Salman Rushdie attack was unjustifiable, says Pakistan’s Imran Khan

[Thinker3]

This has nothing to do with Western hegemony or kowtowing to the West.

What Imran Khan has done is proven, once again, that he is a man of principle and will not compromise on his principles even if there is a political cost or danger to his life.

He said what any sane, rational individual would say, that while we can disagree and condemn Salman Rushdies actions, there is absolutely no justification for the violent attack against him.

This applies to every case where an individual is accused of 'blasphemy' - condemn what you perceive as wrong, but do not take the law into your hands and use violence.


This is not an 'alternate point of view' - it is support and glorification of violence and terrorism against those with whose views you disagree.

There can be and will be NO tolerance for these kinds of views. I encourage the members of PDF to report all such posts on social media for glorification of hatred and violence.

This is not an ordinary blasphemy case.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

This is not an ordinary blasphemy case.

It doesn't matter - nothing justifies the violent attack on Salman Rushdie. Imran Khan is absolutely correct and there is no room for promoting or supporting any view that justifies violence in response to Blasphemy, ordinary or extraordinary.

 

[Thinker3]

It doesn't matter - nothing justifies the violent attack on Salman Rushdie. Imran Khan is absolutely correct and there is no room for promoting or supporting any view that justifies violence in response to Blasphemy, ordinary or extraordinary.

Well it is your opinion, does not mean it is according to Islamic teachings, it is a sensitive issue.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Well it is your opinion, does not mean it is according to Islamic teachings, it is a sensitive issue.

Which Islamic principle allows killing/massacring people over what they wrote or said?

 

[Thinker3]

Which Islamic principle allows killing/massacring people over what they wrote or said?

Like I said it is a sensitive issue. There is no true freedom of speech or expression in the world.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Like I said it is a sensitive issue. There is no true freedom of speech or expression in the world.

I am not arguing over whether Salman Rushdie should have written or said what he did or whether there is 'true freedom of speech or not'. Imran Khan clearly condemned Salman Rushdie's actions, just as he also condemned violence in response to alleged Blasphemy.

The issue here is clear - whether you believe someone committed blasphemy or not, whether you believe true freedom of speech exists or not, there can be NO JUSTIFICATION FOR VIOLENCE.

 

[Thinker3]

I am not arguing over whether Salman Rushdie should have written or said what he did or whether there is 'true freedom of speech or not'. Imran Khan clearly condemned Salman Rushdie's actions, just as he also condemned violence in response to alleged Blasphemy.

The issue here is clear - whether you believe someone committed blasphemy or not, whether you believe true freedom of speech exists or not, there can be NO JUSTIFICATION FOR VIOLENCE.

Like I said this is a sensitive issue, I don't want to argue over it. And IK made a huge mistake by giving statement over it in ignorance.
Now not only his religious opponents but also those secular liberals who normally hold the same or more extreme view toward this are also using this against him.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

If someone had attacked/killed salman rushdie for saying something anti-semitic then the media and powers that be would be celebrating and condoning it. ONLY when it's Islamaphobia, anti-Chinese or anti-russian sentiment is freedom of speech promoted and justified.............

 

[araz]

Imran Khan makes stupid mistakes from time to time, he does not have to give such a statement, it seems as if Imran khan has given up on western hegemony and thinks he cannot come to power if the west is not happy with him. He even gave his opponents a good reason to spread propaganda against him which they are cashing in.

I dont think Imran was ever anti West and to caste him as such is not looking at him factually. He has repeatedly said he is not against West but wants Pakistan to make free independent choices. He does not like the Western tilt towards India and his statements about Afghanistan are at loggerheads with the Western tboughts of the time. But disagreeing with someone's policies does not make someone anti XYZ.
The fact is Imran has stayed in UK for many decades, married a UK origin lady and his kids are in UK to this date. However I can understand if he has grown weary of the Western lifestyle and wants to return to his roots. He understands the West better than any of the other goons that he has to contend with and this understanding shapes his policies vis a vis West and the US. Once understood he will come out in much better light than either Nawaz, Zardari or their ilk who sell themselves for their own petty interests.
A

 

[Muhammed45]

Pakistanis will have to tolerate lack of someone in Jinnah's level for a foreseeable future.

It is true that IK had some dose of independence but when he had to travel in a bus in the streets of USA to meet with American terrorist, i found out his weaknesses. IK of Pakistan, Mosaddegh of Iran. So similar, both were stabbed by Americans. Between Bajwa and IK, it looks like Americans preferred Bajwa for obvious reasons.

 

[Thinker3]

I dont think Imran was ever anti West and to caste him as such is not looking at him factually. He jas repeatedly said he is not against West but wants Pakistan to make free independent choices. He does not like the Western tilt towards India and his statements about Afghanistan are at loggerheads with the Western tboughts of the time. But disagreeing with someone's policies does not make someone anti XYZ.
The fact is Imran has stayed in UK for many decades, married a UK origin lady and his kids are in UK to this date. However I can understand if he has grown weary of the Western lifestyle and wants to return to his roots. He understands the West better than any of the other goons that he has to contend with and this understanding shapes his policies vis a vis West and the US. Once understood he will come out in much better light than either Nawaz, Zardari or their ilk who sell themselves for their own petty interests.
A

Does not matter what IK thinks, if anyone speaks for Islam west becomes against that person and remove him from power, like they removed him.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Like I said this is a sensitive issue, I don't want to argue over it. And IK made a huge mistake by giving statement over it in ignorance.
Now not only his religious opponents but also those secular liberals who normally hold the same or more extreme view toward this are also using this against him.

There is no ignorance - just right or wrong.

You are either on the side of justice and the rule of law by condemning violence or you are on the side of violent extremism, criminals and terrorism by justifying and glorifying violence.

This BS of 'oh it's a sensitive issue, oh its a complex issue, oh it's this or that' is all just excuses to justify criminal behavior and violence in response to someone's views.

If you have to resort to violence in response to what someone says or writes, then it is your own faith that is weak and corrupt.

 

[Thinker3]

There is no ignorance - just right or wrong.

You are either on the side of justice and the rule of law by condemning violence or you are on the side of violent extremism, criminals and terrorism by justifying and glorifying violence.

This BS of 'oh it's a sensitive issue, oh its a complex issue, oh it's this or that' is all just excuses to justify criminal behavior and violence in response to someone's views.

If you have to resort to violence in response to what someone says or writes, then it is your own faith that is weak and corrupt.

Like I said I don't want to argue over this issue, this is Western Ideaology which you are talking from, although they themselves don't follow it.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Like I said I don't want to argue over this issue, this is Western Ideaology which you are talking from, although they themselves don't follow it.

You're deflecting because you have no response.

The issue is simple and it has nothing to do with Western, Eastern or Islamic ideology - it is a universal truth - you either condemn violence in response to speech you disagree with or you support violence in response to speech you disagree with.

Supporting and justifying violence in response to speech (offensive or otherwise) makes you a supporter of extremism, terrorism and criminal activity - period.

 

[Thinker3]

There is no ignorance - just right or wrong.

You are either on the side of justice and the rule of law by condemning violence or you are on the side of violent extremism, criminals and terrorism by justifying and glorifying violence.

This BS of 'oh it's a sensitive issue, oh its a complex issue, oh it's this or that' is all just excuses to justify criminal behavior and violence in response to someone's views.

If you have to resort to violence in response to what someone says or writes, then it is your own faith that is weak and corrupt.

For example what will happen if you speak against holocaust event in West? They will fire you from your job or kick you out of collage, is this not violence, terrorism?

You're deflecting because you have no response.

The issue is simple and it has nothing to do with Western, Eastern or Islamic ideology - it is a universal truth - you either condemn violence in response to speech you disagree with or you support violence in response to speech you disagree with.

Supporting and justifying violence in response to speech (offensive or otherwise) makes you a supporter of extremism, terrorism and criminal activity - period.

I can give you many justifications but I don't want to, you can ask people with Islamic knowledge to explain you this issue.