Suppression of Free Speech in the Netherlands; Islam v. Christianity
The Nov 29, 2004 National Review tells us
On November 2, the day on which Americans gave their verdict on the president,
the people of the Netherlands received, through the murder of filmmaker Theo van
Gogh, a horrific reminder that no country anywhere can be truly be said to be
immune from the threat posed by Islamic extremism. In Amsterdam that day, an
assassin shot Van Gogh, stabbed him, and then butchered him like a sacrificial
animal. By making the film Submission, a caustic attack on Muslim misogyny, Van
Gogh had transgressed the code of the fanaticism that has, alas, made its home
in Holland too. And for that he had to die. In the aftermath, there was tough
talk from the Dutch government, but the best clue as to what will happen next
comes, probably, from Rotterdam. There, a local artist reacted
to the murder by
painting a mural that included the words “Thou Shalt Not Kill.” Fair comment,
you might think. Apparently not. The head of a nearby mosque complained. The
police showed up. City workers sandblasted the inconvenient text into
oblivion.
“Thou Shalt Not Kill.” Erased, obliterated, unacceptable. Much like Theo van
Gogh. R.I.P.
This reminds me of the people in
Saskatchewan and Sweden who got into trouble
with the law for quoting Scripture on the subject of homosexuality. Homosexuals
and Moslems are both good at being pressure groups, using political heft, simple
complaining, and the threat of court coercion. Moslems, in addition, have used
the threat of violence effectively.
(Looking back at my previous posts, I see that I have one on
Canada generally too and that the prominent pro-homosexual politician in this debate, Svend Robinson, is the same man who in 2004 resigned after being caught stealing a valuable diamond ring. )