Flight diverted after Cat Stevens found on watch list
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
From: Coventry
FFF,
Denying visas is one thing, but diverting a plane because a passenger who has been to the US several times before, the most recent time just 2 months ago, is totally irrational.
I don't think we are "US bashing" as such, we are just criticising the handling of the "War on Terror".
Nothing at all against the US people, most of them did not vote for the moron who currently occupies the White House.
Denying visas is one thing, but diverting a plane because a passenger who has been to the US several times before, the most recent time just 2 months ago, is totally irrational.
I don't think we are "US bashing" as such, we are just criticising the handling of the "War on Terror".
Nothing at all against the US people, most of them did not vote for the moron who currently occupies the White House.
Gatvol
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 4,197
Likes: 1
From: KLAS/TIST/FAJS/KFAI
"most of them did not vote for the moron who currently occupies the White House."
Some of us did. Look at what he has for competition. I will have to vote for him again.
For sure there is no equality in why some are allowed and some are refused entry. Thats just the way it is. We at the bottom of the food chain just have to deal with it and hope things turn out OK. Seems to be no cut and dry rules out there and that folks higher up the food chain are making decisions based on their opinion. Not good for sure.
Some of us did. Look at what he has for competition. I will have to vote for him again.
For sure there is no equality in why some are allowed and some are refused entry. Thats just the way it is. We at the bottom of the food chain just have to deal with it and hope things turn out OK. Seems to be no cut and dry rules out there and that folks higher up the food chain are making decisions based on their opinion. Not good for sure.
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
From: London
Jack Straw, (who is presently in the U.S), has told Colin Powell, that he made a mistake, and Cat Stevens should have been allowed in.
I don't remember hearing him saying anything when other "ordinary" people have been denied entry into America.
419
I don't remember hearing him saying anything when other "ordinary" people have been denied entry into America.
419
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
From: Wet Coast
Don't think Colin Powell had anything to do with it.
A relatively low-level decision within the DoHS I imagine, or maybe even the Capt.'s call depending on how the situation was communicated to him/her.
A relatively low-level decision within the DoHS I imagine, or maybe even the Capt.'s call depending on how the situation was communicated to him/her.
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
From: London
PaperTiger,
I realise that Colin Powell wouldn't have anything to do with making the original decision, but as he is the U.S Secretary of State it is ultimately his responsibility.
To quote Jack Straw's spokesman
"He (Mr Straw) heard the reports of what happened to Mr Stevens. he did say to the Secretary of State that this action should not have been taken"
419
I realise that Colin Powell wouldn't have anything to do with making the original decision, but as he is the U.S Secretary of State it is ultimately his responsibility.
To quote Jack Straw's spokesman
"He (Mr Straw) heard the reports of what happened to Mr Stevens. he did say to the Secretary of State that this action should not have been taken"
419
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
From: Wet Coast
Yes, not a criticism of your post 419. In addition to Powell not having anything to do with the decision in this case, I also don't think he would have any success in getting the 'procedures' changed (assuming he wanted to). The various agencies concerned with Homeland Security do not seem to be accountable to anyone for their actions, the politicians having created them, are now out of the loop.
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
From: London
Is the Homeland security force a totally new setup, or is it an offshoot of a different organisation (such as the FBI)
419
419
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
From: Wet Coast
It's a new cabinet-level department, Tom Ridge is the Secretary (in the US, cabinet members are normally appointed not elected.)
The FBI and CIA remain completely separate.
The FBI and CIA remain completely separate.
The Act creates a new cabinet-level department, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), whose primary mission will be to prevent terrorist attacks in the United States, reduce America's vulnerability to terrorism, and minimize the damage of, and help in recovery from, terrorist attacks that do occur. To create the department, the Act consolidates into a new entity 22 existing federal agencies with more than 170,000 employees that are currently involved with border security, bioterrorism defenses and disaster management. Major agencies to be transferred to the new department include the Coast Guard, Transportation Security Administration, Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA), Customs Service, Secret Service, and agricultural import and entry inspection functions of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. The measure abolishes the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and splits the agency into two separate components — an immigration enforcement bureau and a citizenship bureau with both INS components placed within the new Department of Homeland Security.
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 4,236
Likes: 80
From: Just behind the back of beyond....
FFFFlyer,
He supported the Fatwah.....? Not according to him:
"Yusuf Islam Talks about the Satanic Verses Controversy
By Yusuf Islam
CatStevens.Com
March 12th, 2003
Firstly, it is very difficult to educate people in the midst of a political battlefield of smoke and antagonization, which is what I believe represented the atmosphere between the West and Iran back in the early 1990’s when I simply attempted to answer a question presented to me during a lecture.
Sadly, 14 years later and right up to today, some people still try to connect me to this issue, whereas I had nothing really to do with it; I was tricked and foolishly fell for the trap.
My view today with regard to respect for treaties and international law has obviously developed since those early days of ‘fire and brimstone’; the keeping of the peace and respect for the sacred is to me at the heart of Islam’s and other Religion’s prohibition against Blasphemy. But there are deep legalistic questions connected to this subject of which there can be many views, this is not necessarily the subject of this particular essay.
So…back in February 1989 I was delivering a talk about my journey to Islam at Kingston University in London, when somebody (probably a disguised journalist) mischievously posed a question about Islam’s view on apostates and blasphemers. As a student who had studied the issue for the first time, I simply did my best by answering direct from legal texts which I had read.
Instead of reporting my response in context, which I naively expected, suddenly the headline in next day’s paper read “Cat Says Kill Rushdie!” Well, needless to say, all hell then broke loose and my political education had really begun. Thank God the newspaper responsible, Today, has since folded and is now out of circulation; unfortunately the monstrous myth it created still survives.
What I actually tried to do at the lecture in Kingston, and subsequently during other interviews, was to quote ‘from the book’ what Islam says about the legal consequences for someone who commits blasphemy within the context of Islamic law where it is adopted and applied, I never ever sanctioned people taking the law in their own hands or overstepping the laws of the Britain which is what the Fatwa of Ayatollah Khomeini proposed. The truth is I never once stated support for the ‘Fatwa’
I was simply a new Muslim who had stated something which I considered quite plain and obvious and if you were to ask a bible student you know what the Ten Commandments were you would expect him to repeat them honestly, you wouldn't blame him for doing so; the Bible is full of similar headlines if you’re looking for them.
On reflection, the Satanic Verses question was another glaring case of journalistic malice, a chance for someone to distort and damage another person’s character or faith – in this case, me and Islam.
Today the myth that I supported the edict of Ayatollah Khomeini on Salman Rushdie still perpetuates. Even when music journalists review a record of mine occasionally, a few can’t help regurgitating the same old story as if I have done nothing else of worth in my fifty odd years on earth!
As for my actual statements, forget it! They would never make news. Following the fake headline printed on 23rd February 1989, I immediately sent out an official Press Release explaining my true position – one of abiding by the law and letting the legal process deal with such offences – was wholly ignored, and was only printed in a local paper in Willesden, North London.
After confirming that Islamic Law considers Blasphemy without repentance as a capital offence, I stated clearly, “Under the Islamic law, Muslims are bound to keep within the limits of the law of the country in which they live, providing that it does not restrict the freedom to worship and serve God and fulfil their basic religious duties (Fard ‘Ayn). One must not forget the ruling in Islam is also very clear about adultery, stealing and murder, but that doesn’t mean that British Muslims will go about lynching and stoning adulterers, thieves and murders. If we can’t get satisfaction within the present limits of the law, like a ban on this blasphemous book, ‘Satanic Verses’ which insults God and His Prophets – including those Prophets honoured by Christians, Jews as well as Muslims – this does not mean that we should step outside of the law to find redress. No. If Mrs Thatcher and her Government are unwilling to listen to our pleas, if our demonstrations and peaceful lobbying does not work, then perhaps the only alternative is for Muslims to get more involved in the political process of this country. It seems to be the only way left for us.”
I would also like to quote a letter I sent to the Viking, the publishers, on 8th October, five months prior to that lecture after I had been sent a preview of the Text of Satanic Verses, “I wish to express my deepest outrage at the insensitivity of Penguin Books in Publishing Salman Rushdie’s book, ‘Satanic Verses’, This book is clearly blasphemous in nature and so deeply offensive to the Muslim Community…I urge you to give the contents of this letter your most urgent attention and take a responsible decision.”
It is not my intention to say things did not become heated later during the debate, certainly there were times when I felt it necessary to speak out, emphasising the need to respect Muslim beliefs which must have sounded abrasive to liberal ears and which must have confirmed to them their image of me and my ‘apparent’ position; however, as can be seen from the foregoing, the true reality of my actual statements is light years away from the myth which has been projected.
One of the benefits - if we can consider it as such - is the motivation the whole issue gave in driving me back into the studio again. It was obvious to me that the subject of Islam was never going to be represented fairly by non-Muslim journalists and authors; it was really up to us, to help people understand some of the treasures this faith has to offer humanity, hidden as it has been by the smoke of political controversy over the years, particularly since the Iranian Revolution..
In the text of a Press Release during the launch of my first album, The Life Of The Last Prophet (Album), made after 17 years of absence from the Studio, in 1995, it read:
“The Satanic Verses was Salman Rushdie’s view of the Prophet of Islam; The Life Of The Last Prophet (s) is mine! Rushdie’s book, by his own confession, is based on fiction - mine is based on facts! Therefore people are free; they now have a choice, so let them listen and see who they are more inclined to believe. That is all I wish to say on that matter.”
On VH1’s Cat Stevens (Bio): Behind the Music documentary aired in October 200, again I was asked about the controversy. Below is a transcript of the response:
Narrator: BY THE MID 1980'S POP STAR CAT STEVENS HAD VANISHED INTO THE SHADOWS. NOW Yusuf Islam (Bio) EMERGED INTO THE LIGHT. HE WORKED TIRELESSLY FOR MUSLIM CAUSES AROUND THE WORLD. AND BY THE END OF THE DECADE HE HAD FOUND HIS VOICE AGAIN... AS A SPOKESMAN FOR THE ISLAMIC COMMUNITY. THEN IN FEBRUARY 1989 HE WAS DRAWN INTO A CONTROVERSY WHICH - FOR A TIME - WOULD ECLIPSE A DECADE OF GOOD DEEDS. WHEN BRITISH AUTHOR SALMAN RUSHDIE WAS ABOUT TO PUBLISH HIS NOVEL 'SATANIC VERSES', IT CAUSED AN OUTRAGE IN MUSLIM COMMUNITIES AROUND THE WORLD. THEY ALLEGED THAT THE AUTHOR COMMITTED BLASPHEMY BY INSULTING GOD AND HIS PROPHETS.
Yusuf: I was contacted by someone saying there's a book coming out (er) and will you join a petition to write to the publishers, and that's what we did you know it was very simple.
Narrator: THE PETITION TO STOP THE BOOK'S DISTRIBUTION FAILED. THEN, THE ALREADY VOLATILE SITUATION WAS IGNITED. IRAN'S ISLAMIC LEADER, THE AYATOLLAH KHOMEINI ISSUED A JUDGEMENT - OR A FATWAH - CALLING FOR THE DEATH OF SALMAN RUSHDIE.
Yusuf: I found myself somehow being pushed up to the front of the vanguard of this kind of struggle (um) and being asked to comment.
Yusuf (TV clip): Our aim is an ideal society....
Narrator: WITHIN DAYS OF THE CONTROVERSY ERUPTING, YUSUF ISLAM FOUND HIMSELF IN THE HOTSEAT... PRESSED TO EXPLAIN THE QUR'AN'S POSITION ON BLASPHEMY. YUSUF - A RECENT CONVERT - SAID THAT THE QUR'AN - LIKE THE BIBLE - TEACHES THAT THE PENALTY FOR BLASPHEMY IS DEATH.
Yusuf: I'd done enough studying at that point to be able to actually sort of more or less quote you know (er) chapter and verse the commentary of religious texts based on the Qur'an (um) of which there are different opinions, I said, “…well yes it says this…” Next day, you know, the headline read, ‘Cat says kill Rushdie’. I was horrified!
Narrator: BUT YUSUF SAYS THE NEWSPAPERS HAD IT WRONG.... HE NEVER ENDORSED THE FATWAH ON RUSHDIE'S LIFE.
Yusuf: I was simply a new Muslim who had stated something which I thought was quite simple and if you were to ask a bible student you know what the Ten Commandments were you would expect him to read that, you wouldn't blame him for that.
Narrator: APPALLED BY THE MEDIA'S INTERPRETATION OF HIS COMMENTS, YUSUF IMMEDIATELY RELEASED A STATEMENT TO CLARIFY HIS POSITION. IT READ,
"That is not to say I am encouraging people to break the law or take it into their own hands: far from it."
Narrator: IT WENT ON TO SAY:
"Under Islamic Law, Muslims are bound to keep with in the limits of the law of the country in which they live, providing that it does not restrict the freedom to worship and serve God and fulfill their basic religious duties."
Yusuf: In other words you can't take a rule in Islam even it is right from the Qur'an or the sayings of the Prophet, peace be upon him, and suddenly apply it yourself. You know, I think I was a little bit naïve many times (um) perhaps I should have (er) thought a little bit more before answering (er) but then again you know I was expecting people to have good intentions but it's not like that.
Narrator: THE MEDIA, HOWEVER, IGNORED HIS ATTEMPTS TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT.
I know this may not put an end to certain questions and doubts in some people’s minds about the subject, but my hope is that it will provide a clearer insight for others who may now be able to see the level of distortion which took place during the early days of this sordid controversy, and God Guides to the Truth.”
This dangerous fanatic condemned the school seizure by militants in Beslan, that left more than 300 dead, nearly half of them children. He said: "Crimes against innocent bystanders taken hostage in any circumstance have no foundation whatsoever in the life of Islam and the model example of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him."
I suspect that the paranoid Israeli reaction to his supposed support of Hamas is equally misplaced. This bloke is a peace activist, not a terrorist.
He supported the Fatwah.....? Not according to him:
"Yusuf Islam Talks about the Satanic Verses Controversy
By Yusuf Islam
CatStevens.Com
March 12th, 2003
Firstly, it is very difficult to educate people in the midst of a political battlefield of smoke and antagonization, which is what I believe represented the atmosphere between the West and Iran back in the early 1990’s when I simply attempted to answer a question presented to me during a lecture.
Sadly, 14 years later and right up to today, some people still try to connect me to this issue, whereas I had nothing really to do with it; I was tricked and foolishly fell for the trap.
My view today with regard to respect for treaties and international law has obviously developed since those early days of ‘fire and brimstone’; the keeping of the peace and respect for the sacred is to me at the heart of Islam’s and other Religion’s prohibition against Blasphemy. But there are deep legalistic questions connected to this subject of which there can be many views, this is not necessarily the subject of this particular essay.
So…back in February 1989 I was delivering a talk about my journey to Islam at Kingston University in London, when somebody (probably a disguised journalist) mischievously posed a question about Islam’s view on apostates and blasphemers. As a student who had studied the issue for the first time, I simply did my best by answering direct from legal texts which I had read.
Instead of reporting my response in context, which I naively expected, suddenly the headline in next day’s paper read “Cat Says Kill Rushdie!” Well, needless to say, all hell then broke loose and my political education had really begun. Thank God the newspaper responsible, Today, has since folded and is now out of circulation; unfortunately the monstrous myth it created still survives.
What I actually tried to do at the lecture in Kingston, and subsequently during other interviews, was to quote ‘from the book’ what Islam says about the legal consequences for someone who commits blasphemy within the context of Islamic law where it is adopted and applied, I never ever sanctioned people taking the law in their own hands or overstepping the laws of the Britain which is what the Fatwa of Ayatollah Khomeini proposed. The truth is I never once stated support for the ‘Fatwa’
I was simply a new Muslim who had stated something which I considered quite plain and obvious and if you were to ask a bible student you know what the Ten Commandments were you would expect him to repeat them honestly, you wouldn't blame him for doing so; the Bible is full of similar headlines if you’re looking for them.
On reflection, the Satanic Verses question was another glaring case of journalistic malice, a chance for someone to distort and damage another person’s character or faith – in this case, me and Islam.
Today the myth that I supported the edict of Ayatollah Khomeini on Salman Rushdie still perpetuates. Even when music journalists review a record of mine occasionally, a few can’t help regurgitating the same old story as if I have done nothing else of worth in my fifty odd years on earth!
As for my actual statements, forget it! They would never make news. Following the fake headline printed on 23rd February 1989, I immediately sent out an official Press Release explaining my true position – one of abiding by the law and letting the legal process deal with such offences – was wholly ignored, and was only printed in a local paper in Willesden, North London.
After confirming that Islamic Law considers Blasphemy without repentance as a capital offence, I stated clearly, “Under the Islamic law, Muslims are bound to keep within the limits of the law of the country in which they live, providing that it does not restrict the freedom to worship and serve God and fulfil their basic religious duties (Fard ‘Ayn). One must not forget the ruling in Islam is also very clear about adultery, stealing and murder, but that doesn’t mean that British Muslims will go about lynching and stoning adulterers, thieves and murders. If we can’t get satisfaction within the present limits of the law, like a ban on this blasphemous book, ‘Satanic Verses’ which insults God and His Prophets – including those Prophets honoured by Christians, Jews as well as Muslims – this does not mean that we should step outside of the law to find redress. No. If Mrs Thatcher and her Government are unwilling to listen to our pleas, if our demonstrations and peaceful lobbying does not work, then perhaps the only alternative is for Muslims to get more involved in the political process of this country. It seems to be the only way left for us.”
I would also like to quote a letter I sent to the Viking, the publishers, on 8th October, five months prior to that lecture after I had been sent a preview of the Text of Satanic Verses, “I wish to express my deepest outrage at the insensitivity of Penguin Books in Publishing Salman Rushdie’s book, ‘Satanic Verses’, This book is clearly blasphemous in nature and so deeply offensive to the Muslim Community…I urge you to give the contents of this letter your most urgent attention and take a responsible decision.”
It is not my intention to say things did not become heated later during the debate, certainly there were times when I felt it necessary to speak out, emphasising the need to respect Muslim beliefs which must have sounded abrasive to liberal ears and which must have confirmed to them their image of me and my ‘apparent’ position; however, as can be seen from the foregoing, the true reality of my actual statements is light years away from the myth which has been projected.
One of the benefits - if we can consider it as such - is the motivation the whole issue gave in driving me back into the studio again. It was obvious to me that the subject of Islam was never going to be represented fairly by non-Muslim journalists and authors; it was really up to us, to help people understand some of the treasures this faith has to offer humanity, hidden as it has been by the smoke of political controversy over the years, particularly since the Iranian Revolution..
In the text of a Press Release during the launch of my first album, The Life Of The Last Prophet (Album), made after 17 years of absence from the Studio, in 1995, it read:
“The Satanic Verses was Salman Rushdie’s view of the Prophet of Islam; The Life Of The Last Prophet (s) is mine! Rushdie’s book, by his own confession, is based on fiction - mine is based on facts! Therefore people are free; they now have a choice, so let them listen and see who they are more inclined to believe. That is all I wish to say on that matter.”
On VH1’s Cat Stevens (Bio): Behind the Music documentary aired in October 200, again I was asked about the controversy. Below is a transcript of the response:
Narrator: BY THE MID 1980'S POP STAR CAT STEVENS HAD VANISHED INTO THE SHADOWS. NOW Yusuf Islam (Bio) EMERGED INTO THE LIGHT. HE WORKED TIRELESSLY FOR MUSLIM CAUSES AROUND THE WORLD. AND BY THE END OF THE DECADE HE HAD FOUND HIS VOICE AGAIN... AS A SPOKESMAN FOR THE ISLAMIC COMMUNITY. THEN IN FEBRUARY 1989 HE WAS DRAWN INTO A CONTROVERSY WHICH - FOR A TIME - WOULD ECLIPSE A DECADE OF GOOD DEEDS. WHEN BRITISH AUTHOR SALMAN RUSHDIE WAS ABOUT TO PUBLISH HIS NOVEL 'SATANIC VERSES', IT CAUSED AN OUTRAGE IN MUSLIM COMMUNITIES AROUND THE WORLD. THEY ALLEGED THAT THE AUTHOR COMMITTED BLASPHEMY BY INSULTING GOD AND HIS PROPHETS.
Yusuf: I was contacted by someone saying there's a book coming out (er) and will you join a petition to write to the publishers, and that's what we did you know it was very simple.
Narrator: THE PETITION TO STOP THE BOOK'S DISTRIBUTION FAILED. THEN, THE ALREADY VOLATILE SITUATION WAS IGNITED. IRAN'S ISLAMIC LEADER, THE AYATOLLAH KHOMEINI ISSUED A JUDGEMENT - OR A FATWAH - CALLING FOR THE DEATH OF SALMAN RUSHDIE.
Yusuf: I found myself somehow being pushed up to the front of the vanguard of this kind of struggle (um) and being asked to comment.
Yusuf (TV clip): Our aim is an ideal society....
Narrator: WITHIN DAYS OF THE CONTROVERSY ERUPTING, YUSUF ISLAM FOUND HIMSELF IN THE HOTSEAT... PRESSED TO EXPLAIN THE QUR'AN'S POSITION ON BLASPHEMY. YUSUF - A RECENT CONVERT - SAID THAT THE QUR'AN - LIKE THE BIBLE - TEACHES THAT THE PENALTY FOR BLASPHEMY IS DEATH.
Yusuf: I'd done enough studying at that point to be able to actually sort of more or less quote you know (er) chapter and verse the commentary of religious texts based on the Qur'an (um) of which there are different opinions, I said, “…well yes it says this…” Next day, you know, the headline read, ‘Cat says kill Rushdie’. I was horrified!
Narrator: BUT YUSUF SAYS THE NEWSPAPERS HAD IT WRONG.... HE NEVER ENDORSED THE FATWAH ON RUSHDIE'S LIFE.
Yusuf: I was simply a new Muslim who had stated something which I thought was quite simple and if you were to ask a bible student you know what the Ten Commandments were you would expect him to read that, you wouldn't blame him for that.
Narrator: APPALLED BY THE MEDIA'S INTERPRETATION OF HIS COMMENTS, YUSUF IMMEDIATELY RELEASED A STATEMENT TO CLARIFY HIS POSITION. IT READ,
"That is not to say I am encouraging people to break the law or take it into their own hands: far from it."
Narrator: IT WENT ON TO SAY:
"Under Islamic Law, Muslims are bound to keep with in the limits of the law of the country in which they live, providing that it does not restrict the freedom to worship and serve God and fulfill their basic religious duties."
Yusuf: In other words you can't take a rule in Islam even it is right from the Qur'an or the sayings of the Prophet, peace be upon him, and suddenly apply it yourself. You know, I think I was a little bit naïve many times (um) perhaps I should have (er) thought a little bit more before answering (er) but then again you know I was expecting people to have good intentions but it's not like that.
Narrator: THE MEDIA, HOWEVER, IGNORED HIS ATTEMPTS TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT.
I know this may not put an end to certain questions and doubts in some people’s minds about the subject, but my hope is that it will provide a clearer insight for others who may now be able to see the level of distortion which took place during the early days of this sordid controversy, and God Guides to the Truth.”
This dangerous fanatic condemned the school seizure by militants in Beslan, that left more than 300 dead, nearly half of them children. He said: "Crimes against innocent bystanders taken hostage in any circumstance have no foundation whatsoever in the life of Islam and the model example of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him."
I suspect that the paranoid Israeli reaction to his supposed support of Hamas is equally misplaced. This bloke is a peace activist, not a terrorist.
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Well that is what he says now. Funny how he never sued the NYT for libel.
'The musician known as Cat Stevens said in a British television program to be broadcast next week that rather than go to a demonstration to burn an effigy of the author Salman Rushdie, ''I would have hoped that it'd be the real thing.''
The singer, who adopted the name Yusuf Islam when he converted to Islam, made the remark during a panel discussion of British reactions to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's call for Mr. Rushdie to be killed for allegedly blaspheming Islam in his best-selling novel ''The Satanic Verses.'' He also said that if Mr. Rushdie turned up at his doorstep looking for help, ''I might ring somebody who might do more damage to him than he would like.''
''I'd try to phone the Ayatollah Khomeini and tell him exactly where this man is,'' said Mr. Islam, who watched a preview of the program today and said in an interview that he stood by his comments.'
http://www.nytimes.com/books/99/04/1...shdie-cat.html
Cat Stevens authored an Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP) (a known militant group) brochure, which contains plain old anti-Semitism: "The Jews seem neither to respect God nor his creation. Their own holy books contain the curse of God brought upon them by their prophets on account of their disobedience to Him and mischief in the earth. We have seen the disrespect for religion displayed by those who consider themselves to be 'God's chosen people.' ... There will be no justice until all the land is given back to its rightful owners ... Only Islam can bring peace back to the Holy Land..."
Truly a moderate.....
'The musician known as Cat Stevens said in a British television program to be broadcast next week that rather than go to a demonstration to burn an effigy of the author Salman Rushdie, ''I would have hoped that it'd be the real thing.''
The singer, who adopted the name Yusuf Islam when he converted to Islam, made the remark during a panel discussion of British reactions to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's call for Mr. Rushdie to be killed for allegedly blaspheming Islam in his best-selling novel ''The Satanic Verses.'' He also said that if Mr. Rushdie turned up at his doorstep looking for help, ''I might ring somebody who might do more damage to him than he would like.''
''I'd try to phone the Ayatollah Khomeini and tell him exactly where this man is,'' said Mr. Islam, who watched a preview of the program today and said in an interview that he stood by his comments.'
http://www.nytimes.com/books/99/04/1...shdie-cat.html
Cat Stevens authored an Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP) (a known militant group) brochure, which contains plain old anti-Semitism: "The Jews seem neither to respect God nor his creation. Their own holy books contain the curse of God brought upon them by their prophets on account of their disobedience to Him and mischief in the earth. We have seen the disrespect for religion displayed by those who consider themselves to be 'God's chosen people.' ... There will be no justice until all the land is given back to its rightful owners ... Only Islam can bring peace back to the Holy Land..."
Truly a moderate.....
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,540
Likes: 3
From: UK
So suddenly we can believe the press can we FFFlyer? Is that because in this instance it helps to show a pacifist muslim in the role of a demon?
Contrary to the scorn so often heaped by luminaries of these pages onto stories made by reporters and journalists, and claims of their lazy and inaccurate news gathering, we can believe the report you quote rather than accept the singers word that he was misquoted when giving an answer that didn't really fit the question?
Contrary to the scorn so often heaped by luminaries of these pages onto stories made by reporters and journalists, and claims of their lazy and inaccurate news gathering, we can believe the report you quote rather than accept the singers word that he was misquoted when giving an answer that didn't really fit the question?
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
From: Wet Coast
Wrong Mr. Islam
Whatever.
According to Time, Cat Stevens isn't on the 'list':
http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...702062,00.html
Maybe he should change his name again. Let's see now, Ted Kennedy ? David Nelson ?
According to Time, Cat Stevens isn't on the 'list':
http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...702062,00.html
Maybe he should change his name again. Let's see now, Ted Kennedy ? David Nelson ?
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
The programme HYPOTHETICALS (A SATANIC SCENARIO) from which the above quote was taken is listed in the ITN archive but there is no description, so it evidently exists, as does the below.
The camera obviously lies....
LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM
1. CU christian Science Monitor reporter asking Yussuf Islam a question 0.10
2. CU Yussuf Islam replying to question with cutaways to interviewer (5 shots) 0.52
TRANSCRIPT (SEQ 1) INTERVIEWER: "In addition to being a devout Moslem you're also a writer; how does the creative artist in you cope with the idea of killing a writer for writing a book?"
TRANSCRIPT (SEQ 2) YUSSUF "In Islam there is a line between let's say freedom and the line which is then transgressed into immorality and irresponsibility and I think as far as this writer is concerned, unfortunately, he has been irresponsible with his freedom of speech. Salman Rushdie or indeed any writer who abuses the prophet, or indeed any prophet, under Islamic law, the sentence for that is actually death. It's got to be seen as a deterrent, so that other people should not commit the same mistake again."
http://www.itnarchive.com/cgi-bin/taweb.exe?x=d&o=d&q=(satanic%20AND%20verses%20AND%20cat%20AND%20stevens)%20AND%2 0(19871231%3cSYS_DATE%3c19900102)&d=RTV&i=271913&p=2&t=doc.t mpl&v=tabbed
Take your point tho, he is really a moderate muslim.
Time isn't saying he is off the watch list if you read it carefully.
The camera obviously lies....
LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM
1. CU christian Science Monitor reporter asking Yussuf Islam a question 0.10
2. CU Yussuf Islam replying to question with cutaways to interviewer (5 shots) 0.52
TRANSCRIPT (SEQ 1) INTERVIEWER: "In addition to being a devout Moslem you're also a writer; how does the creative artist in you cope with the idea of killing a writer for writing a book?"
TRANSCRIPT (SEQ 2) YUSSUF "In Islam there is a line between let's say freedom and the line which is then transgressed into immorality and irresponsibility and I think as far as this writer is concerned, unfortunately, he has been irresponsible with his freedom of speech. Salman Rushdie or indeed any writer who abuses the prophet, or indeed any prophet, under Islamic law, the sentence for that is actually death. It's got to be seen as a deterrent, so that other people should not commit the same mistake again."
http://www.itnarchive.com/cgi-bin/taweb.exe?x=d&o=d&q=(satanic%20AND%20verses%20AND%20cat%20AND%20stevens)%20AND%2 0(19871231%3cSYS_DATE%3c19900102)&d=RTV&i=271913&p=2&t=doc.t mpl&v=tabbed
Take your point tho, he is really a moderate muslim.
Time isn't saying he is off the watch list if you read it carefully.
