Van Gogh's murder should wake up the whole world. It was just as much of a threat to freedom of expression as the fatwa against Salman Rushdie. I put it on a level with our 9/11 because they singled out one artist. How can the world sit idly by with fascists running around killing people who merely comment on the dangers of religious intolerance?
Because the world is full of stupid, cowardly Leftists who never met a decisive action they could support.
This is a very good point and one worth repeating. At the time, the Iranian fatwa against Rushdie was seen as a one-off, but now even Sunni Moslems have taken up the Iranian Shiite radicals' tools, and they make bold to assassinate Westerners in their own cities, for expressions of view uncongenial to the muftis.
Supporting your point, Daniel Pipes concluded his 1990 book The Rushdie Affair with the following thoughts:
At the same time, the ayatollah's [Khomeini's] accomplishments must not be exaggerated. The global fear of early 1989 is not likely to be soon repeated. Khomeini was a unique ruler and the furor surrounding The Satanic Verses is likely to remain without match. In theory, while many of Khomeini's tactics can be imitated by anyone, Iranian prototypes tend rarely to be imitated, so this incident may well turn out to be a one-time affair. The Iranians institutionalized and systematized the recruitment of suicide bombers, but few states availed themselves of this powerful tool. Seizing the U.S. embassy in Tehran proved to be a brilliant tactical innovation by the Iranian radicals in 1979, but it has not been emulated even once [as of 1990 -- this was before the Guevarist MRTA seized the Japanese embassy in Lima in 1996]. Taking such a step requires a radicalism, an ideological devotion, and a personal commitment as deep as that of Khomeini and his followers. In the Rushdie case, Khomeini managed to impose an unprecedented form of trans-border censorship precisely because no one is like him. No other leader challenged the existing order in so profound a way or had a vision of the just society that differed so fundamentally from the prevailing models. Accordingly, conventional dictators typically find that following in the ayatollah's footsteps is beyond their capabilities.Moreover, even his achievement was less than complete. It should be remembered that it was the Saudis who got the book banned in most Muslim countries; Iranian efforts to extend censorship to the West failed. For all the fear Iranians created in the West, their attempts at intimidation turned The Satanic Verses into a spectacular commercial success. Despite and because of the Muslim efforts, The Satanic Verses became the book of the year. Boastful claims that protests would continue until the book was recalled and the author and publisher apologized came to naught. The controversy caused many Westerners to feel a highly unusual sense of solidarity, seeing themselves again as the only civilized people and recalling old animosities toward Islam. In many ways, the ayatollah not only did not get his way but he stirred up antagonisms taht will harm his cause for years to come.
Is the power that Khomeini achieved an aberration or the beginning of a subtle shift in norms? While it is too early to say, it is clear that the answer depends far more on the West than on Khomeini and his ilk. The West has to make it clear that the fundamentalist Muslims will gain nothing through threats and intimidation. [Quoting The Times of London] "The only acceptable way to end The Satanic Verses affair is to go on repeating that until the message is heard and believed."
-- Daniel Pipes, The Rushdie Affair, pp. 250-251. (Emphasis added.)