyoungfogey.blogspot.com
June 19th, 2007 at 2:06 pm
Superb post, Bel.
Have you noticed that just about everything we do in the West these days is, “calculated to insult Islam”?
My walking around veil-less, that’s an insult, my Convention right of freedom of expression, that’s an insult and my Sovereign exercising her constitutional powers- that’s an insult to these muppets too.
What makes me weep is that there is always some Hackney luvvie ready to wring his hands and suggest that we start apologise for breathing.
I’m still waiting for my apology from Pakistan for the importation of honour killing of women and girls to this country and for their breathtaking misogyny generally.
I could be waiting a long time- but at least I won’t be threatening to blow myself and others up on the underground in the meantime.
June 19th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
I’m still waiting for my apology from Pakistan for the importation of honour killing of women and girls to this country and for their breathtaking misogyny generally.
Well said!
June 19th, 2007 at 4:10 pm
I haven’t read anything by Salman Rushdie, but I supect it was more of a political nomination. The trouble is that they are all knocked together (the honours list)by the PM and then presented to ERII as a done deal.
June 19th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
I tried reading SV. It was just too dull. I see that a Pakistani government Minister has used this knighthood to justify suicide killings.
Interesting interpretation…
June 19th, 2007 at 6:24 pm
People like that will use anything to justify suicide killings.
That is something they already want to do; all that they lack is an excuse.
June 19th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
Nicely put and totally agree.
June 20th, 2007 at 8:44 am
i think in this maybe am showing my mixed politicalness. Yes I agree we should be able to give knighthoods to whoever we choose
Yes i agree that periodically deciding that somebody deserves death is a little extreem and is something to be frowned upon
Yes i agree that wether or not salmon rushdie is a good or evil man is no different today, last week, last month.All thats changed is perception and his visability/publicity.
so am left wil two small points that I divert on.
Firstly this idea that each year we have to find ‘n’ worthy people of knighthood. I get that its the queens birthday and all but wouldnt it make more common sence to award knighthoods through the year as and when merited rather than having to ‘look’ for candidates?
Secondly as already pointed out, while freedom of speech is valuable, there are some things that we all KNOW would cause offence to one portion of society or another, and there will always be somebody that is offended by something, but when there has been this much tension over one person, and when awarding a knighthood is likely to cause additional problems, one simple question, is the reason for awarding the knite hood based purely on worthyness, or is it a red flag, s it a statement of indipendance, and is it intended to enrage tensions.
For myself i’ve never met the man, I’ve not read his book, He deserves freedom and liberty as do we all, am not convinced he deserves to be placed ona pedistall either as an example or as an obvious target.
June 20th, 2007 at 8:55 am
to link back to your previous post bel, if there was a veil of ignorance on the selction committe, if it consisted of a range of british nationals , from religious zellots, agnostics of all persuasions , would the choice of salmon rushdie have been fair and just, is there a person that could be awarded a knighthood that all would consider worthy? or as i suspect is the reality the same as for picking laws. There are no perfect selections, but maybe you can apease the masses by a collection of laws, a collection of knighthoods that when taken together are balanced. Is there no member of the muslim comunity deserving of knighthood? Is there nobody that is equally disliked by another part of society. In life if you are going to damage a person in some way its always helpfull if you can also benifit them in another way - its only fair.
Now before i start my work for the day, one final thought, regardless of wether you could find a just selction of laws, regardless of wether you could find a worthy selection of men and women for the queens honour list, if the prsss focus on just one aspect of that selection its always going to appear biased, not because the selction is , but because the media fosters tunnel vision.
I guess all i am saying is that regardless of wether laws or knighthoods are just, whats equallyif not more important is that they are percieved to be just and fair, and at the end of the day, its the media, press and spin that determine the justness of society.
June 20th, 2007 at 5:34 pm
(Whistling innocently) Accidently tagged you Bel.
Don’t know how it happened…
June 20th, 2007 at 7:31 pm
Has anyone noticed the similarity between Dame Jade Goody and Sir Salmon?
Both have brought a lot of money to media interests both get death threats, both induce burning protests in ex-colonies, both have interesting “partners”, both have rudely challenged “sacred cows”.
June 26th, 2007 at 9:33 pm
I havnt read any writings of SR.But the point is this:We have many problems on this earth to solve..why should we give so importance on the honour conferred on a person who has tried to axe the belief of a certain community?