Nimshi can you post the content of the book of Rusdie to clear this issues.

@Reindeer: « #92 on: Yesterday at 10:50:22 PM »

Alhaji olabowale

why you dey allow people drag you around now.

Nimshi's sidekick, reindeer is giving "advise." Except that he is advising to evil deeds. Like my dear sister have said. should anyone have to polute his/her senses by watching a "porn movie," before he/she realises it is not fit for "good natured sexually grounded person?" The same with Satanic Verses of Salman Rushdie.

go read the book and then talk, its only logical that you'd be better informed to make meaningful and well considered conclusions. before then, any contribution is based on other people's convictions and not yours and for someone who prides himself on reasearch and quotes.its a major dragdown.
peace

I do not have to go to the city dump, full of heap of tons of garbage, seeing from a distance that there are all kinds of vermins, before I know it smells terribly, especially when i see the garbage collectors, with their noses covered and unfortunately, ther clothes dirty. Visual observation in this case is sufficient. Thats the case with Rushdie masterpiece to you. But it is master garbage to me.

ayinba1:

@nimshi

You have assumed that the judgement was passed on S. Rushdie without the concerned authorities actually reading the publication. Can you actually prove this?

The burden of proof is not on me. The burden of proof is on those who claim that the fatwa was/is actionable to show that it was a valid fatwa. And particularly, anyone who'll come to a public forum to advocate such a fatwa has the responsibility for knowing what they're talking about.

We find it so easy to pass judgements on other authority once it's not the US of A, or Britain.

Such an inferior disposition isn't ever my way. (You many well go see my comments on the US and Britain on the topic of "terrorists", "moderate Muslims" etc etc)

Note that I do not know the details but since you are so vehement about how wrong the sentence was, can you say for sure that it was passed with no knowledge of what Satanic Verses contained?

First of all, you have alluded to my posts what has not been evident. Below, to clear you all up:

1) I have speculated that the Ayatollah Khomeini (who issued the fatwa) probably never read SV.
2) What you may say Ihave been vehement about (and have no apologies for) is this: olabowale (and anyone else) couldn't reasonably discuss the contents of the book without having read it.
3) I have also said this: there were devoted and devout Muslims who read SV and disagreed with the fatwa on religious grounds.
4) There are devoted and devout Muslims who felt Rushdie is indictable for the things he wrote; yet, were completely against the fatwa.

The major point is this: my interlocutor on this issue has no basis for discussing the contents of the book without having read it. That is, I think, makes straighforward sense.
.

samba123:

Nimshi can you post the content of the book of Rusdie to clear this issues.

First, I don't think the copyright on the book has expired.

Second, I don't think it'll be possible to post all of the book were the above not to be the case.

Do you want to read SV? Have you read any other of Rushdie's works?
.

Nimshi:

First, I don't think the copyright on the book has expired.

Second, I don't think it'll be possible to post all of the book were the above not to be the case.

Do you want to read SV? Have you read any other of Rushdie's works?
.

Then what is your purpose to depend the book of S. Rusdie if you can’t provide a single page to support your allegation. We need fact about the content, how could you favour that book without presenting to the public any substance?

Now I’m asking you to put some perspective point were we can have a view of the alleges book of Salman Rusdhie. Still you are hiding defensively without any proven fact to show us here. Much more of your hyperactive allegation it doesn’t help, sitting any content/source which might become harmful to the public is dangerous it put you on jeopardy. Are you accompanying with Salman Rusdhie Book to endorse publicly and support him in every occasion? I’m thinking you are just one of the devotee/admirer to this masterpiece book of SV.

samba123: what're you talking about?? Why should I be able to provide a book for you?? What contents?? SV's a book, more than 300 pages; how does one post that? And, I'm not interested in proving any facts to you or olabowale. My contention is simple ans straighforward: people who haven't read a book shouldn't be commenting about its contents. Simple.

And, I don't think SV is a materpiece; it's not even Rushdie's best. And, no where have I endorsed Rushdie's views, but, I will defend his right to write.

I hope you understand these; in case it appears confusing, perhaps re-reading will be useful.

Cheers.

Alhaji na wah o!
you say im nims sidekick, well in this case yes!sidekick, frontkick,anything. its only funny you fail to see reason with the fact that commenting on what you really dont know is out of place and then those analogies, not good enough, imagine a christian who has been told that the koran contains trash who goes ahead to pass judgements on the faith without reading, well i guess you'll excuse him/her based on the fact that you can judge a book by its cover she?
c'mon man, u know u can read it, its almost as if theres something in it you are scared of seeing.its looking more like fear than disinterest.
no hard feelings though, im a lover not a fighter
peace be unto you.
Dont bother writing your ,long proses to me o! As you may have noticed im not given to so many words.
regards to the alhaja(s)
the deer.

Nimshi


I’m talking about the SV Book of Salman Rusdhie here, what else you like to expect? Its very clear to us you can not even give some Quoted paragraph to backup your allegation in defending Salman Rusdhie SV. A simple question I have been asking you to obtain a presentable quote of SV, but still you avoid giving us. What if there are 300 pages? Don’t tell me you can’t give some of the important part in the book, were you think it right for the people to grab on the issues here.

If you think that book is palatable to you, too us is has no value even how beautiful you think the content paragraph is all about. Nothing compare to the Qur’an when I read it, its give me satisfaction and contentment. What else you like to introduce/endorse other things if you can’t get credit about what you read? Yes, I know knowledge/wisdom/ people like you live by rational thinking…mind is limited oh.

Let the defender of the Book SV fail in Hand of Nimshi endorment…not for us no!!! I see how reasonably you put those things into discussion of nonsensical ideas to defend yourself of Rushdie Book. And trying us to take a look/copy to read it, is that not endorsement to the public eyes? Oh common I myself are not interested to that Book you endorse to have a copy. If the statements are derogatory in my belief, why should I read it? What benefit me of reading the book of S. Rushdie? Enlighten me oh!!!

Samba, I don't know if you are Nigerian or not. I don't know what your first language is. I know though, it is not English. It is hard to read what you type sometimes and I don't get the gist of your post.

Are you asking Nimshi to quote part of the book that gives the man the right to place a fatwa on the writer? Or what part do you ask him to quote? Your request is not clear. If you are really interested in the book, I suggest getting a copy.

Nimshi, I am personally enjoying your posts. I don't know what you are, Muslim o, Christian o, or anything. It doesn't concern me. A balanced discussion is what is needed. Thanks for giving us non-muslim, a different view into the Islamic world. For a while, thought the best we could get was Olabs and Babs and the rest.

Glad to know someone out there, agrees that killing people that don't agree with them, is not right.

Salman Rushdie's Published works

1975: Grimus
1980: Midnight's Children
1983: Shame
1985: The Painter and the Pest (documentary film)
1987: The Jaguar Smile: A Nicaraguan Journey
1987: The Riddle of Midnight (documentary film) - amazon.com
1989: The Satanic Verses
1990: Haroun and the Sea of Stories
1991: Imaginary homelands: essays and criticism, 1981-1991
1992: The Wizard of Oz
1994: East, West
1995: The Moor's Last Sigh
1997: The Vintage Book of Indian Writing (1947 - 1997) (anthology, edited jointly with Elizabeth West)
1999: The Ground Beneath her Feet
2001: Fury
2002: Step Across this Line

And, I don't think SV is a materpiece; it's not even Rushdie's best. And, no where have I endorsed Rushdie's views, but, I will defend his right to write.

Ok.

@Bhola

Samba, I don't know if you are Nigerian or not. I don't know what your first language is. I know though, it is not English. It is hard to read what you type sometimes and I don't get the gist of your post.

Are you asking Nimshi to quote part of the book that gives the man the right to place a fatwa on the writer? Or what part do you ask him to quote? Your request is not clear. If you are really interested in the book, I suggest getting a copy.

Nimshi, I am personally enjoying your posts. I don't know what you are, Muslim o, Christian o, or anything. It doesn't concern me. A balanced discussion is what is needed. Thanks for giving us non-muslim, a different view into the Islamic world. For a while, thought the best we could get was Olabs and Babs and the rest.

Glad to know someone out there, agrees that killing people that don't agree with them, is not right.

You don't have to pick at how Samba writes. If you do not understand what he writes, then you leave it for those that do. Remember that what matter most is the ability to communicate and this is not English Language classroom.

Since Nimshi has said that he has not endorsed SR's views, I let it go.

Quran 5:54 "O ye who believe[b]! If any from among you turn back from his faith, [/b] soon will Allah produce a people whom He (Allah) will love as they will love Him lowly with the believers, Mighty against the rejecters, fighting in the way of Allah, and never afraid of the reproachers of such as find fault. That is the Grace of Allah which He will bestow on whom He (Allah) pleaseth. And Allah encompasseth all, and He knoweth all things."

Bhola: Thanks for your kind words; they are, to me, like fresh air. I agree with you that samba123 isn't straightforward to understand, but I try not to let that overshadow the posted opinion; I think what samba's got to say is more important than how he says it; yet, that's not to diminish your point about difficulty in understanding.

Thank you, again, for your reasonable position on declaration of faith. I would easily have declared my faith - there's no shame, nor compulsion in religion, or lack of it - but I refuse to, for the very fact that some on this board have made it a point to demand that I do it; my response is simple: no; not on this board; heck, I wouldn't do it if I didn't want to even if a sharp, long knife was grazing the small of my neck. We must get to a point where we do not allow threats, or abuse make us do things we do not want to; and not that we like abuse or threats, but because we refuse to give the lawless the satisfaction of lording it over us.

And, I thank you again for the recognition that there are other voices in Islam. At present, I am posting articles written by Muslims on contemporary issues on this site; it is the "Essays by Muslims" series. Please take a look if and when you have the time; the purpose is to generate discussion:

The politics of hijab - A bit of black cloth - https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-189842.0.html
Let The Qur’an Define Itself - https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-189486.0.html
Finding Sincerity In Cross-religious Dialogue - https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-189488.0.html

The book "The Jewel of Medina" has received some attention because of its theme; there's a thread about it here: https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-165868.0.html . I now have an electronic copy of the prologue of this book in my possession and will probably upload it today, Insha Allah.

Many times - as I suspect you may have concluded - the loudest voices do not speak for Muslims.
.

Samba: I think Rushdie is an exceptional writer; this is simple enough. There's no doubt that were it not for SV and the controversy surrounding it, Rushdie would have won the Nobel Prize for Literature. He's also a dangerously playful genius. Of course, I cannot claim to endorse all his views, and because he is irreligious (at least at this time), you should expect that he'll claim some liberties that may be sacriligious/blasphemous to many. Nothing he has written, nor anything he may further write, will warrant an execution. I hope that clears the part about endorsing Rushdie.

Bhola is correct that your request isn't clear. And even if clarity is assumed, you're asking that I post a paragraph or sentence from SV that makes it palatable; there're many such, and I don't think doing that will do anything to move the discussion forward. I asked if you wanted to read SV; the reason is simple: if you do want to read it, you could obtain a copy; yet, I'm not encouraging you to do that; it must be your choice, in accordance with your faith and disposition. I have an electronic copy of SV, but do I distribute it? No, I do not, and I have not. And, many Muslims have read SV, that's not necessarily because it is palatable; you read books for many reasons. For me, the reading to read SV is because it is controversial; that is enough. I will also be reading The Jewel of Medina (in fact, I have committed to post the prologue on the appropriate thread). When I read, then I can contribute and perhaps decide on where to stand. In short: it is a difficult task to comment on a book you haven't read.

I hope you're able to find the answer to your question about why anyone would read Rushdie's book above; and I hope it makes some sense to you.

P.S.: The list in post #105 does not include two of Rushdie's most recent books:

Shalimar The Clown, 2005
The Enchantress of Florence, 2008

Bhola:

Samba, I don't know if you are Nigerian or not. I don't know what your first language is. I know though, it is not English. It is hard to read what you type sometimes and I don't get the gist of your post.

Bhola if you find difficulty in reading my post I regret for not giving such accurate detail about it. I accept you criticism I’m here to learn from people who are intelligently giving a good reasonable thought like Olabowale and Babs. Do I include Nimshi he/she are moderately one of the placid debater in this forum I should give him credit too.
Is that clear to you?
Bhola try to read post .no # 96 # 99# 100#101#103 and thank for criticism me to enlighten my mind.

Nimshi:

Samba: I think Rushdie is an exceptional writer; this is simple enough. There's no doubt that were it not for SV and the controversy surrounding it, Rushdie would have won the Nobel Prize for Literature. He's also a dangerously playful genius. Of course, I cannot claim to endorse all his views, and because he is irreligious (at least at this time), you should expect that he'll claim some liberties that may be sacriligious/blasphemous to many. Nothing he has written, nor anything he may further write, will warrant an execution. I hope that clears the part about endorsing Rushdie.

Bhola is correct that your request isn't clear. And even if clarity is assumed, you're asking that I post a paragraph or sentence from SV that makes it palatable; there're many such, and I don't think doing that will do anything to move the discussion forward. I asked if you wanted to read SV; the reason is simple: if you do want to read it, you could obtain a copy; yet, I'm not encouraging you to do that; it must be your choice, in accordance with your faith and disposition. I have an electronic copy of SV, but do I distribute it? No, I do not, and I have not. And, many Muslims have read SV, that's not necessarily because it is palatable; you read books for many reasons. For me, the reading to read SV is because it is controversial; that is enough. I will also be reading The Jewel of Medina (in fact, I have committed to post the prologue on the appropriate thread). When I read, then I can contribute and perhaps decide on where to stand. In short: it is a difficult task to comment on a book you haven't read.

I hope you're able to find the answer to your question about why anyone would read Rushdie's book above; and I hope it makes some sense to you.

P.S.: The list in post #105 does not include two of Rushdie's most recent books:

Shalimar The Clown, 2005
The Enchantress of Florence, 2008

Nimshi

With the aim of defending Salman Rushdie books, I have no reason to be doubtful your disposition about this issues anymore it clear to me now where you stand for that matter.

Salam Samba

You just have to let Nimshi be since he said:

And, no where have I endorsed Rushdie's views,

samba123:

Nimshi

With the aim of defending Salman Rushdie books, I have no reason to be doubtful your disposition about this issues anymore it clear to me now where you stand for that matter

What do you wish to be clear about? If you're specific, that could offer one the opportunity to choose to respond to you or not; as things stand, the ambiguity makes it impossible to respond to you.

It'll be difficult for me to endorse all of a writer's opinion; it will also be difficult for me to disagree with all of a writer's opinion; things aren't ever always as simple as that. I believe I understand what Rushdie attempted to do in SV; the approach is not inconsistent with much else he's written. But to be clear (since I'm being copiously quoted about it), my statement "no where have I endorsed Rushdie's views" does not necessarily imply that I wouldn't endorse any, many or much of Rushdie's views; quite the contrary as my openinig words in this paragraph show. But ifwe do get specific, then one's position may be clear, for whatever it's worth.
.

Nimshi:Do you care to share what he attempted to do? Having read SV,Do you still care to tell his views you would endorse and we look at it in the light of the Quran and Hadith since you are a muslim

Your claims and posts show you're not reading with good attention; the value of making posts for your benefit is in quite srious doubt. But I'll about oblige you if there's good reason to; here:

Have you read SV?

.

Did u read my last post or you didnt pay attention as well?

Nimshi:

What do you wish to be clear about? If you're specific, that could offer one the opportunity to choose to respond to you or not; as things stand, the ambiguity makes it impossible to respond to you.

It'll be difficult for me to endorse all of a writer's opinion; it will also be difficult for me to disagree with all of a writer's opinion; things aren't ever always as simple as that. I believe I understand what Rushdie attempted to do in SV; the approach is not inconsistent with much else he's written. But to be clear (since I'm being copiously quoted about it), my statement "no where have I endorsed Rushdie's views" does not necessarily imply that I wouldn't endorse any, many or much of Rushdie's views; quite the contrary as my openinig words in this paragraph show. But ifwe do get specific, then one's position may be clear, for whatever it's worth.
.

Even you’re not endorsing any books of Salman Rushdie to the public its doesn’t mean your intention is there actually, but it’s hard to ponder when you uphold those view of your own in this issues along we can see how you stand for it.

I live in the US and the penalty for treason is death

the US is center right and not a liberal society. what an hostile religion

Omo Illinois. Illini boy. The cat from Chitown.

olabowale:

@HUxley: If he entered Islam deceitfully, with the intention that when he leaves it because of his/her prominence, others will leave it. If he maligns Islam in addition, speaking falsehood about it. Yes.

Thing of it, it is better for a person to die, while million lives are preserved, saved as a result. When that person is evil, he should be made a true example of the ending of evil soul!

This is the way moderate human being thing. I know that you are off-the-chart in your thinking. Mr. Monkey, the grand Child of Gorilla! You are not insulted am sure, since this is your belief. I have to, God willing bleed it off of your blood.

You just lost all the respect ,i had for you with this statement.

I sincerely hope,you have reconsidered,if not I certainly cannot continue to exchange views with someone like you !

then the most liberal society will seek death penalty on his life!

Ok seriously this is very untrue.
Liberal societies don't condone murder, infact they're the ones that try to fight against it.
Liberals are the ones that pretty much say let all do what they want, let freedom ring.

The Colonial overlords of any nation will kill off those who embank on treasonious activities.
Go back to history and face reality. Jesus, from the Bible was "killed off," because his
actions, the Jews thought was treasonious. The Roman emperor went along withit realising
that if he does not, it is a recipe of civil agitation in the territory

It was not a liberal society, liberal societies didn't take form until recently

And when was the last time that the US sentenced someone to death for treason?

The US is not liberal, there are liberals in the US. but the US. is not liberal.

Huxley: Please ask "Bastage," if anyone have been convicted for "treason," in the past 30 years and have not be sentenced to be executed? This guy takes the charge of treason to be as its like stealing a love of bread. It isa serious crime and its not everyday a person is charged.

Its a crime that the society as a whole frowns upon, and the harshest of all sentences are metered for it!

apostacy is not treason that you speak of. one is of religious belief the other is of government, those two are to be separate. that's apples and oranges.

calling for the death of apostates leads one to believe that the islamic religion is compulsory. if you want to leave you should die, that is compulsory, just as islam was spread by the sword so are muslims kept by the sword.
"choose islam or choose death" is not a choice and "if you leave you will die" is also not a choice.

@Lady

just as islam was spread by the sword so are muslims kept by the sword.

Where did you get your story/fact from?

Dont know about the speading by the sword part but they sure use the sword now and for me, thats enough discouragement, i actually saw a video on a muslim friend's phone wherein people beheading a white caucasian male kept shouting alahu akbar, it was really barbaric and i knew such a spirit of hatred and murder cannot be from God.

@Reindeer; If I proof to you that Christians have killed some people in the past by beheading them, boiling them in hot liquid, putting them in spiked cage, impaling them on a stick, and many more grusome method, will you also agree that Christianity is not from God?

We already know your opinion about Judaism, Hinduism and other "isms," plus atheism and agnosticism. For if you thought anyone of them is of "God," unless you are still "SEARCHING" or in denial, then you will not be a "Christian".

I will wait to hear from you, REINDEER. Santa Clause is riding his "sledge" on Reindeer. If Santa Clause is only a Fairy tale, then I wonder about many things Santa Clause is affiliated to!

Oh boy. You are in for a rude awakening.

hi olabs!

boiling people in hot oil IN THE PAST when men were at best, one step from barbaric isnt the same as doing it now, many thousand years later, moreover you'd hardly see christians killing these days in the name of God or Jesus unlike what we see everyday from islam, killing in the name of allah or mohammed is the order, its as if bloodthirst and disregard for human life is normal in islam.
There is no justification for taking human life in the name of 'God' whether 'the other party DID it in the past or not and no defence will suffice for beaheading, on TV , while shouting praises to your god, its primal!

So, in conclusion, reindeer agrees wth me that Christianity was once "barbaric" too, just like Islam of today! I get it now. Christianity did not begin in the time of Jesus, but after. So we thank God Allah the Almight for this. Yet, it has close to 600 years, ahead of Islam.

Go back 600 years ago, could you say with certainty, that there was no "killing" based on Christian religious idealogue, alone? Of course, are were. Even rapes and enslavement and captives of peoples and tribes. All that was used was the "BIble" alone. The White people of Europe amputated "colored people" and dehumanized them, based on "Bible verses" alone.

South African's Afrikaan whites used the Bible for Apartheid. The American white, in their KKK clubs, "Sons and Daughters of revolution" use the "Bible!" They are still killing people, today in europe, and else where based on the Bible, alone. The mantra of "Christian god is bigger than Muslim God" is well known and established. Where have you been reindeer: in the heavy snow of "northpole with the elfs?" Stop your nonsensical.

Just now in America, a grown woman and some other cohorts taunted a young neighbor, an under age girl to commit cyberspace suicide. And unfortunately, many people saw it "live" without anyone alerting the authorities. By the way almost all of the "cyberspace audience" will chalk up Christianity as their "religion," if asked! You should be ashamed of yourself, reindeer.

CLAIMING THAT ISLAM IS BARBARIC, WHILE PRAISING CHRISTIANITY IS PURE DISINGENOUS! iF YOU SAY THAT SOME MUSLIMS ARE HORRIBLE AND MAY NOT PRACTICE ISLAM WELL, IN YOUR OWN OPINION, WHILE MANY IN CHRISTIANITY ARE BY AND LARGE MORE CHARITABLE, NOW, I MAY AGREE WITH YOU. Thats all.

Your inability to live in the present baffles me, you keep refering to being barbaric 600 years ago, could that be a justification for barbarism today? Cybercrimes are commited by people claiming to be christians, well ,fine but how many times are they chanting 'in jesus name' while slaughtering? infact how many of those crimes now are motivated by desire to please a bloodthirsty god like in islam, everywhere you look from bauchi in nigeria to afghanistan, its people being killed, maimed and innocents being killed all to the chants of allahu akbar!
My dear friend only the insincere will claim islam does not support openly the murder of seeming enemies of their god.
christianity as of today discourages all such forms of physical violence while islam the much touted 'religion of peace' is associated with violence, destruction and intolerance and the pictures are all around you, turn on your TV and see whats happening in india right now on CNN
only a physically blind or thouroughly brianwashed fella will say islam does not encourage basal barbarism.
jesus loves you bro, come to real inner peace.
o

Omo boy, be baffled a little: In 1991, duing the first Gulf war dubbed "Desert Storm," I saw many Bombs being loaded for "Iraqi perile" while the "Christian miliatry personnels" wrote on them, "now you are going to meet your Allah," and many anti-slogans.

I remeber that there is a general in America talking about the "christian god more powerful" than the Muslim God! The Attorney General of the US, in 2002 was reported to have said that the Christian god sent his son to die, while the muslim God wants people to die from Him!

Think about this for a moment: The same people who a god sent his son to die for, will still have to die. But while they are alive do not stop killing with ammon of mass destructions the muslims who will die for their God! Who is killing the other faster?

Now watch videos under the title " Christian Missionary atrocities". resident Bush was even talking about Crusade in post 911. Now tell me: how recent shall I come to 3008, before you get it? DuuuuuH!