<< IRAQ'S BEST AND BRAVEST ~ MAIN ~ BIG JAW WANTS YOUR NAME >>

QUIZ TIME

Why was Theo van Gogh murdered? See if you can guess:

The self-confessed killer of Theo van Gogh faced his victim’s mother in an Amsterdam courtroom yesterday and told her that he felt no remorse for his crime.

Turning his chair towards Anneke van Gogh as she watched from the public gallery, Mohammed Bouyeri said: “I don’t feel your pain. I don’t have any sympathy for you. I can’t feel for you because I think you’re ... ”

a. a supporter of Iraq’s invasion
b. an impediment to Palestinian justice
c. a non-believer

Posted by Tim B. on 07/13/2005 at 09:26 AM
  1. I’ll lock in ‘C’ thanks Tim.
    Speaking of ‘non believers’, the big issue over at Margoville is yes, SALINATION.

    Posted by Nic on 2005 07 13 at 10:34 AM • permalink

  2. vegetarian?

    Posted by jorgen on 2005 07 13 at 10:36 AM • permalink

  3. WARNING!  If you get an e-mail with the headline “breaking news from CNNonline.com” IT IS A VIRUS

    Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 07 13 at 11:06 AM • permalink

  4. I’ll take what’s behind Door #3, Tim.

    But you knew that, since that’s the answer with all these clowns.

    Richard - thanks, but I always delete that stuff anyway. (Particularly CNN - why on earth would I give them my e-mail address?) I don’t recomment that anyone ever click on such e-mails.

    I did sign up for Fox once, and can’t figure out how to stop it.  But I never click on it; I just go to their web site to see if anything important’s happening.  (Really important, I mean, not Hollyweird “important.”)

    Posted by Barbara Skolaut on 2005 07 13 at 11:25 AM • permalink

  5. Option c.

    I do the same as Barbara.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2005 07 13 at 01:14 PM • permalink

  6. The answer is “C” although I suspect it is of little comfort to Van Gogh’s mother.

    What I do not understand is why it is necessary to kill unbelievers - what purpose does it serve apart from cowing the dhimmis to the will of the caliphate?

    Speaking of killing the unbelievers, I guess there are no rules of engagement in a jihad. All are potential sacrifices to Allah.

    Little Non-believers

    Posted by dc981924 on 2005 07 13 at 01:34 PM • permalink

  7. None of the above
    He was in the right place at the wrong time and crossed the path of a crazy ant.

    Wonder what Adam’s spin would be on that horrific statement about not feeling your pain because you are an infidel?
    Or would the Catch Fire Ministeries be prosecuted under Victorian law for quoting that remark in Church?
    When a muslims tells you he has every right to kill you as you are an infidel, is he practising his right to religious freedom?

    Posted by davo on 2005 07 13 at 02:28 PM • permalink

  8. what purpose does it serve apart from cowing the dhimmis to the will of the caliphate?

    Um, why does it need any more purpose than that?

    Posted by Warmongering Lunatic on 2005 07 13 at 04:25 PM • permalink

  9. “because I think .....”

    Vile filth can’t think!

    Posted by Gravelly on 2005 07 13 at 05:04 PM • permalink

  10. Sigh…

    Well it was a rhetorical question - we both know the answer. These folks don’t play by the same set of rules as the rest of the civilized world and any means are justified to accomplish their ends.

    Still, it’s not like we’ve never seen this sort of behavior - we have lots of examples of totalitarian and otherwise deranged behavior in recent history. Unfortunately, we keep forgetting what we’ve learned from these historical examples and how best to deal with them - by standing against them, with force if necessary.

    Still, two things boggle me:

    1 - What is Islam really all about?

    Have the fanatics have gone completely off the rails with what’s in (or what they perceive to be in) the Koran?

    Or, are these mad bombers really representative of what the religion demands - a return of the caliphate and world submission to Islam? Every time I hear a “moderate” Muslim say “that isn’t Islam” after the latest atrocity I have to wonder…

    2 - Are these fanatics really that stupid or do they just not care what the rest of the civilized world things?

    I guess all the liberal media, legal advice, and public relations offers from Madison Avenue cannot “rationalize”, “spin”, or “neutralize” incidents like today when a bunch of innocent kids gets blown up just for being there. Have we forgotten what happened in Beslan with those Russian kids? They were just so much cannon fodder for the Islamic terrorists threatening to blow them up.

    I guess the only “good” that can come of any of this is their actions and motives are explicit and abhorrent. They do not deserve the civilized treatment and appeasement the Left so longs to give to them. Why does the Left long to appease these bastards? Well that boggles me too, but my head would explode trying to sort that out.

    Posted by dc981924 on 2005 07 13 at 05:37 PM • permalink

  11. Too bad the Dutch don’t have the death penalty; they could use this guy’s head to plug a hole in a dike somewhere.

    Posted by paco on 2005 07 13 at 05:43 PM • permalink

  12. Or, are these mad bombers really representative of what the religion demands - a return of the caliphate and world submission to Islam? Every time I hear a “moderate” Muslim say “that isn’t Islam” after the latest atrocity I have to wonder…

    The problem is, you only hear “that isn’t Islam” after an attack. It would really help, I think, if they said that often and loudly before an attack.

    Posted by Rob Crawford on 2005 07 13 at 05:54 PM • permalink

  13. Virulent death cults know no reason, and have no rules regarding their opponents. They have to be dealt with in a manner effective under these rules of engagement.
    I am indebted to Graham Richardson for the phrase, so appropriate to these times;
    Whatever It Takes.
    This guy is so loopy that he is admitting everything, and leaving his defence team with nowhere to go. Dealing with terrorists in a court of law can often be farcical due to the weighting of presumption in favour of innocence, and the difficult onus of proof requirements. They deserve none of the protections which apply to normal citizens.

    Posted by blogstrop on 2005 07 13 at 06:03 PM • permalink

  14. SPOT-ON TIM!
    Did you hear what the cretin said to the victim’s mother in the courtroom?
    Something along the lines, “I can’t share your pain because I suspect you’re a non-believer.”
    That’s a BIG ‘C’ and I’m not talking answers here!

    Posted by Brian on 2005 07 13 at 07:48 PM • permalink

  15. Tim, you forgot: d. you are a woman; e. you are not wearing a burqa.

    Posted by mr magoo on 2005 07 13 at 08:56 PM • permalink

  16. d. ...you’re not a Kyoto supporter.
    e. ...you’re an evil practitioner of globalization.
    f. ...you’re not doing enough to help the poor in my home counrty.

    Posted by Tommy Shanks on 2005 07 13 at 09:49 PM • permalink

  17. Guy’s a walking, talking argument for instituting shock belts for defendants in Dutch courts.  Or shock jock straps.

    Posted by Achillea on 2005 07 13 at 10:05 PM • permalink

  18. #10 dc981924…good questions.

    I would add this: if Christianity and our western culture, in general, are so abhorrent; why do so many Muslims immigrate to the U.S. and Europe?

    Why would they want to live amongst the “infidels”, when they could live among fellow muslims?

    Are we being set up?

    Posted by rinardman on 2005 07 13 at 11:04 PM • permalink

  19. d. Dutch?

    Posted by Habib on 2005 07 13 at 11:13 PM • permalink

  20. Also:

    d. you’re not a rich ageing popstar, singing about African poverty
    e. your son didn’t cut off his ear
    f. you didn’t cut off your ear
    g. you’re just an evil Crusader, anyway.

    Posted by mr magoo on 2005 07 13 at 11:17 PM • permalink

  21. rinardman - Are we being set up?

    You bet your ass.  They’ve said so.

    And if you’re in EUrope, that goes double.

    Methinks we need the services of Charles Martel again.  (Though I’d settle for Black Jack Pershing)  :-(

    Posted by Barbara Skolaut on 2005 07 13 at 11:38 PM • permalink

  22. Oddly enough, some Melbourne Muslims, whose houses were recently raided, were later quoted in newspapers saying that they could not practice their fundamentalist beliefs in their home countries, which was why they preferred to live here – they now have the freedom to follow their beliefs in a way they couldn’t elsewhere. (Sorry, can’t be bothered looking up the exact quotes.) It’s all rather paradoxical.

    Posted by Ck on 2005 07 14 at 04:47 AM • permalink

  23. No, it is the facts. These people are persona non grata in their own countries because they are Trouble. They are now here.

    Posted by blogstrop on 2005 07 14 at 05:36 AM • permalink

  24. Well he is just echoeing the words of several London-based Imans. Only one of them is on trial.

    Posted by Andrew Ian Dodge on 2005 07 14 at 06:36 AM • permalink

  25. Who let them in?

    Posted by gubbaboy on 2005 07 14 at 07:04 AM • permalink

  26. This explains from whom the Spanish inquisitors learned their unorthodox approach to church-building.

    Posted by Rittenhouse on 2005 07 14 at 11:42 AM • permalink

  27. Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Members:
Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the "pending" list and you won't be able to log in. All accounts that are "pending" for more than one week will be deleted.