This Boston Globe story is interesting for a few reasons. Yes, it starts and ends by somewhat portraying Muslims as victims, not the perpetrators - true as far as it goes, but an odd frame to provide the incident - and also somewhat frustratingly referring to the "alleged killer," (alleged? Come on.) but along the way we can observe a couple of things...

Boston.com: Killing fuels Dutch clash of cultures

Uh oh, the "cycle of violence" comes to The Netherlands.

The Hague, heal thyself!

Interesting. Cracks of an admission that anti-religiosity can be as fundamentalist and intollerant as the religious variety.

"Allegedly by his suspected killer..." Don't commit yourself to anything there, Globe.

I didn't mean to fisk this, actually. Instead, I just wanted to point out a couple of interesting tid-bits that I think relate to some domestic political issues. Skipping ahead:

Is it too much to point out that this is an indictment of bi-lingual education here at home? I don't think so. Allowing isolated communities to stay isolated feeds their lack of success and inability to integrate into the greater society. Learning English in school (here at home) and mainstreaming students with full English instruction ASAP is one of the solutions.

It's good to see Jihad being mentioned in a paper like the Globe without a disclaimer about true Jihad as a spiritual struggle rather than a physical one.

And here's an interesting argument against hate-speech laws:

Once you start making some citizens more protected than others, you instantly begin to risk feelings of second-class status in the others.