Assassinated Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn is often portrayed as some kind of Le Pen figure. That couldn't be farther from the truth for this gay libertarian sociology professor. Here's what he actually said and believed:

"Large groups in the community are lagging behind in social and cultural terms. These groups often originate from countries which did not participate in the Judeo-Christian-humanist developments which have been taking place in Europe for centuries. These shortfalls in development are highly regrettable, as they result in a divide in society and form a threat to the functioning of our large cities.

"This must be tackled vigorously, on the one hand by paying extra attention to housing, schools and cultural education for these groups, but on the other by requiring these groups to make a maximum effort themselves. Cultural developments which are diametrically opposed to the desired integration and emancipation, such as arranged marriages, honour revenge and female circumcision, must be fought by means of legislation and public information. Discrimination against women in fundamentalist Islamic circles is particularly unacceptable.

"In a democratic society like ours, all citizens have the same rights and obligations, irrespective of race, gender, beliefs and nature. There is a division of Church and State in the Netherlands, and therefore also of mosque and state. Thanks to the division of powers (the executive, legislative and judiciary powers), citizens can develop themselves in relative freedom. Our hard-fought freedoms are worth protecting against increasing fundamentalism. We must carry out a study into whether the introduction of a social and military service for boys and girls of eighteen years of age or older can contribute to integration."

These tears might mean something if Pim Fortuyn had been given the police protection he asked for. These tears might mean something if Fortuyn hadn't been the victim of a campaign of slander and hatred, incited not by anti-gay bigots but by the left. These tears might mean something if anyone believed, even for a second, that the same deniable hand-washing of refused protection and incitement won't happen again. But of course, it will.

The evidence is before us right now, in Eurocrats like Belgian Foreign Minister Louis Michel. His response to the acknowledged "dangerous" situation was that people need to "campaign in a cautious way." Appeasement, shifting of responsibility, denial - the classic Eurocrat reflexes. Not even a mention of regret. Translation: "Pim asked for it." And now he has obligingly gone away.

The drama couldn't have played out more conveniently for them if Pim had been a French Jew. Real outrage and real action, after all, are reserved only for harm to certain groups.

Looks like Pim didn't make the list either.