Now that writer Salman Rushdie has violently reacted to a few lines against his beloved wife, and threatened the writer with a baseball bat, he should be a better judge to the fury of Muslims, when he himself wrote a whole book, abusing the wives of the beloved Prophet of 1.3 billion Muslims.

It is surprising, that even after such a grave provocation, not a single baseball bat was swung against him. All he received was a judicial opinion or fatwa from Imam Khomeini sentencing him to death for blasphemy. The sentence could only have been executed if he had tried to enter the Islamic Republic of Iran. No other Muslim country for reasons of their own passed any such death threats to him.

But if the Muslims around the world had been as violent as they are made out to be, he would have long met the fate that befell Netherlands’s filmmaker Van Gogh, where no fatwa appeared anywhere around the world.

Imam Khomeini’s fatwa was exploited by the Western countries to demonize Muslims, especially as it was coming from the so-called ‘evil’ empire of Iran that had snatched back the country and its oilfields from Western stranglehold, through a popular revolution.

Just as Rushdie would have preferred the New York Time fashion reporter not to have written 'mean things' about his wife, are Muslims in the wrong, if they expect rest of the world not to address mean things to their prophet in particular and Islam in general?

 Especially when the real motivation is the politics of exploitation.