Lack of Resolve; or Lack of Technique; Salman Rushdie Survives, But Does This Mean He Won?

Submitted by M Tovey (United States), Aug 14, 2022 at 16:15

The hurrahs from the enemies of Salman Rushdie must likely be hushed now that the word is he survives and their best hiopes of vinfication of the edict of the now passed Iranian leader seems temporarily quashed.
What did this belated attempt to silence an opponent of unrestrained Islam prove?
That remains to be seen. Even as the over thirty years of the threat appeared proved nothing in resolve to 'get it done,' the idea that one lone adherent of the edict managed to express his adopted hatred for the author, apparently he did not plan for the aftermath in that what would be his excuse for not 'getting it done?'
And of the aftermath, that Mr. Rushdie did survive (it seems for the moment), his road to recovery must likely hold some regret that he was not better prepared (as is alluded to my Dr; PIpes' varoous warnings) for protecting himself in this sort of eventuality, the circumstance of which would seem to indicate being better prepared for teh next attempt. After all, what this does indicate is a persistance of intent that is likley now prompting more planning on the part of those who are disappointed in the results.
As the topic heading predicates, Mr Rushdie must not adopt tha attituide that he won the argument merely based on surviving one misguided attempt; he has merely infuriated others of the same hatred in that he survived this time for the cause of destiny and the odds were in his favor this time.

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".