Dutch broadcaster fakes discrimination incident, waves away passersby trying to help woman in burqa

What is the word for being sick and tired of moslems?
Islamonausea? Islamoweary? Islamorepulsion?

I won't help a women in a burqa. I'm an unrelated male. I could be killed by the religious police, her irate Muslim husband or any of her male relatives. Sorry.

I signed in to point out the very real dangers of helping these women and the excellent reasons for not doing so. Tanstaafl got in ahead of me.

"I won't help a women in a burqa. I'm an unrelated male. I could be killed by the religious police, her irate Muslim husband or any of her male relatives. Sorry."

Excellent point. I wonder if these dhimmis realized they were putting that woman and any potential males willing to help her in grave danger.

Here in Denmark a lot of "decent" people hold the view that the harsh tone in the public debate about immigration and integration may cause the immigrants to feel alienated and thus actually harm the integration efforts.

But on the other hand, is it conceivable that constantly being told that you're being discriminated against can make you eventually believe in it and cause you to withdraw and feel mistreated when life doesn't quite go the way you wanted, like it so often does..?

How can you know it's a woman in the first place?

"Here in Denmark a lot of "decent" people hold the view that the harsh tone in the public debate about immigration and integration may cause the immigrants to feel alienated and thus actually harm the integration efforts."
-- from a posting above

Those people may be "decent" but I am sure they have not looked into the texts and tenets of Islam, nor studied the 1350-year history of Islamic conquest, and subjugation of non-Muslims. If they did, their "decency" would cause them to be more alarmed for themselves and their children, and for the untrammelled artistic expression and free inquiry upon which science depends, and the highly-developed system of individual freedoms that Denmark possesses, as part of the civilizatinal legacy of the West, and not any of which has been, or could have been produced, under Islam. And all of which is threatened by Islam -- and by Islam I mean its bearers, its carriers, whose large-scale presence, in Denmark, as elsewhere, have led to a situation that for the indigenous Infidels, and for other (non-Muslim) immigrants, is more unpleasant, expensive (the costs of monitoring Muslims, and of guarding likely targets of Muslim aggression), and physically dangerous than it would be without such a large-scale Muslim presence.

Any compromise with Muslims or desire to be solicitous and meet their demands, is regarded by them as a sign of weakness by the Infidels, not as a sign of Infidel sweet reason and goodness to be matched in turn, or even recognized as such. When Western non-Muslim men and women judge their own actions on the basis of what they believe, what they have been taught, they are doing themselves a great and dangerous disservice. They must understand that the basis of Islam -- beyond the rituals of the Five Pillars -- is a division of the world between Believer and Infidels. The Qur'an, the Hadith, the Sira are full of this. And between the Believers and the Infidels, a state of permanent war (though not of open warfare) must exist. And the duty of Muslims -- a central, not tangential duty -- is to work to spread Islam everywhere, to tear down whatever legal or political or social barriers to the spread of Islam exist in Infidel lands, and to ensure not only the spread of Islam, but its ultimate dominance....everywhere.

Few Infidels do the work necessary to grasp that. And it is too unpleasant to grasp. One wishes it were otherwise. But in the end, one need not be apologetic, or forever grasping at the straws of this or that individual Muslim, whose personal charm and plausible presentation (heavy on tu-quoque and taqiyya) we allow ourselves to be taken in by. Learn, study, and then resist, without yielding to the temptation to see things, as a good liberal, "from the Muslim point of view."

This is part of the duty that Western man owes his Western legacy: to protect and defend it from Islam and the instruments of Jihad that matter most: the Money Weapon (see the fury against Wilders by moneyed interests in the Netherlands), Da'wa, and demographic conquest.

Let the tone be harsh. Let more and more Muslims conclude that the tone has changed - irrevocably. Then they will have to decide: do they stay, or do they go? The more who choose to go, the better for the survival of the political and legal instititutions and easygoing social arrangements, in the state -- which so far appears to be far from rotten, indeed appears to be the most unrotten state in all of Western Europe -- of Denmark.

Islamo-fakia.

The new Taqiyya.

I don't help anyone in a burka. Too much of a chance of being harmed by them. There's a reason that people wear masks.

If the Western media ever gets with the program and does some real journalism on the scourge of Islamania we wouldn't have any problems with the neverending misconception of it being a religion of peace. Once that misconception is eliminated then we can finally get some progress on combatting jihadists all over the world. Instead, the public gets garbage like this, allowing the problem to fester endlessly like unremoved trash.

Please don't give the BBC ideas.

The Eurabians are learning accepted methods of distorting reality from their good friends in Pallywood.

Wave away those kuffars who are messing up the intended message that infidels are bad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_B1H-1opys

LazerofSerbia -

"the strain of her refrain"

propaganda, pure and simple

'Few Infidels do the work necessary to grasp that. And it is too unpleasant to grasp. One wishes it were otherwise. ... Learn, study, and then resist, without yielding to the temptation to see things, as a good liberal, "from the Muslim point of view."'

That's very insightful, Hugh. Sums up my experience.

"This is part of the duty that Western man owes his Western legacy: to protect and defend it from Islam and the instruments of Jihad that matter most: the Money Weapon (see the fury against Wilders by moneyed interests in the Netherlands), Da'wa, and demographic conquest."

A powerful well crafted message that's worth repeating.

I just think the poor BBC is uninformed.

el greco; by choice. CBC (Canada) likewise. Ptui! ;)

Don't forget NBC and their infamous Muslim plants at the NASCAR race in Martinsville.

http://www.nascar.com/2006/news/headlines/cup/04/06/nbc.dateline/index.html

Most (damn near all) news reporters are a waste of good oxygen.

I think that so called news like this is total schlock when you have to stage something then manage the "people in the streets" to boot. But look where it aired, on the youth web channel, consider the source. Why don't they sneak into a mosque and find out what Muslims say about us kaffirs for a change, you d'himmi news twits?

"Public broadcaster BNN"
Public, as in funded by taxpayer money.
I either get to pay for this, or for Kassams.

ABC's Primetime: What Would You Do? "Islamophobia: She Wasn't Dressed Right" is another treasonous example of Islamic propaganda. Even worse, comments at their site on the segment quoting the word of Allah and the example of Mohammed have been deleted repeatedly while other misleading posts remain:

http://amillennialist.blogspot.com/2008/02/abc-primetime-and-john-quinones-have.html

In the sense that Hugh intended, he is right about not seeing things from a "Muslim point-of-view," the way apologists for jihad want us to see things, which is not at all.

In another sense, we don't have enough people seeing things from the Muslim Point-of-View, which is according to the command of Allah and the example of his pedophile prophet.

All of us, especially those with the responsibility to lead (in politics, media, and academia) need to see things this way. Then we can begin to properly defend ourselves against the tyranny of Allah.

Why bother with all the half-hearted subterfuge? Why not go the whole mile, and just hire actors? The poor orange-dropping Muslim could be tied up by the evil Zionist Hindu Crusader and laid on the railroad tracks, laughing maniacally and pulling on his Snidely Whiplash moustache as the train approaches, only to get his comeuppance by the just-in-time freedom-fighting jihadi. That ought to get the message across.

For "special_guest" just above, a little Perils-of-Pauline:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ic9n0HUb9XQ&feature=related

Thanks. The suspense is barely bearable. Dutch station BNN is halfway there. They have their heroine, the train, the music; just add the villain, the hero, an ending, and it's a wrap.

interestinconundrum,

Islamonausea, definitely! Great word!

For a really good Muslim point of view piece, they should have had a person with his (or her) right arm in a sling, leaving only the left hand free to assist the poor burqa-clad little musliah.

Would she then go nuts, not only having "najis kaffur" hands picking up her fruit, but also using only that horrible but necessary left hand?

Too bad I don't have a video camera. That would be a prime YouTube offering.

Rule #7. To prove that discrimination exists, you must create the appearance of discrimination when there is no discrimination.

This reminds me of that television news crew that went to a NASCAR race to film all the conservatives discriminating against two guys in turbans. They had to scrap the story because no one discriminated against the actors.

They should try the same stunt in Berkeley with a woman in uniform and see what happens.

They're still pulling this nonsense? Weren't they doing this a couple weeks ago also? I'm almost positive I saw a video, or picture of people blocking/obstructing citizens that wanted to help the lady.

Then they had something similar to this in the US too.

What is sick, twisted and nasty is that the non muslim leftists are going to new lows to protect Islam.

“When the prophet migrated to Medina in 622 AD, he became the chief administrator, chief of army, chief of judiciary and chief law maker in Medina and according to the self invented doctrine of jihad, started oppressing the original non-Muslim inhabitants of the city. But sometimes it happened that Muslims erroneously fell victims, and Muslim women were tortured and raped by their own believers.

So, necessary arose to mark Muslim men and women so that they could be distinguished from the non-Muslim kafirs. The problem for the male believers was solved by the Prophet by asking them to keep beard and shave moustache. But it became difficult to mark the women. At such a juncture, Umar, a close associate and son in-law of the Prophet, suggested that Muslim women, when went out door, should wear clothes to cover their modesty. And Allah wasted no time to approve the idea by revealing a verse 33/59

It is not difficult to notice that Allah had no hesitation to tell that the basic need of such a dress code for Muslim women was firstly, to distinguish them from kafir women and secondly, to escape humiliation and harassment by their own people. In no time, allah revealed other similar verses like- 24/31, 24/31, 33/55”
http://www.indianresurgence.com/islam7.htm
By Dr Radhasyam Brahmachari