I'm just in a bad mood this morning. Maybe it's because my vacation in North Carolina is about to end.

I wrote the following to the NY Times late last night regarding the murder of Theo van Gogh.

Your November 5 editorial "Deadly Hatreds in the Netherlands" places the blame for two politically motivated murders squarely on the shoulders of the Dutch people and their government as opposed to those that committed the acts. It appears that you are promoting the right not to be offended above the right to free speech. Also I cannot reconcile your misgivings against both the violence against women as reported by Theo van Gogh, and his decision to bring attention to the problem.

While I may have sent it too late even to be considered for today's edition, the final statement of the letter they did publish is so ridiculous, I can't believe it made it in to print.

To the Editor:

Re "Deadly Hatreds in the Netherlands" (editorial, Nov. 5):

Theo van Gogh, a filmmaker whose recent short film criticized the mistreatment of Muslim women, was killed on Tuesday on an Amsterdam street. The police have arrested an Islamist extremist and eight other suspected Muslim militants in connection with the murder.

As an American living and working in the Netherlands, I can attest to the incredible impact that the murder has had on the Dutch.

The Netherlands has been a beacon of religious, social and cultural tolerance in the world since before America even existed. The Dutch know and cherish this.

I'm confident that their response to this assault on their way of life and everything they hold dear will stand in stark relief to ours.

Rahul Sen Sharma
Amsterdam, Nov. 5, 2004

As if the U.S. went to war and passed the Patriot Act over a simple case of murder instead of an attack on it's financial and military centers resulting in the deaths of thousands with threats of more to come.

And if there are more Muslims in the Netherlands who profess the desire to kill anyone who says anything against Islam they do deserve a harsh response, not "understanding".