Morons for God - continued…
Pakistani clerics have responded to Salmon Rushdie’s knighthood by handing out a religious bauble to Osama bin Laden.
Pakistan’s Ulema Council gave the al-Qaida leader the title “Saifullah”, or sword of Allah. The Ulema Council is part of a demented, Islamist coalition, that actively opposed the Pakistani government when it wanted to make changes in the Hudood laws.
The Hudood laws made it possible for raped women to be stoned to death – because in these laws there is no difference between adultery and rape.
Whilst nominating our good friend Osama for this religious honour, the council chairman, Tahir Ashrafi, said,
If a blasphemer can be given the title ‘Sir’ by the west despite the fact he’s hurt the feelings of Muslims, then a mujahid who has been fighting for Islam against the Russians, Americans and British must be given the lofty title of Islam, Saifullah,”.
Yes, of course – such eminent reasoning.
Hurting someone’s feelings is bad, bad, bad. Flying planes into buildings…; ah well, boys will be boys – and hey, man, Osama’s feelings were hurt so báááád, by the West, by people like Rushdie, no doubt.
So, give the poor guy his Saifullah plaster already and kiss it all better.
Oh, right: I almost forgot. Before I declare end of rant, I’d like to turn the spotlight on one Oliver Miles. I’d never heard of him before but he wrote an opinion piece in today’s online Guardian. Miles mentions that, as a sensitive Christian,
I am pained when somebody throws a bucket of filth over the cherished symbols of my religious culture.
Right, another one of those hurt feelings twits.
There are many appeasers in the West. Like Chamberlain and his stupid umbrella they are always committed to the peace at any cost concept– and always more than willing to suck up to one little Hitler or the other. In a way these people are even more contemptible than all those raving mullahs and suicide bombers.
Again, insanity is a time-honoured defence in law; complicity is not.
So, apropos Rushdie’s knighthood: our good Christian is against it. Surprise, surprise. One of his points,
Or rather it is only our concern if there is a feeling around that he deserves an honour because he has suffered for his art. I would argue that the suffering was self-invited.
Ah, Listen to the children of the night: what sweet music they make. Self-invited death sentences. Like those raped Australian women, no doubt. You remember: those self-inviting pieces of uncovered meat that drew those poor cats to them.
Bad, bad Rushdie. Bad bad women.
Anyway, Oliver Miles ends his good little German speech with a passionate,
Unfortunately I see no realistic way in which the harm that has been done can now be undone. It is tempting to suggest that someone - but who? - might acknowledge that a mistake has been made, and indeed the more of us who do so the better. But one of the drawbacks of the pomp and ceremony associated with state activities like the grant of honours is that they are inflexible, unable without very great difficulty to react to the unexpected.
Indeed, it is very unfortunate that a knighthood is for life – and not just for Christmas. Like the late Ayatollah’s death sentence. Oh no, sorry, I forgot. That was self-invited, of course.
Anyway, back to our Muslim hot air Miles,
Which leaves me with the question: was it really unexpected? Did no one really understand that far from being in the category of those who have made a positive contribution, Rushdie has deepened the divisions in our society, and this accolade was likely to deepen them still further?
And has it occurred to our appeasing friend that Rushdie might have served England quite well, for showing how many demented, little monsters had been nurturing their evil thoughts and hate-filled souls, living in but actually loathing the place that had welcomed them and their families, when they had no other place to go to?
End of rant.
For now…
If you enjoyed this post, subscribe today to get free updates by email or RSS.
