Print
Rushdie knighted in honours list
by BBC
Thanks to Linda Ward Selbie for the link.
Reposted from:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6756149.stm
Salman Rushdie, who went into hiding under threat of death after an Iranian fatwa, has been knighted by the Queen.
His book The Satanic Verses offended Muslims worldwide and a bounty was placed on his head in 1989.
But since the Indian-born author returned to public life in 1999, he has not shied away from controversy.
A devout secularist, he backed Commons Leader Jack Straw over comments on Muslim women and veils and has warned against Islamic "totalitarianism".
The son of a successful businessman, Sir Salman was born into a Muslim family in Mumbai in 1947.
He was educated in England at Rugby School and studied history at Cambridge University.
Booker prize
Following an advertising career in London, he became a full-time writer.
His first novel, Grimus, was published in 1975 but was generally ignored by the book-buying public and literary establishment.
But his second effort - the magic realist novel Midnight's Children - catapulted him to literary fame.
It won the Booker Prize in 1981 and was awarded the Booker of Bookers in 1993 after being judged the best novel to have won the prize during its 25-year history.
Sir Salman, who turns 60 on 19 June, is renowned as a purveyor of story as political statement.
Death sentence
He takes history and fictionalises it, with imaginative brilliance, and much of his work is set in his native India and Pakistan.
His fourth book - The Satanic Verses in 1988 - describes a cosmic battle between good and evil and combines fantasy, philosophy and farce.
It was immediately condemned by the Islamic world because of its perceived blasphemous depiction of the prophet Muhammad.
It was banned in many countries with large Muslim communities and in 1989, Ayatollah Khomeini, Iran's spiritual leader, issued a fatwa, ordering Sir Salman's execution.
In 1998, the Iranian government said it would no longer support the fatwa, but some groups have said it is irrevocable.
Despite living as a virtual prisoner, with full police protection, Sir Salman continued to write and produced several novels and essays during his confinement.
His re-emergence has not been without controversy.
In backing Jack Straw over his comments on Muslim women wearing veils, Sir Salman said veils "suck" as they were a symbol of the "limitation of women".
He also weighed into the furore surrounding the Danish cartoons, which satirised the Prophet Muhammad, warning against Islamic "totalitarianism".
Of his knighthood for services to literature, Rushdie said: "I am thrilled and humbled to receive this great honour, and am very grateful that my work has been recognised in this way."
Reposted from:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6756149.stm
Salman Rushdie, who went into hiding under threat of death after an Iranian fatwa, has been knighted by the Queen.His book The Satanic Verses offended Muslims worldwide and a bounty was placed on his head in 1989.
But since the Indian-born author returned to public life in 1999, he has not shied away from controversy.
A devout secularist, he backed Commons Leader Jack Straw over comments on Muslim women and veils and has warned against Islamic "totalitarianism".
The son of a successful businessman, Sir Salman was born into a Muslim family in Mumbai in 1947.
He was educated in England at Rugby School and studied history at Cambridge University.
Booker prize
Following an advertising career in London, he became a full-time writer.
His first novel, Grimus, was published in 1975 but was generally ignored by the book-buying public and literary establishment.
But his second effort - the magic realist novel Midnight's Children - catapulted him to literary fame.
It won the Booker Prize in 1981 and was awarded the Booker of Bookers in 1993 after being judged the best novel to have won the prize during its 25-year history.
Sir Salman, who turns 60 on 19 June, is renowned as a purveyor of story as political statement.
Death sentence
He takes history and fictionalises it, with imaginative brilliance, and much of his work is set in his native India and Pakistan.
His fourth book - The Satanic Verses in 1988 - describes a cosmic battle between good and evil and combines fantasy, philosophy and farce.
It was immediately condemned by the Islamic world because of its perceived blasphemous depiction of the prophet Muhammad.
It was banned in many countries with large Muslim communities and in 1989, Ayatollah Khomeini, Iran's spiritual leader, issued a fatwa, ordering Sir Salman's execution.
In 1998, the Iranian government said it would no longer support the fatwa, but some groups have said it is irrevocable.
Despite living as a virtual prisoner, with full police protection, Sir Salman continued to write and produced several novels and essays during his confinement.
His re-emergence has not been without controversy.
In backing Jack Straw over his comments on Muslim women wearing veils, Sir Salman said veils "suck" as they were a symbol of the "limitation of women".
He also weighed into the furore surrounding the Danish cartoons, which satirised the Prophet Muhammad, warning against Islamic "totalitarianism".
Of his knighthood for services to literature, Rushdie said: "I am thrilled and humbled to receive this great honour, and am very grateful that my work has been recognised in this way."
Add to del.icio.us
Posted: Saturday, June 16, 2007 | PermalinkComments 1 - 49 of 49 |
Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers2. Comment #50287 by Quetzalcoatl on June 16, 2007 at 12:35 pm
Corylus, you'll get no argument from me. The whole Royal Family can get lost as far as I'm concerned! Useless bunch. Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl
3. Comment #50288 by Friend Giskard on June 16, 2007 at 12:54 pm
If it's Charles that does the honours (and he does from time to time stand in for the queen on such occasions), Rushdie had better watch out. Charles is a crypto-muslim, and Rushdie is a notorious apostate. Charles will be holding that sword very close to Rushdie's neck. Other Comments by Friend Giskard
4. Comment #50305 by MIND_REBEL on June 16, 2007 at 3:30 pm
Rushdie is a great author. I'm planning to read several of his books this year. Other Comments by MIND_REBEL
5. Comment #50306 by BAEOZ on June 16, 2007 at 3:41 pm
Corylus, I'm glad I didn't have my coffee near me when I read your comments. Very funny. Other Comments by BAEOZ
6. Comment #50313 by perkyjay on June 16, 2007 at 4:37 pm
For all you non-Brits who are not familiar with the honours process, it is entirely the responsibility of the Prime Minister of the day to recommend candidates for honours. A friend of mine was Mrs.Thatcher's adviser on honours, and the process seems to be out of the monarch's hands - in other words, what the Prime Minister wants, the Prime Minister gets.Other Comments by perkyjay
7. Comment #50318 by Dr Benway on June 16, 2007 at 5:42 pm
When a tourist I say "aren't the titles quaint and fun!" But as a yank I say... "Howls of derisive laughter, Bruce!"
I read about the IBM guy who set up a Lotus system for the Labour Party for "next to nothing," then was knighted. He later retired from IBM to work for the Carlisle Group.
Tony Blair is retiring to work for ... the Carlisle Group! Amazing coincidence, no?
Power corrupts, m'Lords.
Other Comments by Dr Benway
8. Comment #50352 by pissinintothewind on June 17, 2007 at 5:26 am
The morons that are the royal family and the sychophants that surround them have a vested interest in the " honours " system. They honour the court jesters who are are interface between them and joe public. The last thing the royal firm wants is to be ignored. I am not saying that people should not be honoured for their achievements Rushdie is a great writer but royalty in contemporary society is as defunct as the church of England. As for Rushdie if he does not have a jesters outfit for the occassion, maybe Sir Elton John could lend him a dress.Other Comments by pissinintothewind
9. Comment #50362 by jesus_christ_himself on June 17, 2007 at 8:00 am
What does Dicky Dawkins think about the monarchy? I'm sure a knighthood is just around the corner for him.Other Comments by jesus_christ_himself
10. Comment #50365 by PrimeNumbers on June 17, 2007 at 8:18 am
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6760927.stmNow Iran, that paragon of virtue, is daring to criticise this honour given to Mr Rushdie.
They think it offends them - what a blinking surprise. They're always being offended by something. Muslims the world over need to be told a few things:
Being a muslim doesn't make you special,
Like all religious beliefs, should be kept private,
Go around threatening people with death sentences and you'll be treat like the small stupid squabling children you are.
Other Comments by PrimeNumbers
11. Comment #50410 by CJ on June 18, 2007 at 12:06 am
Iran reacts-a) With polite acknowledgement of the authors skill
b) Calm criticism of honouring a person who has upset you.
c) Like rabid lunatics
Video here
Where you surprised?
Other Comments by CJ
12. Comment #50436 by PrimeNumbers on June 18, 2007 at 6:22 am
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6763119.stmNow Pakistan is in on the act.
Other Comments by PrimeNumbers
13. Comment #50455 by Friend Giskard on June 18, 2007 at 8:40 am
This may lead to riots and deaths, like the equally ridiculous motoon affair and the Miss World affair. Seems that muslims will never miss a chance to remind the world what a bunch of dickheads they are. Is it any wonder no-one repects them? Other Comments by Friend Giskard
14. Comment #50468 by Arcturus on June 18, 2007 at 10:17 am
The whole Iranian government is an insult to secular values and human rights. What should we do? Should we start burning the Iranian flag, strap bombs on and kill as many of them because they insult us? How stupid it all sounds. Instead what do we do? We write books, we have debates, we are so peaceful. So the "religion of peace" wants to send suicide bombers ...Freedom of speech is a hard won right, we don't want to go back to the tyranny of religion, to ages when blasphemers were burned like rats.
What a stupid world we live in ...
Other Comments by Arcturus
15. Comment #50472 by savroD on June 18, 2007 at 10:41 am
Stupid is as stupid does.... welcome to the world of religion! Other Comments by savroD
16. Comment #50473 by phasmagigas on June 18, 2007 at 10:51 am
interesting how the first few comments were critical of the honours system, the along comes the more significant follow up news that Islamists are starting to get fired up again and we realise that at least the honours system is nothing more than a ridiculous little diversion that nobody really cares about anyway. I wonder just how many people will lose their lives over this one? choose stabbing, burning, stamping, hanging. When i see groups of men getting all murderous over an 'insult' like this I see it as an excuse to indulge in a bit of tribal male backslapping no different to football hooligans rioting (and these guys would murder too if they could get away with it), I suppose it reinforces their own status above their females and just makes them feel better about themselves generally. sex and status, is that all it ever boils down to? I'm sure we will see demonstrations in the UK in the next few days, should be revealing. Other Comments by phasmagigas
17. Comment #50478 by gordonmackie on June 18, 2007 at 11:15 am
Has a fatwah ever been announced against JK Rowling? Her novels should be much more troubling to god-botherers.Other Comments by gordonmackie
18. Comment #50481 by liberalartist on June 18, 2007 at 11:44 am
Lets hope the western world stands up against this type of ignorance and fanatical protest instead of what they did when a bunch of harmless cartoons were printed. I get angry when people start apologizing for offending someone's religion! Offend away!Muslims are living in a modern world with a midieval religion. Either the world will return to the middle ages or muslims need to adjust to the modern world. We can't have modernity, freedom of expression, freedom of thought, human progress, etc. while being inprisoned by a this or any other religion. We need more Salman Rushdies in the world.
Other Comments by liberalartist
19. Comment #50483 by mmurray on June 18, 2007 at 11:51 am
Has a fatwah ever been announced against JK Rowling? Her novels should be much more troubling to god-botherers.
I don't see why her novels would particularly annoy Muslims and she wasn't born or converted to Islam so she is just an infidel not an apostate. There are comments in the Bible attacking magic as the work of the devil as a result of which some people have tried to get her books banned -- mostly in the US. I did watch a shop assistant in a local shop here in Australia try and convince the person in front of me not to buy one of the books for this reason.
Michael
Other Comments by mmurray
20. Comment #50499 by scottishgeologist on June 18, 2007 at 1:05 pm
Friend Giskard: "Charles will be holding that sword very close to Rushdie's neck"ROFLMAO!! Brilliant, wish I'd thought of it.
So instead of "Arise Sir Salman", its "Allahu Akhbar, die, infidel!!"
Wonder what Camilla makes of it "Gosh, Chas, that was so masterful, run your pork sword through me now... No No, No... Not Pork Camilla... AAAARGH!!
Other Comments by scottishgeologist
21. Comment #50516 by CJ22 on June 18, 2007 at 2:13 pm
More religious bullying from afar. And more of our democratically elected officials in patently craven appeasement with them. Spineless collaborators, the lot of them. If you're not prepared to take a stand for freedom of speech over religious extremism, get out of the fucking houses of parliament. Other Comments by CJ22
22. Comment #50524 by Arcturus on June 18, 2007 at 3:03 pm
"This is an occasion for the (world's) 1.5 billion Muslims to look at the seriousness of this decision," Mohammed Ijaz ul-Haq, religious affairs minister, said in parliament."The West is accusing Muslims of extremism and terrorism. If someone exploded a bomb on his body he would be right to do so unless the British government apologises and withdraws the 'sir' title," ul-Haq said.
-----------------------------
With such positions, they really enforce the idea that they are extremist terrorists. "We are definetely not terrorists but we will explode to kill you. There is no greater act of terrorism than writing a book about us and the being honored as a knigth."
Other Comments by Arcturus
23. Comment #50525 by Dr Benway on June 18, 2007 at 3:07 pm
Poor sod. The honor likely cranked his life insurance premium through the roof. Other Comments by Dr Benway
24. Comment #50567 by Young Fogey on June 18, 2007 at 7:41 pm
Whilst I have no particular interest in Sir Salman's novels I am pleased to see him honoured as his knighthood demonstrates that whilst honouring our own we will not be intimidated or influenced by outside political pressures.It is of course ludicrous to claim that this honour is "an obvious example of fighting against Islam by high-ranking British officials." Were this true we would not have seen a 2005 knighthood bestowed by The Queen upon Sir Iqbal Sacranie, Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain, described by The Guardian as the "Most Influential Muslim in the UK".
Rather than criticise the British government, Iran should congratulate Britain for having recently raised a number of British Muslims to the highest ranks of British Society as members of the House of Lords. These include Lord Ahmed of Rotherham, the first Muslim peer; Lord Patel of Blackburn, leader of the British Hajj Delegation; Baroness Falkner of Margravine; and Baroness Uddin of Bethnal Green. See my blog for more: http://www.bloggingyoungfogey.blogspot.com
Other Comments by Young Fogey
25. Comment #50616 by Jonathan Dore on June 19, 2007 at 5:28 am
Lord Ahmad was on the news last night condemning (to be fair) the Pakistani minister's comments, but also complaining that someone like Robert Fisk hadn't been honoured instead, because he and Rushdie were both "writers". I was sad to see no-one on the programme make the obvious point that journalism and novel-writing are completely separate activities. Extraordinary to realize that vast swathes of people out there simply don't understand "fiction" as a literary category.Other Comments by Jonathan Dore
26. Comment #50617 by pewkatchoo on June 19, 2007 at 5:30 am
To be honest, I have not got the foggiest idea why Salman Rushdie has been honoured in this way, or even at all. Sorry, but I find his books pretentious rubbish, I have never been able to finish one, full of literary tricks but with no useful message (at least as far as I was able to read). I am not surprised the ayatollah put down a fatwah on him, I would too.Then there is the little issue of Rushdie slagging off the brits and british society. That was after the government spent millions on providing him with personal protection. A bit of an ingrate our mr Rushdie.
Anyway, I am not a socialist, but I too find the honours thing to be a load of old cobblers. However, if anyone was to offer me a K and a fully expenses paid seat in the Lords I might just reconsider.
Other Comments by pewkatchoo
27. Comment #50620 by pewkatchoo on June 19, 2007 at 5:35 am
4 comment by Mind RebelHave you ever actually read any of Rushdies' books? Or are you just intending to?
Other Comments by pewkatchoo
28. Comment #50667 by Sianodel on June 19, 2007 at 10:23 am
on the BBC's 'Newsnight' program last night I was confronted with a Labour peer who suggested that instead of honouring Salman Rushdie we should be honouring J.K. Rowling!To compare the literary merit of J.K. Rowling with that of Salman Rushdie is absurd.Salman Rushdie is an extremely influential author, whatever your opinion of his work you cannot deny that he has fostered a whole generation of British-Asian writers and their readers. Would there be a Vikram Seth or an Arundhati Roy without him? You can be sure that these authors and many others like them would never have been so successful without 'Midnight's Children'.Other Comments by Sianodel
29. Comment #50722 by PrimeNumbers on June 19, 2007 at 4:28 pm
Reading the BBC reports on this it just gets worse and worse... I think it's wonderful that Salman is a Sir and this has brought "offense" to Muslims as it shows them for what they are - the moaning minnies of the world, and that their religion is wrong and bad if it can't stand up to the odd bit of criticiscm. Other Comments by PrimeNumbers
30. Comment #50793 by Sargeist on June 20, 2007 at 2:30 am
I agree with PrimeNumbers. People don't tend to worry about offending the BNP, or other groups who have views that we find absurd, unreasonable or just basically wrong. This is the attitude of a lot of atheists towards religious protest.The interesting thing about this whole Rushdie affair is the way in which it has kind of morphed into a discussion of whether he deserves his knighthood at all. If we imagine for a moment that the whole fatwa thing had not coloured our views of him - would anyone on the television be making so much noise about it? I mean, for goodness' sake, Nicky Clarke has been honoured for "services to hairdressing"!
Yes, the honours may well be a stupid anachronism, but the point the news should be focussing on is how godawfully *barmy* those effigy burning cretins are.
Has there been an official statement from our esteemed Government yet?
Other Comments by Sargeist
31. Comment #50798 by Sargeist on June 20, 2007 at 2:38 am
Sorry, just another comment.It only occurred to me last night that there is the obvious impending problem of the extra security that may well be needed when Rushdie turns up at the Palace to be knighted.
At least the Queen will have a large sword with which to defend the honour of her subjects.
*cue Yoda-like gymnastic displays and instant YouTube celebrity, resurgence of monarchism, dissolving of government, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria*
Other Comments by Sargeist
32. Comment #50799 by Corylus on June 20, 2007 at 2:39 am
Sigh. The Malaysians are at it now:http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20070620/tts-uk-rushdie-protests-cff01a2.html
Remarkable, how they feel they have the right to dictate to other countries how and in what fashion they honour their citizens. It is not as if this is some dreadful human rights violation that citizens of all countries have a duty to protest against. Like for example,
http://richarddawkins.net/article,1220,Man-to-die-over-insult,Daily-Herald
I never received a reply from the Pakistani High Commission to my polite and respectful letter to them about this. Not even a 'we have received your mail: thank you'. Not that I expected one mind you – violent protest appears to be all that is understood in the Islamic world.
Pewkatchoo
I am not a socialist…
Nah! Get out of town! Never would have guessed ;)
Nevermind mate, I'm fine with honest political disagreement :)
Re: a seat in the Lords. I have actually sat there. Some moons ago on a school trip to the Houses of Parliament. We were told; by some unctuous little weasel; not to go near the seats as they were 'for the Lords'. Down went my rear end. Up the revolution – nothing to lose but our chains!
P.S. Quite comfy – no wonder the old farts doze off.
Other Comments by Corylus
33. Comment #50807 by mjwemdee on June 20, 2007 at 3:10 am
It's just a bloody BOOK, dammit! They don't have to READ it if they don't like it. Oh...wait...they probably haven't...
Other Comments by mjwemdee
34. Comment #50808 by pewkatchoo on June 20, 2007 at 3:14 am
CorylusNever been in the HoL. Been in the commons, many many moons ago. I would guess that the seats there are less comfortable than those provided for their lordships.
Down wiv the monarchy, well after the queen pops off at least.
Other Comments by pewkatchoo
35. Comment #50815 by Sargeist on June 20, 2007 at 4:40 am
I've been trying to find some kind of official government statement with the gravity that is appropriate to the circumstance in which the government of a supposed ally tells us that we deserved to be bombed by terrorists.Nothing in Hansard this month about Rushdie, so far as my searches can tell. All I have found so far is the comment from the Prime Minister's Official Spokesman (PMOS) on the number 10 website:
Asked how the Prime Minister had reacted to a member of the Government effectively saying that this justified retaliation by giving Salman Rushdie a knighthood, the PMOS replied that he was not going to get drawn into it, as it was best left to the proper diplomatic channels.
I see. A country with a military dictatorship, and which has nuclear weapons, tells us we deserve to get bombed, and *that's* the response we get?
Hmm, funny how all those other countries seem to want some WMD, isn't it? What *possible* benefit could they be?
Other Comments by Sargeist
36. Comment #50817 by _J_ on June 20, 2007 at 4:48 am
There was a photo in my paper this morning of some Pakistani folks burning an effigy of Salman Rushdie in the streets.First, it was a rubbish effigy. It didn't even have a face.
Second, the people doing the burning seemed to be having a whale of a time, which makes me think we might be missing out on an entertaining pastime. After all, Bonfire Night is fun.
Anyone fancy joining this invigorating international debate by burning some poorly made effigies? I think, to avoid inciting violence against any particular living person, we should opt for a fictional character to burn - but one that's still relevant to the topic, of course.
How about Muhammad?
Other Comments by _J_
37. Comment #50827 by Sargeist on June 20, 2007 at 5:33 am
Those lucky Pakistanis - it always seems to be Guy Fawkes night over there.Just think of all those pennies they can collect on the streets.
To show some solidarity (well, by providing him with a few pennies through royalties) I was going to buy a copy of The Satanic Verses. But I did browse it once in a bookshop, and it didn't really grab me.
Other Comments by Sargeist
38. Comment #50867 by Friend Giskard on June 20, 2007 at 8:48 am
Unsurprisingly, Margaret Beckett has just apologised to the poor hurt muslims. Other Comments by Friend Giskard
39. Comment #50869 by Friend Giskard on June 20, 2007 at 8:56 am
Look at thishttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/06/20/do2002.xml
QUOTE
If Pakistan is so offended, however, there is a dignified way to deal with the problem.
Last year, Tony Blair went to Lahore to praise its "enlightened moderation" and to announce a rise in our aid budget to Pakistan from £236 million to £480 million. If this is tainted money, it can presumably be returned.
Why are we giving £480m in aid to these ungrateful dogs who have obviously spent more than that on nuclear weapons?
Other Comments by Friend Giskard
40. Comment #50872 by pewkatchoo on June 20, 2007 at 9:18 am
Perhaps we could burn an effigy of Margaret Beckett. Better still, just burn the real thing. Other Comments by pewkatchoo
41. Comment #50883 by Sargeist on June 20, 2007 at 9:49 am
While looking for the Margaret Beckett update on BBC news site, I saw that the use of the HPV vaccine on schoolgirls has been approved. So at least it's one small victory for common sense against religious nuts. Other Comments by Sargeist
42. Comment #50885 by _J_ on June 20, 2007 at 10:04 am
39. Comment #50869 by Friend GiskardWhy are we giving £480m in aid to these ungrateful dogs who have obviously spent more than that on nuclear weapons?
I think I read - in the same paper - that Pakistan is regarded as 'an important ally in the War on Terror', or something. Don't know how long that'll last now their politicians are suggesting that suicide bombings 'to protect the honour of the Prophet Mohammad' are 'justified'.
Although, when our politicians see that as a good reason to apologise...! Baffling. 'I'm sorry that you are homicidally deluded idiots who have unjustifiably chosen to take violent offence to something that has absolutely nothing to do with you', perhaps.
Other Comments by _J_
43. Comment #50890 by Sargeist on June 20, 2007 at 10:22 am
This is the "British Way", though. Someone treads on your foot and *you* apologise.Oh, I'm really sorry that I'm about to been blown up by you. What awful things I must have done to cause you (who are obviously perfectly sensible) to take this attitude towards me.
raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrggggggggggghhhhhh!
What a fucking stupid stupid stupid world this is.
Other Comments by Sargeist
44. Comment #50892 by PrimeNumbers on June 20, 2007 at 10:34 am
This "paying respect" to stupid religious viewpoints is exactly what Dawkin's book is about. Or should I say, the stupidity of paying respect to religion.....1) only individual people can deserve respect - religions' can't be respected as they're not people
2) Islam is plain stupid
3) those who justify terrorism, those who say death to Rushdie, death to Queen, death to Britian should be dealt with sharply.
4) no aid to countries that allow their people to behave like this
5) no aid to countries to ministers who behave like this
Other Comments by PrimeNumbers
45. Comment #50893 by Sargeist on June 20, 2007 at 10:37 am
It occurs to me that perhaps the reason why Pakistan is such an important ally in the War Against Terror is that they are producing all the Terror.(ok, I'm kidding, it's really Saudi Arabia)
Other Comments by Sargeist
46. Comment #51034 by Russell Blackford on June 21, 2007 at 8:01 am
I'm not a great fan of royal honours, but Rushdie is one of the greatest novelists of our generation (even if he's not to pewkatchoo's taste). If he doesn't deserve a gong, no one does.I think that the UK government should tell its detractors to stick it. This was a good decision.
Other Comments by Russell Blackford
47. Comment #51037 by Philip1978 on June 21, 2007 at 8:16 am
Sargeist you have to understand this British attitude works when our football/cricket/rugby/tennis team gets the most horrible drubbing. We simply shrug our shoulders, say "bravo!" to the opposing team for playing well, slag off our team for being rubbish for a couple of weeks and then get right back behind them the next game, confident in their abilities. Such optimism is commendable! I call it the Tim Henman syndrome, every bloody year people still yell for the poor boy but every year he gets his arse kicked despite beating all the people he loses against abroad!! hehehe Tally bally ho! More Tea I say!
Other Comments by Philip1978
48. Comment #51041 by Vaal on June 21, 2007 at 8:39 am
Oh Dear, Muslim's having a tantrum again, and the appeasers are out in force again. When will they learn?I feel sorry for people born into Islam, as they are born into virtual slavery, where they have no choice of religion, and no choice from religion, without the threat of murder or, at best, ostracization. This is a basic human right that these enslaved people are being denied. I would like to take it to the human rights courts and have Islam banned, as the genocidal, anachronistic, mind numbing clap trap it really is.
Please, any brave muslims out there who can produce the equivalent of "The life of brian?"
Other Comments by Vaal
49. Comment #51168 by funflower on June 21, 2007 at 8:20 pm
This was a great decision. Honoring Rushdie for his literary acheivements and moral courage is exactly the right use of a knighthood.Other Comments by funflower
Over 1.5 million copies sold
Books by Richard Dawkins
The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing
by Richard Dawkins
The Selfish Gene
by Richard Dawkins
The Blind Watchmaker
by Richard Dawkins
The Ancestor's Tale
by Richard Dawkins
Unweaving the Rainbow
by Richard Dawkins
1. Comment #50286 by Corylus on June 16, 2007 at 12:30 pm
As for 'honours' the simple truth is that some people earn them and some don't. There are some worthies (charity workers in the main), but the vast majority of those getting their nose into the 'Queen's Birthday Honours' are either faceless civil servants or famous 'entertainers' (who are amply rewarded by their huge incomes anyway).
However, I am all in favour of this one, for the simple reason that it will probably p*ss off Prince Charles. I wonder what the 'Defender of Faiths' and 'Friend of Islam' is making of all this? Has he had words with Mummy?? Also, I find myself wondering whether the invitations he and Horseface receive to toady up to the House of Saud will dry up because of this. Shame. Jug-earred cretin!!
Waits to get flamed by a royalist….
Other Comments by Corylus