Level Extreme platform
Subscription
Corporate profile
Products & Services
Support
Legal
Français
Mr. President, I'm headed to Mexico
Message
 
 
General information
Forum:
Politics
Category:
Other
Miscellaneous
Thread ID:
01112837
Message ID:
01115447
Views:
15
>>>Are you sure it's just cos he's a muslim? Why him in particular? Not because of his views and statements? For example, some 10 years ago he supported the fatwah on Salman Rushdie because of his book, "The Satanic Verses" I used to be a Cat Stevens fan but after that I stopped listening to his music (and to think he's of Greek origin).
>>
>>I remembered Salman Rushdie in UK. Why Y. Islam's visit to USA might be a threat with Rusdie?
>
>Not a threat to Rushdie. Y Islam has been expressing Islamic ideas sympathetic with acts of terror by islamic extremists. Therefore he's persona non grata in the USA.
>
>>
>>And I know Y. Islam as a sunni. This fatwah's owner is Ayetullah Humeyni. Humeyni was a shi'a. A sunni don't care about a shia's fatwah. Did you read any comment about it from Y. Islam?
>
>This was all years ago. I can't remember the details. I recall he was sympathetic with the fatwah.
>
>>
>>However any muslim cannot think about Rushdie about that book. Because he used so hard words about Islam in that book. He tried a big challenge.
>
>Before the muslim world came out in protest, baying for his blood, just how many:
>
>1. had actually read it, given the short time it had been out
>2. could actually get hold of a copy, to judge for themselves
>3. even if they COULD have got one, could have actually read it?
>
>Yet the whole of Islam was out in anger.
>
>I've never read the book. I've never seeb the Mel Gibson film of Christ. It was slated as blasphemous yet the whole christian world was not after Gibson's head.
>
>>


What was supposed to be blasphemous about "The Passion of the Christ"? IIRC most of the controversy was over the violence. Roger Ebert wrote at the time, and I agreed with him, that it was the most violent mainstream American movie ever released. If violence can be considered pornographic, this was a porno movie, minus the sex.

The reason Christians were not after Mel's head was it was an adoring fundamentalist depiction of the accounts in the Bible. Of course they liked it, it promoted their agenda. Fundamentalist churches had special screenings, actively encouraged their members to go see it, etc.
Previous
Next
Reply
Map
View

Click here to load this message in the networking platform