3 ms·
It will be interesting to see if we learn about the motivations of the attacker, the AP doesn't seem to be reporting on that yet.
by ch4s3 4y ago
It will be interesting to see if we learn about the motivations of the attacker, the AP doesn't seem to be reporting on that yet.
- Overtonwindow 4y ago
- toyg 4y agoLol, you must be young. You think "they" didn't like the Pope, or the Kennedys, or Reagan, or any of the famous folks publicly attacked...?
- Overtonwindow 4y ago[flagged]
- ch4s3 4y agoThis feels conspiratorial, but is actually also incorrect. Rushdie didn't actually receive much support in the media around the fatwa, the popular narrative in certain types of publications was that he had brought it on himself.
- jsnk 4y agoDo we really need the press to tell us 4 is the sum of 2 and 2 for everything? I think it's fairly simple and we should be able to put 2 and 2 together.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- Beltalowda 4y agoQuite a number of people have been assassinated by random people with mental health issues. Of course, it would be naïve to not suspect a relation to Islamic fundamentalism, but as a public person you're kind of always at risk, and you can never know the motivation. It doesn't really matter if that's reported today or tomorrow, when we can operate on facts rather than assumptions (even if those assumptions are likely to be true). And taking back wrong reporting is basically impossible as many people will never see the correction.
- ch4s3 4y agoThe fact is we don't actually know anything yet. One can suppose that the attacker was angry about something Rushdie said or wrote, but we don't know that yet. For all we know the guy could just be insane, or have a more personal grudge.
- xdennis 4y agoI don't think there's anything to criticize about the press here. Many articles mention the calls for his assassination and bounties placed on him by Islamic extremists. But without learning more about the attacker it would be wrong to rush to accuse anyone.
- xdennis 4y agoUnless he said something as he was attacking, there's no way to find out right away.
- ch4s3 4y agoHe could have posted about it online or have a know connection to Rushdie beforehand. But yes that's what I'm saying, it will be interesting to find out later.
- danso 4y agoThe AP (nor anyone) isn't even reporting Rushdie's medical condition, presumably because it's still unknown. How are they expected to know what's in the just-apprehended attacker's head? The AP article does include context about the fatwa against him and the $3M reward: > Rushdie’s book “The Satanic Verses” has been banned in Iran since 1988, as many Muslims consider it to be blasphemous. A year later, Iran’s late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini issued a fatwa, or edict, calling for Rushdie’s death. > A bounty of over $3 million has also been offered for anyone who kills Rushdie. > Iran’s government has long since distanced itself from Khomeini’s decree, but anti-Rushdie sentiment has lingered. In 2012, a semi-official Iranian religious foundation raised the bounty for Rushdie from $2.8 million to $3.3 million.
- ch4s3 4y agoYes, it WILL BE INTERESTING to see… in the future if we find out.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 4y agoIf it helps, I suspect people are responding as though you're expecting that this would have already been reported because of the second half of your first comment: > ... the AP doesn't seem to be reporting on that yet. Seemingly to suggest that they should currently be reporting on it. (I do understand that you are probably simply pointing out that it is true that they are not reporting on it.)
- ch4s3 4y agoYeah I thought it was obvious that I meant that as far as I could tell they didn’t have the information yet, but I’m interested to see what unfolds. Anyone reading my statement to mean that they should already be reporting the motive is projecting something, IMHO.
- SergeAx 4y agoDo you imply that there could be motivations other than religious hate? Given a context, it looks really improbable.