Talk:Mohammed Bouyeri

Terrorist label
Someone of you educated, skilled wikipedians should find the Dutch Ministry of Justice source of the open letter and add it to the references. The style of reference to the text of this controversial letter is not user friendly and for research purposes it reflects the foolhardyness and scholastic recidivism inherent to the israeli lobbys censorship efforts. As the killing of Theo Van Gogh is mentioned in the JOB COHEN article, an internal wikilink would be of use, as the open letter to MRS. ALI mentioned JOB COHEN particularly with regards to his indoctrination by Talmud. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.193.109.174 (talk) 09:35, 27 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I wish to comment on the use of the Terrorist label on this man.


 * This man was a murderer but was not a terrorist any more than the man who killed John lennon was.

'' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.112.129.230 (talk • contribs) 12:11, 2005 July 11


 * I took the following text from the terrorism page, lets see if mister Bouyeri can be "labelled" as a terrorist ;


 * 21st century definitions (terrorism) of the word range very widely. They typically involve some subset of the following criteria:


 * The motive is political or religious ( This is obvious, Bouyeri is a religious fundamentalist and he was "acting" in the name of Islam)
 * More like the Wahabbi death-cult that pretends to be Islam.
 * Wahabbism is one form of Islam, just as mormonism is in Christianity. Whabbism is just as much a part of Islam as any other forms! I hate people protecting the name "Islam" when, in reality, it inspires so much evil! Uchiha Thγmφ (talk) 19:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Mormons consider themselves to be a restoration of an otherwise apostate religion, but of course no other Christians agree with this. Christianity is a religion primarily defined as monotheistic and trinitarian, whereas Mormonism is non-trinitarian and henotheistic as opposed to monotheistic, which of course is what necessitates a complete redefinition and restoration of Christianity in the minds of its founders. Members of any type of Christian orthodoxy, however, dismiss these claims out of hand. Wahabbism, on the other hand, gives us no discernible doctrinal reason to say it is not Islam. Wahabbism affirms that Allah is God and Mohammed is his prophet, there's the five pillars, there's the Koran, and then of course there are some major issues with violence, coercion, and violation of human rights in the name of religion. All of that has also happened within the confines of Christian orthodoxy at one time or another, especially when it came to Roman Catholicism during the Middle Ages. That didn't make anyone any less Christian, and all of these types of things do not make a Muslim any less of a Muslim. If they messed around with the nature and person of Allah or Mohammed in one way or another, or if they stopped being monotheistic, that would be the sort of thing that would do the trick. But being violent and restrictive in order to serve the interests of whatever religion you believe to be true? That doesn't change the doctrine you believe in, the only thing it does is it makes you a terrible person who happens to be a Muslim. 2601:244:4E00:7CB8:25D2:A338:AF5F:6799 (talk) 23:28, 30 August 2015 (UTC)


 * The target is civilian ( Theo van Gogh was a civilian)
 * The objective is to intimidate (I suggest you read the letter that was left on mr van Goghs corpse)
 * The intimidation is directed at government or society ( See above)
 * The perpetrator is non-governmental (Bouyeri was not even remotely involved, or in contact with any government)
 * The act was unlawful (duh)

--
 * Well actually, he was convicted for perfoming an act of terror. So that makes him a terrorist, someone who murders someone is also a murderer.--Soyweiser 13:59, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Obviously the object of terrorism is to terrorize some people into doing or not doing something - like e.g. giving special attention and privileges to a group of people or not daring to critizise them.
 * Sometimes regular Muslims do kill others out of their regular Muslim anger. This guy does seem to have had an existing affiliation with a known terror group that was identified as such, though, so I'm satisfied with the conclusion that he was a terrorist. Being a terrorist doesn't automatically make him any less of a Muslim, but he did have an existing affiliation. It's a little bit like when a black person kills someone. Did he do it for gang-related reasons, people often wonder, or was he just a regular black guy. Being affiliated obviously doesn't make him any less black, but it does present a separate chain of causality that has nothing to do with race. Equally obviously, being black all on its own does not equate to being affiliated. In this analogous example, it turns out the black guy was affiliated, and he did have a history of being involved with some element of organized crime. That is a very good reason for saying it's gang violence. Now in this situation, the guy who killed the other guy has a certain ethnicity and a certain religion. But was he a terrorist, and was this an act of terror? There are all sorts of terrorist networks out there, and if he was involved with an organized group that promotes terror, then that would bring the terrorist thing squarely into the discussion. (No, Islam as a whole does not count as a terrorist organization. Stop it). As it turns out, he was involved with a known terrorist group. He was in the network, he was affiliated. Then he did something violent in the name of Islam, which is still very much a factor but the terror thing has more direct bearing on the chain of causality. That's why the "terrorist" and "terrorism" terms belong and should stay. 2601:244:4E00:7CB8:25D2:A338:AF5F:6799 (talk) 23:28, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

BTW. if someone wants to make a psychological profile of this guy (and other young islamist/takfiri radicalists) perhaps this might be of interest:

''Of Bouyeri, the Telegraaf writes that he “has a sickening sexual interest. Together with his ‘brothers’, he enjoyed CD-ROMs where one can see how to amputate male genitals. On his laptop he also had illegal images of a man having sex with a dead woman.” According to the paper, “Mohammed B. was aroused by gruesome amputations and sex with a dead woman.”'' The Secret Life of Mohammed Bouyeri

History tells us that many terrorists or radicals are in fact petty criminals and/or sexual deviants who have merely found a religious or political disguise for their disgusting activities. --BirgerLangkjer 14:32, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

"History tells us..." is a convent way for saying "My personal opinion is..." Also, I don't see how Mohammed Bouyeri's sexual preferences fit into this article. It really seems like that bit is just added as an ad hominem attack. 172.131.64.132 (talk) 02:12, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * "History tells us"...how about this. Sharia law tells us, very consistently, that anyone who chooses to leave Islam should be killed, and anyone who insults the religion or the Prophet should be punished severely in some way, especially if their intent is to persuade people to leave Islam. Sharia law tells us this just about every single time, and as you probably know, Sharia law is the codification of common law as created by Muslims based on the Koran. So what does that have to do with the religion of Islam, and what in the world might it have to do with causing Muslims to be intolerant...oh, I don't know, there's so many Muslims who aren't born and raised in a country with Sharia law, who can really tell. I mean, it's just a bunch of Muslims who create laws in Muslim-dominated countries that are based on the Koran which consistently wind up being horrific and intolerant, but that can't possibly have anything to do with anything. 2601:244:4E00:7CB8:25D2:A338:AF5F:6799 (talk) 23:40, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Snuff films
I removed the following passage because it was unsourced. He was wrong to kill Theo Van Gogh but Wikipedia is not the place to make this terrible and possibly libelous statement without citing the source properly :

'He also reportedly became virtually ecstatic when he watched snuff films.' --Godfinger 12:54, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not going to insert it again if you find it important to leave out, but actually this is pretty much taken directly from the first citation:
 * "Mohammed el Morabit, a Moroccan member of the Hofstadgroup, who was not among the fanatics, told his Dutch interrogators that Mohammed Bouyeri became virtually ecstatic when he watched horrifying snuff films. In Bouyeri's house, a CD-rom was found with films showing images like the public amputation of a penis and sex with a dead female body." Rune X2 15:33, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * To be frank, it would not surprise me that it might be true as this guy seemed seriously disturbed. But as it's wikipedia policy to avoid libelous remarks it would be wise to be careful what one says in biographies. Obviously it is a case that aroused strong feelings and one might be tempted to ascribe all sorts of terrible things to this man but in the interests of accuracy we should only report what is truly sourced .In this case you appear to be correct so if you want to put it back then I wont object-but it definately needs to be properly cited-maybe as a quote perhaps or something --Godfinger 16:05, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Sexual fetishism
This section has been repeatedly been removed by a number anonymous editors and now by FayssalF, however there should be a discussion on talk pages before removing cited material.

The sexual fetishism of Mohammed Bouyeri as well as his fondness for snuff films, is well attested and much attention has been given to these aspects. Including a number of Muslims arguing, that Mohammed Bouyeri wasn't in the least moved by Islam, but just using it as a flimsy cover for his real interests. The section is merited in the article on account of it giving some background to the man in question, and perhaps giving some kind of possible answer to what his reasons for killing van Gogh.

a Moroccan member of the Hofstadgroup, who was not among the fanatics, told his Dutch interrogators that Mohammed Bouyeri became virtually ecstatic when he watched horrifying snuff films. In Bouyeri's house, a CD-rom was found with films showing images like the public amputation of a penis and sex with a dead female body.

Bouyeri also tried to decapitate Theo van Gogh with a big knife, at which point he discovered that it was not so easy. In the months or weeks before the murder, he had tried to perfect his decapitation technique on one or more stolen sheep. A book on Zarqawi was also found in Bouyeri's house, the notorious Jordanian Al-Qaeda terrorist who introduced the terror cult of decapitation to. Terror on Trial: First hand report on the Hofstadgroep trial by Emerson Vermaat

Indeed it does not. In a shocking set of revelations, the ’ daily, De Telegraaf, has reported that Mohammed Bouyeri and his associates in the Hofstadgroep used radical Islamism to hide the fact that their group was actually a “sexual cult.” In a report titled “Preaching and Porno,” the paper went on to recount the story of the Islamist “lover boys” who clothed their lurid sexual preferences in the garb of religious extremism.

The group was inclined to a vast array of depraved activities, not the least disturbing of which was the sexual abuse of young women. The group also reportedly had a penchant for marrying young women, most of whom were native Dutch and had converted to Islam. Bouyeri and his co-religionists would use them as “porn princesses,” before abandoning them after two weeks.

“has a sickening sexual interest. Together with his ‘brothers’, he enjoyed CD-ROMs where one can see how to amputate male genitals. On his laptop he also had illegal images of a man having sex with a dead woman.” According to the paper, “Mohammed B. was aroused by gruesome amputations and sex with a dead woman.” The Secret Life of Mohammed Bouyeri

etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rune X2 (talk • contribs) 13:28, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I just considered your reverts w/o using the edit summary a bit odd. By the way Rune X2, do you have a source for the " Including a number of Muslims arguing, that Mohammed Bouyeri wasn't in the least moved by Islam". If you have it it would be good as all we need in Wikipedia is balance (NPOV). -- FayssalF  -  Wiki me up®  14:04, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the entire section, hear me out. It first appeared to me as a cheap smear - the chap isn't notable for his sexual fetishes. Reference 2 and 3 were cited but 3 is now a broken link. Reference 2 is a very dubious source and I'm surprised this article has remained written around it. The actual content, well - the amputee fetishism was not really accurate, and unless he has self-identified as being a necrophiliac, I don't really see how a single movie file ammounts to a fetish - does everyone who has seen 2girls1cup have a faeces fettish? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.27.103 (talk) 23:16, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Murder method
This article says he stabbed van gogh, the page on van gogh says he was shot... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.6.39.213 (talk) 06:43, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
 * He shot Van Gogh multiple times then slashed his throat and pinned a note to his chest using a butcher's knife. So both statements are true (abeit incomplete). SpeakFree (talk) 10:56, 28 August 2011 (UTC)