| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| Fatal Detraction -Theo Van Goh |
| 2004-11-05 |
| A provocative, and offensive, filmmaker and columnist attacks Islam and pays with his life. BY LEON DE WINTER AMSTERDAM--It was only two years ago that an animal-rights extremist assassinated the populist Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn, explaining later in court that he did so, in part, to stop Fortuyn from using Muslim immigrants as "scapegoats." Now the Netherlands is once again in shock. On Tuesday, the filmmaker and newspaper columnist Theo van Gogh--a distant descendant of the artist Vincent--was murdered, allegedly by a Muslim immigrant (now in police custody). On Wednesday the police arrested eight Islamic radicals in connection with the slaying. The Netherlands prides itself on being a liberal and tolerant country. What is going on? Like Mr. Fortuyn, whom he admired, Mr. Van Gogh was a radical libertarian, a champion of free speech who refused to be constrained by taboos or social codes. I know from personal experience what it felt like to be the target of his invective. Mr. Van Gogh's pen could be vulgar and radical, and he managed to offend me more than once. In 1984, after I directed a feature film called "Frontiers," about a Dutch journalist who goes abroad to interview a terrorist and discovers his own violent side, Mr. Van Gogh accused me of "selling out my Jewish identity," although there was not a single Jewish character in the picture. Writing elsewhere about Jewish writers or filmmakers, he made Holocaust-tinged jokes like: "Hey, it smells like caramel today--well then, they must be burning the diabetic Jews." Such attacks went on for almost 20 years. (Mr. Van Gogh was 47 when he died.) To be clear: Mr. Van Gogh did not limit himself to Jewish topics. He attacked Christian values and symbols as well. Theodor Holman, another Dutch columnist, once wrote that "every Christian is a criminal," and a storm of controversy broke out. Mr. Van Gogh came to his defense by writing that people offended by those words were only "the fan club of that rotting fish in Nazareth." After viewing Mel Gibson's recent film, Mr. Van Gogh remarked in the daily Metro: "I just went to see 'The Passion of the Christ,' a film as bad as an LSD trip which shows once again that also in the sewers of Christianity collective daftness just leads to mud." |
| Posted by:Anonymous4724 |
| #5 Radical Islam will not co-exist peacefully with any other group that does not "submit" to them. That's almost their definition of Islam=submission="peace". That is the essence of the current conflict, both in the Netherlands and in the world. The other side of the conflict largely hasn't awakened to the true situation, although the cited article is a small step toward that awakening. Since Nov. 2, the MSM has been interpreting Bush's victory as a victory for evangelical Christianity. This view is a distortion. In the USA nominal Christians and nonbelievers alike are simply defining where they stand and acting on their basic beliefs concerning "all men are created equal", inalienable rights,and freedom of speech and religion, due to the worldwide Islamic supremacy movement. Freedom of speech means, among other things, tolerating scurrilous verbal attacks on what is held most dear without resorting to extortion or murder. |
| Posted by: Ebbavith Angang9747 2004-11-05 7:41:29 PM |
| #4 SPOD took the words right out of my, er, fingers. No religion, other than islam, would encourage or condone such an act. Freedom of speech, without fear of physical reprisal, is a foundation of life in the west -- Most non-middle eastern countries share that value to greater or lesser degrees. And, to our credit, it's mostly greater. Not so in muslim countries. A religion/culture like islam cannot exist in the west. It must adapt or be expelled. And I see no early signs of adaptation. By the way.... Van Gogh didn't strike me as a "likeable" curmudgeon, SPOD. Which makes the whole freedom of speech thing even more poignant -- even detestable people have the right to say what they want without fear. |
| Posted by: PlanetDan 2004-11-05 2:11:38 PM |
| #3 Spot on SPOD. |
| Posted by: Howard Uk 2004-11-05 11:16:18 AM |
| #2 Sock Puppet of Doom, You got it! But the PC crowd is not stating the obvious: he insulted Jews and Christians and God knows who else but none of those recipients of his hatred killed him. It was a Muslim who did it and this act speaks volume for their lack of tolerance and their inability to understand freedom of speech or any other freedom, for that matter. |
| Posted by: Anonymous4724 2004-11-05 11:14:35 AM |
| #1 This is a good read. This guy Van Gogh was a likeable curmudgeon and an equal opportunity bigot of sorts. He may have deserved a good ass beating more than once but no one had the right to kill him. On the other hand, that a person will kill for their religious zealotry in the year 2004 is not acceptable. Reasoning with this cult is impossable. We are left with what, having to kill them one by one? Put them all behind a fence? After 9/11 we can't ignore them any more that is certain. How do we respond to them without becoming them? This is not the same thing as Afghanistan or Iraq. This is downtown not out in BFA. Do we walk around ready to drop the hammer on them if they look cross eyed? (hard as hell to do where I live.) |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom 2004-11-05 10:11:02 AM |