Jump to content
Islamic Forum
dot

British Queen Made A Mockery Of Herself

Recommended Posts

I Read it , It s filled with filth & garbage , He even Had a wet dream of the Queen in the Book , no wonder he is being Knighted .

 

He uses the Filthy "F" word more than 100 times in the Book I guess thats why westerners like him .

 

He Said that White Women are made for one thing Only ............... ?

 

But i think this is all art to the west , since they live in moral less societies to start with .

 

You are familiar with the concept of fiction? You realise that an author might not actually agree with everything his characters say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds
I Read it , It s filled with filth & garbage , He even Had a wet dream of the Queen in the Book , no wonder he is being Knighted :sl: .

 

He uses the Filthy "F" word more than 100 times in the Book I guess thats why westerners like him .

 

He Said that White Women are made for one thing Only ............... ?

 

But i think this is all art to the west , since they live in moral less societies to start with .

 

I see ideas such as symbolism, context, character personality, irony and mystisicm mean nothing to you. But then I guess thats why his book was so popular seeing as one of the major themes was about ppl who dont think, they simply act in a self-righteous manner never questioning. This thread is a wonderful example

 

As for your last comment, I find it deliciously ironic you have a selective memory of current events when you compare 'the west' to the failure that us the muslim states of today

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We know that the satanic Salman Rushdie who write the infamous 'Satanic Verses' to slander and insult Islam are supported by the satanic West. And today the satanic West admits that the satanic West is behind the 'Satanic Verses' by awarding the satanic third class writer with knighthood, for his satanic works of insulting Islam and our beloved prophet Muhammad. It is an irony that the satanic Salman Rusdie has no guts to debate!

 

This satanic conspiracy is exposed now !!! I think Queen Elizabeth should award the writer and the producer of Da Vinci Code with knighthood, for their works of insulting Christianity and Jesus. I think the Christians would be happy to support the naive Queen and celebrate the award! God never save the Queen!

Edited by wiseguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We know that the satanic Salman Rushdie who write the infamous 'Satanic Verses' to slander and insult Islam are supported by the satanic West. And today the satanic West admits that the satanic West is behind the 'Satanic Verses' by awarding the satanic third class writer with knighthood, for his works of insulting Islam and our beloved prophet Muhammad.

 

This satanic conspiracy is exposed now !!! I think Queen Elizabeth should award the writer and the producer of Da Vinci Code with knighthood, for their works of insulting Christianity and Jesus. I think the Christians would be happy to support the naive Queen and celebrate the award!

 

Actually, the original Satanic Verses was written by Ibn Ishaq. So its muslims slandering muslims....well in this case ancient Muslim scholars.

 

Do your research

Link *Edited*

{Moderator note}

This post violated forum rule #03. Action taken. View (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php?act=boardrules"]details[/url].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, the original Satanic Verses was written by Ibn Ishaq. So its muslims slandering muslims....well in this case ancient Muslim scholars.

 

Do your research Link Removed

Do your research and visit answering-Islam lol. Btw, your link doesn't mention anything about Ibn Ishaq?

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, the original Satanic Verses was written by Ibn Ishaq. So its muslims slandering muslims....well in this case ancient Muslim scholars.

 

Do your research Link Removed

 

MY COMMENT:

 

I have gone to this anti-Islam website many times to read its articles only to find that the articles are all lies that are invented by to slander and insult Islam. If you use this garbage as your reference, you should be ashamed of yourself for being an ignorant man. And I will not give a damn to your garbage and the bigoted and immoral priests of the garbage!

 

All the lies of the garbage have been refuted by you are not allowed to post links yetanswering-christianity(contact admin if its a beneficial link) !!!

 

Rebuttals and Responses to anti-Muslims' articles (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetanswering-christianity(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/ac8.htm#links"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetanswering-christianity(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/ac8.htm#links[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think Queen Elizabeth should award the writer and the producer of Da Vinci Code with knighthood

 

She can't. He is American and not eligible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peace,

 

She can't. He is American and not eligible.

 

 

bummer :sl:

 

 

 

 

:sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How the hell does someone come here and try to deny the fact that this book makes a mockery of Islam? Oh, I know. They don't know anything about Islam.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peace,

 

Satanic Verses is an expression coined by the historian Sir William Muir in reference to several verses allegedly interpolated into an early version of the Qur'ān and later expunged. The story of these verses can be read in, among other places, al-Wāqidī and al-Tabarī's recension of Ibn Ishaq's biography of Muhammad, the Sīrat Rasul Allah, believed to date 120-130 years after the death of Muhammad. The authenticity of the Satanic verses has been disputed by the earliest Muslim historians.

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Satanic_Verses"]Wikipedia[/url]

 

I can appreciate why an anti-Islamic web-site is the wrong place to look to find information on Islam but in this instance the information appears to be correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are talking about the satanic Salman Rushdie who is being supported and protected by the satanic West for writing 'The Satanic Verses'. It is a satanic conspiracy between a satanic writer and his Western masters to slander and insult Islam.

 

Who is Salman Rushdie?

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetmediamonitors(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/firasalatraqchi2.html"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetmediamonitors(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/firasalatraqchi2.html[/url]

 

According to a critique by John Esposito, Rushdie insulted and slandered 1.6 billion Muslims with passages in The Satanic Verses "that questioned the authenticity of the Quran, ridiculed the Prophet and the contents of the Quran and referred to Muhammad as "Mahound," a term used in the past by Christian authors to vilify Muhammad. The book also had prostitutes assuming the identity and names of Muhammad's wives, and the very Quranic symbol for their seclusion and protection, "the Curtain," is transformed into the image of a brothel, which men circumambulate as worshipers do the sacred shrine (Kaaba) during the pilgrimage to Mecca. "

 

Is this literature or simple Islamphobia? I am reminded of the artistic rendering of Mary using elephant faeces in the Met in New York in 1998. Then-Mayor Guiliani saw it as highly provocative and an insult to the Catholic community and had it removed. I am also reminded of the incessant ridicule and harassment mitigated to anyone who questions the Holocaust. Why then is it an expression of freedom when Rushdie so intricately defames the entire notion of Islam?

 

In 1997, famed auteur-extraordinaire John le Carré criticised Rushdie’s attacks on Islam when he stated; "My position was that there is no law in life or nature that says great religions may be insulted with impunity." Rushdie responded to le Carré by calling him a pompous ###### and that any defense of the Islamic outcry is a "philistine, reductionist, radical Islamist line that The Satanic Verses was no more than an "insult," and ... anyone who displeases philistine, reductionist, radical Islamist folk loses his right to live in safety."

 

In 1993, prolific religious studies author Karen Armstrong is quoted as saying; "Up came all these neo-crusaders defending the cause of free speech, but from a standpoint of ignorance. They were protesting against the burning of the Satanic Verses as if the Christians had never ever set fire to books with which they disagreed. I was forced to ask my friends why the blasphemy laws in England only applied to Christianity."

Edited by wiseguy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl: dear muslims

 

This is just retarded now.

 

If you're not Muslim, you are not going to be offended,

 

What authority do you have to decide if someone can be offended or not.

 

Just because its Religion ,which you may not take seriously, does not make it invalid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"In fact, the "Satanic Verses" is not a historical event at all. Ibn Ishaq, Wakidi, Ibn Sa'd, and Tabari record it as it was categorized even at that time: a rumor without a source, a "high flying claim" without any appeal to authenticity, and NOT as a historical fact with a chain of reliable narrators.

 

This is critical to point out since many orientalists consider it as a fact.

 

The actual incident took place as follows: The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was reciting the Chapter of the Qur'an called "Al Najm" during which the pagans were so awed by it they prostrated. A rumor began that the reason they prostrated was because of a verse that appealed to their false deities, which has no authentic source whatsoever because in fact those that prostrated later became Muslim and had prostrated out of awe of the recitation.

 

In fact, the alleged Satanic verses do not even match the style in the Qur'an and are contradicted in the directly following verses of the Qur'an in which the spurious claims allege they were uttered. So not only do they fail the challenge of the Qur'an in every way, but the allegation is not even sustainable according to the text of the very chapter of the Qur'an, chapter 53 in case you wanted to check it out, it's short.

 

Not only that, but the alleged revelation that repealed the fraudulent verses actually was NINE years after this event, which further shows that the person who built the story around the repealing verse did not know when it was actually revealed or the implications of his lie."

 

For more information:

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetislamic-awareness(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/Polemics/sverses.html"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetislamic-awareness(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/Polemics/sverses.html[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peace,

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Satanic_Verses"]Wikipedia[/url]

 

I can appreciate why an anti-Islamic web-site is the wrong place to look to find information on Islam but in this instance the information appears to be correct.

 

There are two different things. Satanic verses, the phrase, and The Satanic Verses, the book. It's the book that we have a problem with.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you've read the book - and have a concept of what fiction is - you'll know that Rushdie explores Islam (among many other things, the main one being the immigrant experience in the UK), not insults it. Ultimately, though, it's a work of art and therefore only judgeable as such.

 

(Did Christians really get upset about 'The Da Vinci Code'? I didn't notice.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peace everyone

Defending salman rushdie is the last thing you can post in an Islamic forum. This topic had a few of those. Anyone else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think that defending Rushdie is the same thing as defending an insult to Islam or blasphemy? It seems to me that the posters who 'defended' him were not in fact doing that, they were disputing the judgement that the book is insulting or blasphemous. Is that against the rules?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you've read the book - and have a concept of what fiction is - you'll know that Rushdie explores Islam (among many other things, the main one being the immigrant experience in the UK), not insults it. Ultimately, though, it's a work of art and therefore only judgeable as such.

 

If you've read the Qur'an and have a concept of what Islam is, you would realize that the book makes a complete mockery of Islam. And how does a book of FICTION explore something when it is based on an utter lie?

 

What part of Islam is expored in this book? Enghten us please, since you are oh-so educated.

 

Summary given on wiki, for those interested. Dare to disagree.

 

The novel consists of a frame narrative, using elements of magical realism, interlaced with a series of sub-plots that are narrated as dream visions experienced by one of the protagonists. The frame narrative, like many other stories by Rushdie, involves Indian expatriates in contemporary England. The two protagonists, Gibreel Farishta and Saladin Chamcha, are both actors of Indian Muslim background. Farishta is a Bollywood superstar who specializes in playing Hindu deities. Chamcha is an emigrant who has broken with his past Indian identity and works as a voice over specialist in England.

 

At the beginning of the novel, both are trapped in a hijacked plane during a flight from India to Britain. The plane explodes over the English Channel, but the two are magically saved and float down to the English coast unharmed. In a miraculous transformation, the two are reborn; Farishta takes on the personality of the archangel Gibreel, and Chamcha, that of a devil. Farishta's transformation can be read on a realistic level as the delusional symptom of the protagonist's developing schizophrenia.

 

Both characters struggle to piece their broken lives back together. Farishta seeks and finds his lost love, the English mountaineer Allie Cone, but their relationship is overshadowed by his mental illness. Chamcha, having miraculously regained his human shape, now bears a revengeful hatred towards Farishta for having forsaken him after their common fall from the hijacked plane. Chamcha takes revenge on him by fostering Farishta's pathological jealousy and thus destroying his relationship with Allie. In another moment of crisis, Farishta realizes what Chamcha has done, but forgives him and even saves his life.

 

Both later return to India. Farishta, still suffering from his illness, kills Allie in another outbreak of jealousy and then commits suicide. Chamcha, who has found not only forgiveness from Farishta but also reconciliation with his estranged father and his own Indian identity, decides to remain in India.

 

Embedded in this story is a series of half-magic dream vision narratives, ascribed to the disturbed mind of Gibreel Farishta. They are linked together by many thematic details as well as by the common motif of divine revelation, religious faith and fanaticism, and doubt.

 

One of these sequences contains most of the elements that have been criticized as offensive to Muslims. It is a transformed re-narration of the life of the prophet Muhammad (called "Mahound" or "the Messenger" in the novel) in Mecca ("Jahilia"). At its centre is the episode of the "Satanic Verses", in which the prophet first pronounces a revelation in favour of the old polytheistic deities in order to win over the population, but later renounces this revelation as an error induced by Shaitan. There are also two fictional opponents of the "Messenger": a demonic heathen priestess, Hind, and an irreverent skeptic and satirical poet, Baal. When the prophet returns to the city in triumph, Baal organises an underground brothel where the prostitutes assume the identities of the prophet's wives. Also, one of the prophet's companions claims that he, doubting the "Messenger"'s authenticity, has subtly altered portions of the Qur'an as they were dictated to him.

 

The second sequence tells the story of Ayesha, an Indian peasant girl who claims to be receiving revelations from the Archangel Gibreel. She entices all her village community to embark on a foot pilgrimage to Mecca, claiming that they will be able to walk on foot across the Arabian Sea. The pilgrimage ends in a catastrophic climax as the believers all walk into the water and disappear, amid disturbingly conflicting testimonies from observers about whether they just drowned or were in fact miraculously able to cross the sea.

 

A third dream sequence presents the figure of a fanatic expatriate religious leader, the "Imam", set again in a late-20th-century setting. This figure is a transparent allusion to the life of Ayatollah Khomeini in his Parisian exile, but it is also linked through various recurrent narrative motifs to the figure of the "Messenger".

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/The_Satanic_Verses"]Wikipedia[/url]

Edited by Layna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you think that defending Rushdie is the same thing as defending an insult to Islam or blasphemy? It seems to me that the posters who 'defended' him were not in fact doing that, they were disputing the judgement that the book is insulting or blasphemous. Is that against the rules?

 

They're not disputing the judgement. They're SAYING that it is neither insulting or blasphemous (by the way, you should probably remove "blasphemous", because it doesn't get any more blasphemous than this).

 

If that isn't a case of defending something, then obviously we need to refer back to a dictionary.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Wiki summary is pretty good, although necessarily a bit shallow. I really and honestly don't see how having a FICTIONAL CHARACTER hold a blasphemous viewpoint is proof than an author or a book is blasphemous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wiki summary is pretty good, although necessarily a bit shallow. I really and honestly don't see how having a FICTIONAL CHARACTER hold a blasphemous viewpoint is proof than an author or a book is blasphemous.

 

Because the characters, plots and the names allude to people and situations in Islam. They're not portrayed in a good light, Islam is made out to be a religion of superstition and based on mistakes. How much more blasphemy do you people need before you simply admit that it is meant to depict Islam in an UNTRUE manner? It is a book of lies masquerading as a work of fiction. The fact that it is written by an ex-Muslim who is well-known for his animosity toward Islam does it no justice.

 

Salam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ALL religions which believe in the supernatural are fairly accused of superstition by non-believers. You really can't complain about that.

 

Writing about religious belief/disbelief has got to be permissable, and it's unfair to expect an ex-Muslim to write about a different religion. From my reading of Satanic Verses his qualms are about faith and belief in general, not especially Islam. As the 'walking across the sea to Mecca' theme shows, Rushdie does not totally dismiss possibility (or at least the 'poetic' possibility) of the supernatural.

 

I seriously doubt that Rushdie 'lies" (in the sense that he believes what he says is true to be in fact untrue) about Islam, with the proviso that this is a work of art. It is not meant to be a literal manifesto of the author's beliefs.

 

(Just as a disclaimer, much as I enjoy talking about literature and how Rushdie probably isn't the blasphemer you think he is, for me the bottom line is that threatening to kill someone for something they think/speak/write is unjustifiable. The same goes for merely banning works of art.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(Did Christians really get upset about 'The Da Vinci Code'? I didn't notice.)

Yes, they did.

 

I didn't notice.

And why it doesn't surprise me?

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no big deal really. one man's meat is another man's poison. the queen may drool over rushdi's books and one may drool over princess diana's short life :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are familiar with the concept of fiction? You realise that an author might not actually agree with everything his characters say?

 

 

Islam Is not Fiction Freind , You make fun of it , You have to deal with it .

 

And Rushdie will get whats coming to him sooner or later , Or he will die a Slow death like that PIG SHaron is :sl: .

 

The worms are eating off his carcass while he is on that life support .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×