Dutch Politicians in Hiding After van Gogh Murder

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

Quote:
Hmmm...the Dutch believed appeasing terrorists would be a good idea. Well, it probably sounded like a good idea at the time...

No, they did not believe that!

The Netherlands actively participate in the war on terror. They even took charge of Afghanistan on the 10. Februar 2003! What is wrong with you?

(Btw, Holland is a part of The Netherlands and 'Dutch' is an old denomination that can be lad back to the 'founder of a part of Niederlande, a certain "Wilhelm von Oranje" ', a German -- *Deutsch*. The 'Wilhelmus' is the national anthem of the Netherlands and starts like this:

Wilhelmus van Nassouwe

ben ik van Duitsen bloed

den vaderland getrouwe

blijf ik tot in den dood").

Duits is Netherlands for German.)

RonOnGuitar · Joined: 08 Jan 2003 Posts: 1916

Hmmm...the Dutch believed appeasing terrorists would be a good idea. Well, it probably sounded like a good idea at the time...

Dutch Politicians in Hiding After van Gogh Murder

Dutch police now believe that the muder of film maker Theo van Gogh is part of a larger and coordinated action by radical Muslims to public figures that they feel are 'enemies of Islam.' As a result, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Geert Wilders, two politicians critical of Muslims, have been taken to a safe house by Dutch police.

Death threats were made by terrorists against Ms. Hirsi Ali, a former Muslim from Somalia who has been critical of Islam and Mr. Wilders who is a vocal opponent of Turkey's proposed membership in the European Union. The threats were made via telephone calls and on a five page letter attached to van Gogh's body by a knife.

The note claimed that Holland was controlled by Jews and called for Muslims to make jihad or holy war against infidels such as the Neatherlands, the United States and specifically against Ms. Hirsi Ali. To her, it read, 'Since you stepped into the political arena in the Netherlands you have been constantly busy terrorising Muslims and Islam with your remarks. With your apostasy you have turned your back on truth and you are marching with the ranks of evil.'

The letter shocked many prominent politicians and government officials in Holland. Dutch Justice Minister Piet Hein Donner said, 'It is worrying because it gives the impression that it is not the message of an individual, but a wider organization.'

In response, one official said the Dutch government may move to have Islamic militants stipped of their duel citizenship if they hold both Dutch and foreign passports.

Van Gogh's accused killer, known only as Mohammed B., will be the first criminal to be charged with murder under Holland's anti-terrorism laws. Eight other radical Islamists were arrested and charged with being part of a conspiracy to murder the controversial film maker. According to police sources, a terrorist bombing in Casablanca is also connected to the murder of van Gogh.

Brad Kurtzberg

RonOnGuitar · Joined: 08 Jan 2003 Posts: 1916

No, they did not believe that!

Actually, it would be more correct to note that most of Europe is "soft" on terrorists, in hopes it will be spared if Europe assumes continues appeasement - or, perhaps, at the strongest, a passive & defensive stance ("we'll wait till they hit us, then we'll hide"). But this has long been the Euro-mindset towards terror. e.g. Abu Abbas, one of the terrorists who hijacked a passenger ship in October 1985 and who murdered an wheelchair-bound American Jew was allowed to roam free afterwards by Europeans.

Abbas was probably the one of the first of the Iraq-based terrorists to be caught as he tried to escaped Bagdhad; his home after Europe.

I'm trying to picture how incredibly vast the European mourning will be when Arafat - the daddy of the Munich 1972 Massacre of Jews, best buddy of the aforementioned Abu Abbas and the author of much more inhumanity - finally kicks the bucket.

One weblogger provided some good insight on the issue facing the Dutch (and all Europe for that matter):

"In the immediate term, hiding Dutch politicians in safe houses to protect them from assassination is probably necessary. But we hope authorities in the Netherlands have figured out that they need to go on the offensive against the killers who want to terrorize their citizens into submission. Assuming, of course, that they have the means to do so."

DreamTone7 · Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571

Ron - "Actually, it would be more correct to note that most of Europe is "soft" on terrorists, in hopes it will be spared if Europe assumes continues appeasement..."

And so it was with Hitler...will these Europeans ever learn? :laugh

Meanwhile, Galmin points to Hollands involvement in the war in Iraq as an attempt to disprove that they would be "soft" on terrorists...meanwhile, in another thread, claims are made that Iraq had nothing to do with terrorists. You Europeans better get united and get your story straight, or old Osama will have you all bowing to Mecca before long! :wgrin

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

Quote:
Actually, it would be more correct to note that most of Europe is "soft" on terrorists, in hopes it will be spared if Europe assumes continues appeasement - or, perhaps, at the strongest, a passive & defensive stance ("we'll wait till they hit us, then we'll hide" .

Europe has fought terrorism long before Al Qaida learned how to fly planes in the US!

Quote:
But this has long been the Euro-mindset towards terror.

No.

Quote:
But this has long been the Euro-mindset towards terror. e.g. Abu Abbas, one of the terrorists who hijacked a passenger ship in October 1985 and who murdered an wheelchair-bound American Jew was allowed to roam free afterwards by Europeans.

Classy. Got any other first-class statements just like that one?

I am sure you know the case.

Quote:
I'm trying to picture how incredibly vast the European mourning will be when Arafat - the daddy of the Munich 1972 Massacre of Jews, best buddy of the aforementioned Abu Abbas and the author of much more inhumanity - finally kicks the bucket.

You do? I'm afraid you need to try much, much harder to get the message across, then.

Quote:
One weblogger provided some good insight on the issue facing the Dutch (and all Europe for that matter):

"In the immediate term, hiding Dutch politicians in safe houses to protect them from assassination is probably necessary. But we hope authorities in the Netherlands have figured out that they need to go on the offensive against the killers who want to terrorize their citizens into submission. Assuming, of course, that they have the means to do so."

And if they do not have the means, be sure Europe will provide it.

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

Have you sorted it out yet, DT?

If it was an honest mistake, I could understand that. Even Rumsfeld has problems with sorting that very difference out. :lol

If it wasn't an honest mistake, I await your apology.

Edited by: Galmin at: 11/7/04 3:32

DreamTone7 · Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571

Sorry Galmin, but not my mistake, methinks. You can't claim that the war in Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism, then turn around and use a country's involvement in that war as an example of not being "soft" on terrorism. The mistake is yours.

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

Quote:
You can't claim that the war in Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism, then turn around and use a country's involvement in that war as an example of not being "soft" on terrorism. The mistake is yours.

I gave you the benefit of a doubt and time to check facts, a futile attempt, it seems.

Quote:
Meanwhile, Galmin points to Hollands involvement in the war in Iraq as an attempt to disprove that they would be "soft" on terrorists

1, The Netherlands. The country is called The Netherlands. Holland (a province) is that small strip of land at the coast where Egmont aan Zee probably is the most prominent place.

2, I know that world geography outside of your country may be a completely alien concept to you, but Afghanistan and Iraq doesn't even start on the same letter!!

I pointed out The Netherlands involvement in the war on terror in Afghanistan. That was my example!

I wrote this:

Quote:
The Netherlands actively participate in the war on terror. They even took charge of Afghanistan on the 10. Februar 2003!

Let me be perfectly blunt:

Afghanistan is not Iraq

Iraq is not Afghanistan

Please check it up if you're still unsure.

Quote:
meanwhile, in another thread, claims are made that Iraq had nothing to do with terrorists.

I claimed that the invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with the war on terror. I still stand by that statement.

Quote:
You Europeans better get united and get your story straight, or old Osama will have you all bowing to Mecca before long!

I got my 'story' straight. It is you who cannot distinguish between Afghanistan and Iraq (and I am not the least surprised).

DreamTone7 · Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571

"War on Terror" is a term that generally reflects upon Iraq, not Afghanistan. The two sentances in question, therefore, do not appear to be speaking of the same subject or event. Please chose your terms more carefully next time, Galmin.

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

Quote:
"War on Terror" is a term that generally reflects upon Iraq, not Afghanistan

100% wrong.

The 'Operation Enduring Freedom' is the official denomination of the military part of the War on Terror. This particular operation was set up to get the #1 enemy of the western world, Bin Laden (and his network Al Qaida, the terrorist organisation behind 9/11). Remember? War on Terror? Short attention span?

The 'Operation Iraqi Freedom' (the invasion of Iraq) did not, even in the wildest dreams of Mr Chalabi, carry any of the requisite to qualify to be eqvivalent to the term "War on Terror".

DreamTone7 · Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571

Galmin, you can chose to use terms that make sense to you, or you can chose terms that make sense to others. In the field of communications, I think it makes the most sense to chose the latter. Wouldn't you agree? Here in the US, "The War on Terror" is most closely associated with the invasion of Iraq...whether or not you think this to be an accurate term or not is, I'm afraid, of no consequence in this particular discussion. So, I reiterate...please chose your terms more carefully.

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

Quote:
Galmin, you can chose to use terms that make sense to you, or you can chose terms that make sense to others. In the field of communications, I think it makes the most sense to chose the latter. Wouldn't you agree?

I do. In an international community it is well advised to use terms and their meanings that are internationally acknowledged.

Quote:
Here in the US, "The War on Terror" is most closely associated with the invasion of Iraq...whether or not you think this to be an accurate term or not is, I'm afraid, of no consequence in this particular discussion.

Is it? I know the sitting US administration has indeed tried hard to tie the invasion of Iraq to the "War on Terrorism". Is it your job to spread that misconception? I believe you guys need to take a public vote on what 'War on Terrorism' actually is about, maybe the supreme court can help in that decision.

Wikipedia writes this:

The 'War on Terrorism' or War on Terror, in modern usage, refers to an effort by some countries (primarily the United States and its principal allies) to neutralize international groups it deems as "terrorist" (primarily so-called radical Islamic terrorist groups, including al-Qaida). The term "war on terror" has been used at various times throughout the 20th century, but it has been revived as a consequence of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.

Most recently, the war on Iraq has been tied to the "War on Terrorism" by the Bush administration. However, no direct evidence has been provided for such a connection.

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

You claim that "The War on Terror" is most closely associated with the invasion of Iraq in your country.

If it is such a clear cut of terms, how on earth can members of your congress say that the war on Iraq draws focus away from the War on Terrorism?

I mean, don't they know it's the same thing? :lol

DreamTone7 · Joined: 20 Sep 2002 Posts: 2571

Colloquially, I rest my case...since you're coments were addressed to Ron, who is a US citizen. After all, this IS an international community...and one would think that a little more care should be taken when chosing terms that could easily be misconstrued by certain members of it...especially the ones that your comments are aimed at. Congress has an axe to grind over the whole Iraqi conflict...statements they make are often more political in nature than colloquially correct. But I think you already know that, Galmin. Or do you?

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

Quote:
Colloquially, I rest my case...since you're coments were addressed to Ron, who is a US citizen.

Then I suggest that the same US citizen, before talking about The Netherlands and claiming the country to be 'soft on terrorism', collect his information and read up on the matter instead of typing ill informed propaganda (such an enterprise would, however, be contra-productive to his goal, which seems to be just that: typing ill informed propaganda). Your own attempt to draw the focus off topic is at least entertaining.

Quote:

After all, this IS an international community...and one would think that a little more care should be taken when chosing terms that could easily be misconstrued by certain members of it...especially the ones that your comments are aimed at.

Ron isn't the Bush administration, is he? Even if he was, he would not be given any special treatment from my part. When people start topics about The Netherlands, at least basic knowledge about the matter is to be desired.

Now when there, even at your end, cannot be any doubt about the semantics in my post, you and Ron (Experto Nederlands) are free to address the topic. I am however, quite convinced that this will never happen.

Quote:
Congress has an axe to grind over the whole Iraqi conflict...statements they make are often more political in nature than colloquially correct.