# Al-Qaeda threat to UK over Salman Rushdie



## jester.

Article

Those of you who have been following the news lately probably know that Queen Elizabeth II has recently granted knighthood to Salman Rushdie in order to honour his achievements in literature.

In 1988, after the publication of the novel "The Satanic Verses", the Iranian government issued a fatwa on Rushdie - a death sentence ordering any muslim to kill Salman Rushdie. He consequently had to live in hiding.

Now that he has been honoured for his achievements, muslims all over the world are once again indignant at Rushdie. And now Al-Qaeda is even threatening a whole country. They're threatening not to take Rushdie's life but also those of other, uninvolved an innocent people.

That makes me wonder how a whole religion can be so immature and ignorant (My PM box is now open for death threats).

I mean there have been insults to and conflicts abour christianity and I don't recall any death sentences issued by the pope or the government of a Christian country.


----------



## cuchuflete

> ...Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osma bin Laden’s deputy, warned that his group was planning a “very precise response” to the British Government’s decision to honour the author...





jester. said:


> That makes me wonder how a whole religion can be so immature and ignorant (My PM box is now open for death threats).



I don't see that the threat issued by one person is a reason to accuse an entire religion of immaturity and ignorance.  Do you make the gross error of assuming that anything said by
an Al Quaida leader is representative of the beliefs and intentions of all Muslims?


----------



## Fernando

Well, Iran is only a part of the muslim world.

Anyhow, it is not a big deal. Al Qaida and/or other fundamentalist Islamist are currently threatening:

- US (a hundred of times or so).
- UK (Irak)
- Denmark (Mahommed's cartoons)
- European Union (for the -mild- support of Denmark)
- Spain (Al Andalus + Afghanistan + Lebanon)
- All other countries with troops in Irak.
- Philippines 
- All Islamic governments, specially Pakistan's and Egypt's.
- Iraq government and officials.
- Sunnies (by fundamentalist Shiites)
- Shiites (by fundamentalist Sunnites)
...

So, I would say that an express fatwa against UK do not add very much.


----------



## jester.

cuchuflete said:


> I don't see that the threat issued by one person is a reason to accuse an entire religion of immaturity and ignorance.  Do you make the gross error of assuming that anything said by
> an Al Quaida leader is representative of the beliefs and intentions of all Muslims?



Now. I'm referring to the fatwa issued in 1988 which ordered all muslims to kill Salman Rushdie.


----------



## ukuca

jester. said:


> That makes me wonder how a whole religion can be so immature and ignorant



Hi, I'm a nonmuslim living in a country which most of its population is Muslim.  I really have to say that this kind of aggressive Muslims take a very small part of the community. Yes, it's possible to say that there's a certain kind of pressure on nonmuslims but do you really think that all muslims are following Al-Qaeda?


----------



## jester.

ukuca said:


> Yes, it's possible to say that there's a certain kind of pressure on nonmuslims but do you really think that all muslims are following Al-Qaeda?




Not necessarily. But I wonder if any muslim has ever publicly condemned Al-Qaeda's actions (I don't know, but I'm very interested).


----------



## zebedee

jester. said:


> Not necessarily. But I wonder if any muslim has ever publicly condemned Al-Qaeda's actions (I don't know, but I'm very interested).



Jester, if you do a google search with: muslim+condemn+al-queda

you'll get back over a million entries including the following:



> First of all, almost all the major Shiite Grand Ayatollahs have condemned Bin Laden and al-Qaeda. You could say that is easy, since Shiites don't generally like Wahhabis. But they are the leaders of 120 million Muslims (some ten percent of the 1.2 billion). etc





> *Qaradawi Rejects Al-Qaeda’s Killing of Innocents
> **Prominent Muslim scholar Dr. Youssef Al-Qaradawi has condemned Al-Qaeda*





> *Spanish Muslims decry Al Qaeda*
> 
> Last Thursday, Spain's Islamic Commission issued a  _fatwa_ condemning Osama bin Laden and his followers.





> An Islamic *Condemnation* of *Al Qaeda* Killings By Mustafa Akyol


*



Resolution of Condemnation by Muslims  Against Al Qaeda, ALL Suicide Bombers and other Terrorists

Click to expand...

*Please feel free to click on these links to find out more for yourself.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

jester. said:


> Now. I'm referring to the fatwa issued in 1988 which ordered all muslims to kill Salman Rushdie.



Yes, but are *all Muslims* subject to a fatwa issued by one Iranian cleric? Are all Christians (or even all Catholics) subject to the Pope?

To claim that an entire religion is "immature and ignorant" due to the publishings of one or two fundamentalist groupings is utterly ridiculous.


----------



## jester.

Oh man, I knew I shoudln't have had started a thread about this religion nonsense. Mods, please close it, it's pointless. And don't worry, I'm not going to participate in Cultural Discussions again. Sorry for bothering you.


----------



## Arrius

I spent a decade and a half treading softly in a muslim country with extreme customs and viewed with dismay Her Majesty's honouring this writer, which was inevitably going to be viewed as provocation.  Rushdie whose works I have never deliberately avoided may be very talented, but the Queen's honours are for achievements that bring her country some good of which this is the antithesis. It is unwise to drop a cigarette end in a gunpowder barrel or tread on a witchdoctor's toe, but both foolish acts may be easily avoided. Unfortunately, H.M. has little choice in what she does and this time her advisers were ill-advised.


----------



## TimLA

Should we back-down in the face of bullies?
Do we change our lives, even a little, because of threats from the irrational?
Should the Queen fear making someone a knight?
These, to me are rhetorical questions...their answers are self-evident.

We are in the midst of the Third World War - only few admit it.
Where are the Winston Churchills of this century?


----------



## Arrius

Should we be held up and inconvenienced at airports because of the extra necessary security precautions?  Should we consider taking a bus instead of the underground so we won't be trapped when a bomb goes off?  Should we think twice about criticising in print the lot of the muslim woman so we are not assassinated in Holland by a fanatic on a bicycle? These are other questions worth pondering.
  I am simply advising caution in what you already regard as a state of war, not a capitulation of our way of life or customs, just as one was careful to keep one's gasmask and steel helmet around and retreat to the air-raid shelter when Winnie was in charge of the war.  Though unlike yourself, I do not think he would have a clue what to do in the present situation, so unlike the world he used to know.


----------



## Outsider

Pedro y La Torre said:


> Yes, but are *all Muslims* subject to a fatwa issued by one Iranian cleric? Are all Christians (or even all Catholics) subject to the Pope?


From what I understand, _fatwas_ are a lot less binding than Papal decrees. Any Muslim "wise man" can issue a _fatwa_. Nobody needs to take any notice of it.

Because of the political context in Iran in 1988, the Ayatollah Khomeini's _fatwa_ aganist Rushdie was very serious. But is Al Qaeda as respected in the Muslim world as Khomeini was? Although I doubt that, it's true that in principle all they need is a couple of fools to fulfil their _fatwa_.

This announcement is a bit odd. With all that's going on in the world, and in their front yard, you'd think Al Qaeda would have greater concerns than a writer. Is this a political move by bin Laden aimed at the Muslim masses? Why such a stunt? Is Al Qaeda feeling a need to win back lost popularity, perhaps?


----------



## elizabeth_b

Personally I think words like respect and diplomacy have been forgotten by today's politicians.  I also agree with the fact that we cannot judge any country, religion, culture etc... based on the behaviour of a few ones


----------



## Athaulf

Outsider said:


> From what I understand, _fatwas_ are a lot less binding than Papal decrees. Any Muslim "wise man" can issue a _fatwa_. Nobody needs to take any notice of it.
> 
> Because of the political context in Iran in 1988, the Ayatollah Khomeini's _fatwa_ aganist Rushdie was very serious. But is Al Qaeda as respected in the Muslim world as Khomeini was? Although I doubt that, it's true that in principle all they need is a couple of fools to fulfil their _fatwa_.



I think that there is a huge difference between Sunni and Shia Muslims in this regard. The former indeed have a totally decentralized structure of religious authority based on the individual reputations of local "wise men", and their fatwas are indeed followed only to the extent that common Muslims individually choose to follow one teacher rather than another who has a different opinion on the same subject. I believe that their _de facto_ situation has been like that since time immemorial, and there hasn't been even a _pro forma_ central authority ever since Turks abolished the office of the caliph in the 1920s. 

However, my understanding is that for Shia Muslims, the rulings of the ayatollahs  (in particular the Grand Ayatollah) have some sort of formal authority akin to what the bishops (headed by the Pope) have in Catholicism. I might be mistaken about this, though; it would be good if someone with some insider knowledge clarified things. 

Note also that Khomeini's death sentence against Rushdie is still in effect -- that has been even formally confirmed several times in recent years. 

On a related note, it's interesting to know that certain Islamic groups believe that even insulting Jesus is a sufficient ground for a similar death sentence. 



> This announcement is a bit odd. With all that's going on in the world, and in their front yard, you'd think Al Qaeda would have greater concerns than a writer. Is this a political move by bin Laden aimed at the Muslim masses? Why such a stunt? Is Al Qaeda feeling a need to win back lost popularity, perhaps?


Well, whatever "Al Quaeda" is in reality -- and it's indeed an extremely elusive entity, assuming it exists at all as a coherent organization of some sort -- they certainly understand that PR comes before anything else in today's world. For a terrorist organization, it's definitely important to use such opportunities to confirm that they are willing not only to use violence against the individuals they dislike in the Western countries, but also to lash out on the general public if they dare to tolerate the presence of those among themselves.


----------



## panjabigator

Athaulf said:


> I think that there is a huge difference between Sunni and Shia Muslims in this regard. The former indeed have a totally decentralized structure of religious authority based on the individual reputations of local "wise men", and their fatwas are indeed followed only to the extent that common Muslims individually choose to follow one teacher rather than another who has a different opinion on the same subject. I believe that their _de facto_ situation has been like that since time immemorial, and there hasn't been even a _pro forma_ central authority ever since Turks abolished the office of the caliph in the 1920s.
> 
> However, my understanding is that for Shia Muslims, the rulings of the ayatollahs  (in particular the Grand Ayatollah) have some sort of formal authority akin to what the bishops (headed by the Pope) have in Catholicism. I might be mistaken about this, though; it would be good if someone with some insider knowledge clarified things.
> 
> Note also that Khomeini's death sentence against Rushdie is still in effect -- that has been even formally confirmed several times in recent years.
> 
> On a related note, it's interesting to know that certain Islamic groups believe that even insulting Jesus is a sufficient ground for a similar death sentence.
> 
> Well, whatever "Al Quaeda" is in reality -- and it's indeed an extremely elusive entity, assuming it exists at all as a coherent organization of some sort -- they certainly understand that PR comes before anything else in today's world. For a terrorist organization, it's definitely important to use such opportunities to confirm that they are willing not only to use violence against the individuals they dislike in the Western countries, but also to lash out on the general public if they dare to tolerate the presence of those among themselves.



As a general comment, I think your definitions of the Sunni and Shi'a community are quite encompassing.  It's very difficult to summarize the differences between them, but I do believe, based off of what I've have read, that this is a good analysis.

Jesus is revered as one of Islam's Prophets and is highly revered by them.  It makes sense to me that they would respect him as much as they respect the Prophet Muhammad, but saying that those who are disrespectful should be punished with death is an extremely fundamentalist statement.  I doubt that mainstream Muslims are in accord with this thought.


Back to the subject of Fatwas.  My understanding is that you can "pick and choose" the ones you choose to follow.  I do not believe that Islam really has an established clergy so really any person can appoint themselves as a designated holy man, and therefore proclaim whatever floats his boat.  I have been on several discussion boards where people have argues over certain fatwas and there importance.  I think the only set-in-stone point lies with the Koran, respective to X Muslim community.


----------



## EmilyD

jester. said:


> I mean there have been insults to and conflicts abour christianity and I don't recall any death sentences issued by the pope or the government of a Christian country.


 

Actually, the Crusades and The Spanish Inquisition come to mind. People who were not Christian were expected to Convert, Leave or Die....

The Pogroms of Eastern Europe? The Czars were "the government" once upon a time...

And, more recently on this side of the pond, "Witches", et cetera were executed..."capital punishment" is still accepted in much of the US (not Rhode Island, however).

I will not be unhappy if this post is deleted or edited or this thread is closed...

N.


----------



## Arrius

_Los reyes católicos,_ Ferdinand and Isabelshowed great intolerance in Spain by kicking out the unconverted Moslems and Jews around 1492, and many of those who did convert also suffered persecution. Although the Moors who had ruled over a large part of Spain for nearly 800 years had squabbles with one another as well as with the Christian kingdoms, they showed an admirable tolerance in their dominions to those of other religions and the revered Jewish savants and Chrisitian artists who flourished among them. Wise men from both non-muslim communities were appointed to important posts in the government, just as happened later under the Ottoman Sultans. It is a crying shame that this admirable liberality which still exists in some places did not become universal in Islam.


----------



## Setwale_Charm

jester. said:


> Oh man, I knew I shoudln't have had started a thread about this religion nonsense. Mods, please close it, it's pointless. And don't worry, I'm not going to participate in Cultural Discussions again. Sorry for bothering you.


 
Dear me!! Jester, I am so glad that you opened this thread and feel free to discuss anything you wish.... I will be most upset if you shut up and decide to avoid the touchy subjects from now on discouraged by the reactions which you might possibly ever encounter, like entire 'politically-correct' generations have learnt to do...
I have nothing against Muslims or any other religion but from the way "the politically-correct" react to this type of issues, I think you raised the issue of quite a different type of fundamentalism with your thread, the fundamentalism which is much more prosperous and , in my opinion - dangerous, today - the fundamentalism of inability to speak your mind and discuss topical issues around you in a way that is different from the slogans you are taught as part of 'tolerance' campaign. 
It is not religions that are immature, it is the majority of those who are so afraid of speaking about it that they are repeating the same old propaganda thing...my, I am sometimes tempted to ask them to invent a different wording at least.


----------



## Setwale_Charm

Outsider said:


> From what I understand, _fatwas_ are a lot less binding than Papal decrees. Any Muslim "wise man" can issue a _fatwa_. Nobody needs to take any notice of it.
> 
> Because of the political context in Iran in 1988, the Ayatollah Khomeini's _fatwa_ aganist Rushdie was very serious. But is Al Qaeda as respected in the Muslim world as Khomeini was? Although I doubt that, it's true that in principle all they need is a couple of fools to fulfil their _fatwa_.
> 
> This announcement is a bit odd. With all that's going on in the world, and in their front yard, you'd think Al Qaeda would have greater concerns than a writer. Is this a political move by bin Laden aimed at the Muslim masses? Why such a stunt? Is Al Qaeda feeling a need to win back lost popularity, perhaps?


 
 Christians have simply gotten over that stage of evolution (and not all, I assure you!! plenty of more fundamentalist ones would beat a most fundamentalist Muslim in a raging-fundamentalism competition).
 But, Outsider, you surely are not seeking logic and obedience to religious
norms among extremists. this is not a philosophy of religion. This is the philosophy of extremism and hatred. As smb rightly put here, it`s a matter of dropping a lit match into a powder keg. 
 The majorityof Muslims are no worse than anybody else, they do not care for the extremist individuals who have run mad among them.. 
 It takes a handful of people to make the chaos rule on earth...


----------



## min300

jester. said:


> Not necessarily. But I wonder if any muslim has ever publicly condemned Al-Qaeda's actions (I don't know, but I'm very interested).


 
Hi there,

I am really sad for what my country is doing in the world. I usually don't write these kind of things, because I am living here and it's dangerous to say an opposite opinion to the ....
Yes. I am shameful for what some people here do or say. 
I have suffered a lot. There are many things I want to say, but ...
Just search about the situation inside my country. They are arresting women, they are cruel even to their own people. I just feel like crying. I wish God could help us.
But I am an ordinary person. There are a lot of people like me in my country,but we are not allowed to express our ideas.


I condemn Al-Qaeda and any selfish fundamentalist and extrimist who wants to harm other people.


----------



## Sepia

It would be something close to a crime to claim that no Muslims are condemning the terrorist actions by Al-Qaeda and others. Clerical persons and politicians are regularly doing so - and at least in Hamburg I hear now and then about people being expelled from their religious communities for spreading extremist propaganda. 

However, do they get as much news coverage as the ones run around killing and torturing people? And when they do, do you pay attention?

I hope that Christian communities also expell members for spreading extremist propaganda, but I have not yet heard of any doing so.


----------



## Nil-the-Frogg

> Hi there,
> 
> I am really sad for what my country is doing in the world. I usually don't write these kind of things, because I am living here and it's dangerous to say an opposite opinion to the ....
> Yes. I am shameful for what some people here do or say.
> I have suffered a lot. There are many things I want to say, but ...
> Just search about the situation inside my country. They are arresting women, they are cruel even to their own people. I just feel like crying. I wish God could help us.
> But I am an ordinary person. There are a lot of people like me in my country,but we are not allowed to express our ideas.
> 
> 
> I condemn Al-Qaeda and any selfish fundamentalist and extrimist who wants to harm other people.


I must say that I feel for you and will remember this post. We tend to forget that freedom of speech isn't a given, even over the web. I hope you will not have to suffer from your opinions.

To me, the war is not raging in a Christendom vs Islam kind of way (I'm not Christian myself, to begin with). The conflict is rather opposing democracy and free-speech to totalitarian doctrines...


----------



## Trisia

Nil-the-Frogg said:


> I must say that I feel for you and will remember this post. We tend to forget that freedom of speech isn't a given, even over the web. I hope you will not have to suffer from your opinions.



May I join in and express my sympathy, Min300? Your post did remind me that I am blessed to be able to speak my mind. 



			
				Nil-the-Frogg said:
			
		

> To me, the war is not raging in a Christendom vs Islam kind of way (I'm not Christian myself, to begin with). The conflict is rather opposing democracy and free-speech to totalitarian doctrines...



I'm afraid, Nil, that those extremists we are discussing here see it more like a matter of true believers versus infidel dogs. Emphasis on extremists, of course.

True, you can't call a religion immature. Still, I'm also getting tired of the same old stuff claiming that cultural/religious paradigms are not compatible, they are not to be compared so on and so forth. Clearly we live in a society with more liberties. The Muslim world doesn't. At least, that's my impression of it.


----------



## Nil-the-Frogg

Trisia said:


> I'm afraid, Nil, that those extremists we are discussing here see it more like a matter of true believers versus infidel dogs. Emphasis on extremists, of course.


Doesn't change a kopek. I mean that you can threaten, kill and torture in the name of Comunism, Islamism, Christianism (  to Trisia)... It still boils down to totalitarian stances.

Now, you can be a communist trying to democratically change society in order to eliminate capitalism. You can be a faithful Muslim or Christian who understands that not everyone share your beliefs. I'm absolutely fine with that (even if I may be strongly opposed to your views: freedom has nothing to do with consensus)

That's why I maintain my view of the conflict: totalitarian ideologies vs freedom. The frontline doesn't follow borders, though, for Western countries are not always exemplary, far from it...


----------

