Don’t cross the Dutch

The Netherlands are very friendly and quite liberal. Multiculturalism’s got a lot of fans among the Dutch, who are a polite and patient people. But when you repeatedly stomp on their toes and their collective fuse finally burns down … step back. They are not passive.
Theo van Gogh was a distant relative of the famous painter. He made movies, and his newest film, Submission, criticizes muslim attitudes toward (and abuse of) women. An Islamist recently demonstrated his disapproval of Van Gogh’s movie after spotting him on the street.

His attacker was a Dutch Moroccan who wore traditional Islamic clothing. After shooting van Gogh, he stabbed him repeatedly, slit his throat with a butcher knife, and left a note containing verses from the Qur’an on the body.

By “left a note”, Spencer means “pinned a note to the victim’s chest with two knives.”
Note to Islamists: don’t screw with the Dutch. See here and here and here and here and here and here and here … get the point?

UPDATE: Pieter Dorsman of Peaktalk is an American of Dutch extraction who’s covering the van Gogh murder and its fallout, and he’s doing it quite well (thanks for pointing this blog out, Arthur). Give Zacht Ei a look, too.
UPDATE 2: Professor Goose gets it.

  1. I hate to admit this, but the whole Van Gogh thing has me thinking. Imho, those of us that are to the left of center should be opposing Bush’s fascism AND Islamo-fascism jointly. (in fact, I just blogged this whole point over on my site)
    If you sit back and think about it, Bush’s idea of order is not nearly as bad as the idea of Islamic fascism, it’s actually much more tolerant. Remember, an “order” is the fundamental component of fascism…and any leaning to the right is on the road to fascism, while any leaning to the left is on the road to socialism/communism.
    My case: most people in the US are politically equal (=voting, etc.) and have some semblance of equality of opportunity. I see nothing in Bush policy that is attempting to change those fundamentals.
    However, if you actually watch the Van Gogh movie, it strikes a chord, as it demonstrates some of the horrors that women (and I’m sure others) face on a daily basis in Islamic nations.
    Do we want that here? Do want to allow Wahabis to control the oil supply and drive up the cost of oil and end our culture as we know it?
    We on the left can deride the US all we want, but I don’t see any women here getting their genitalia mutlilated systematically. I don’t see any women wearing birqas or being raped by uncles.
    Opposition to this war has been politicized for all of the wrong reasons, in my opinion. In Britain, it was the right that opposed the war in Iraq, in the US, it was the left. Why? Because they were both the parties OUT OF POWER.
    Ideologically, the left should be in complete support of this war, but for some reason we choose not to out of political expediency. That’s a problem, folks…and it’s ideologically inconsistent.

  2. I agree that we need to oppose the jihadists, both Islamic and Christian, in this country and abroad, and largely, I don’t see the left doing anything but that.
    So I don’t understand your criticism. Furthermore you skipped over the part of your argument where you explain why opposing fundamentalist theocracy in the Middle East meant invading one of the few nations there with a secular government.
    If you want to oppose jihadism, then you need to strike at its source. That’s Saudi Arabia. But in order for that to happen, we have to shake off the Saudi stranglehold on American politics.
    Oh, and just to be an asshole 🙂 :
    I don’t see any women here getting their genitalia mutlilated systematically.
    You’re looking in the wrong restroom. In the US, we do it to the men, not the women.

Comments are closed.