Entry details

Curzon
Author

Curzon

Date

July 13th, 2005

Tags

,

Comments

11 Comments so far.
Add yours.

No regrets

Defendant has ‘no regrets’ for Dutchman’s death
By Ian Bickerton in Amsterdam and agencies

Mohammed Bouyeri, a 27-year-old Dutch-Morroccan charged with the murder of film-maker Theo van Gogh, broke his silence yesterday to say he had no regrets and would kill again. Mr Bouyeri, an alleged radical Islamist who had waived his right to a defence on religious grounds, told a high-security court in west Amsterdam: “I did it and I am not sorry.”

Dutch prosecutors called for him to be jailed for life for the murder, which occurred in daylight in an Amsterdam street last November, saying it was carried out with a terrorist intent.

He was charged with shooting and stabbing the director before cutting his throat and leaving a note pinned to his body with a knife.

Mr Bouyeri said he did not hate Van Gogh but had been motivated by religious beliefs that “demand that I behead anyone who insults Allah”. He said he would have done the same to his own father or brother. “I want you to know that I acted out of conviction and not that I took his life because he was Dutch or because I was Moroccan and felt insulted,” he told the court.

Frits van Straelen, prosecuting officer, said the “meticulously planned” act bore a terrorist intent. “He [Mr Bouyeri] wanted to attack our democracy with violence.”

If only the Dutch weren’t involved with the US in Iraq, they could have avoided this tragedy! The folly of towing the US line is revealed! How long will Europe be fooled!

And as for the home-grown nature of European terrorism:

Mr Bouyeri, who was born in Amsterdam and grew up there, was injured in a gun battle with police before he was arrested in the eastern part of the city shortly after the murder.

I’d be happy to oblige! Better late than never, right?

I also look forward to hearing an argument by Grendal or one of the other anti-capital punishment fundamentalists that Bouyeri will somehow be corrected by the penal experience. As they might say in Texas: “Fry him.”

PLUS: One more argument for executing Bouyeri, via Slate.com’s blog roundup:

“If I ever get free, I would do it again.”

Comments to this entry

snow
July 13, 2005
4:54 am
I don't believe there is any way to negotiate or rehabilitate jihadist terrorists. Execution is the best option in this case.
J.Kende
July 13, 2005
7:17 am
Would putting him in a room where audio of Allah being insulted is pumped in 24 hours a day be considered torture? If so, do it. THEN fry him.
Martey
July 13, 2005
1:45 pm
If the possibility of dangerous prisoners escaping is a serious concern in sentencing, then perhaps a reform of the penal system is needed, not more capital punishment.

Would the knowledge that he would face the death penalty have been enough to deter Bouyeri from killing Van Gogh? Unlikely. Would sentencing Bouyeri to death deter other jihadists from commiting crimes? Probably not. Would the death of Bouyeri encourage other people of his ilk? Probably.
Curzon
July 13, 2005
2:25 pm
For me, deterence of lunatics in Bouyeri's vein are irrelevant. People like that can only be deterred one way -- by being killed. Executing Bouyeri is an issue of right and wrong. Ending his life is the right thing to do, both for abstract sense of justice and for the safety of society at large.

Vague assertion that it will "probably" encourage more people suggests to me the last holdout of desperation for those who think the death penalty should never, ever be used -- no offense intended, Martey.

Personally tho, I like J. Kende's idea...
Chirol
July 13, 2005
4:17 pm
I agree. I say we lock him in a room with his hands tied and them show him hollywood movies all day, maybe Baywatch even, while listening to Jennifer Lopez or Brittany Speers. Then, at the end of each day, I recommend force feeding him pork, perhaps even puttin ga live pig in his room (Provided he can't hurt the pig).

If his head doesn't explode after a few years of that, then we should definitely fry him.
Alfred Russel Wallace
July 13, 2005
5:39 pm
I am disappointed that the idea of justice and punishment is being confused with humiliation. Society should not be in the business of humiliating anybody, whatever their crimes.

I do feel sympathy for any gaolers who have to deal with prisoners who intend to commit their crime as often as possible, and perhaps a speedy death penalty would be best. But it should not be confused with humiliation.
J. Kende
July 13, 2005
5:48 pm
It has nothing to do with humiliation. It has to do with punishment. What kind of punishment is one that the punished does not consider a negative experience?
Martey
July 14, 2005
2:44 pm
Curzon, how does executing Bouyeri make society safer? If the choice is between isolation from society through imprisonment or isolation from society through death, does it really make a difference?

If the state is going to use the death penalty, I would expect they would treat it with the seriousness that it deserved (no judges saying "Fry him!"). The suggestions that J. Kende and Chirol have given cross the line into cruel and unusual punishment, I think. While Bouyeri might not believe in the ideas that make up Western liberal democracy, the state should not follow his example in setting his punishment.
Chirol
July 14, 2005
7:00 pm
Martey: Perhaps it wasn't clear that I was intentionally going over the line. Of course I don't seriously advocate such punishment!
Eddie Beaver
July 14, 2005
8:51 pm
You do not detain or imprison monsters, you slay them. Would the men who sent suicide bombers to blow up Londoners and Iraqi children (in the span of a week no less) be considered criminals or monsters? At some point in the WOT, the distinction must be made. This particular monster does not deserve a cot in a jail cell but a bullet in the brain, what should be the standard fare for all jihadists, whether they blow up a train or slaughter another human being who held views incompatible with theirs.
Grendel
July 15, 2005
8:54 pm
What's up Curse-on,
can't live with loosing an argument?

I also look forward to hearing an argument by Grendal or one of the other anti-capital punishment fundamentalists that Bouyeri will somehow be corrected by the penal experience.

It is disappointing you're intentionally insinuating arguments I've never stated. Hope you'll do better next time, until then

eod

p.s. please look up "fundamentalism" in a dictionary