Lol, they finally got him


Rushdie was a one time vocal backer of the Islamic revolution in Iran and would denounce the USA for the usual valid reasons - "the bandit posing as sheriff"

The islamic Iranian government even bestowed literary prizes upon him - but later on after fatwa he was decried as a crap CIA agent

It's worth noting that the first public protests worldwide against "The Satanic Verses" happened in Bolton and Bradford in the UK - and that most of the worldwide coverage of these was done by the BBC and the British media - which in turn inspired massive protests in India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh that quickly took the matter global despite being in the pre-internet era. Basically it was a controversy fanned into a fireball by British media in the beginning



Anyhow, all the Abrahamic religions are the same shit; Judaism, Islam and the Christian religion - there's no "good" in that poison shamrock - the world would be better place if they all disappeared tomorrow

It wouldn’t be quite so bad, but still terrible, if they would at least make half an effort to read and comprehend their own bloody book. Yet instead, the reliance is on a bunch of holy, but deviant, educated elite to tell the masses what to get upset about. The interpretations and understanding seem to variable and optional, so long as the response is intolerance.

The religion of peace just keeps on giving! Or is that taking?

As for the independent republics of Bolton and bradistan- at least the curry’s are occasionally good.

Digressing. Back on topic. It’s heartening that the brave soul who finally ‘got him’ is being perceived as a hero. Rushdie, a dangerous 75years old. No wonder people are frightened of thinkers..

Legally binding-

Isn’t this the dilemma that faces societies that are still very much fundamentally bound to religious tradition, no matter how much they ascribe to (or claim to) a secular society? Who do they obey?
Which is the higher court and law? God, or the court of the population, guided by god or religion?

Khomeini effectively assumed, with the more fundamental Islamic thinking of the country, the moral high ground of every person under his sway. With it, the attitudes of Iran became more guided by the religious rather then the rational thinking. Ably assisted by a revolution very much driven by a resentment of a ruling establishment which had also fostered a more modern position of Persia in the modern world.
Khomeini issued his fatwa, but didn’t the legal government not fully embrace this, at times? (I know- double negatives)

Fatwa’s, depending on your position- religious (non-secular) or secular, the Fatwa might be regarded as an absolutely legally binding judgement. Overriding any other court, because the ruling is in effect perceived to be that of god. Fatwa are often recognised as being related to sentences of death, where in fact they are an interpretation, binding or otherwise, of a point of law. In their case, Sharia. ( I suppose it might almost be compared with the Supreme Court of the USoA, considering the 2nd amendment and what it means, for instance.)

Except, it’s based on a fallible human being’s interpretation of the very god that they claim to represent and serve. Most times, they’re actually allowing their ego to replace their god, in my not so humble opinion.

The fact that the Fatwa is deemed to be in effect and valid well beyond the borders just goes to demonstrate how very much out of touch with the modern world this cult is.