|
Daniel Pipes Mobile Edition Regular Site |
|
| Home | Articles | Blog | Reviews | Spoken | Books | Other Languages | Biographical | Middle East Forum | About this site | Mailing List | Search | |
Reader comment on item: Khomeini vs. Rushdie, Two Decades Later
Submitted by Paul (United States), Feb 26, 2009 at 08:28
Hello,
Two things:
1. Noted you used the word "edict" not "fatwa." My guess is that there is an interesting reason for this.
2. Very important point in this paragraph. Good to expand to full oped column length article and publish widely.
Sincerely,
Paul
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".
Daniel Pipes replies:
1. Yes, Khomeini's decision concerning Rushdie did not meet the requirements of a fatwa.
2. Thank you but I have written extensively on the Rushdie case - including a book - and so limit my comments on it at this point.
| Title | Commenter | Date | Thread | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| You are right [48 words] | Johnny | May 20, 2010 06:53 | 173141 | ||
| Khomeini [7 words] | Jon Purizhansky | Feb 26, 2009 13:32 | 151232 | ||
w/response from Daniel Pipes | Paul | Feb 26, 2009 08:28 | 151219 |