Here is another classic case of Infidelobia.

If a Poodle barks in the desert, and no Saudi is listening, did the Poodle really bark?

Posted by: flowerknife_us at February 26, 2007 3:20 PM

The area the group was traveling in is restricted for Muslims only

Are AP and the killers assuming the French travelers weren't Muslims?

Posted by: yadayada at February 26, 2007 3:26 PM

The RoP strikes again!

Google doesn't seem to turn up any results when trying to find muslims killed near the Vatican. What gives...?

Moral equivalence indeed.

-XRDC

Posted by: XRDC at February 26, 2007 3:28 PM

They didn't even get the chance to surrender first?

Posted by: AMartinez at February 26, 2007 3:29 PM

Whole story sounds fishy. Since when do the 'militants' spare the women and children?

Posted by: Infidel33 at February 26, 2007 3:45 PM

This may seem extreem, but wait untill Paris is a Muslim only zone and we are seeing the French killed for getting to close to the restricted area.

Posted by: Ameriki at February 26, 2007 3:47 PM

"The Prophet Muhammad was born in Mecca, where he began spreading the message of Islam ..."

Those Frenchmen were given the true "message of Islam." The Pirate Mohammed would be proud.

Posted by: Stendec at February 26, 2007 3:48 PM

Does the AP say, "the Lord Jesus Christ?" No! Then, why "the Prophet Mohammad"?

How about, "the Muslim prophet Mohammad." This identifies him not as everyone's prophet.

Posted by: sonomaca at February 26, 2007 3:52 PM

s_sgt7. I despise muslems and the way they get a free pass. I ment the surrendering as a joke. As an American I'm suprized the would even harm a Frenchman. As much as the French kiss old moe butt. I find it kinda funny but sad. Seams like people will never learn.

Posted by: AMartinez at February 26, 2007 3:52 PM

I really want to know if they were French muslim converts. Otherwise why would they go somewhere that was muslim only?

Posted by: kelisw at February 26, 2007 4:03 PM

'Then AP speaks of "the Prophet Muhammad" in capsule form, with no caveat such as "Muslims believe that...":'

What concerns me is the dhimmified wording by the our so called western press. Had it been the other way around, such as speaking of Christ, one can be assured that it would read "Christians believe that" The certainty of the great mohammedan lie is revolting if not absolutely disgusting!

Posted by: descendantofacrusader at February 26, 2007 4:06 PM

The sign, if real, is scary enough. non-muslims in lower case wording with Muslims capitalized. That sign speaks volumes about Saudi Arabia.

I too am very curious about the religious affiliation of the Frenchmen in this case.

Posted by: awake at February 26, 2007 4:09 PM

'...spread Islam...'

like thick, rancid butter.

Posted by: Dane at February 26, 2007 4:11 PM

Is this the 'benevolence that is the heart of Islam, Condi?

http://dhahran.usconsulate.gov/dhahran/Secretary_of_State_Condoleezza_Rice_hosted_the_Annual_State_Department_Iftaar_Dinner.html

Posted by: Alert at February 26, 2007 4:14 PM

QUESTION:

Are there signs similar to this in Europe yet? In public areas?

It would seem that the Islamic forces implanted in Europe are trying to put them up, aren't they? The same with America, correct? In "airport prayer rooms" et al.

It seems just a matter of time, doesn't it?

Muslim washroom only

non muslims to the back of the bus

Posted by: Abraham_Lincoln at February 26, 2007 4:20 PM

Were the Muslims afraid the travelers would learn something about Islam...oh , I see...Yes they did....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at February 26, 2007 4:22 PM

Everybody knows that frogs are haram.

Posted by: Zenster at February 26, 2007 4:30 PM

Dhimmi gets out of line; dhimmi pays the price. Allahu-akbar!

Posted by: MP at February 26, 2007 4:37 PM

"Three French travelers were killed by gunmen Monday in the Saudi Arabian desert when they stopped their car to rest on the side of a road leading to the holy city of Medina in an area restricted to Muslims only."

As I understood, they were all Muslims. Oops... they done it again..216 virgins got snapped in evil Mo's virgin generator parlor.

Posted by: MusHuntCowboy at February 26, 2007 4:38 PM

All that French ass-kissing, jizya payments and anti-Israel rhetoric, and still no gratitude from the Mohamedans.

Posted by: US_infidel at February 26, 2007 04:20 PM

Good point, US_infidel! .. So what will Jaques Chirak do? Pass a UN resolution condemning the brutal and barbaric killings? Or pretend nothing happaned to the people who elected him like dubya did when Daniel Pearl was butchered by Pakistan?

Posted by: Alert at February 26, 2007 4:38 PM

"Three French travelers were killed by gunmen Monday in the Saudi Arabian desert when they stopped their car to rest on the side of a road leading to the holy city of Medina in an area restricted to Muslims only."

As I understood, they were all Muslims. Oops... they done it again..216 virgins got snapped in evil Mo's virgin generator parlor.

Posted by: MusHuntCowboy at February 26, 2007 4:39 PM

Zenster,

Drop by RB. People have been asking about you. Bring a recipe.

Posted by: omvi at February 26, 2007 4:40 PM

Somehow this was amusing to me in what do Muslims have blinking lights on their heads so every Muslim knows them immediately.

What it appears like is some idiot gangsta wanna be jihadists upset their welfare check was too much to spend decided to ambush some "foreigners" who just happened to be Muslims.

The frogs got to learn to wear the blinking lights.

Posted by: Lame Cherry at February 26, 2007 4:42 PM

And odds are the muslims who killed them were "civilians", like the muslims that beheaded the schoolgirls. The problem is the west is facing a paradigm which is both ancient but also has mutated into a form calculated to be difficult for the west to combat. Islam doesn't distinguish between civilian and combatant, not only in terms of its' victims, but also in terms of it's combatants. The combatant doesn't wear a uniform, he/she acts and dresses just like a civilian, indeed may even be temporarily non-hostile, until he/she develops sudden jihad syndrome and starts targeting enemy civilians. Which fact causes the west to treat a military problem in a police way.

Because ideas matter, and holding a "prophet" that orders a person to wage jihad against nonmuslims to be the perfect man, means that most likely, at a minimum, that person will not act to protect a non-muslim being victimized by a muslim, or will join in the assault himself/herself, and there is loads and loads of ancient and recent historical data from all over the world that a belief in Islam causes a person to react this way when witnessing an unprovoked attack on a non-muslim by a muslim most of the time.

The British recently reported that they are monitoring 2,000 plotters. But that is a police way of dealing with a problem, it is REACTIVE, you try to prevent known bad guys from doing something bad, and in large part you are waiting for them to do something bad, and then giving them a trial. But these guys consider themselves, and are in fact, muslim soldiers in the country in order to kill British citizens. But they don't wear uniforms. If 2000 uniformed muslim soldiers landed in Britain, would the British wait for them to do something before PROACTIVELY militarily eliminating the threat? They would not even let them land (hence, ban travel/immigration to and from Pakistan).

So those 2,000 guys are enemy combatants not entitled to Geneva protection because they are out of uniform and targeting civilians. So round 'em up, get the names of their contacts through aggressive interrogation, then give them the traditional bullet reserved for combatants out of uniform, round up their contacts, and repeat until Britain is cleared of enemy combatants. Because you can treat a military problem in a police fashion only to a certain numerical point before your policing resources are overwhelmed, and Great Britain is approaching that point. As will the US if muslim immigration changes the demographics. If you don't want to see the US to have to declare martial law to solve the muslim terrorist problem here at some point, you need to be against muslim immigration.

But what does Blair do? Well he complains about the treatment terrorists that have British citizenship are getting at Guantanomo. He should strip them of British citizenship for membership in a terrorist group making war on Great Britain, and the problem is solved, zero British citizens at Guantanomo.

Posted by: godfreyofbouillon at February 26, 2007 5:15 PM

Blair is clearly a moonbat. He has completely bought into the madness that is PC and multi-culturalism.

The voters of Britain are moonbats if they leave a single member of his party in power come election time.

If they value the inherent greatness of England that was so hard-earned and re-earned in the 20th Century, they will throw all of these fools out of office!

Posted by: Abraham_Lincoln at February 26, 2007 5:20 PM

Can anyone produce a sign like the one above in the US? We are the ones who are supposedly racist and islamophobic....any highways marked Christians only?

Posted by: Carolyn2 at February 26, 2007 5:29 PM

I also like the second line(it's to early to tell if this is terror-related). Ah mr frenchman please do not worry while i kill you, as this is not for terror , i do this for the love of allah, pig poo upon him.

Posted by: AMartinez at February 26, 2007 5:29 PM

Now you know why the Muslims are trying to wipe out Israel. That's a "Muslims only" area.
Maybe Israel needs to become an "Infidels only" area.

Posted by: jewdog at February 26, 2007 5:48 PM

Saudi Arabia is supposed to have some of the toughest gun control laws in the world. There is no "right to bear" arms in islam's homeland. How unlucky for these travellers to be chanced upon by "gunmen."

Posted by: 3812Michelle at February 26, 2007 5:53 PM

French TV is calling an attack by "activistes." Not one mention of the word "terror." "Militants," "activists," "youth," ...anything to avoid the obvious - the elephant in the middle of the room that no one wants to acknowledge.

Posted by: BunrattyBill at February 26, 2007 5:53 PM

Maybe this will teach the all the French that it isn't worth the bother to deal with muslims....don't go in person, next time, just send bombs instead.

Posted by: angryeagle at February 26, 2007 6:26 PM

"Imagine we would shoot and kill any muslim that dared to enter a "non-muslim" area anywhere in Europe!"
posted by American in Germany

Imagine we even HAD a non-Muslim area anywhere in the world? If Mecca and Medina are off-limits to non-Muslims then what if we made Rome and the Vatican off limits to Muslims?

I would suggest barring them from Jerusalem and Bethlehem, but they're already there. No kicking them out. Might violate their human rights. They kicked Jews out of Mecca after Muhammad had his "visions" but doing to them what they do to others is not allowed.

Someday they'll get theirs. It's all we can hope for.

Posted by: PMK at February 26, 2007 6:35 PM

From the French TV, I have to assume that they will start using even more benign terms to describe the killers. Finally they will run out of terms and just call them Muslims.

Posted by: credit man at February 26, 2007 6:41 PM

"The Prophet Muhammad was born in Mecca, where he began spreading the message of Islam, until he fled to Medina. From Medina, he spread Islam until he died and was buried in the city."

What is that? Lifted from some 'respect' demands from the MCB? Is the target audience 'dhimmis in conversion phase?' It's bizarre.

Posted by: John Sobieski at February 26, 2007 7:39 PM

So interesting that a person’s religion can be spotted through physical characteristics from a distance in a moving car.

Posted by: dm60462 at February 26, 2007 8:07 PM

This killing is disgusting, but I have to ask - what on Earth could motivate any sane person to "travel" in that godforsaken hellhole?

Posted by: angloirishslav at February 26, 2007 8:57 PM

This is why they should all be deported from America and England. Islam is unacceptable behavior.

Posted by: Jeff at February 26, 2007 9:07 PM

I'm not at all surprised. Look at the sign-it's in Arabic and English only,no French. I think the French embassy should demand some special rights, like putting up those signs in French. And while they're at it, they should take the Saudi ambassador to Paris to task about this, just like the Muslims always take to task the ambassadors of infidel countries when one of their politicians says something that displeases the ummah.

I sincerely hope Paris makes a big deal about this, because this is disgusting in the extreme.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at February 26, 2007 10:15 PM

The BBC version has a little bit more detail.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6398395.stm

"Saudi TV said the victims were part of a group of French nationals, some of whom were Muslims heading to Mecca.

But a French diplomat confirmed to the French news agency AFP that none of those shot was Muslim."

So it appears to be a mixed group of people, Muslims and non-Muslims traveling together. However I am still unclear as to whether the Muslims were with the French people when they were fired upon.

Posted by: non-redneck at February 26, 2007 10:18 PM

This is just another deplorable story of Muslim intimidation and intolerance against western infidels. Most westerners simply fail to understand that "holy" Mecca is reserved for Muslims only. The consequences for failing to adhere to this draconian and discriminatory Muslim custom can prove to be deadly- as in this outrageous case.

Where is the critical western press when one most needs it? The time has come for the timid western press to attack the exclusionist Muslim mindset that treats infidels ( in this case French citizens) as inferiors and subject to a violent punishment?

Let's reverse the picture for the sake of moral reasoning. Imagine just for one second that the holy Vatican in Rome was only accessible for Christians only.

Picture a big sign posted in front of Rome's streets with the writing "All Christians may enter" and then alongside it "All Non-Christians leave here."

Would this new Christian custom result in some controversy in the Christian west? Imagine Christians armed with guns shooting down Saudis who happen to travel on the road to the Vatican.

Would this cause outrage in the western media?

There is a double standard operating in the western press when addressing topics related to Islam and Muslims.

Instead of challenging the dysfunctional Islamic customs and practices that threatens the civility of the world, the western press would rather concentrate on reporting about Europe's discriminatroy practices against the huge influx of Muslims that have immigrated into Europe during the past 50 years.

Do you remember the "youth" riots that occurred on the streets of Paris, France?

Recall how the western press covered the violent riots in France. The western media widely failed to provide an accurate sociological snapshot that highlights how the non-adapting and supremacist French Muslim youths were responsible for the violent riots that lasted several weeks on the streets of Paris, ultimately taking the lives of innocent Frenchmen?

What the western press covered instead, especially here in America, was the viewpoint that the riots were caused by the following: 1) native French cops who were targeting Muslim youths and 2) a racist French society that excludes immigrant Muslims from N. Africa.

Chasing after criminal French Muslims is not a racist action that should provoke a riot. After all, these "youths" ran into the power lines on their own volition because they were afraid of getting arrested for a crime. They weren't thrown into the power lines by racist French cops. But you would have never known by the way that the western press ignored the facts surrounding the case and reported instead how the native born French cops in this case were somehow complicit in these "innocent" deaths.

The western media largely reported that native born white Frenchmen caused young immigrant Muslims to flee to the margins of society and not integrate into French society.

It is time for the western media to report more about the dyfuntional customs that are part and parcel of Islam. Unless the western media begins to inform westerners about the ugly nature of Islamic supremacist beliefs and customs, such as forbidding non-Muslims to come close to Mecca, more westerners will fall victim to the fate that faced these innocent French tourists.

Posted by: Johnathan at February 27, 2007 1:04 AM

We jes' don't cotton to your kind aroun'here boy!

Posted by: joeblough at February 27, 2007 4:24 AM

Then AP speaks of "the Prophet Muhammad" in capsule form, with no caveat such as "Muslims believe that...":

Just the facts, just the facts.

Jesus, not Jesus Christ from the mouth of AP this morning.
From Associated Press
February 26, 2007 7:20 PM EST
NEW YORK - Filmmakers and researchers on Monday unveiled two ancient stone boxes they said may have once contained the remains of Jesus and Mary Magdalene, but several scholars derided the claims made in a new documentary as unfounded and contradictory to basic Christian beliefs.

[..] same story (big fact) They couldn't even bring themselves to finish the story. I wonder what happened after the three days???

Most Christians believe Jesus' body spent three days at the site of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem's Old City.

[...] 'small fact"
Jacobovici said the ossuaries did not initially seem extraordinary because the names on them were all common.

But the filmmakers had statisticians calculate the likelihood that any other family in first-century Jerusalem would have had that cluster of names.

"The numbers range from 1 in 100 to 1 in 1,000 that there is some other family," said Andrey Feuerverger, a professor of mathematics at the University of Toronto.

(pretty wide range) Of course if you put the same guys to work on Hispanic families in LA, I wonder what the statistics on common names would be.

Posted by: auntbea at February 27, 2007 6:02 AM

Those killed were NOT in a Muslim-only area. They were in the area of Madain Salih and the Hijaz Railway, north of Medina. That area is not restricted to Muslims.

That the wounded were taken to a hospital in Medina does not indicate that they were Muslim. Non-Muslims are permitted emergency care in both Medina and Mecca, when no easy alternative is possible.

Posted by: John at February 27, 2007 10:26 AM

With apologies, Hugh,Marisol,Robert,

I have become aware of a deletion,for this handle, of a post for this thread. For some time, this handle has been accessed by four seperate individuals;rest assured this privilege has been revoked.

Sincerely yours,
Mr. Oscar "refuser"

Posted by: We need G.C. Scott at February 27, 2007 10:29 PM