‘Fatwa’ Against Bollywood Actress

Posted on | December 18, 2011 | 27 Comments

Model and actress Veena Malik’s appearance on cover of the men’s magazine FHM caused a huge controversy in Pakistan, including threats of a fatwa from a Muslim cleric:

She claimed she only posed topless for FHM, but that photos were doctored to make her look completely naked.
Since the pictures appeared of her, with just an ISI (an acronym for the Pakistan spy agency) fake tattoo on her arm, she has been the subject of death threats from militant group Lashkar-e-Toiba.
The Lahore-based militants issued a statement saying: “She has made fun of all Muslim women and brought shame to the entire nation. Veena Malik will be dealt with accordingly on her return to Pakistan.” . . .
And prominent Muslim cleric Maulana Abdul Qawi warned of a fatwa against Malik for shaming Islam.
Malik said attitudes in Pakistan were from the ‘Stone Age’, adding: “The things I have done in life, I have the guts to stand by. This is my body; this is my life.”
Vowing not to back down she said she was being vilified by her compatriots.
“This attitude, I’m sorry, is in the society. When they say they have become modern, grown up, that’s wrong. They still live in the Stone Age.”
In a text to journalists Pakistan’s military press office said the scandal was “the height of humiliation for Pakistan, done by a Pakistani on Indian soil”.

(Via Memeorandum.) There was a two-day panic after Veena Malik’s manager said she went missing Friday, but today the news came that she was “fine and in a hotel in Mumbai.”

The concerns for her safety highlight the “Stone Age” attitudes Malik had complained about. Americans may agree that posing for nude photos is shameful, but nobody has issued a fatwa against Lindsay Lohan.

Category: Pakistan

Comments

27 Responses to “‘Fatwa’ Against Bollywood Actress”

samuel gonzalez
December 18th, 2011 @ 8:09 am

I thought I was in for another traffic boost. I got 19,00 hits from a 9 month old post when she accused Mulim clerics of sex abuse in Misques. I’m surprised whe’s still alive.
ThePaganTemple
December 18th, 2011 @ 8:29 am

What makes her think it makes any difference to a raghead whether her pictures were faked or not? Hell, those god damned goat fucking animals will kill their own daughters if they get RAPED, even if its by multiple men at the same time as though its always the woman’s fault and the shame is on the family, screw the woman. Fake, real, its all the same to them. We should ship all our progressives, Democrats, and booger-eating Paultards to Pakistan, that way they can see what real shame is about.
JeffS
December 18th, 2011 @ 9:07 am

…nobody has issued a fatwa against Lindsay Lohan.

That’s because Lindsay herself is a waste of pixels, especially with her “A desperate bid for relevance”.
JeffS
December 18th, 2011 @ 9:08 am

It might matter to her personally, TPT. Which is entirely relevant. Otherwise, spot on.
Cube
December 18th, 2011 @ 9:22 am

Pakistan and the rest of the islamic world has to decide whether they want to be modern societies or raghead societies. They can’t have it both ways. If they choose the later then they can’t complain when the rest of the world ridicules them.

And speaking of shame, Veena Malik is not the one who has shamed islam. The ones who bring shame on islam are the pigs and sons of pigs who make everything that happens a woman’s fault. Want proof? Pigs eat their own young and muzzies attack their own. Therefore, MUZZIES ARE PIGS!!!

Got a problem with that, muzzies? Then change YOUR behavior, get it through your PIG heads the difference between the perp and the victim, and get it right which is which. Every decent human being can tell the difference. And while you’re at it, admit that some things are YOUR OWN FAULT. Not a woman, not the infidels, yours. Learn to appreciate beauty instead of hiding it. Then you’ll start getting some respect.
Mortimer Snerd
December 18th, 2011 @ 9:43 am

I may buy a copy, but only because I want to know how to mix those seven drinks.
ThePaganTemple
December 18th, 2011 @ 9:57 am

Actually, I think she’s lying when she says the pic is fake, what magazine would do something like that with somebody they’ve signed a contract with. Then again, I have to admit that when I look at that pic, I find myself wanting to believe she’s lying. As for the ragheads, religious sensibilities are one thing, but what kind of people would want to hurt somebody like that? You probably haven’t heard yet what happened in Pakistan. Some Taliban members caught a woman breast feeding. They cut off her breasts in small pieces, or maybe just the one the infant was feeding, and made some other women eat the pieces of breast. That’s why I say, she shouldn’t expect anything any different from these fucking animals.
Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup » Pirate's Cove
December 18th, 2011 @ 10:24 am

[…] Metal Jacket (last week). And how about Live At 5. And Rule 5! (last weeks). And a Fatwa against Veena Malik for her Playboy […]
ThomasD
December 18th, 2011 @ 11:09 am

Remember not too long ago when the offices of that French magazine got firebombed for their cartoon of Mohammed, and all the lefties said they asked for it?

Wonder what they’ll say when this woman gets exploded or her head sawn off?
Anonymous
December 18th, 2011 @ 11:20 am

“Remember not too long ago when the offices of that French magazine got firebombed for their cartoon of Mohammed, and all the lefties said they asked for it?”

No, I don’t remember that, because that didn’t happen. At least some lefties said no such thing.
ThomasD
December 18th, 2011 @ 11:41 am

What didn’t happen?

The firebombing?

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/75f87b24-0541-11e1-a3d1-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1guAlcMLJ

Or the lefty reaction to it?

http://news.yahoo.com/firebombing-charlie-hebdo-continuing-fight-against-radical-islam-145459444.html
ThomasD
December 18th, 2011 @ 11:44 am

Or maybe this one

…the Paris correspondent for
Time magazine, asked Charlie Hebdo’s
editors: “Do you still think the price you paid for
printing an offensive, shameful, and singularly humor-deficient
parody on the logic of ‘because we can’ was so
worthwhile?”

RTWT

http://www.aina.org/news/20111107120433.htm
Anonymous
December 18th, 2011 @ 11:57 am

You made a specific statement. Here, let’s look at it with quadruple emphases for, um, emphasis:

ALL the lefties said they asked for it?

I am a lefty. Not only did I not say they asked for it, I explicitly took their side. QED, your claim is false.
ThomasD
December 18th, 2011 @ 12:15 pm

Wow.

My apologies for the hyperbole. Never realized you were quite so literal.

Just to be clear though, when I said “I Wonder what they’ll say when this woman gets exploded or her head sawn off?” I wasn’t literally expecting a reply from every person ‘on the left.’

Ok?
‘Fatwa’ Against Bollywood Actress : The Other McCain - The NeoSexist
December 18th, 2011 @ 12:18 pm

[…] Against Bollywood Actress : The Other McCain Dec.18, 2011 in General http://theothermccain.com/2011/12/18/fatwa-against-bollywood-actress/ Win the Future! Share […]
ThomasD
December 18th, 2011 @ 12:21 pm

So, to everyone reading, in order to get Knappster’s panties unbunched please amend my initial statement to read:

“Remember all the lefties who said they asked for it?”
JeffS
December 18th, 2011 @ 12:30 pm

We’ll have to agree to disagree on her mendacity, TPT. But, as I said, otherwise, spot on.
JeffS
December 18th, 2011 @ 12:35 pm

I believe that you’re debating a “Capital L” Libertarian, Thomas. Literalism is a given with that sort.
Anonymous
December 18th, 2011 @ 12:42 pm

Works for me.

My own response — not yet written, although it may be — to this thing is that the fatwa constitutes the assault (“offer to do harm”) portion of assault and battery, and that therefore anything reasonable the lady or her proxies care to do by way of defense (e.g. killing the fatwa’s issuer) is justified.
Anonymous
December 18th, 2011 @ 12:43 pm

JeffS, For the record, no, I am not a “capital L” Libertarian (a member of the Libertarian Party). Used to be, but not any more.
Charles G Hill
December 18th, 2011 @ 1:46 pm

FHM, incidentally, hasn’t published a North American edition for five years. (File under “Things that make you go Hmmmm…”)
JeffS
December 18th, 2011 @ 2:20 pm

Eh, if you say so.

But, strictly as an observation, too much navel gazing tends to leave a mark.
Anonymous
December 18th, 2011 @ 2:45 pm

Jeff,

Yeah, but the navel-gazing was part of what got me out of the LP.

Back when I was involved in electoral politics, I was about winning, and had elected several local officials and won several ballot issue campaigns as a campaign manager.

In the LP, the “anti-navel-gazing faction” all too often turned out to be the “naive celebrity-chasing faction.”
Bob Belvedere
December 18th, 2011 @ 4:22 pm

As someone who Photoshops such things [the wife always insists that I make her appear thinner], the pic looks photo shopped from the waist down.
Bob Belvedere
December 18th, 2011 @ 4:23 pm

I don’t think she looks bad for a woman of 55 years…wait…what?!?….oh!… never mind…
Daily scoreboard « Don Surber
December 18th, 2011 @ 5:02 pm

[…] From Robert Stacy McCain: “Model and actress Veena Malik’s appearance on cover of the men’s magazine FHM caused a […]
Cube
December 18th, 2011 @ 7:26 pm

Yeah, and I loved their response. They published another cartoon of Mo (pigs be upon him) in a gay kiss. I took that to say, “You dogs were offended enough to firebomb our place over those Mo cartoons? Let us show you just how offensive we can be. Now what’cha gonna do?” Pushback is a great thing.