Reaction from FrontPage Magazine

Alexis Amory apologizes for what she says was an accidental case of plagiarizing my blog. Thanks to Rogier for the role he played in bringing this to their attention.

Update Saturday 4/12/04, 9.27: I'm waking up to an email from Rogier. Whereas I was satisfied with the apology I got from Amory, Rogier didn't believe her explanation and decided to prod FrontPage Magazine editor David Horowitz again. The result: Amory will not be writing for FPM anymore. Yet I experience the same lack of triumphant feelings Rogier describes. I've never found pleasure in the misfortune of others. Plus, I feel being banned from FPM may be disproportionate punishment for what she did.

22:34

permalink comment(s) (4) trackback(s) (0)

Dutch 101

My new column at Netkwesties, a Dutch magazine on internet civil rights, can be found online here. It's entirely in Dutch, but since the article is an extended version of this English piece, it might prove interesting stuff for, say, the two non-Dutch out there who want to learn our wonderful language.

16:35

permalink comment(s) (1) trackback(s) (0)

The Dallas Morning News gets it:

'Ayaan Hirsi Ali is the Salman Rushdie of our time,' this newspaper writes. Money quote:

'All of us must do everything we can to protect her. Whether one agrees with her views on Islam is entirely beside the point. In the West, no one may threaten or carry out violence to silence speech. This fundamental right is under threat today from Islamic extremists. It must be defended without hesitation and without apology.'

Indeed. Read the whole thing here.

(For those of you struggling with the registration requirements, try Bugmenot. Not all passwords that are given there will work, though.)

16:22

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)

Denial and that river in Egypt (2)

The Nation goes 'la la la, we can't hear you, nothing to see here, blame the victim':

'Van Gogh used free speech as a vehicle for racism and the Dutch tradition of "killing taboos" to boost his own career.'

I can't even begin to explain how grossly uninformed this is. Any person who doesn't know (or chooses to ignore) the difference between provocation and genuine hatred of others, is guilty of the same dogmatic stereotyping that is so common in genuine racists. Van Gogh wasn't one of the latter. He did really like to provoke people, in which he succeeds even posthumously.

Anyway, it's besides the point. Whether or not you consider someone to be a racist, you don't kill him for it.

So of course The Nation uses the famous 'but' phrase (although they don't need the word 'but' itself). For that, they can get one of my fingers.

(And by the way, the various Nazi references to anyone who disagrees with the author's point of view ('collaborator' for MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali, 'Jewish question' as a reference to future European policy towards radical Islam, and the list goes on), make me want to invoke Godwin's Law. Good thing the author doesn't flat out accuse all Dutch of being fascists. Then we could challenge her assumptions. Oh well, I guess there is still freedom of cowardice.)

(Hat tip: Matthijs.)

15:13

permalink comment(s) (0) trackback(s) (0)