Rushdie slams “pussies” who won’t defend free speech

April 27, 2015 at 6:28 pm (apologists and collaborators, democracy, Free Speech, intellectuals, islamism, Jim D, literature, satire)

The world is turned upside down: Amnesty’s conference recently voted against condemning anti-Semitism, and now PEN members refuse to defend free speech:

Salman Rushdie slams the “pussies”, some of whom are (or were) friends of his:

“If PEN as a free-speech organisation can’t defend and celebrate people who have been murdered for drawing pictures, then frankly the organisation is not worth the name,” Rushdie said. “What I would say to both Peter and Michael and the others is, I hope nobody ever comes after them.”

This speech is simply superb:


  1. Steven Johnston said,

    Well said Rushdie and shame on PEN, when it really matters they show what a bunch of bankers they are.

  2. Mike Killingworth said,

    Bob Dylan wrote:

    I pity the poor immigrant
    Whose labours are all in vain

    and they’re in vain because the immigrant will never be accepted by the land they arrive in (because they’re too old to learn all they need to learn) or the one they’ve left (because they left it – no matter what horrors they ran from. The immigrant’s children – that’s a different story.

    Rushdie of all people should know better. Clearly he doesn’t: perhaps he should go talk to some “recovering” alcoholics of Irish origin about his Englishness. And in the unlikely event that they don’t license themselves to kick the beejaysus out of him, he might – just – learn something. He might even learn why a fatwa was pronounced against him.

    And you might do well to reflect why it is that there are more people who wish to destroy Western culture than there are people born into it. A blog that – rightly – quotes Lenin with approval should know far better than to post this self-serving nonsense.

  3. Jim Denham said,

    What the fuck are you on about, Mike?

    • Mike Killingworth said,

      Let me have a post (say 300-400 words) and I’ll tell you, Jim. But in the meantime, a one sentence summary: the politics of ethnicity is far more fundamental than that of class.

      • februarycallendar said,

        I recognise that they have that power on a large number of people, but I still find it indefensible that people will defend physical violence if it comes from the “right” people who have been sufficiently oppressed in the past. I don’t think the majority of Irish people today would reckon that the crimes of the British Empire in another time, inexcusable and profound as those are, justify the issuing of fatwas.

        What is your opinion of the Irish people who welcomed the Queen in 2011? If you are not Irish yourself, you do not have the authority to call them “race traitors” or anything along those lines.

  4. Lamia said,

    He means Rushdie should have stayed in the proper box for immigrant Muslims that good leftists like Mike Killingworth prepared for him, and left the atheism stuff to white, native-born British people.

    “He might even learn why a fatwa was pronounced against him. ”

    What a scumbag this pseudo-socialist Mike Killingworth is. Utter filth.

    • Mike Killingworth said,

      There’s an old saying: no case – abuse plaintiff’s attorney.

      • Lamia said,

        You have made no case yourself, just a sneer at Rushdie that you are unable to support.

        But then, what better could we expect from someone who supports turning areas of our cities over to Sharia rule, sacrificing the rights of women and minorities in order that he and others be allowed to keep their own for a little longer?

  5. Steven Johnston said,

    Oh I know why the Fatwa was pronounced against Rushdie and the Satanic Verses was just a feeble excuse.

    The real reason was that the Ayatollah Khomeini was not winning the war against Iraq, so he could not show the Muslim world that he was a powerful leader. So he needed another way to show them this, so step forward Rushdie, right man at the right time and hey presto, the fatwa! Now the Ayatollah could boast that he was the spiritual leader of Islam.

    Does that answer your question Mike? It was not Rushdie’s fault so stop blaming the victim, that is not really something the left does anyway, so I’m confused as to why they are doing it here.

    • Mike Killingworth said,

      Half right. The Ayatollah however knew that he could never convert the Sunni Arabs to Shia Islam and, so far as I know, never tried.

      • Steven Johnston said,

        Say Mike, I’m a little out of touch with the left, do you still see religion as the opaite of the masses?
        As for the fatwa were you on the side of the Ayatollah and with Charlie Hebdo attack, did they ask for it?

      • Mike Killingworth said,

        It is not a question of whose side I am on: it is a question of objective analysis.

        Marx’s description of a communist society IIRC was one in which aesthetic appreciation had replaced creedal religion: that is to say, people lived in the cultural superstructure nevertheless. That is where most of us spend most of our time in the world as is.

        I do not expect you to be satisfied, Steven, until you have fostered upon me, at least to your own satisfaction, views which I do not hold and you have no reason to suppose that I hold. It was precisely to elicit the kind of thoughtless anger which lies behind your comments that I made my original posting in the terms that I did. Those who let their heart rule their head may well be behaving as is natural for humans to behave – I’d say they are – but it was precisely to overcome such an approach to life that Marx politicised the Hegelian dialectic.

      • Glesga Keeping Scotland Free From Loonies said,

        Going by your posts you seem to believe in free speech.

  6. Steven Johnston said,

    Mike, there is an old saying BS baffles brains.
    Just a simple yes or no will do, did you support the fatwa on Rushdie?
    Did you support the Charlie Hedbo attacks?
    With all due respect these are easy questions to answer.

    • Mike Killingworth said,

      The short answer is of course “no” in each case. However, were anyone to accuse me of giving that answer only because I am a white Westerner (I am assuming that such a person would be neither of those things, and indeed wishes to destroy both Western culture and its cultural assumptions, including the insights of both Marx and Freud) then I would have to answer “yes” to that. I have no idea what answer to the question – or any other question – I would give if I were not a white Westerner, because then I would be someone else entirely.

      • Steven Johnston said,

        Well, as a leftie Mike I’d sure you’d see class being more important than race.
        But thank you for answering my questions, I’d say the same as you, it’s no to both.

  7. mike said,

    unremarkable speech by Rushdie/ He’s singing out of the imperialist hymnbook.

    • Glesga Keeping Scotland Free From Loonies said,

      He was speaking for himself you idiot. What crap is an imperialist hymnbook supposed to be. Rushdie is the man that exposed the Islamists for what they are. He said what people knew and were afraid to say. Now everyone knows that Islam is a death cult.

      • Steven Johnston said,

        Capitalism, and therefore Imperialism, does not give a damn for religion, for any race or creed!

        Profit alone is its motivation and that, in a competitive world, means geo-political control over markets and resources. Of course it will use differences between people, race, religion, football (useful worldwide to reinforce national allegiances), to divide and weaken potential opposition.

        This was clearly seen in Iraq ,where there was a far greater toll of the indigenous population due to inter-Muslim strife than was caused by the coalition military action.

        In fact, one group of Muslims, the Sufis who were viciously persecuted by Saddam Hussein’s “progressive” regime, were freed from their terrible incarceration following the fall of the Baathists.

        No wonder the left is fucked with people like this representing it!

    • Steven Johnston said,

      Why the f**k would imperialists care what religion you are?
      All they are interested in is extracting a profit from each and every worker. It cost them! It hit their pocket too the fatwa with all the extra security they had to pay for to protect him. If anything they would want to shut him up.

      • Glesga Keeping Scotland Free From Loonies said,

        Each worker gets a wage from the profit. Each worker could set up their own business and keep the profit! Do you have an alternative! Like big brother state just making paper clip factories and homes for the workers where we all appreciate the state and march along with the red flags thanking big brother.

  8. Steven Johnston said,

    But then, what better could we expect from someone who supports turning areas of our cities over to Sharia rule, sacrificing the rights of women and minorities in order that he and others be allowed to keep their own for a little longer?”

    I’m trying to work out why the left would want to do this, what I’ve come up with is…if you are reactionary on political grounds that is rightly something the left condemns. but, if you your reactionary politics stem from your religion that is acceptable and if anyone condemns those beliefs, they are the racists.
    So, BNP members that beat up blacks and gays are bad, but if a gay person is sentenced to death in an Islamic country for being gay that is fine.

    Have I got that right or am I miles away? I know the left is famous for personalising attacks on capitalism, you know they blamed Thatcher etc and they are fanatically anti-American, so perhaps they think my enemies enemy is my friend. But, as the Ayatollah Khomeini showed, they’d be the first against the wall.

    • Lamia said,

      Well that is one possible explanation, Steven. Another is that the commitment of some/many on the far left to fight for women and some minorities was only ever skin-deep and tactical – i.e. it was a case of doing the opposite of ‘the right’. Now that the far left has mates who are far more socially reactionary than the conservatives and even, for the most part, UKIP, they consider women’s rights and gay rights either an irrelevance or a nuisance, and something to be disparaged and dismissed as motivated by ‘racism’. The same with antisemitism, which they are keen either on not seeing or on reclassifying as ‘anti-zionism’. We know that some on the far left have a tendency for dinosaur-like attitudes to women, rape etcetera. The mask is slipping with ‘progressives’ like Mike, and what lies beneath is patriarchal, reactionary and ugly.

      • Mike Killingworth said,

        There is a difference between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, you know. If only because Arabs are as Semitic as Jews.

      • Jim Denham said,

        Oh! I see that old favourite (a favourite of anti-Semites the world over, that is) that as Arabs are “semites” then there can be no such thing as anti-Semitism and/or it isn’t specifically anti-Jewish, etc, etc: it’s bollocks of course.

      • Mike Killingworth said,

        Perhaps if you linked to a site that wasn’t called “Zionism on the Web” your point would be more credible, Jim.

        And… yes, in order to be racist it is first necessary to be white.

      • Jim Denham said,

        Try dealing with the argument, Mike, instead of resorting to knee-jerk anti-“Zionism.”

        And of -fuckin’- course, non white people can be racist. Noticed recent events in South Africa, by any chance?

      • Mike Killingworth said,

        I presume you are referring to the “anti-immigrant” violence in that country. The cause of that, as you well know, Jim, is the behaviour of white people in Africa over the last 300 years. I suggest you go and ask a few black activists if black people can ever be racist and you will be able to reflect upon their answer from your hospital bed. So far as I know the supposedly Marxist Zuma government has not expropriated the villas of the rich white capitalists nor indeed made their life significantly less pleasant than it was under the apartheid regime.

      • Jim Denham said,

        The responsibility for the violence in South Africa lies with the people who are carrying it out Mike: a somewhat complex idea I admit.

        As it happens, I *have* discussed the question of whether black people can be racist with black people … and their response to incredulity at the idea that anyone was even asking the question (ie obviously: “yes”!). Your comment about landing up in a “hospital bed” is, I’d suggest, somewhat … racist.

      • Mike Killingworth said,

        I think we can agree that some black people, both in the present and in the past, have licensed themselves to practise violence by reference to past white violence against blacks (e.g. the Middle Passage). Because I am white I do not think I have the right to criticise the behaviour of black people. Apparently you think this is a racist position.

        But what else can I expect of a man who has one and one only political interest, i.e. Zionism, which he calls anti-Semitism (presumably to see if he can get away with it) and runs a blog whose title would lead the unwary to suspect that he had some vague connection with left-wing thought.

  9. caseypurvis said,


  10. Steven Johnston said,

    “And… yes, in order to be racist it is first necessary to be white.”

    I. Am. Speechless.
    As they used to say in the wild west, give ’em enough rope…
    Mike, no keyboard but your own can do a better job of condemning you.

    • Glesga Keeping Scotland Free From Loonies said,

      Steven would it be in order to call the Grand Mufti of Palestine a racist? He wanted to kill Jews of all colours.

  11. Steven Johnston said,

    “Your comment about landing up in a “hospital bed” is, I’d suggest, somewhat … racist.”

    …and shows that he is probably in the SWP!

    As they seem to find that acceptable behaviour or to laugh about.
    Debating with a fascist/Tory/someone you don’t agree with…beat ’em up!

    But I get the point about his comment being racist, as he seems to suggest that black people will turn violent if you say something offensive to them. Ethnic fury?

    • Mike Killingworth said,

      I knew if I persisted for long enough you would make me smile! I have NEVER been a member of the SWP, although I have abused a few of them down the years…

      • Steven Johnston said,

        Well at least we agree on something! The SWP deserve all the abuse they get and then some. Like the Morning Star, you know you are in the wrong when you agree with the SWP.

      • Glesga Keeping Scotland Free From Loonies said,

        I thought the SWP were former alter boys escaping abuse. Happy May Day.

      • Mike Killingworth said,

        Not that sort of abuse. I’m not into smells and bells…

  12. damon said,

    Is it really free speech when issues like Israeli soldiers speaking out about what happened in Gaza last year can’t get discussed without people cursing each other and making accusations of antisemitism etc?

    If what I read in the Guardian today is true, then some of those Israel champions are pretty dishonest people. (I was thinking of an Israel supporting website I got banned from for suggesting things that the soldiers are talking about here)

    • Mike Killingworth said,

      This site does not stand for free speech. Or for socialism. Only for Zionism.

      • Steven Johnston said,

        The fact that you are allowed to post such drivel here proves it does stand for free speech.

      • Mike Killingworth said,

        No. It simply means that I haven’t been banned. Yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: