The media is so intent on whitewashing the savage protesters in Tahrir square in Cairo that the brutal rape and beating of Lara Logan went on in public for at least a half hour to three hours, according to various reports. The people in the square watched it and allowed it to go on for some extended period of time.

Think about that. These horrible people stood by for hours while this went on. And the media paints these people as "freedom-yearning people." And the dirty little secret about this is that this kind of treatment of an infidel woman is acceptable in Islam, and that's why the media doesn't talk about it.

The media's collective silence makes them as guilty as those in the crowd that stood by and did nothing

And the UN? They are busy drafting resolutions condemning the tiny Jewish state.

CBS international reporter Lara Logan is a well known public figure. And CBS and other media have accepted that she was brutally assaulted. However, Youtube and some Arab Websites are offering some further claimed shocking details not reported by the U.S. media and even some video about the extreme brutality of the attack on CBS reporter Lara Logan . Reportedly, some videos did show a crowd of about 200 or more men surround and separate Lara Logan from her security, and the crowd shouted “Jew, Jew!”, and “American b!tch!”. Lara Logan is not Jewish or American, she’s a South African native.

Reportedly some of physical and sexual assault activity was caught on camera phones as well. One video purportedly involved some boy fondling the breasts of the reporter. However, another purported video that was described by a controversial YouTube video claims that a bearded man ripped the top off the reporter and began slapping her face and breasts. He then pinned her to the ground, and by this time she stopped resisting, apparently accepting the fact that she was overpowered. The bearded man then removed her pants and masturbated in front of her before raping her. He also reportedly clawed at her breasts with his hands. The YouTube video claims that at least six men raped her vaginally, and a number of
men also raped her anally as well. She was reportedly masturbated on and urinated on by some men as well according to the YouTube video claims which was supposed to be pieced together from information and videos posted on Arab Websites and other sources.

It was claimed by various reports that the sexual assault and beatings might have lasted anywhere from 20-30 minutes on the short side, and as long as about 3 hours on the other hand. It was also claimed that her left breast might have been bitten or might even had the left nipple bitten off as well. One report claims that somewhere from 6 to about 50 men might have sexually assaulted or beat the attractive reporter.

One one hand, Lara Logan deserves her privacy. On the other hand being a major public figure, this international crime story is a very important one. It is also important to understand how anti-Americanism seemed to play a major role in the extreme level of brutality here. Reportedly, the reporter was left bloody, with semen and urine on her as the crowd shouted anti-American slogans. This reporter deserves far better respect than these claims of the brutality suggest. This mob violence against an attractive reporter who risks her life by reporting from the world’s hot spots only illustrates the type of danger that reporters potentially face when they report the news.

The assault on Lara Logan illustrates just how much order has recently broken down in the MidEast region which is now far more dangerous for Westerners. Further, some dangerous heads of Al Qaeda have been released from prison in places like Libya as rioting crowds demanded that political prisoners are released. When reporter Lara Logan heals from her injuries, she will no doubt bravely go right back to reporting on all the perils of this region.

There was no official inquiry into the 7/7 Islamist terrorist attacks in London because the Government took a deliberate decision to protect the Muslim community from scrutiny. A series of documents released by the Home Office shows that senior civil servants and government officials agreed on the conspiracy of silence in order not to draw attention to the reasons why Muslims in Britain would commit such attacks. According to the papers released under a Freedom of Information Act request, Home Office permanent secretary Sir John Gieve wrote in a paper sent to then Home Secretary Charles Clarke that upsetting Muslims would be a "potential cost" of ministers agreeing to demands for a full inquiry. Full report: http://www.derbygripe.co.uk/muslims7.htm

What is happening to Muslims? In Egypt's Alexandria, Muslim terrorists killed 21 Coptic Christians on New year's Eve and wounded hundreds. This community has lived in Egypt for almost two thousand years and at 8 million, comprise 10 percent of Egypt's population. In Nigeria, a Muslim terrorist cult attacked several churches last year that left scores dead. In Iraq, a church was taken over by Muslim fanatics on October 31, 2010, that resulted in the killing of about fifty Christians. In Pakistan, Asia Bibi, a Christian and a mother of five, faces a death sentence under the country's notorious blasphemy law. For daring to speak out against this law, Salmaan Taseer, the governor of Punjab, was gunned down by one of his bodyguards. Full report: http://reachforsky.blogspot.com/2011/01/mu...-christian.html

This thread is not about Islam but about the injustice of anyone discussing or speaking out against Islam being labelled intolerant and racist. There is a real conspiracy to silence all dissenters of Islam either through the social shame of being labelled intolerant or a real violent backlash from Muslims. We have seen too many of these.

It is trendy to make fun of other faiths, but deemed intolerant and racist when it is Islam. The atrocities done in the name of Islam are too often hidden behind the excuse of culture and respect for the beliefs of Muslims. Yet there is no such leniency accorded to other faiths, Christianity in particular is a fair game to all, not only amongst the Muslims but also in the West. It is OK to poke fun at Christianity or Christians. Because they would not go on murderous rampage or kill you. Have we really become so blinded by political correctness that we're scared of speaking out against something that is so blatantly wrong? Some AF posters deemed my postings intolerant and biased due to its theme. But how can truth be biased? Those are legitimate news articles taken from other sources. How can someone speaking out against something that is very real and threatening be accused of bias, racist and a 'S' stirrer? If someone saw a tornado approaching, would he be accused of being biased and racist to warn other residents against the oncoming tornado?.

Why is it acceptable to speak out against other faiths but intolerant to see the forest for the trees in the case of Islam? Why are we intimidated? Is the media actually programming us in the name of liberal Political Correctness and Multiculturalism to keep us silent? Or are they just as scared of the backlash of violence that seems to follow criticism of Islam? There is even a conspiracy of silence excercise by the media when one of theirs was brutally attacked and raped recently in Egypt's Tahrir Squre

Source: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_s...cesanction.html

More related link

1. On the Silence of Left about Muslims Atrocities
http://www.theaugeanstables.com/2007/03/31/731/

2. The deafening silence over the increasing danger to Christians in Muslim countries:
http://cifwatch.com/2011/03/08/the-deafeni...slim-countries/

3. Muslims in the UK


4. Muslims Must Protect Their Minorities

THE ISLAMIC PRINCIPLE OF TAQIYYA
In order to understand the Islamic mentality we have to understand the Arab Bedouin Tribal culture. This is a culture based upon tribalism and the hard nomadic values of tribal rivalry and hostility by raiding neighbouring villages and taking their women and children as slaves and concubines, and plundering their possessions, their stock and their grazing lands and killing their men with perhaps the exception of those who would cry for mercy and accept Islam. The nomadic people are mainly illiterate, but cunning, and resourceful in order to survive. They are also extremely proud and arrogant people, especially the men who were the heads of families or tribal elders. The masculine Arab culture placed a very high value on ‘honour' associated with his place in the social order of his family, and his tribal group, or his society. It is important that he does not suffer "a loss of face." The importance of honour and status is so important that it often justifies "honour killings" within families. Blood feuds and vendettas are often maintained for generations to defend the honour of long dead ancestors. As an example, Mohammed himself ordered the vengeful murder of all those who mocked or satirised him, as he was an Arab and the loss of face was unacceptable. Those were the codes and the role of men.
“Lying and cheating in the Arab world is not really a moral matter but a method of safeguarding honour and status, avoiding shame, and at all times exploiting possibilities, for those with the wit and cunning for it, it is possible to deftly and expeditiously convert shame into honour on their own account and vice versa for the opponents. If honour is at stake, lies and deceit may be absolute imperatives.” [5]
Thus by skilful manipulations, by dissimulation, deceiving, disguise, lying, confounding, deflection of accusations, it is possible to foil or block or fend off an attack or accusation, and thus turn a humiliation into a victorious outcome and save one’s honour or one’s life. This skill is part of the tribal Bedouin culture and it has been adopted into the Islamic way of life in the defence and protection of Islam. This skill is known as "Taqiyya" and greatly enhances the capabilities of Muslims to defend and promote Islam. This skill, Taqiyya, comes so naturally to Muslims that they are not even aware that they are using it to communicate and to dissimulate Islamic information to the kafir. It is a part of their way of life, instilled since childhood. This trait can also be observed in many other cultures especially in the sub continent of Asia.
To give a few examples of Taqiyya, Muslims will deny that "terrorist suicide bombers killed innocent people" were Muslims who were responsible for the 9/11 attacks on the twin towers in New York. They use the Western terminology of "terrorist suicide bombers" and will deny that Islam supports such forms of terrorism. And they are technically correct. And they are correct because "The Koran condemns Suicide" (Haram, so they "suicide bombers" could not have been Muslims) and wanton murder of "innocent people" ( but Muslims also do not consider non-Muslims (kafir) as innocent. They (kafir) are the enemy and so are legitimate targets.). So Muslims may safely say that they condemn any terrorist acts, because terrorists cannot be identifiable as a Muslims. But Muslims knew that these were really acts of "Islamic Jihad," and thus were truthful in denying it was "an act of terrorism" by Muslims, because they were actually "acts of martyrdom" or Jihad not "terrorism." Muslims do not do "terrorism." (Taqiyya)(Semantics) Yet this is what the Koran commands her followers:
Qur'an:8:12 "I shall terrorize the infidels. So wound their bodies and incapacitate them because they oppose Allah and His Apostle."

Qur'an:8:57 "If you gain mastery over them in battle, inflict such a defeat as would terrorize them, so that they would learn a lesson and be warned."
So, Muslims are very particular about diction, and will twist and use to their advantage any ambiguities of meanings. By forcing Westerners to use "political correct" phrases or terminology, the Muslims have the advantage in many arguments. This "political correctness" was surreptitiously imposed over 30 years ago when the Arabs used the Euro-Arab Dialogue to subject the West to be "political correct" if they wished to get co-operation from the Arabs. De Gaulle was responsible for providing the Arabs with the trump cards in his desire to make France the greatest nation in Europe to counteract American influence in Africa-Europe.
KITMAN
Lying by omission. An example would be when Muslim apologists quote only a fragment of verse 5:32 (that if anyone kills "it shall be as if he had killed all mankind") while neglecting to mention that the rest of the verse (and the next) mandate murder in undefined cases of "corruption" and "mischief."

Though not called Taqiyya by name, Muhammad clearly used deception when he signed a 10-year treaty with the Meccans that allowed him access to their city while he secretly prepared his own forces for a takeover. The unsuspecting residents were conquered in easy fashion after he broke the treaty two years later, and some of the people in the city who had trusted him at his word were executed.

Another example of lying is when Muhammad used deception to trick his personal enemies into letting down their guard and exposing themselves to slaughter by pretending to seek peace. This happened in the case of Ka'b bin al-Ashraf (as previously noted) and again later against Usayr ibn Zarim, a surviving leader of the Banu Nadir tribe, which had been evicted from their home in Medina by the Muslims.

At the time, Usayr ibn Zarim was attempting to gather an armed force against the Muslims from among a tribe allied with the Quraish (against which Muhammad had already declared war). Muhammad's "emissaries" went to ibn Zarim and persuaded him to leave his safe haven on the pretext of meeting with the prophet of Islam in Medina to discuss peace. Once vulnerable, the leader and his thirty companions were massacred by the Muslims with ease, belying the probability that they were mostly unarmed, having been given a guarantee of safe passage (Ibn Ishaq 981).

Such was the reputation of Muslims for lying and then killing that even those who "accepted Islam" did not feel entirely safe. The fate of the Jadhima is tragic evidence for this. When Muslim "missionaries" approached their tribe one of the members insisted that they would be slaughtered even though they had already "converted" to Islam to avoid just such a demise. However, the others were convinced that they could trust the Muslim leader's promise that they would not be harmed if they simply offered no resistance. (After convincing the skeptic to lay down his arms, the unarmed men of the tribe were quickly tied up and beheaded - Ibn Ishaq 834 & 837).

Today's Muslims often try to justify Muhammad's murder of poets and others who criticized him at Medina by saying that they broke a treaty by their actions. Yet, these same apologists place little value on treaties broken by Muslims. From Muhammad to Saddam Hussein, promises made to non-Muslim are distinctly non-binding in the Muslim mindset.

Leaders in the Arab world routinely say one thing to English-speaking audiences and then something entirely different to their own people in Arabic. Yassir Arafat was famous for telling Western newspapers about his desire for peace with Israel, then turning right around and whipping Palestinians into a hateful and violent frenzy against Jews.

The 9/11 hijackers practiced deception by going into bars and drinking alcohol, thus throwing off potential suspicion that they were fundamentalists plotting jihad. This effort worked so well, in fact, that even weeks after 9/11, John Walsh, the host of a popular American television show, said that their bar trips were evidence of 'hypocrisy.'

The transmission from Flight 93 records the hijackers telling their doomed passengers that there is "a bomb on board" but that everyone will "be safe" as long as "their demands are met." Obviously none of these things were true, but these men, who were so intensely devoted to Islam that they were willing to "slay and be slain for the cause of Allah" (as the Qur'an puts it) saw nothing wrong with employing Taqiyya in order to facilitate their mission of mass murder.

The near absence of Qur'anic verse and reliable Hadith that encourage truthfulness is somewhat surprising, given that many Muslims are convinced that their religion teaches honesty. In fact, it is because of this ingrained belief that many Muslims are quite honest. When lying is addressed in the Qur'an, it is nearly always in reference to the "lies against Allah" - referring to the Jews and Christians who rejected Muhammad's claim to being a prophet.

Finally, the circumstances by which Muhammad allowed a believer to lie to a non-spouse are limited to those that either advance the cause of Islam or enable a Muslim to avoid harm to his well-being (and presumably that of other Muslims as well). Although this should be kept very much in mind when dealing with matters of global security, such as Iran's nuclear intentions, it is not grounds for assuming that the Muslim one might personally encounter on the street or in the workplace is any less honest than anyone else. [5a] [5b]

A modern example of Kitman is the deafening silence (kitman) emanating from Muslims living in the West, after 9/11 and 7/7 atrocities, when it was clear that the majority of the Muslim communities in Islamic countries, celebrated and cheered for the successes of Jihad on these occasions.

But I do feel the need to speak up for muslims here because I agree that many have an inability to dialogue with clarity on the identity crisis as muslims today. ... From here: http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/index.php?...67540&st=40

A pox on both houses, really....

I don't see how Christianity and Islamic followers could ever resolve their differences and crusades if they carry on like enemies rather than brothers

Chutzpah, This may illustrate why Muslims are so hypersensitive. Not many non-Muslims realise why Muslims become so agitated when non-Muslims discuss Islam. Muslims immediately go on the defensive and assume that it is an attack on Islam, when all we are doing is discussing the tenets of Islam. They get hyper sensitive because they know that this Sharia Law applies to those who insult Islam, but non-Muslims are unaware that such a law even exists nor does it apply to them. This the the Sharia Law:

Now can you see why Muslims go berserk if thought that you or I were denigrating Islam even if all we are doing is highlighting the tenets of Islam or quoting from the Qur'an or the Hadiths?

chutzpah: And the reason for this gross inequality is because of Ignorance. Ignorance from both sides, of Muslims not appreciating the world outside of Islam, and of non-Muslims who do not understand the ideology of Islam. This is the main reason some of us who have a deeper insight into Islam owe it to all people to disseminate their information here. Let me illustrate. I am now only going to dispense information/facts not disinformation.

Not many people understand the philosophy of Taqiyya and Kitman in Islam and thus I will post this excerpt:

Huh? I have been a member of AF since 2006 and I have no agenda to spread any form of conspiracy or fear as you obviously do.

So what if you have been here since 2006, it doesn't give you the right to lecture and admonish anyone, it is a free site for all, so long we stay within the confine of AF rule and regulations, which you have consistently break by throwing insult at elleXO and I.

If u think I am a sheriff juz cuz I post to disagree with your views, then ask the mods to ban me. I made the thread about you and ellexo being islamophobes and yet no action was taken against me. So that means the mods think there is a genuine case to make.

Yes you seem to tell us what we should or shouldn't do. There are ways to disagree with posters here but it is certainly not the way you have been employing! If any of the mods think we are as you said how come none of our posts deleted or banned? You have been seeking for us to be banned from the start. Because you disagree with our view. You think it is wrong for us to discuss Islam and yet you have not borthered to counter or refute any of our posts. All you do is throw more lies and unfounded accusations to justify your hatred of us. And why should I ask you to be banned? I am not like you.

Yes, I am doing my bit for bridging the non-muslim and muslims... how? By telling you how you can bridge your differences with fellow muslims with more positivity than negativity. We are young, we are not old like Ellexo who is obviously set in his ways and hell bent on leaving some kinda lasting legacy on the internet with his two-cents worth of askewed interpretation of Islam.

What you do is your business and there is no need to lecture us on any bridging. How many times should I remind you that we do not dislike nor hate Muslims? Why should you always take it out on elleXO's age? How would you like it if someone make fun of you when you hit his age? You haven't the slightest idea about Muslims and Islam and yet you dare to insult elleXO's excellent scholarly writings. Haven't I pulled you up several times on your idiotic statements about Islam?

What have you ever said about us that is positive? You started attacking us without so much any provocation from our part. Who are you to tell us how to behave here when your behaviour has been appalling to say the least? You don't need to tell us what is what, we are perfectly able to live our lives and hold on to our views without your interference. If we breach any rule of AF, there is the mods who are capable to do their part. We don't need you to do their job.

Do you have muslim friends? Why don't you speak with them about your fears that you have sounded out on this board?

I have muslim friends from all over the world, and whilst some may fit the mould of anti-capitalist and anti-western muslim brotherhood, most of the others are certainly not. There are muslim girlfrens from Eastern Europe doing yoga with me and they are the ones who taught me not to see the muslims as a monolithic bloc. They have an identity crisis that has everything to do with the genocide there committed by the Slavs against Bosnian muslims, but they don't feel like they're muslim belonging to a big brotherhood with the Saudi sheikhs or the Malaysian muftis. They scorn the Bin Laden terrorists. They are more concerned about their national identity and their country's GDP, job creation etc...

What is it to you whether I have Muslims friends? I don't need to justify my posts and least of all to you. You think by having Muslim friends especially those doing Yoga justify your behaviour towards us? Why don't you look into what is happening to non Muslims living in Islamic states before start pontificating to us? Your double standard is just amazing. The fact the world knows about the Bosnian genocide by Serbs is testament to our fair and equal system under the laws. Who speaks up for the Iraqis and Egyptian Copts? Who speaks up for the demise of the Coptic church in Turkey? What about the constant rape and killing of Christians in Pakistan? Try bridging that why don't you. In short you are behaving like a double standard hypocrite!



I don't have all the answers to everything. But we should optimism about living in harmony with our muslim neighbors. I know you are living in Singapore and it worrying that there are christians like yourselves harbouring such a negativity about the influence of Islam on muslims. Of course I should not think it's Christianity that is at fault for your negativity, but the way you go on and on about this subject of Islam and Conspiracy to Silence on Muslim Atrocities against good Christians, one would think if there were a crusade or inquisition in Singapore now, you'll be the Torquemada in a heartbeat. (Joking...please dont go ballistic... )

Anyways, i am going back to my navel gazing...

Whether I am a Christian or not is totally beside the point because I do not pontificate and lecture others the way you do. I don't even tell them what they should or shouldn't do except in my recent post in retaliation of your constant harrassments which btw is against AF rule. So keep Christianity out of the equation.

You are absolutely right, you don't have all the answers neither does anyone, so why labour on it? It is your perogative if you disagree that there is a Consp. of Silence, but there is a way to express your view without having to resort to lecture, admonishing mode and snide remarks which you seem to favour. And it is not up to you to decide what subject I can or can not post. If I want post the atrocities done to Christians by Muslims I will do so. Unless they are not factual event you have no right to tell me not too to post them. Similarly I do not tell you whether you should continue practising your navel gazing (not very Buddhist more New Age hocuspocus). It is called live and let live or is this concept too difficult for you to grasp?

jarhier:"if you are sensitive about your religion, then you shouldn't attack religion of others. that's how the golden rule works isn't it? i don't see anyone attacking christianity constantly in af. there are hardly any muslim members in this forum to defend their religion, so i think it's very unfair to generalize all mulsims that they are capable of violence, rape, and murder. like i've been saying this before, there are extremists in every religion and they don't represent the majority that practices it.

it is said that 200,000 americans convert to islam each year, not because muslims go to door to door to promote it, but because anti muslim agenda from MSM is having an opposite effect. you don't need to bring others down to promote goodness of your religion. "

[b][i]jahier, I assume that you are not a Muslim but an "apologist for Islam" from the way you express yourself. Why do you say, "you shouldn't attack religion of others" when most people are only discussing Islam in general. That is not attacking but discussing it.

Regarding your video, Allison had to become a Muslim to marry a Muslim man. Barbara was captivated by the 5 times a day prayers, and the "myth" that Islam is a religion of "peace." Even the ex-PM Tony Blair recently said that Islam is a religion of peace but hijacked by some extremist groups. NOW HOW NAIVE CAN ANYONE BE IF THEY BELIEVE THAT because that is not Islam.

All Muslim memorise the Quran. That is what they know and that is what guides their actions. All Muslims submit to the will of Allah and listen to the Imams. I bet 99% Muslims know this Quranic verse:
Qur'an:8:12 "I(Prophet Muhammad) shall terrorize the infidels. So wound their bodies and incapacitate them because they oppose Allah and His Apostle."

you make a lot of assumptions. since you are 2nd guessing my faith, even though i have already told you that i'm a christian, i'm asking what your religion is.. are you a jew? agnostic? atheist? if we get that out of the way it'll make your motive much more clear why you are obsessed with this one particular religion.

to the point, i was discussing that media has turned blind eye to both main stream religions like christianity and islam before, and so as their attacks on both religions. and i also mentioned that christianity was attacked more due to political reasons. even as we speak, media is all over the incident where syrian govt conducted a virginity test after arresting 100s of female protesters. it sure doesn't sound like MSM is playing nice and showing favoritism towards muslims.

and about the attack part, this is exactly what i'm talking about. you are not merely discussing it. if it were so, i would not have bothered. it was allison's choice to become a muslim, because of constant negative coverages of islam from media for over a decade to decide to study islam herself, and so are 200,000 americans each year converting testify to that, so your version of telling the "truth" over and over again about islam is utterly fruitless. it's arrogant and condescending for you to make mockery of her decision, her spiritual journey, as if she never read the quran nor knows nothing about her own religion, and that you know more about their religion than them - especially when you accuse and imply things like all muslims are yearning for violence:

Jarhier: "you make a lot of assumptions. since you are 2nd guessing my faith, even though i have already told you that i'm a christian, i'm asking what your religion is.. are you a jew? agnostic? atheist? if we get that out of the way it'll make your motive much more clear why you are obsessed with this one particular religion. "

jarhier: "and about the attack part, this is exactly what i'm talking about. you are not merely discussing it. if it were so, i would not have bothered. it was allison's choice to become a muslim, because of constant negative coverages of islam from media for over a decade to decide to study islam herself, and so are 200,000 americans each year converting testify to that, so your version of telling the "truth" over and over again about islam is utterly fruitless. it's arrogant and condescending for you to make mockery of her decision, her spiritual journey, as if she never read the quran nor knows nothing about her own religion, and that you know more about their religion than them - especially when you accuse and imply things like all muslims are yearning for violence:"

I am basically a "free thinker" or "open minded" and I was brought up in Christian environments and attended Christian Missionary schools, but I also lived in Christian-Muslim-Buddhist-Taoist-Jewish environments. I consider myself a Christian and guided by Christian principles but I am a Free-Thinker Christian.

My purpose in life is to share information. To tell the truth and to dispel MYTHS AND DISINFORMATION. So that ALL PEOPLE MAY SEE THE TRUE LIGHT.

..I know about Christianity (some), Judaism (less), Islam (a lot)[/b], Ahmadiyya (a lot), Buddhism (much), Taoism (some)..

How can you know the truth when you are dedicated more to spreading Islam than Christianity?

As it says, any bad press is good press. You will not convince anyone but do only harm with your islamic obsession. I'll leave it at that.

Nov 24, 2004 | On the morning of Nov. 2 in a busy street in east Amsterdam, a 26-year-old Dutch Moroccan named Mohammed Bouyeri pulled out a gun and shot controversial filmmaker Theo van Gogh, who was riding a bike to his office. Van Gogh hit the ground and stumbled across the street to a nearby building. He didn't make it. As the Moroccan strode toward him, van Gogh shouted, "We can still talk about it! Don't do it! Don't do it." But the Moroccan didn't stop. He shot him again, slit van Gogh's throat and stuck a letter to his chest with a knife. He was slaughtered like an animal, witnesses said. "Cut like a tire," said one. Van Gogh, the Dutch master's great-grand-nephew, was 47 years old.

The letter pinned to van Gogh's chest contained accusations aimed not at him but at Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali refugee and liberal parliamentarian, who for years has been fighting for women's rights in the Netherlands' widespread Islamic community.

Written in Dutch, the bloody letter called Hirsi Ali an "infidel fundamentalist" who "terrorizes Islam" and "marches with the soldiers of evil." With her "hostilities," she "unleashed a boomerang and it's just a matter of time before this boomerang will seal your destiny." In capital letters it said: "AYAAN HIRSI ALI, YOU WILL SMASH YOURSELF ON ISLAM!" The letter ended with a kind of chant: "I know for sure that you, O America, are going to meet with disaster. I know for sure that you, O Europe, are going to meet with disaster. I know for sure that you, O Holland, are going to meet with disaster."

However, his critical views and brusque approach also made him unpopular among a lot of people. According to a November 2, 2004 article in Expatica.com, businessman and broadcaster Harry Mens described Theo as "a bit of a 'kamikaze,' who expressed his views regardless of whom he might offend." And offend he did. He harshly criticized Christianity and Judaism. However, the Muslim community bore the brunt of his irritation, which was evident when he likened Dutch Muslim immigrants to "goat f--kers."

At approximately 8:45 a.m. on November 2, 2004, an unknown assailant dressed in a traditional Moroccan "djelleba," brutally attacked Theo outside of a city council building as he bicycled to work in central Amsterdam. The attacker shot Theo Van Gogh and stabbed him repeatedly in the chest, callously disregarding his victim's pleas for mercy. Despite his life-threatening injuries, Theo was able to gain enough momentum to stumble to the other side of the street but by the time he made his way across, his attacker shot and stabbed him again. He then slit Theo's throat with a butcher knife as onlookers gasped in sheer horror.

In a final assault against his victim the attacker lodged his knife, which had a letter attached to it, into Theo's chest. The assassin then ran off through the neighborhood and into the nearby Oosterpark, where he and police exchanged gunfire. During the shootout, a motorcycle police officer and an eyewitness were seriously wounded.

Just as Theo's murderer exited the other side of the park, the police caught up with him and shot him in the leg. He was immediately arrested and taken to a nearby hospital for treatment of his wounds. The attacker was eventually identified as 26-year-old Mohammed Bouyeri, an Islamic extremist with dual Dutch and Moroccan nationalities who was believed to have links with other Islamic militant groups. Investigators revealed that Bouyeri's motivation to kill was likely sparked by the movie Submission and further aggravated by his hate of the western world and those who refused to accept Islamic values.