The Queen, Salman Rushdie and Freedom of Speech Tirade

Pic of Salman Rushdie after receiving knighthood. Sadly this dude’s head is too impure to be used as stadium for Qatar’s world cup

There has always been a tendency the “civilised” West has always forgotten to stay clear of – and that is, conflating criticism with gaslighting and denigration of our faith. From grotesque drawings with stereotypical caricature by so called Danish and French cartoonists to displaying hideous cartoons of the prophet ﷺ on government buildings, no stone has been left unturned in trying to synonymise blatant insult and valid criticism.

However, the emergence of this conflation is not recent and is certainly not limited to the infamous fatwa by Ayatollah Khomenein demanding Rushdie’s head for a set bounty and go even beyond far beyond the 19th century. This collective crusade by the West against Islam has been taking place through plays, movies, stories, documentaries and various other medias has been raging since forever.

Estimates show that more than 80,000 books against Islam alone were published since the onset of World War 2. To put that into perspective, if one book was written per day, at the beginning of the writings, the Ottomans would still be taxing Jizya from the USA in the Mediterranean, the Holy Roman Empire would still exist, the French revolution still wouldn’t have taken place and most importantly the Caliphate would still be alive.

Not to invalidate the writings however, in their zeal for diminishing the growing control and influence of Islam, they have mistaken mockeries and lies for criticism, and genuine criticism for ungratefulness and affront. Muslims and victims of British colonialism and genocides that refused to mourn the queen’s death or offer their condolences to the royal family have attracted outrage in media.

The Queen and Colonialism

The truth is, it is a moot point to address the Queen and her role in British atrocities against third world and underdeveloped nations. This is especially so considering the nominal and ceremonial status of the British monarchy, which renders them mostly handicapped and unable to participate in politics or decision making.

Some monarchs solely serve a ceremonial role, thereby leaving no space for the monarch to wield any form of authority over policy. These monarchs typically have very specific constitutional roles that are limited to providing the necessary ceremonial formalities for decisions to be implemented.

However, this does not explain the Queen granting Salman Rushdie and Tony Blaire the highest level of knighthood. This would be the Middle Eastern equivalent to the Saudis and the Emiratis awarding their nation’s highest prestigious national award to Modi, branded as the butcher of Gujarat.

Tony Blaire and the Bush administration principal genesis for the war crimes in Iraq that led to the death of millions where half a million young children died as a result of the war and famines. While Bush cannot be trialed by ICC for war crimes due to USA not being a signatory, that singles Blaire out. He was not up to be questioned or trialed during his ministry due to diplomatic immunity. And even then, he has evaded trials several times.

On January of 2022, he was granted knighthood by the Queen of England, the nation’s most prestigious honour. This resulted in immense backlash where around 500 thousand people filed petition for removal of his knighthood.

Despite the Queen not being active and unable to participate in politics, this to some extent is a reflection of the royal family’s endorsement of war crimes, genocide as well as the blatant and blind opposition to Islam. Tony Blair, after stepping down, converted to Catholicism and allegedly “repented” for his crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Salman Rushdie and freedom of speech

Nothing can be a better love story than the right to freely criticise political authorities and governments and……a mediocre writer attempting to write subliminal garbage. His book, “The Satanic Verses” coincidentally inspired by the life of our prophet with an added concoction of a materialist man consumed by desires. The name also pays tribute to the myth of the satanic verses based on mawdu’ (fabricated) hadith found in works of Ibn Ishaq.

Rushdie LOOOOOOVES free speech. He in fact has very passionate nights with it reports show

Proded to fame by the Ayatollah Khomeini’s infamous fatwa, he has received numerous threats and bounties on his head. This was a griveous mistake by the Shia clergy that has further enabled the Western world to propagate their views with greater tenacity against Muslims politically and through a variety of mediums.

Despite not campaigning or speaking unequivocally for free speech as a central tenet of his beliefs and ideas before or even after the writing, Salman Rushdie is hailed as warrior for free speech. Titles such as “Salman Rushdie’s lifelong fight for free speech”, “Salman Rushdie, The Free Speech Champion Who Lived In Hiding For Nine Years”, “Sir Salman Rushdie: A life spent fighting for free speech – attacked at a bastion of free speech” and other ridiculous and absurd titles.

Salman Rushdie has not a single book or article as credit of his contribution to free speech.

Free speech and selectivism

Absolute free speech is always anarchic. It is merely common sense that there is some level of restriction to maintain law and order. An army where the soldier questions and mocks the authority lacks discipline and order. A nation that mocks its national anthem and uses its flag as toilet paper lacks patriotism and desire to put their all and sacrifice their lives for their nation. However, that is not to say that free speech should be done away with as a whole to maintain law and order to the extent of the Chinese.

Rights should not be ceded to the authority to meet their desire for imperialism, communalism and warmongering tendencies. Absolute free speech is impossible and hence there should be a level of selection that would enable the greater good for the society. The same countries that fashion themselves as the paradigm of liberty, equality and freedom are the same nations that try to cancel any sort of oppositions that question their history and political narratives.

“It is unfortunate that those who advocate that the freedom of expression cannot be restricted in any way when it comes to themselves easily restrict this freedom when it relates to others.” said the Turkish Foreign Ministry to France that tried to ban symbol of the Gray Wolves which they defined as a Turkish ultranationalist alr right group.

Turkish people living in France and Turkey were outraged by the decision that led to the criminalization of denying the genocide Armenian genocide which is overwhelmingly denied by the Turkish public and authorities. The law that was repealed carried a penalty of 40,000 euros in fines or a year in prison. Denial of the Armenian genocide was crowned as “hate speech”.

Despite the Armenian genocide being up for criticism in the name of free speech, the same respect is not granted to other various genocides.

French police have imprisoned a teenager for irony less than a week after the pro-“free expression” demonstrations that erupted in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists’ murders. Such self stab in the back is mandatory for a group of agenda driven neo conservative imbeciles and morons rallying on a comically extremist rendition of post modernist position.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.