If one thinks about de Rijke’s words, there is no difference. She does not blame the man who raped her because he simply could not help it – in other words, he is no better than an animal, without the intelligence, will or self-control to prevent himself from doing what he was doing. He has none of the attributes that make us human. She stretched to give him the benefit of the doubt about whether he was remorseful, although he did nothing to give any reasonable person that impression.

This is part and parcel of the left’s opinion of others – they can’t help what they do and are not responsible for themselves because they are barely human.

God forbid you should do anything that might possibly be construed as racist. (Sexist, however, seems to be ok.)

We are so afraid of being called racist or Islamaphobes that we will bear any atrocity with a shrug and a plea for broaden minds.

The issue is that she was confronted with a gruesome reality is a most physical and emotional shattering manner, and I have no problem with affording her some deference with her trying to deal with the wreakage in her personal life (at least until she drags her issues into the public arena, see below**).

As I interpret what went down, Ms. Rijke obejctively is dealing with loss – and there are 5 stages in the grieving process: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. Not everyone gets though all the stage, nor is it a linear process by any means.

Denial, the first stage, can be extremely powerful – and Ms. Rejke demonstrates the power of denial (which includes rationalization, which is what she has done here).

The problem for her is that she decided to go public while still in the denial/rationaization stage. I don’t know if this came from disordered thinking on her part or whether her “friends” with their own political agendas pushed her into this. But, by going public and politicizing her personal tragedy, she has frozen her healing and further injured herself.

**However, her going public at this point moves this situation from a personal tragedy to her committing a public offensethat affects and hurts us all – and at this point I have to lay aside sympathy and deal with the problem that she has created for the rest of us.

By her actions, she has severely damaged women around the world by cutting out the ground from under them when they try to resist rape and abuse and imprisonment in forced marriages by her exoneration of the culpable – thereby putting all these other women victims in the wrong as well for protesting.

So at this point, it no longer matters whether she is confused, in denial, or inhumanely “politically correct” – her actions in defending her rapists deserve censure and condemnation because they are wrong. And if her feelings are “hurt” by this criticism – well that is the consequence of still another bad decision of hers.

But even more, the reaction of other politicians exposes the depraved depths to which postmodern PC thinking has infiltrated the Dutch elite (and many others in Europe and the U.S.).

No, Ms. Rijke’s “victim” status (granted to her by political bias – a conservative “would have had it coming to her”) does not give her the authority to declare that rape was okay in her case – and by defending here position, these leaders and their sympathizers have abandoned any right of claim to speak for human rights or any other universal value.

Rape is evil and wrong, and attempts to selectively immunize certain individuals or groups because of political ideology simply exposes the depravity of the defenders.

I want to feel bad for this reporter, to sympathize because I’m incapable of empathy in this situation. But justifying a rape because it was followed up with tea, biscuits and an offer for more exploitative — but consentual — sex? I can’t even begin to plumb the depths of that sort of depravity.

I don’t blame the woman in the second story, any more than I blame a woman who is raped in an alley, or drugged in a bar. I don’t blame the reporter for being raped. We should not be in the business of suggesting that rape victims were “asking for it,” simply because of a political ideology. She was naive — her naivete made her a victim. She should thank God it didn’t make one of her child.

The two women separated in Istanbul on March 19th, planning to meet up in Beirut. She was last seen on March 31st in Gebze, a town 70 miles southeast of Istanbul. Her naked body was found this past Saturday. A truck driver, who confessed to raping and strangling di Marineo, was caught after using his SIM card in di Marineo’s cell phone.

However, I will criticize her decision to go public and politicize the story – which now puts her in a position where she will find it very difficult to actually sort out her psyche as she now has boxed herself into having to defend her rationalizations.

In that regard I have no sympathy for the liberal argument that her experience automatically grants her moral authority – sympathy with her experience does not immunize her from the consequences of a bad decision to “go public”. Geert Wilders is fully entitled to criticize her statements.

What is so discouraging is the eagerness of the Dutch elites to justify rape and to exculpate the perpetrators on political grounds, thereby severely damaging women around the world who now find their moral ability to stand up against male rapist compromised by this craven surrender.

This is what we’ve become. We as a nation (excepting people who still have their brains intact) are so afraid of being labeled racist that we not only hesitate, but REFUSE to take steps to protect ourselves, our children, and even strangers from someone who could be dangerous!

I’d like to say it’s “unbelievable” or “outrageous”, but I’m saddened and dismayed to say that I’m not surprised at all.

pathetic