Pim Fortuyn was a Leftist and gay Dutch politician who — unlike many of his dhimmi gay activist counterparts in the U.S. — saw Sharia oppression of gays and began to speak out against jihad terror and Islamic supremacism. According to the Guardian, van der Graaf said, “I shot Fortuyn for Dutch Muslims.”
Now he is going to be released, just days before the anniversary of his murder. Are Islamic supremacist Sharia advocates in the Netherlands planning to greet him with welcoming celebrations?
“Killer of Pim Fortuyn to be released under strict conditions on May 2,” from the Amsterdam Herald, March 26 (thanks to Fjordman):
The man who shot dead politician Pim Fortuyn dead in a car park 12 years ago is to be released a few days before the anniversary of the killing.
A statue to Pim Fortuyn in his home city of Rotterdam. Volkert van der Graaf’s freedom will be subject to strict conditions, including a ban on contacting Fortuyn’s relatives, talking to the media or visiting the scene of the crime. The last restriction will be enforced by satellite tracking.
The 44-year-old is eligible for early release after serving two-thirds of an 18-year sentence for murdering Fortuyn on May 6, 2002, at the media centre in Hilversum.
Junior justice minister Fred Teeven confirmed his release date of May 2 as well as the special conditions in a letter to Parliament on Wednesday.
Van der Graaf will be electronically monitored using GPS technology to ensure he does not visit Fortuyn’s home city of Rotterdam, The Hague or Hilversum. He is also banned from the residences of Fortuyn and his family.
The murder of the charismatic populist politician nine days before the 2002 Parliamentary elections sent a shockwave through the Dutch political system that is still being felt. His party, LPF, rose from nowhere to become the second largest group in Parliament and joined the coalition government, but collapsed in on itself within months, forcing new elections the following January.
Van der Graaf’s release conditons include an obligation to work with a psychologist or psychiatrist and report to the rehablitation service on a weekly basis.
The prison where Van der Graaf has been held decided there were no grounds to keep him in custody, he was not suffering from a psychiatric disorder and the chances of him reoffending were very low.
Teeven said he believed the prosecution service (OM) had considered its decision “carefully and conscientiously”. “I have informed the Lower House that I share the conclusions of the public prosecution service that it would not be appropriate to delay or refuse the conditional release of Volkert van der G.,” said the minister.
A majority of MPs backed the decision on the basis that politicians should not interfere in court cases. D66 member Magda Berndsen said: “Sooner or later prisoners return to society, so it is a good thing if it is done carefully and with conditions attached.”
The Freedom Party (PVV) of Geert Wilders was a dissenting voice, calling for a Parliamentary debate with Teeven. In a statement the party said: “The murderer of Pim Fortuyn has not served the whole of the sentence that was imposed on him.”
Teeven was thwarted in an earlier attempt to stop Van der Graaf being allowed out of prison under supervision before his release as part of the rehabilitation process….
Kalliope says
The prison where Van der Graaf has been held decided there were no grounds to keep him in custody, he was not suffering from a psychiatric disorder and the chances of him reoffending were very low.
Teeven said he believed the prosecution service (OM) had considered its decision “carefully and conscientiously”. “I have informed the Lower House that I share the conclusions of the public prosecution service that it would not be appropriate to delay or refuse the conditional release of Volkert van der G.,” said the minister.
……….
Our lesson for today, dear ones:
Murder by a Muslim = sentencing equivalent of a hand-spanking.
Not to mention the ignored fact that ʾIslām inculcates Muslims to be murderous from birth. They must emulate Muḥammad’s unholiness or die trying.
It is a terrible thing to enslaved to such all-compassing evil.
Diane Harvey says
This line that stands out, “. . . and the chances of him reoffending were very low.”
With all the text found in their Koran about fighting the kafir “wherever you [the Muslim] find him,” Dutch “authorities reach, with all their baffles intact, this conclusion.
DVult says
By the chances of him reoffending are very low they probably mean the chances of him killing Pim Fortuyn again are very low. The fact remains that he did kill Pim Fortuyn and doesn’t appear to regret this or be in any way rehabilitated. Rather than giving him a relatively short jail sentence they should have hung the guy 18 years ago.
Defcon 4 says
@DVult
LOL. That was a darkly humorous take.
mortimer says
Shameful.
Jay Boo says
OF MICE AND MEN
The frightened mice all gathered round and said “oh my, what ever will we do about the hungry cat”
“A BELL is the answer. We will tie a bell around the cat’s neck as it sleeps and then we will hear the cat whenever it comes near” “An excellent idea”, all agreed.
One by one the cat ate all of the mice because each mouse expected the other to be the one to tie the bell around the sleeping cat’s neck.
Defcon 4 says
No, it would be much better to continue to debate about the true intentions of the cat, who might have been misled into his carnivorous lifestyle and, at any moment, be ready to renounce this carnivorous lifestyle and become a vegetarian, or maybe a lacto-vegetarian.
Jay Boo says
LOL
Don’t let NPR hear that. They might do a special episode.
Askar says
He’s going to go after Geert Wilders, just watch, and everyone that likes to pretend Europeans are so civilized and better for letting murderers loose will be to blame. It doesn’t matter that you are a ‘nice’ ‘upstanding’ person and never personally get in trouble, you are just as bad as them – and the inability to see that is just further evidence that you are morally inept and/or insane.
Kepha says
I completely agree, and with SAKOVKT. I also thought about Wilders on seeing this news.
I’m not sure that Europeans are “soft”. They seem to be hardening in favoring things their not-too-distant ancestors would’ve condemned as sin. Perhaps they are lenient on criminals because their donkeys in judicial robes bearing gavels in their oddly mutated forefeet identify far more with the criminal element than with victims. I regret to say that our American judiciary doesn’t seem to be much better.
Salah says
Reinstate the death penalty. NOW.
A murderer MUST be killed. *THIS* is justice.
nacazo says
wow only 12 years. murdering a representative of the people should get at least life in prison without parole imho.
Saxon says
The ultimate dhimmi. I guess the moron never got the memo that his type are always the first ones to lose their heads when Islam takes over.
What a waste of air.
PJG says
“…he was not suffering from a psychiatric disorder and the chances of him reoffending were very low.”
Prison is for PUNISHMENT, not for minding offenders the authorities deem to be crazy or dependent on chances of reoffending.
Or it was, once upon a time.
mortimer says
The Dutch judges are saying Islam is an illness…that jihad, especially, is an illness.
KrazyKafir says
Twelve years for premeditated murder and out, wow, simply wow. No wonder the Dutch embrace the demise of their culture, when their own lives mean so little to them.
pongidae rex says
EU legal policies on multiculturalism that obligate EU countries to accept an unlimited number of Muslim migrants will prove as catastrophic to Europe as the interlocking political agreements of the late 19th and early 20th centuries that led to two world wars, destroyed cities and millions killed. Europe as it has been known for thousands of years will cease to exist in the lifetime of young people now alive due to a single generation of elitist politicians. The notion that what replaces Europe will be some sort of multicultural eutopia is delusional. When Europeans become a minority in Europe, which is a mathematical certainty given existing demographic trends, their fate will be that of all peoples overrun by Islam. The gas chambers and crematoria will begin puffing again in about a century. For Europeans.
Defcon 4 says
@pongidae rex
That’s a very unfair assessment of islam0fascist tendencies. Genocide isn’t always their first or only method of dealing w/the recalcitrant najjis kaffir slavery and/or dhimmitude is much more profitable.
Mannie says
Life is cheap in Europe.
umbra says
In europe, life is not so much cheap as it is worthless (or becoming worthless) … for those who do not tow the line. Incidentally, this is also true for islamic countries.
18 years sentence with parole after 12 years is hardly a discouragement for future political assassinations. Those who perpetrate this type of crime is committing an offense not just against individuals who are murdered, but also against the populace that have elected these murdered victims to represent them.
kafirrific says
(Parody of “She’s Always A Woman” by Billy Joel)
He can kill with a smile
And put out your eyes
And spread that foul faith with his casual lies
And he only reveals what he wants you to see
He screams like a child
But he’s always a Muslim, you see
He’ll mislead you to think
That he can coexist with you
He says he’s got the truth
But he’s ready to hit you
And he’ll take all your freedoms so easily
He steals like a thief
Cause he’s always a Muslim, you see
Oh, you had better watch out
He’s waging Jihad
To control all your mind
Oh, there can never be doubt
He will never give up
What he’s got on his mind
He’ll promise you peace
But he’s only deceiving
As he mercilessly cuts you
And laughs while you’re bleeding
His faith brings out the worst
In humanity
But blame it all on yourself
Cause he’s always a Muslim, you see
Oh, you had better watch out
He’s waging Jihad
To control all your mind
Oh, there can never be doubt
He will never give up
What he’s got on his mind
He’s frequently loud
And quite often rude
He does as he pleases
And will poison your food
He stands here convicted
Of atrocities
And you know what he’ll do
When he gets hold of you
Cause he’s always a Muslim, you see
Alan S says
“saw Sharia oppression of gays and began to speak out against jihad terror and Islamic supremacism. According to the Guardian, van der Graaf said, “I shot Fortuyn for Dutch Muslims.”” Confused on this article, was he anti or pro Jihad/Muslim? “Geert Wilders was a dissenting voice” this indicates he was pro, but this “began to speak out against jihad terror ” anti. Confused.
voegelinian says
Pim Fortuyn was a Leftist and gay Dutch politician who — unlike many of his dhimmi gay activist counterparts in the U.S. — saw Sharia oppression of gays and began to speak out against jihad terror and Islamic supremacism. According to the Guardian, van der Graaf said, “I shot Fortuyn for Dutch Muslims.”
The subject of “began to speak out against jihad terror and Islamic supremacism” is Pim Fortuyn, not his assassin, van der Graaf. The em dash should have clued you in to that.
And van der Graaf was not a Muslim, as Bazooka correctly notes, but rather an extremist Leftist.
Brazooka says
The murdered is not a Muslim. Rather, he’s a politically correct Islamophilic p.o.s.
Defcon 4 says
Clearly, islam0nazism trumps any faux concern lieberals have for gay rights. After all, 18 years for 1st degree murder doesn’t sound so bad when most, normal (i.e. non-scuzzlums) would get life. Who knows? Maybe the Blind Sheikh will be released before he dies by a corrupt US federal government.
Wellington says
This is compassion without justice and compassion without justice makes a mockery of justice and, by default, a mockery of true compassion as well.
For the record, and I have stated before here at JW, I think it immoral NOT to have the death penalty for someone who takes a life in premeditated, first-degree murder mode.
I know that many against the death penalty like to take the high moral ground. This I will never concede to them. And when a freed murderer murders again, as is of course not only possible but in many instances actual, the blood of that murdered victim is partially on the hands of those against the death penalty, though, in my experience, those against the death penalty are ordinarily so convinced of their moral superiority on this issue that they don’t ever consider their culpability here.
Champ says
I agree, Wellington.
Kepha says
Wellington, I’m with you all the way. My guess is that our legal elites have spent so much time dealing with the criminal, anti-social, and just-plain-vicious that they’ve lost any sense of sympathy or compassion for the law-abiding.
I like to think of myself as a firm believer in the rule of law, and highly mistrustful of anyone who would be a Fuehrer, “Great Leader”, or head of a renewed absolute monarchy. But I am beginning to fear that some of our jurists have become bigger threats to the rule of law–for they are making it less a matter of justice or principle than of lawyers’ craft, and throwing the door wide open to thoroughly lawless people in positions of power (the O comes to mind).
Don’t get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for many in the legal profession (especially since they’ve paid me very well for translation work). But law ceases to be law when it ceases to offer protection to the law-abiding.
Wellington says
In agreement with you, Kepha. I think the basic problem for this rot lies in the fact that the law should be guided by common sense and a sapient moral code as should democracy and capitalism. So many times when democracy, the law and capitalism is criticized, it is done by those not realizing that the deficiency du jour that exists does not lie with democracy, the law or capitalisn per se but rather with a dearth of these two “items.”
You’d think by now far more people would have figured this out—–but they haven’t. Ah, it truly does seem, often times, that man never learns. Hey, maybe this is one of many reasons why we need religion, which I hope you appreciate is a plug for “your side.”
Kepha says
Plug accepted. You and yours keep well.
Defcon 4 says
As long as you’re positive those to be put to death, are, in fact, guilty I support the death penalty. Unfortunately, there are a gaggle of people who have been discovered to have been innocent yet still slated to die.
kikorikid says
D4, awkward wording?
“Still slated to die after being found innocent?”
Don’t think so.
How many are in a “Gaggle”?
Very, very few “innocents” are executed
in America. Those convicted of First Degree Murder
should not be afforded an opportunity
to be a recidivist, many are. Far far more
homicidal recidivist than any amount
of innocents executed.
gravenimage says
Wellington wrote:
This is compassion without justice and compassion without justice makes a mockery of justice and, by default, a mockery of true compassion as well.
……………………………..
*Very* true, Wellington.
There are *no* mitigating aspects to this case at all—not in the commission of the crime, not in murderer’s circumstances, and not in any real remorse.
I have no real problem with abolishing the death penalty, as long as those who deserve it receive life without possibility of parole.
But *twelve years* for the premeditated assassination of a public servant?
Far from being “compassionate”, this shows a dreadful *disregard* for the sanctity of life.
And violent Muslims will take note, and exploit the weakness of the foolish modern West in every way that they can. This sort of case will do nothing but embolden them.
Wellington says
Thank you, gravenimage, for your reply. On one specific matter you raise, I have a question for you.
IF the death penalty is abolished in a particular jurisdiction and IF a convicted first-degree murderer gets life without parole (I would add hard labor to this), how then do you further punish such a person if they kill someone in prison, for instance, a fellow inmate, a doctor or nurse attending them, or a prison guard? All it takes is a second or two for a brutal and clever human being to take a life. I know some would respond with toal solitary confinement as a solution, but two points about this: 1) Arguably this is crueler than the death penalty and so the argument that the death penalty is too cruel pretty much dissipates here; and 2) Even someone in solitary confinement can still find an opportunity to kill again—–think Hannibal Lecter here, who has been mirrored by real cases.
Just wonder what your thoughts are about this. Honestly, I’m not trying to push an agenda here or trap you and I myself have entertained the notion of life without parole and no death penalty, though I still come against such an option everytime I’ve mulled over this, partly for the reason I already posed to you and in part because death fulfills two of the four reasons why anyone is punished, these being restraint and retribution (not to be confused with vengeance). Death insures ultimate restraint and society has a right to exact severe penalties from somone who egregiously transgresses against the mores and laws of a society.
BTW, the other two reasons to punish are deterrence and rehabilitation. Many argue that the death penalty doesn’t deter. Frankly, I think to maintain that it doesn’t deter anyone is absurd, but even assuming that it doesn’t deter anyone, there are those two other reasons, restraint and retribution, which I mentioned. And when I was in law school, I was taught that only one of the four reasons need exist to justify punishment.
Hope you are doing well. I read your posts regularly and always profit by them. Take care, my friend.
PJG says
I have a horrible, possibly paranoid suspicion that he has been let out to shut Geert Wilders up, or even worse. If he was so insane as to kill Pim Fortyn “for Muslims” what does he think Geert Wilders’ life is worth? Yes, I know GW has bodyguards but are they enough against a man such as this?
The authorities are sending out the message that the life of anyone who speaks out against Islam is next to worthless.
gravenimage says
PJG wrote:
I have a horrible, possibly paranoid suspicion that he has been let out to shut Geert Wilders up, or even worse…
……………………………….
Actually, I rather doubt it, PJG.
Most of the “hug a murderer” types I’m familiar with simply refuse to believe that these homicidal creeps are truly dangerous—despite the *obvious* proof to the contrary.
There was one idiot here in California who corresponded with an inmate on death row at San Quentin for several years, then at the urging of a friend actually looked up his crime (she and the inmate had never once broached the subject).
She had seemed to have some vague idea that the inmate was either innocent or had in some way been railroaded. She was shocked to find out that the crime had actually been a particularly heinous double murder, and that even she could see that there was no doubt as to his guilt.
Even then, her main reaction was regret that she had looked up the case, because she wasn’t sure that she could go on corresponding with this vicious killer, and fretted over the effect it would have on him if she stopped—no joke. (I don’t know what she finally wound up doing, but this is a fairly insane dilemma, in any case).
This should fall under “well, duh”—but many squishy liberals are so blinded by false compassion that in most cases they *really believe* that the chances of such cold-blooded killers reoffending are “very low”, just because they *really, really* want to to be so…
voegelinian says
Yes: PJG’s question, and gravenimage’s response, represent in microcosm the two sides of a prevalent mood in the Counter-Jihad (with one side apparently dominant and the other side rarely represented or defended) — namely, the mood that notices the Western myopia to Islam and tends to want to explain it as consciously nefarious, rather than as confusedly benighted. gravenimage’s response points out that the PC MC impulse to defend Muslims and to whitewash Islam can derive from a sincere and sincerely deluded perspective that believes in its heart it is doing the right thing and is on the side of the angels. To minimize this factor and to tend to leap to the consciously nefarious explanation in broad terms, every time one bumps into evidence of Western myopia in high places, is a grievously reckless reflex and reflects a strangely alienated mind, alienated from one’s one society, if not one’s own civilization. It also indicates the person has only a skin-deep appreciation of their own civilization.
Christian culture in its own special way, just as much as secularist culture in its own special way, can at times be conducive to such an alienation and superficial sense of civilizational “citizenship” and civic duty — the former in its eschatology if it places all its chips in the eschaton and virtually none in This Life (going the extra mile by deeming all “Elites” as Pauline principalities and powers); the latter through its irresponsibly incoherent parasitism upon social substance and social structures with a negligent appreciation for the historical and spiritual sources of that substance and those structures.
Wellington says
In short, voegelinian, what you’re saying is that ignorance is overwhelmingly the culprit and not nefariousness when it comes to the West’s way of treating Islam. I agree, but don’t overlook a gray area where ignorance is so extensive that it is nefarious to be so ignorant and where nefariousness is actually looked upon by the nefarious agent as something good and thus is rooted in a deep, a profound, ignorance.
gravenimage says
Netherlands: Man who killed Pim Fortuyn “for Dutch Muslims” to be released
Pim Fortuyn was a Leftist and gay Dutch politician…
………………………….
Yes, he was. And yet, *anyone* who is worried about the depredations of Islam is automatically deemed “right-wing”:
“Pim Fortuyn
Maverick Dutch rightwinger poised for success”
http://www.theguardian.com/news/2002/may/08/guardianobituaries.thefarright
“I met the far right Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn…”
In just the same way, Geert Wilders—who is very much a leftist when it comes to economics and social issues; and Ayaan Hirsi Ali—who is an African-born feminist, are both ludicrously plastered with the pejorative “right-wing” label.
And, of course, this does not just happen in the Netherlands, but all over the West.
More:
…who — unlike many of his dhimmi gay activist counterparts in the U.S. — saw Sharia oppression of gays and began to speak out against jihad terror and Islamic supremacism.
………………………….
Yes—Islam represents a huge threat to all gay people, and yet most gays and gay activists are deep in willful denial over this obvious fact. How many more gay people need to be hanged from cranes in Iran before they will notice?
More:
According to the Guardian, van der Graaf said, “I shot Fortuyn for Dutch Muslims.”
………………………….
And what’s to stop him from trying the same thing with Geert Wilders?
The only “remorse” he has ever expressed is to say that if Fortuyn had had armed guards, that he probably wouldn’t have shot him…
More:
The man who shot dead politician Pim Fortuyn dead in a car park 12 years ago is to be released a few days before the anniversary of the killing.
………………………….
A sentence of just 18 years—and then *early release* for *premeditated assassination* of a public servant.
What, exactly, would a murderer have to do to be *denied* early release?
Madness—just twelve years in prison. This is what life is worth in today’s Europe.
And, of course, with the emboldening of violent Muslims that this case represents, it will be worth much less than that soon enough…
dumbledoresarmy says
It’s fascinating how people can be blindsided.
Here is a usually fairly perceptive essayist, whose piece appeared in Jihadwatch in June 2006.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/06/waiting-for-churchill-or-waiting-for-godot.html
He names various politicians on the European scene…but he does not see Wilders at all.
But here is – so far as I can discover – the first mention of Geert Wilders on jihadwatch, in 2004.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2004/12/interview-geert-wilders-the-new-fortuyn.html