Salman Rushdie says he is 'over' knife attack as author reveals 'important moment' he returned to New York lecture stage where he was repeatedly stabbed
Hadi Matar, 27, was sentenced last month to 25 years for attempted murder after he repeatedly stabbed the author on stage during a lecture in New York in 2022.
Sir Salman recently told Radio 4's Today programme that he was 'pleased' the man who set out to kill him had received the maximum possible prison sentence.
But he wishes to move on from the terrifying ordeal and focus on his new book coming out later this year.
Speaking at the Hay Festival in Wales he said: 'It will be nice to talk about fiction again because ever since the attack, really the only thing anybody's wanted to talk about is the attack, but I'm over it.'
He added that an 'important moment' came for him when he and his wife Eliza 'went back to the scene of the crime to show myself I could stand up where I fell down'.
The award-winning Midnight's Children and Satanic Verses writer was left blind in one eye after the attack as well as damage to his liver and a paralysed hand caused by nerve damage to his arm.
The event had tight security, with sniffer dogs and bag searches.
Hadi Matar, 27, was sentenced last month to 25 years for attempted murder after he repeatedly stabbed the author on stage during a lecture in New York in 2022
Once Sir Rushdie entered the stage to an audience of applause, he joked: 'I can't see everyone - but I can hear them.'
Although he said he felt 'excellent' he added there 'were bits of me that I'm annoyed about, like not having a right eye. But on the whole, I've been very fortunate and I'm in better shape than maybe I would have expected.'
Last year, the 77-year-old published a memoir called Knife about the ordeal, which he said was his way of 'fighting back'.
It comes decades after the publication of his novel The Satanic Verses which made him the target of death threats as some Muslims consider blasphemous for its portrayal of the Prophet Muhammad.
A short story collection called The Eleventh Hour is set to be released by the author in November.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
2 minutes ago
- The Sun
My husband killed my kids as revenge for leaving him, but they could have be saved – now I want my babies exhumed
AS ELLIE McCulloch bickered with her ex husband Ron Jonker over who would get custody of the kids, she couldn't believe how unreasonable he was being. Happy for him to see the kids whenever he liked, Ellie wanted her children to have their father in their lives. 8 8 8 But Jonker wanted to hurt her and Ellie underestimated just how far he was willing to go. After losing their custody battle in court bitter Jonker drove his three children miles away from their mum and killed them and himself by filling the car with exhaust fumes. 'He warned if I won in court, he'd make sure I'd lose in the end,' heartbroken Ellie says. 'I begged authorities to take my children away from him. 'I'm devastated that 27 years after my beautiful children were murdered, we still haven't learned that when it comes to children's lives, it's better to be safe than sorry.' Ellie, who lives in Western Australia, was just 15 when she met Jonker, then 21, at her dad David's fishing club. 'We became friends but we didn't start seeing each other until five years later,' says Ellie, now 55. 'By then I was a single mum with a seven-month-old boy named after my dad and Ron had a son with his former wife.' The couple went on to have another boy named Aaron together and got married soon after. When David was six and Aaron was almost four, the couple welcomed their daughter Ashlee. 'All I'd ever wanted in life was to be a mum and I worked hard at being a good one,' Ellie says. 'The kids were my pride and joy. 'David was tall for his age with beautiful blue eyes and blonde hair. He was my little man. He was close to my dad who he called 'Gampa' and he liked fishing and country music. 'Meanwhile Aaron was my quiet one and had a beautiful smile and blue eyes too. 'He and David were best mates and they doted on their blue-eyed baby sister.' Behind closed doors While Ellie thrived off being a parent and loved family life, her relationship with Jonker deteriorated. 'He was verbally abusive and pushed and shoved me,' Ellie says. 'But worse than that he was completely disinterested in the kids and even cruel.' 8 8 Ellie claims there were several occasions when she had seen Jonker physically harm her boys and by the end of September 1998 she ended the relationship moving herself and the kids in with her dad. 'Ron was angry but I tried keeping things civil,' Ellie says. 'I told him he could have the kids over whenever he liked and that he was welcome over for dinner any time. 'I thought we'd work it out.' On Friday, October 2nd, Ron took the kids for the weekend. After a few days he called to ask if he could have the children for a few more days. 'I agreed hoping it was an attempt from him at being a better dad,' Ellie says. 'But when I popped in to see the children, Ron flew into a rage, grabbing me round the throat.' Custody battle begins A few days later Jonker called Ellie to tell he was going to file for full custody of the kids. 'I was distraught,' she admits. 'I loved my kids so much that if I genuinely thought Ron was the better parent, I'd have let him raise them, after all I had been raised by my dad. 'Ron refused to give the kids back and would be violent and abusive when I saw him.' On Monday October 19 1998, three weeks after the couple split, they had the custody hearing. The judge awarded Ellie custody, allowing Jonker two weekends out of three and he was ordered to return the children on October 23rd. 'When I saw Ron outside the court it was like looking at evil and I had a horrific premonition,' Ellie recalls. Killer instincts 'I told my lawyer I was sure he was going to kill our kids and begged her to do something but she said there was nothing she could do as there was no sign he was going to hurt them.' But Ellie was so concerned that she called the police. An officer was sent round to Jonker's home but they reported he was no threat to himself or his children. 'I called the child welfare authorities and begged them to take the kids out of his care,' Ellie recalls. 'I gave them permission to put my kids in the system as long as they were away from him but nobody listened.' On 21st October, Jonker allowed the children to call Ellie and she spoke to Aaron and David briefly. 'They seemed fine and Ron indicated he was bringing them kids back so I was excited,' she says. At around 6.20pm Jonker called and spoke to Ellie's dad David and instructed him to go to the bottom of the drive. 'I assumed he was handing the kids to dad and didn't want to see me,' Ellie says. But David snr only returned with a letter from Jonker. It read: 'I did warn you that if you won in court, you would lose. Murder threats made 'Unless some divine miracle happens the next time you see my kids will be to make a positive ID at the Coroner's Office.' Ellie admits she was 'hysterical' but was able to call the police who arrived 15 minutes later. They consulted with a superior then instructed Ellie to ring Jonker to find out where he was and arrange a meeting. 'After repeated calls, I got through,' Ellie says. 'I told him he could have full custody as long as he didn't hurt the children. 'He agreed to meet me at 8.30pm at a place called Gingin but warned me to come alone.' It was just before 7pm and Gingin was 80 minutes away. 'The cops told me it was too dangerous for me to go and insisted on accompanying me,' Ellie says. 'At 8.20pm he rang and dad answered who stalled him by telling him I was on the way. 'He rang again 20 minutes later, he heard the boys in the background and they were crying 'Gampa help us'.' As the police approached, Jonker caught sight of them and drove off. They followed the car but had to abandon it when Jonker hit 170km. 'He called me afterwards and told me he'd warned me about the police,' Ellie says. 'He said he thought he'd lost them and said 'you've done your dash' then hung up. Where to seek grief support Need professional help with grief? Child Bereavement UK Cruse Bereavement Relate The Good Grief Trust You can also always speak to your GP if you're struggling. You're Not Alone Check out these books, podcasts and apps that all expertly navigate grief… Griefcast: Cariad Lloyd interviews comedians on this award-winning podcast. The Madness Of Grief by Rev Richard Coles (£9.99, W&N): The Strictly fave writes movingly on losing his husband David to alcoholism. Terrible, Thanks For Asking: Podcast host Nora McInerny encourages non-celebs to share how they're really feeling. Good Mourning by Sally Douglas and Imogen Carn (£14.99, Murdoch Books): A guide for people who've suffered sudden loss, like the authors who both lost their mums. Grief Works: Download this for daily meditations and expert tips. How To Grieve Like A Champ by Lianna Champ (£3.99, Red Door Press): A book for improving your relationship with death. 'I knew he meant it was all over now and sobbed, hoping the police would find him again.' But there was no trace of Jonker, 33, and the children until the car was spotted on a quiet bush track by an air force plane the following day. 'A woman officer broke the news to me that Ron and the kids were inside, all dead,' Ellie says. 'I can remember someone putting their arms around me and then being sedated.' Jonker had killed himself and the children with exhaust fumes. Ashlee, 17 months, was in his arms. 'A police friend of dad's advised me not to ID or view the children,' Ellie says. 'I didn't want to go to the funeral, it meant it was real. But of course, I did go. 'When I saw the little white coffins, I almost passed out.' The three children were buried together, with Ashlee dressed in her favourite pair of bunny ears. 'I'd lived for my kids and now I didn't want to live anymore,' Ellie says. 'The only reason I am still here is because otherwise Ron would win. 'I tried blocking everything out with drink and drugs - it broke my dad's heart.' But there was more pain to come for the family. Police blunders uncovered At an inquest in 2000 it was revealed the kids might have been saved if it wasn't for police blunders. They had the 8.30pm meeting time from 7pm but nobody got there until 9.30pm, because it was unclear who was leading the manhunt. The police helicopter was being serviced and the tactical squad was on another job. No roadblocks were set up and when the police did spot Jonkers, they lost him after just one car was in pursuit of him. Officers from another police station couldn't attend because they'd run out of petrol and all the fuel stations were closed. 'It was heartbreaking,' Ellie says. 'After the inquest, I asked for the police files but was told they'd disappeared in transit. 'For another eight years, I was a lost soul.' Then, in 2012, Ellie and her dad moved from Perth to Bunbury, a couple of hours south, for a fresh start, with the father and daughter living next door to one another. 'I met a decent man at last, Richard and dad loved him,' Ellie says. In September 2018, six months after Richard and Ellie were married, David passed away aged 82. 'It's only recently I've felt strong enough to face what happened," Ellie says. 'I can't stand by any longer while these family murder-suicides keep happening. 'So, I'm going to request the police files again, I want accountability. 'The same mistakes are still being made.' Ellie wants to see concerns like hers be taken more seriously. 'If one parent is concerned the other might harm their kids, they should be removed immediately,' she says. 'Give them to the grandparents, just get them out.' Final closure Ellie now wants her children's bodies exhumed to help her gain the final closure she needs. 'I want my babies exhumed and cremated, so they can be with me permanently,' she says. 'When I pass their ashes can be with mine. 'It'll cost about £15,000, which I just don't have. 'I'm considering a GoFundMe but people can be cruel though. 'I've been through so much in my life, I'm not sure I could handle any negative comments so I am still deciding what to do. 'Having their ashes would bring some peace to my life. 'And then at least I'd know that when I pass, I would be with my babies for eternity.' 8 8
Sky News
29 minutes ago
- Sky News
Starmer to meet European leaders for 'coalition of the willing' talks on Ukraine
European leaders who make up the 'coalition of the willing' are set to hold a conference call on Sunday - ahead of crunch talks between Donald Trump and Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelenskyy next week. The coalition - co-chaired by Sir Keir Starmer, France's President Emmanuel Macron and Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz - has the aim of bringing countries together to protect a peace deal in Ukraine. Top of the agenda at Sunday's meeting will be securing a concrete commitment from Mr Trump on a security guarantee that would act as a powerful backstop in any Russia-Ukraine peacekeeping arrangement. European leaders seemed buoyed by the US president's most recent hints on the subject, in the knowledge that US military might is likely to deter Vladimir Putin from advancing in the future. They will also discuss how to bring Mr Zelenskyy into talks after Mr Trump and Mr Putin's Alaska meeting saw him left out in the cold. In coordinated statements, European leaders said Mr Zelenskyy must play a greater role in future talks, and that peace cannot be achieved without him. The hard bit will be to persuade the unpredictable US administration to change its approach, something that has proved almost impossible in the past. 5:55 When Mr Trump re-entered the White House and made it clear the US would no longer provide a blank cheque to protect peace in Europe, others decided they had to step up, and the 'coalition of the willing' was thrown together in March. Since then, information about the allied peacekeeping effort has been patchy, but we know it includes over 30 countries, which have been asked to pledge whatever military support they can, including troops. 2:21 What has been forthcoming from the group though, has been consistent attempts to use their limited leverage to put pressure on the US. That will continue ahead of crunch talks between Mr Trump and Mr Zelenskyy, which are set to take place in Washington on Monday.
The Guardian
32 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Trump hiked tariffs on US imports. Now he's looking at exports – sparking fears of ‘dangerous precedent'
Apple CEO Tim Cook visited the White House bearing an unusual gift. 'This box was made in California,' Cook reassured his audience in the Oval Office this month, as he took off the lid. Inside was a glass plaque, engraved for its recipient, and a slab for the plaque to sit on. 'The base was made in Utah, and is 24-karat gold,' said Cook. Donald Trump appeared genuinely touched by the gift. But the plaque wasn't Cook's only offering: Apple announced that day it would invest another $100bn in US manufacturing. The timing appeared to work well for Apple. That day, Trump said Apple would be among the companies that would be exempt from a new US tariff on imported computer chips. The Art of the Deal looms large in the White House, where Trump is brokering agreements with powerful tech companies – in the midst of his trade war – that are reminiscent of the real estate transactions that launched him into fame. But in recent days, this dealmaking has entered uncharted waters. Two days after Cook and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang had a closed-door meeting with Trump at the White House. The president later announced Nvidia, along with its rival Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), will be allowed to sell certain artificial intelligence chips to Chinese companies – so long as they share 15% of their revenue with the US government. It was a dramatic about-face from Trump, who initially blocked the chips' exports in April. And it swiftly prompted suggestions that Nvidia was buying its way out of simmering tensions between Washington and Beijing. Trade experts say such a deal, where a company essentially pays the US government to export a good, could destabilize trading relations. Martin Chorzempa, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said that it creates 'the perception that export controls are up for sale'. 'If you create the perception that licenses, which are supposed to be determined on pure national security grounds, are up for sale, you potentially open up room for there to be this wave of lobbying for all sorts of really, dangerous, sensitive technologies,' Chorzempa said. 'I think that's a very dangerous precedent to set.' Though the White House announced the deal, it technically hasn't been rolled out yet, likely because of legal complications. The White House is calling the deal a 'revenue-sharing' agreement, but critics point out that it could also be considered a tax on exports, which may not be legal under US laws or the constitution. The 'legality' of the deal was 'still being ironed out by the Department of Commerce', White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters this week. Nvidia and AMD's AI chips are at the heart of the technological arms race between the US and China. Nvidia, which became the first publicly traded company to reach a $4tn valuation last month, creates the essential processing chips that are used to run and develop AI. The US government has played a role in this arms race over the last several years, setting regulations on what AI chips and manufacturing equipment can be sent to China. If China has less computing power, the country will be slower to develop AI, giving a clear advantage to the US. But despite the restrictions, China has been catching up, raising questions on how US policy should move forward. 'They haven't held them back as far as the advocates had hoped. The US has an enormous computing advantage over China, but their best models are only a few months behind our best models,' Chorzempa said. For US policymakers, 'the question they've had to grapple with is: Where do you draw the line?' The AI chips Nvidia and AMD can now sell to China aren't considered high-end. While they can be used for inference on trained models, they aren't powerful enough to train new AI models. When announcing the deal with Nvidia and AMD, Trump said the chip is 'an old chip that China already possesses … under a different label'. This is where a major debate on AI policy comes in. Those who take a hardline stance on the US's relationship with China say that allowing Chinese companies to purchase even an 'old chip' could still help the country get an advantage over the US. Others would say a restriction on such chips wouldn't be meaningful, and could even be counterproductive. To balance these two sides, the Trump administration is asking companies to pay up in order to export to China – a solution that people on both sides of the AI debate say is a precarious one. 'Export controls are a frontline defense in protecting our national security, and we should not set a precedent that incentivizes the government to grant licenses to sell China technology that will enhance AI capabilities,' said John Moolenaar, a Republican US representative from Michigan, in a statement. But Trump's gut-reaction to dealmaking seems focused on the wallet. On Wednesday, US treasury secretary Scott Bessent praised the arrangement and suggested it could be extended to other industries over time. 'I think that right now this is unique, but now that we have the model and the beta test, why not expand it?' he told Bloomberg. Julia Powles, executive director of the Institute for Technology, Law and Policy at the University of California, Los Angeles, said the deal opens up questions of whether similar pressure can be applied to other tech companies. 'What other quid pro quo might be asked in the future? The quid pro quo that would be of great concern to the [tech] sector is anything that reduces their reputation for privacy and security,' Powles said. 'That's thinking of government like a transactional operator, not like an institution with rules about when, how and for what it can extract taxes, levies and subsidies.' But that seems to be how the White House runs now. When explaining to the press how he made the deal, Trump said he told Huang: 'I want 20% if I'm going to approve this for you'. 'For the country, for our country. I don't want it myself,' the president added. 'And he said, 'Would you make it 15?' So we negotiated a little deal.'
