Talk:Mohammed Bouyeri

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

---

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. --—The preceding unsigned comment was 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.

• 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.

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)

The Telegraaf is, decidedly, one of the most sensationalist and least factual newspapers in the Netherlads. As a source it ranks slightly below the Sun. Robrecht 09:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC)