[edit: film was not a documentary, but a 10-minute short]
Story here.
Full Version: Dutch Director Murdered
Reuters reports a sobering story about the murder of Dutch film-maker Theo van Gogh, whose film Submission had angered Muslims. The film was a documentary about a young Islamic woman forced into an abusive, arranged marriage, and who was raped by an uncle.
[edit: film was not a documentary, but a 10-minute short]
Story here.
[edit: film was not a documentary, but a 10-minute short]
Story here.
It's a horrendous story. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.
yet another link
Despite working alongside someone who had suffered from the brutality of Islamic fundamentalists and who has had several fatwas issued against her, he didn't take any precautions. He is quoted as saying "No one can seriously want to shoot the village idiot," it's as if he didn't quite understand or believe the dangerous position he put himself in. Credit to his humility and faith in humanity I suppose. It's a big big shame though.
Can I just point out that the phrase "whose film angered muslims" makes me somewhat uncomfortable. I understand that it was taken from the news report, but it is a huge generalisation which should not be repeated as I am sure that the vast majority of Muslims would be more angered by this act being committed in their name than by his film.
Also, the film wasn't a documentary. It was written and produced by Ayaan Hirsi Ali (mentioned above).
yet another link
Despite working alongside someone who had suffered from the brutality of Islamic fundamentalists and who has had several fatwas issued against her, he didn't take any precautions. He is quoted as saying "No one can seriously want to shoot the village idiot," it's as if he didn't quite understand or believe the dangerous position he put himself in. Credit to his humility and faith in humanity I suppose. It's a big big shame though.
Can I just point out that the phrase "whose film angered muslims" makes me somewhat uncomfortable. I understand that it was taken from the news report, but it is a huge generalisation which should not be repeated as I am sure that the vast majority of Muslims would be more angered by this act being committed in their name than by his film.
Also, the film wasn't a documentary. It was written and produced by Ayaan Hirsi Ali (mentioned above).
QUOTE(gigi @ Nov 5 2004, 08:43 AM)
Can I just point out that the phrase "whose film angered muslims" makes me somewhat uncomfortable. I understand that it was taken from the news report, but it is a huge generalisation which should not be repeated as I am sure that the vast majority of Muslims would be more angered by this act being committed in their name than by his film.
Good point - I've changed the subtitle of the thread.
QUOTE(gigi @ Nov 5 2004, 08:43 AM)
Also, the film wasn't a documentary. It was written and produced by Ayaan Hirsi Ali (mentioned above).
[right][snapback]47145[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]47145[/snapback][/right]
Hmm -- again, you're right. I read somewhere that it was a documentary, but other articles are clear that it was not.
But while Ayaan Hirsi Ali wrote it, it was van gogh who produced it (and directed it, I believe), according to this:
QUOTE
Van Gogh spent 18,000 euros (£12,500) of his own money making the film in secret - and it was to be the first instalment of a three-part series.
As for the film itself,
QUOTE
Submission may have only been a 10-minute English-language short, but it caused uproar in his home country when it was broadcast at the end of August.
The outcry centred on the stories of four Muslim women who were beaten, raped and forced into marriage, and were asking for Allah's help.
It becomes apparent that their chadors and gowns are transparent and their half-naked bodies are visible through their dress.
On their bodies are written Koranic verses describing the permitted physical punishments for women who "misbehave".
The outcry centred on the stories of four Muslim women who were beaten, raped and forced into marriage, and were asking for Allah's help.
It becomes apparent that their chadors and gowns are transparent and their half-naked bodies are visible through their dress.
On their bodies are written Koranic verses describing the permitted physical punishments for women who "misbehave".
Also, CBC reports that "Van Gogh's next film, 06-05, deals with Fortuyn's assassination and is scheduled for internet release in December." (Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn was assassinated a couple of years ago.)
Notice how the anti-Bush crowd, which is appalled that certain international filmmakers have been (wrongly) denied entrance into this country because of post-Sept. 11 profiling, have expressed no outrage about the Islamo-fascists murder of this Dutch filmmaker. Doesn’t fit their political worldview.
For the record, from Andrew Sullivan’s site, here’s what the note, PINNED to the body of the murdered filmmaker, said:
The note - written in fluent, literate Dutch - is chilling. Here is part of its message. Remember that it was pinned into someone's flesh with a knife, and also threatened another person, Dutch parliamentarian, Ayaan Hirsi Ali:
I know for sure that you, Oh America will go under;
I know for sure that you, Oh Europe, will go under;
I know for sure that you, Oh Holland, will go under;
I know for sure that you, Oh Hirsi Ali, will go under;
I know for sure that you, Oh unbelieving fundamentalist, will go under.
For the record, from Andrew Sullivan’s site, here’s what the note, PINNED to the body of the murdered filmmaker, said:
The note - written in fluent, literate Dutch - is chilling. Here is part of its message. Remember that it was pinned into someone's flesh with a knife, and also threatened another person, Dutch parliamentarian, Ayaan Hirsi Ali:
I know for sure that you, Oh America will go under;
I know for sure that you, Oh Europe, will go under;
I know for sure that you, Oh Holland, will go under;
I know for sure that you, Oh Hirsi Ali, will go under;
I know for sure that you, Oh unbelieving fundamentalist, will go under.
Sullivan also notes that the man arrested for the murder is part of the same cult as Abu Musab al Zarqawi.
Believe it or not, it wasn't just rednecks who voted for Bush
As Americans were voting on marriage and marijuana and other matters, the Rotterdam police were destroying a mural by Chris Ripke that he'd created to express his disgust at the murder of Theo van Gogh by Islamist crazies. Ripke's painting showed an angel and the words "Thou Shalt Not Kill". Unfortunately, his workshop is next to a mosque, and the imam complained that the mural was "racist", so the cops arrived, destroyed it, arrested the television journalists filming it and wiped their tape. Maybe that would ring a bell with Oliver James's mum. The restrictions on expression that B J Kelly sees as evidence of European enlightenment are regarded as profoundly unhealthy by most Americans.
Mark Steyn, Daily Telegraph, November 7
As Americans were voting on marriage and marijuana and other matters, the Rotterdam police were destroying a mural by Chris Ripke that he'd created to express his disgust at the murder of Theo van Gogh by Islamist crazies. Ripke's painting showed an angel and the words "Thou Shalt Not Kill". Unfortunately, his workshop is next to a mosque, and the imam complained that the mural was "racist", so the cops arrived, destroyed it, arrested the television journalists filming it and wiped their tape. Maybe that would ring a bell with Oliver James's mum. The restrictions on expression that B J Kelly sees as evidence of European enlightenment are regarded as profoundly unhealthy by most Americans.
Mark Steyn, Daily Telegraph, November 7
QUOTE
Notice how the anti-Bush crowd, which is appalled that certain international filmmakers have been (wrongly) denied entrance into this country because of post-Sept. 11 profiling, have expressed no outrage about the Islamo-fascists murder of this Dutch filmmaker. Doesn’t fit their political worldview.
Perhaps they aren't aware of it. Or perhaps they feel that it is an issue that belongs to a different country. I wouldn't come to a conclusion, nevermind conclude that it "doesn't fit their political worldview" before they have even made a comment on it. Kinda like reviewing a film you haven't seen.
As for
QUOTE
Believe it or not, it wasn't just rednecks who voted for Bush
Hmmm. Not sure about most of the commentary of that article to be honest. Kind of falls for the same petty name-calling tricks that he accuses the "European elite" of (I had been considering posting about the failed European Parliament nomination but with the new board structure, doesn't seem to fit). As for the mural - well, I think it was somewhat narrow minded of them to paint it in front of a mosque. I wouldn't go as far as state intervention, but I would argue that the Imam in the mosque opposite has every right to call it racist. The mural doesn't stand in isolation, it was referring to a specific incident and aimed at all Muslims (no doubt he was very aware the significance the opposing mosque brought to the mural) not the specific fundamentalists that committed the crime. Freedom of speech demands responsibility and I don't think that such a reductive commentary constitutes any real awareness of the issues at hand or serves a positive function.This article has an interesting approach to Van Gogh's murder:
Should add a WARNING that some may find the language offensive.
Free speech fundamentalist on a martyrdom operation
QUOTE
The September 11 attacks on the US set the perfect stage for Van Gogh, a man who addictively cultivated controversy. Holland had looked on its million non-white and Muslim fellow citizens and cried out with fear, so Van Gogh made films and wrote books that celebrated this horror...
The inevitable violence of their response was grist to his mill. He reinforced Fortuyn's achievement of turning debate on minority rights and integration into a baying dogfight. Theo van Gogh became the Jerry Springer of Dutch political discourse.
The result, to use a word that doesn't need translating into Dutch, was b***s***. In the wake of Fortuyn's death and across Van Gogh's stage came some of the most ardently stupid opinions in Europe.
Dutch politicians, social scientists, policemen, teachers, journalists, all fell over themselves to reduce complex issues of migration, race, religion and social responsibility to idiot sloganeering...
These cretinous positions were then celebrated by the Dutch media for their supposed defiance of censorship. The European Research Centre on Migration and Ethnic Relations has reported that Dutch media coverage of minorities is one-sided, negative and tends to focus on their lack of Dutch language skills rather than their real social problems.
The idea that poverty and racism might have a part was dismissed as 'political correctness'. Non-white Dutch families are three times more likely than white ones to live on below average incomes. A quarter of non-white working-age Dutch citizens were on social security in December 2000. The Dutch justice ministry reported that the jobless rate among non-western immigrants was about 10 percent in 2002, compared with about three percent among 'native' Dutch.
It's a fact of life. The right to free speech includes the right to freely speak crap. Fortuyn founded a land where the spoken language is b***s*** and where van Gogh is its poet laureate.
Van Gogh's juvenile shock-horror art finally led him to build an exploitative working relationship with Somalia-born Dutch MP Ayann Hirsi Ali, whose terrible personal experience of abuse has driven her to a traumatizing loss of her Muslim faith.
Together they made a furiously provocative film that featured actresses portraying battered Muslim women, naked under transparent Islamic-style shawls, their bodies marked with texts from the Koran that supposedly justify their repression. Van Gogh then roared his Muslim critics into silence with obscenities. An abuse of his right to free speech, it added injury to insult by effectively censorsing their moderate views as well.
Fortuyn and van Gogh freed the Dutch from responsibility to rationally debate the country's cultural crisis. So without fear of further disturbing already ravaged public sensitivities, applaud Theo van Gogh's death as the marvellous piece of theatre it was.
The inevitable violence of their response was grist to his mill. He reinforced Fortuyn's achievement of turning debate on minority rights and integration into a baying dogfight. Theo van Gogh became the Jerry Springer of Dutch political discourse.
The result, to use a word that doesn't need translating into Dutch, was b***s***. In the wake of Fortuyn's death and across Van Gogh's stage came some of the most ardently stupid opinions in Europe.
Dutch politicians, social scientists, policemen, teachers, journalists, all fell over themselves to reduce complex issues of migration, race, religion and social responsibility to idiot sloganeering...
These cretinous positions were then celebrated by the Dutch media for their supposed defiance of censorship. The European Research Centre on Migration and Ethnic Relations has reported that Dutch media coverage of minorities is one-sided, negative and tends to focus on their lack of Dutch language skills rather than their real social problems.
The idea that poverty and racism might have a part was dismissed as 'political correctness'. Non-white Dutch families are three times more likely than white ones to live on below average incomes. A quarter of non-white working-age Dutch citizens were on social security in December 2000. The Dutch justice ministry reported that the jobless rate among non-western immigrants was about 10 percent in 2002, compared with about three percent among 'native' Dutch.
It's a fact of life. The right to free speech includes the right to freely speak crap. Fortuyn founded a land where the spoken language is b***s*** and where van Gogh is its poet laureate.
Van Gogh's juvenile shock-horror art finally led him to build an exploitative working relationship with Somalia-born Dutch MP Ayann Hirsi Ali, whose terrible personal experience of abuse has driven her to a traumatizing loss of her Muslim faith.
Together they made a furiously provocative film that featured actresses portraying battered Muslim women, naked under transparent Islamic-style shawls, their bodies marked with texts from the Koran that supposedly justify their repression. Van Gogh then roared his Muslim critics into silence with obscenities. An abuse of his right to free speech, it added injury to insult by effectively censorsing their moderate views as well.
Fortuyn and van Gogh freed the Dutch from responsibility to rationally debate the country's cultural crisis. So without fear of further disturbing already ravaged public sensitivities, applaud Theo van Gogh's death as the marvellous piece of theatre it was.
Time to weigh in...
gigi:
Actually, Van Gogh himself said that that statement wasn't based on his believe in humanity but on his own arrogance...
gigi:
What's wrong with that phrase? The film did anger muslims. Period. Not all muslims, but it angered a lot of muslims. Right now Van Gogh is being celebrated as the king of free speech while muslims are afraid to admit they think Van Gogh crossed the line with that movie. 'Freedom of speech'....?
Jeffrey:
I've seen no reports on that.
Some politicians, scientists etc. did so. Not all of them. I won't deny there's a tendency to shy away from the difficult questions. But there's also a tendency on the right wing side (Fortuyn, Van Gogh) to answer difficult question with simplistic answers. Neither of these approaches do any justice to the complicated nature of the problems.
Thank you, I'll stick to the written language ;-)
Klaas
gigi:
QUOTE
He is quoted as saying "No one can seriously want to shoot the village idiot," it's as if he didn't quite understand or believe the dangerous position he put
himself in. Credit to his humility and faith in humanity I suppose.
himself in. Credit to his humility and faith in humanity I suppose.
Actually, Van Gogh himself said that that statement wasn't based on his believe in humanity but on his own arrogance...
gigi:
QUOTE
Can I just point out that the phrase "whose film angered muslims" makes me somewhat uncomfortable. I understand that it was taken from the news report, but it is a huge generalisation which should not be repeated as I am sure that the vast majority of Muslims would be more angered by this act being committed in their name than by his film.
What's wrong with that phrase? The film did anger muslims. Period. Not all muslims, but it angered a lot of muslims. Right now Van Gogh is being celebrated as the king of free speech while muslims are afraid to admit they think Van Gogh crossed the line with that movie. 'Freedom of speech'....?
Jeffrey:
QUOTE
Sullivan also notes that the man arrested for the murder is part of the same cult as Abu Musab al Zarqawi.
I've seen no reports on that.
QUOTE
Dutch politicians, social scientists, policemen, teachers, journalists, all fell over themselves to reduce complex issues of migration, race, religion and social responsibility to idiot sloganeering...
Some politicians, scientists etc. did so. Not all of them. I won't deny there's a tendency to shy away from the difficult questions. But there's also a tendency on the right wing side (Fortuyn, Van Gogh) to answer difficult question with simplistic answers. Neither of these approaches do any justice to the complicated nature of the problems.
QUOTE
Fortuyn founded a land where the spoken language is b***s*** and where van Gogh is its poet laureate.
Thank you, I'll stick to the written language ;-)
Klaas
gigi wrote:
: As for the mural - well, I think it was somewhat narrow minded of them to paint it
: in front of a mosque.
Hmmm, I would like to learn how and why that mural was painted there -- who owned the wall, etc. -- before assuming anything, myself.
: I wouldn't go as far as state intervention, but I would argue that the Imam in the
: mosque opposite has every right to call it racist.
He does and he doesn't. He does, because freedom of expression is freedom of expression (even if, in this case, it led to a clampdown on someone else's freedom of expression). And he doesn't, because race is NOT religion. To be critical of Islam or any faction thereof is not "racist" at ALL. "Religionist", sure. "Cultureist", maybe, even. But "racist", definitely not.
: As for the mural - well, I think it was somewhat narrow minded of them to paint it
: in front of a mosque.
Hmmm, I would like to learn how and why that mural was painted there -- who owned the wall, etc. -- before assuming anything, myself.
: I wouldn't go as far as state intervention, but I would argue that the Imam in the
: mosque opposite has every right to call it racist.
He does and he doesn't. He does, because freedom of expression is freedom of expression (even if, in this case, it led to a clampdown on someone else's freedom of expression). And he doesn't, because race is NOT religion. To be critical of Islam or any faction thereof is not "racist" at ALL. "Religionist", sure. "Cultureist", maybe, even. But "racist", definitely not.
You might think that Matthijs (the reader Jeffrey refers to) implies that Van Gogh was killed because he was a jerk. Personally I don't think that's quite true. And I don't think (fwiw) that's what Matthijs wanted to say. I think what Matthijs is saying is that Van Gogh was no saint. From what the media are reporting you might think that Van Gogh's work is being embraced by all of us (yes, I'm from the Netherlands as well). That simply isn't true.
I believe Van Gogh's murder is more symbolic. Van Gogh is THE symbol of free speech and therefore a symbol of a very important Western value. Just like the Twin Towers weren't hit simply because they're high, Van Gogh wasn't murdered for simply offending muslims. His death is part of a battle against something far bigger than just Theo or even the freedom of speech. It's a battle against the whole western world.
It's sad..... but true.
Klaas
I believe Van Gogh's murder is more symbolic. Van Gogh is THE symbol of free speech and therefore a symbol of a very important Western value. Just like the Twin Towers weren't hit simply because they're high, Van Gogh wasn't murdered for simply offending muslims. His death is part of a battle against something far bigger than just Theo or even the freedom of speech. It's a battle against the whole western world.
It's sad..... but true.
Klaas
FYI, you can see the 10-minute short film here
Disturbing developments
As has been mentioned, it seems that Van Gogh's murder has at heart a much wider issue than free speech.
As has been mentioned, it seems that Van Gogh's murder has at heart a much wider issue than free speech.
Sixty Minutes last night had a fascinating article regarding the events of Theo Van Gogh's murder, the political climate in the post-Theo Netherlands, and most interestingly, a mini-interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the writer of Submission: Part I, who has been in hiding for years and is currently being protected by the Dutch government. Her statements could easily get her killed, even outside of the film itself. She lashes out against portions of the Koran that she considers inflammatory, speaks up for women's rights in Islam, and makes public certain practices that she insists are a constant threat to Islamic women -- situations where wives are raped and women are taken across borders in order to be killed. She's a black woman from Somalia, raised in an Islamic home but has fled the faith and her country and now lives somewhere in The Netherlands. She continues to relay her first hand knowledge of Islam, speaking out against at least the radical side of it.
She was asked whether or not Submission Part II will be made. Her response was that absolutely it would be made. To not do so would only be "to submit" to the terrorists that killed Theo.
-s.
She was asked whether or not Submission Part II will be made. Her response was that absolutely it would be made. To not do so would only be "to submit" to the terrorists that killed Theo.
-s.
QUOTE(stef @ Mar 14 2005, 11:41 AM)
-- situations where wives are raped and women are taken across borders in order to be killed.
If I remember, she was attacking a passage in the Koran on the rape issue.
QUOTE
She's a black woman from Somalia, raised in an Islamic home but has fled the faith and her country and now lives somewhere in The Netherlands. She continues to relay her first hand knowledge of Islam, speaking out against at least the radical side of it.
[right][snapback]60805[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]60805[/snapback][/right]
She has been a longtime member of parliament, which is why the government has been protecting her.
I was just cruising through--couldn't help jumping in here. As a confirmed anti-Bush person, I'm just as condemning of the Muslim Radicals who hijack Islam and do all kinds of horrendous things in the name of their religion, including the murder of the Dutch film director, not to mention the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, as well as radical Palestinians who've also got a long history of committing horrible things in their names, too. It's a shame about the murder of the Dutch film director.
I might also add, however, that, unfortunately, religious fundamentalism seems to be on the increase worldwide, and, unfortunately, pretty much every religion has its radical fundamentalists who usurp religion to do horrendous things in the name of their religion. Even Judaism has its fundamentalists who are fanatics, both in Israel and here in the United States(being a secular Jew myself, I can say that ), as does Christianity. (the conflict in Northern Ireland is just one example in point). Islamacism also has extremely radical factions, which are responsible for all the terrorist acts like Sept. 11th.
I might also add, however, that, unfortunately, religious fundamentalism seems to be on the increase worldwide, and, unfortunately, pretty much every religion has its radical fundamentalists who usurp religion to do horrendous things in the name of their religion. Even Judaism has its fundamentalists who are fanatics, both in Israel and here in the United States(being a secular Jew myself, I can say that ), as does Christianity. (the conflict in Northern Ireland is just one example in point). Islamacism also has extremely radical factions, which are responsible for all the terrorist acts like Sept. 11th.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.