Every scoundrel claims his words were “taken out of context” when he’s caught out. In this case it’s noteworthy that Khan feels compelled to take the “out of context” defense lest anyone think he actually supports the freedom of speech and Salman Rushdie’s right to live despite having ostensibly offended Islam. Aren’t the Muslims who support jihad violence just a “tiny minority of extremists”? So why is Khan so afraid of appearing to support Rushdie?
“Imran Khan Claims Remarks on Salman Rushdie Taken ‘Out of Context,’” Newsweek Pakistan, August 20, 2022:
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan on Friday backtracked from an earlier interview in which he had come out against the attack on author Salman Rushdie at an event in New York last week.
On Friday, British publication The Guardian published an interview with Khan in which he described the attack on the author of The Satanic Verses as “terrible” and “sad,” adding that while the anger over the book was understandable, there was no justification for violence. “Rushdie understood, because he came from a Muslim family. He knows the love, respect, reverence of a prophet that lives in our hearts. He knew that,” Khan told The Guardian. “So the anger I understood, but you can’t justify what happened,” he added.
As the interview started circulating on social media, supporters of the right-wing Tehreek-e-Labaik Pakistan (TLP) accused the former prime minister of supporting a “blasphemer” while Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (Fazl) chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman used it as “proof” of allegations that Khan was “an agent of foreigners” against Islam. PTI supporters, meanwhile, sought to defend Khan by highlighting earlier statements in which he had called Rushdie “unbalanced” for criticizing him over the boycott of an event in India that was to be attended by both.
Rejecting the criticism, Khan told 92News—in a video also shared by the PTI’s official Twitter account—that The Guardian had taken his statement out of context. “I had refused to attend an event in India over its invitation to Rushdie,” he recalled, noting that Rushdie had given a speech against him over his boycott. “During the interview, I had sought to explain the Islamic position on [legal action against] blasphemy, and had cited the Sialkot tragedy as an example,” he said. “It was in this context that I had talked about Salman Rushdie,” he added….
Wellington says
He understands the anger but can’t justify what happened?
He’s either lying or he is ignorant and confused respecting what Islam professes. I think he’s lying.
tim gallagher says
I’m with you. I would never trust a word that comes out of Imran Khan’s mouth, Wellington. He was shown in a report on the TV news out here last night (probably they would bother to show him because he is such a famous former cricketer and is thus fairly well known in Australia) and he was talking at a rally and the report said that the authorities want to arrest him for stirring up trouble (can’t recall the exact issue). He got ousted from his position as Prime Minister a while back and the news report said that he is now trying to make some kind of comeback to political power. I can imagine that, with his ego, he wouldn’t be able to stand being out of power for long. Pakistan would hardly ever make the news out here, except for a terrorist attack with big death toll, so I thought that the only reason they decided to show Khan was because of his fame as a big time cricketer many years ago.
Infidel says
His life would have been so much smoother had he done what other cricketers do and simply gone into cricket administration or commentary
tim gallagher says
That’s true, Infidel. I have to say that I lost track of Khan, as most Australians would have done, from the time when he stopped being the playboy cricketer, who married the daughter of that very rich man from the UK, and then I was surprised that he turned up as a big wheel in Pakistani politics. I guess that being a mere cricket commentator or coach would not have satisfied his notion of his own importance so he had to, instead, have a go at running the country not just some cricket team. I wish him nothing but the worst of everything. Pakistan seems an appalling country to me and I’m sure he fits right on in. i suspect that life is just one massive ego trip for Khan.
mortimer says
Reply to Wellintgon: Either Khan is lying or ignorant of what Islam teaches. Imran Khan knows what Islam teaches … he is lying according to another Islamic teaching called ‘TAQIYYA’.
Imran Khan explained the issue as an Islamist who believes in the blasphemy punishment. Khan basically acknowledged that Rushdie had no excuse for blasphemy.
Khan said, “Rushdie understood, because he came from a Muslim family. He knows the love, respect, reverence of a prophet that lives in our hearts.”
So Rushdie deserved the death sentence/fatwa as an apostate and blasphemer.
We get your not-so-hidden message, Mr. Khan.
Khan’s message is taqiyya, because Khan is an Islamist.
The blasphemy punishment of assassination is part of jihadic warfare against ‘THE NEAR ENEMY’.
Gregory D. says
A grotesque human being who follows a grotesque attempt at a religion, whose acolytes have perpetrated 300 million murders against the human species.
He can’t be fixed, any more than his prophet’s reputation can be stabbed into respect and credibility.
mortimer says
Imran Khan is a hard-core Islamist. He was censured recently for incitement to public disharmony.
gravenimage says
True–but this seems to be mostly an internal Pakistani power struggle. It is not as thought the Pakistani government is opposing attacks on “blasphemers” or Infidels.
gravenimage says
Pakistan: Imran Khan walks back condemnation of attack on Rushdie, says his words were taken out of context
……………………..
Really, I’m just as barbaric as every other pious Muslim thug! I love stabbing peaceful authors! Good grief…
mortimer says
Please, GI, you are a journalist. A journalist has a responsibility to express things accurately and fairly.
Khan is an Islamist and strict follower of Sharia. Executing a blasphemer is Allah’s legislation. Imran Khan supports Allah’s legislation, because for him that is the truth.
According to the Koran, ‘fitna’ (meaning to disagree with Mohammed) is worse than killing.
Sharia law says that someone who verbally opposes Islam is ‘at war’ with Islam. Rushdie should be executed because he broke two rules of Sharia law.
Sharia law says: “The gravity and magnitude of this severe crime (of blasphemy) can never be accepted in any shape or form, in any era or reality.” – On the authority of Hassan ibn Ali (ra) The Prophet of Malhama (Slaughter), The Prophet of Maahi (Destruction) said ‘Whoever insults a Prophet kill him.’ [Recorded in Al-Haakim in his book Al-Mustadrak]
James Lincoln says
mortimer says,
“Khan is an Islamist and strict follower of Sharia. Executing a blasphemer is Allah’s legislation. Imran Khan supports Allah’s legislation, because for him that is the truth.”
I guess what you’re saying is that Khan is another human being with the “wrong information”.
It may explain his behavior – but does not excuse it.
somehistory says
Right on, James Lincoln. So very true!
Infidel says
GI is a journalist? That’s news to me
somehistory says
me too. she has said she is an artist and that’s not the same thing at all.
gravenimage says
Infidel and Somehistory, I have done a lot of publication work and have at times worked with journalists. And my husband has a degree in journalism. But i am not myself a journalist, nor have I ever claimed to be.
gravenimage says
Mortimer, I did not include quote marks–I was mocking Imran Khan and those like him, not presenting this as something he literally said. Moreover, no one would assume that he would characterize himself as a Muslim thug, so obviously my intent was not to mislead anyone about this being an exact quote.
Then, I am not a journalist and have never claimed to be. I have worked around journalism and journalists–my husband has a degree in journalism, and I have done editorial and graphics editorial work on publications–mostly arts journals.
I have a great deal of respect for serious journalists, but have not claimed to a journalist myself.
Nor do I comment here as a journalist. I am very careful to report the truth here, but not in cases, as above, where I am obviously being sarcastic. I suppose I could have put the “sarc” tag on that post. but I assumed that this was so obvious as to not be necessary in this case.
As for what Shari’ah law teaches re “blasphemy”, I am all too aware of this savagery, and have cited the same here myself.
Infidel says
You’re one of the lucky ones that he didn’t condemn to Nuremburg, his home away from home 😈
somehistory says
Like that say so often on that game show, “good answer, good answer.”
somehistory says
She did use the word “thug.” Guess that was a passable label. I’m going to try for “tapioca brains.” we’ll see how that goes over.
gravenimage says
Thanks, Infidel and Somehistory.
Infidel says
One of the funniest aspects of this story is that the Guardian tried to rehabilitate his image, which had taken a beating during his leadership of Pakistan. Only problem for him: that required showing him as humane towards an islam critic, which was problematic w/ those fans of him who are on the jihad against islamophobia. So he had to walk back that statement, effectively either showing that he’s a flip-flopper, or that the Guardian newspaper is a liar
Both are true!
gravenimage says
Spot on analysis.
Ex Sgt Brown says
Because a woman:s rights to choose her own husband is Un-Islamic
mortimer says
A Muslim woman may choose her husband unless the patriarch decides she should marry someone else. Today, fewer Muslims are willing to enforce patriarchal rights over their children, through honor killing. Almost every Muslim family has an apostate in it today.
gravenimage says
Over 90% of the world’s “Honor Killings” are perpetrated by Muslims. So quite a few Muslims are all too willing, I’m afraid.
Infidel says
Yeah, any muslim who dares oppose the murder attempt on Rushdie risks losing the support of the muslim gallery. Imran Khan did it so that his party’s support doesn’t drop, just like Washington Post columnist Rana Ayyub deleted her recent tweet just hoping for a quick recovery for Rushdie after muslim trolls announced their disappointment w/ her and decided to ‘unfollow’ her
That should show people where muslim majority opinion is on things such as this. If the overwhelming majority of muslims opposed this, neither Imran Khan nor Rana Ayyub would be shy of supporting Rushdie
somehistory says
Your comment should be re-posted every time some one speaks the Truth and then backs up or apologizes or deletes.
the “moslum community,” a.k.a. mozlum majorities….are all for the “strike the neck.” and other demonic commands.
mortimer says
To Infidel: Muslims who observe Sharia law strictly should not be opposed or criticized by other Muslims who follow it loosely. That is also in Sharia law.
somehistory says
“mortimer” doesn’t want anyone to criticize what is ‘written” in the book of unholy demonic filth. Because we might hurt the feelings of mozlums who strictly follow it.
“mortimer” wants us all to observe the lawlessness from satan.
Bikinis not Burkas says
Taqiyya!
Andrew Blackadder says
He certainly learned the way of the politician rather fast didnt he by saying something live on TV and then saying thats not what he meant to say….
Say what you mean and mean what you say… Why is that so hard for some people?.
Beneath the Veil of Consciousness says
Oh! It was Islam that caused the guy to fly into a murderous rage. I heard Islam has a tendency to effect people in this way. Now I feel safer.