The surveillance video shows Ibrahim and the woman leaving an apartment, and Ibrahim standing over the woman and removing his pants. A man approached Ibrahim and the woman at one point, the video shows. Ibrahim got up, confronted the man and, with no pants on, chased him down the hallway. Ibrahim then returned to the woman. The video also shows Ibrahim striking the woman five times.

Was the woman a Somali?

Were the apartment dwellers Somalis?

How would this be handled 'back home'?

They were both drunk? Drunken Somalis?

Well, they couldn't call for a cab, of course.

Posted by: PRCS at August 24, 2007 7:37 AM

ST. PAUL, Minn. — A security video from an apartment hallway shows at least 10 witnesses ignored a woman's cries for help for more than an hour as a man beat and sexually assaulted her, prosecutors in Minnesota said.

This was going on for an hour?

At one point, the 26-year-old woman knocked on a door, yelling for the occupants to call police. A man inside that apartment told police he did not open the door or look out, but said he did call police — although they have no record of his call, according to court documents.

Is this true? Could it be that he did call and described a muslim male raping a women; but the police decided to look for fair-skinned Catholics from Sweden who were passing out Baptist Bible tracts?

This story is truly sickening!

Then there is this unrelated but similiar situation with the muslims on the Seattle ferry incident:

FBI's release of ferry passenger photos resented
By Lornet Turnbull, Janet Tu and Mike Carter

Seattle Times staff reporters

Related

Archive | FBI asks: Who are the men in this photo from ferry?

For Arabs and Muslims across the Puget Sound area, a rise in the nation's threat level or a bombing halfway around the world often can mark a period of unease.

...

Now the FBI's release of photographs of two men of unknown origin, who the agency says were observed acting suspiciously aboard as many as six different Washington ferry routes in recent weeks, is creating new worries in the community.

Muslim- and Arab-American leaders are upset that the FBI didn't consult them — as it has done in other instances — before releasing the photos on the Internet and to news organizations.

They worry that the action may fracture the relationship the agency and the community have carefully built.

The FBI has stressed that the release of the photos is a rare move, taken only after it had exhausted other efforts to identify the men. The agency also has said the men's actions could be innocuous, but it needs to question them.

...

Dozens of Muslims and Arabs have complained to community leaders about the photographs. The fallout has led to a meeting planned today between Muslim- and Arab-American community leaders and law-enforcement officials.

"We need to get some type of apology from them and figure out how to get back to where we were," said Rita Zawaideh, head of the Arab-American Community Coalition.

...

First, I think the FBI and the police in this rape story, owe an apology to the real victim in this case AND American citizens whom they are supposed to be protecting.

Second, I think these muslims owe a HUGE apology to this country for the suffering they have caused
(sure, I'll hold my breath and wait).

Third, I want to make a few suggestions that will get me banned from posting on JW; but I won't make them here!

Posted by: witness at August 24, 2007 7:46 AM

OBTW, the source for the story about Seattle is here:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003849315_ferries23m.html

Posted by: witness at August 24, 2007 7:47 AM

"....all just a huge misunderstanding."

That's right, she misunderstood her requirement to give submit to this a-hole's every whim and depravity. The cops simply misunderstood that these immigrants' culture accepts this behavior, and that they had neither the reason nor the right to arrest the male victim. Americans at large simply misunderstand that it's our own culture that stands in the way of gloriously peaceful society. Shame on us for not submitting to our multi-culturist mandate and for remaining intolerant of imported, aberrant behaviors.
/sarc off

Posted by: Gondemar at August 24, 2007 7:59 AM

"Walsh said police were shocked by the behavior of the bystanders."

.......This "look the other way" behavior is typical of the NonMuslims in Muslim countries...They have refused to get involved when Muslims attack....it is this behaviour that may explain why they are almost non existant in these countries....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at August 24, 2007 8:10 AM

Mainstream media will more than likely twist this in favor of the Muslim rapist. YES, *Muslim* and *rapist*. Be sure to stress on that.

Posted by: Crusader at August 24, 2007 8:18 AM

"Muslim- and Arab-American leaders are upset that the FBI didn't consult them —"

....sharing intellegence on possible Muslim terrorist suspects with other Muslims has killed many American soldiers.....

....The Muslims may be upset that we know something about them that they not want us to know.....

.....We should start banning Muslim immigration..

Posted by: exsgtbrown at August 24, 2007 8:30 AM

Police said they responded to a call of drunken behavior and found Somali immigrant Rage Ibrahim, 25, and a woman lying unconscious in the hallway early Tuesday. The woman's clothing had been pulled up and she had fresh scratches on her face and blood on her thigh, according to the criminal complaint.

Coincidence his name is Rage?

Posted by: Elric66 at August 24, 2007 8:36 AM

Well, let's just send those misunderstanding sons-of-bitches back to Somalia....

God, this is just disgusting.

Tsk, tsk, tsk, what would good ole Mo say about that drunkenness thing?....

Posted by: bonncaruso at August 24, 2007 8:38 AM

OH, man, did I accidentally write "misunderstanding sons-of-bitches". That was a mistake: I meant "misunderstood peace-loving muslims". I think my computer interchanges these sentences often. :)

Posted by: bonncaruso at August 24, 2007 8:39 AM

Hey, that happens a lot when you're angry seeing this kind of crap going on in this country.

I want ALL TEN of these witnesses charged, regardless of whether they indict, with the misdemeanor. Take 'em to the cleaners.

This is just sick.

Posted by: Miss_Anthrope at August 24, 2007 9:16 AM

AntiDhhimmi Alert

Aussie Lawmaker Likens Muslim Immigration to Bird Flu

A NSW Senate candidate has compared the immigration of Muslims to Australia to the bird flu and says it should stop.

Christian Democratic Party (CDP) Senate candidate Paul Green called today for a moratorium on Muslim immigration while a study on its social impacts was carried out.

http://www.weaselzippers.net/blog/2007/08/aussie-lawmaker.html

Posted by: Elric66 at August 24, 2007 9:33 AM

If you're not enjoying the blessings of diversity, go ahead and thank Ted Kennedy for his 1965 Immigration Act disaster.

I'm sure he would empathize with the drunk Somali Muslim.

Posted by: US_infidel at August 24, 2007 9:33 AM

What have I been telling you all? The authorities in the Twin Cities will do NOTHING about Somali violence and FGM.

Posted by: CGW at August 24, 2007 9:34 AM

Wiki Kitty Genovese. And be astonished that once upon a time, such a story was frontpage news for weeks and could never be forgotten by the people who heard about it, leading to a Wikipedia entry. This story will be forgotten tomorrow.

I too would be interested in the background of the witnesses.

Let's hear it for security cameras, and screw the first person to mention Orwell.

Posted by: Karl Pov at August 24, 2007 9:34 AM

If this is muslim-on-muslim violence, I got only one thing to say:

yawn

Which probably explains the sentiments of those passers-by.

Posted by: Kim Hartveld at August 24, 2007 9:48 AM

So the argument is...
'He didn't rape her' and 'she had it coming'?

If they want to live like this, why do they come here?

Posted by: Mr Ape Pig at August 24, 2007 9:50 AM

If they want to live like this, why do they come here?

Posted by: Mr Ape Pig at August 24, 2007 9:50 AM

Because its required by the Ummah

Posted by: Elric66 at August 24, 2007 9:58 AM

Thank you for doing so much to remind people of the widely underestimated threat we are facing. I believe the West is still enfeebled by misguided notions of multiculturalism and tolerance to be able to respond adequately to this threat. I also know that radical Muslims are taking advantage of our weakness and passivity.

Check out my blog where I debate a leftie. We are now discussing the detainment of illegal combatants in the War on Terror: http://blogger-heads.blogspot.com/

Keep up the good work,
Liron

Posted by: Liron of Sydney at August 24, 2007 10:00 AM

Tape Shows at Least 10 Witnesses Ignoring Minnesota Woman's Cries for Help During Sexual Assault,"

and

Minnesota law makes it a petty misdemeanor to not give reasonable help to a person in danger of "grave physical harm."

Walsh said it is unlikely police would pursue charges against witnesses in this case because authorities would have to show that witnesses knew the woman was in extreme danger.

So, the authorities possess video taped evidence that clearly identifies the actual assault as well as a minimum of 10 witnesses to a sexual assault and battery, yet somehow justify not pursuing charges against each and every witness refusing to aid the victim with a simple phone call from the security of their own home. Disgusting.

Is this really the kind of behavior Minnesota police want to encourage? Shame on them. I suppose there is no need for un-indicted co-conspirator CAIR to offer their services for 'sensitivity training' to these Minnesota police. It's apparent they're quite sensitive already.

And as for those cowardly witnesses. Is this the type of muslim community the police, FBI, and other Federal authority consult -

— as it has done in other instances — before releasing the photos on the Internet and to news organizations.

and expect to receive co-operation? Fools - the lot.

This incident provides ample evidence of how the muslim community as a whole is an utterly useless lot when it comes to protecting the community at large.

Enough already.

Exsgtbrown is on to something . . .BAN MUSLIM IMMIGRATION NOW. Deport those that commit crimes at first offense and all those that protect the scum .

Muslims will either culturally adapt to the laws of this country or be held accountable and forced to leave. We don't need them. We don't want them.

Boycott islam - see Foehammers site for details.
http://foehammer.net/2007/07/boycott-islam-campaign.html

Posted by: justamomof4 at August 24, 2007 10:00 AM

"He did not rape her," Jamal said.

This is because there isn’t 4 witnesses to testify for the rape. Second she had is coming because she wasn’t wearing a burqa, this makes her a woman of the street or pro.

Where is your cultural acceptance people?!? Your Multicultural Card is about to be revoked by the PC Police! Get back in your place Kafur.

Posted by: senor doeboy at August 24, 2007 10:01 AM

Has Keith ellison weighed in on this yet? Has CAIR?

Posted by: Elric66 at August 24, 2007 10:02 AM

...he chased someone with his pants down, and then went back to assaulting this woman? For 90 minutes? This whole article could be a reprint from the hadith.

It is just another day at the office for islamists, but we cannot have this in our country. Next it will be our daughters. This country is experiencing an immigration backlash after Newark. Arrest, deport.

Who wants to bet this "ideal man" gets off?

Posted by: CapitalistGig at August 24, 2007 10:03 AM

"He did not rape her," Jamal said.

This is because there isn’t 4 witnesses to testify for the rape. Second she had is coming because she wasn’t wearing a burqa, this makes her a woman of the street or pro.

Posted by: senor doeboy at August 24, 2007 10:01 AM

***

Now see, I was thinking the reason it went on for so long was that the others wanted to make certain the victim could get four male witnesses to the attack. Intervene too soon, and they'd have to condemn the woman for adultery.

See, sharia works. Allah knows best.

Posted by: CJ at August 24, 2007 10:08 AM

"If this is muslim-on-muslim violence, I got only one thing to say: yawn"
Posted above

You can't possibly really mean that, in this case, on this soil?

What Muslim men do to each other in the name of their religion in their own countries, I agree, who gives a sh_t. But to a woman?? Here??

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at August 24, 2007 10:20 AM

". . . their reaction, or lack thereof, seems culturally inconsistent with American behavior."

I would like to criticize that particular statement in light of the Kitty Genovese incident in NYC in 1964. Ms Genovese was brutally murdered while her neighbors heard her screams and did nothing. The discussion of the apparent disinterest from her neighbors was a subject of editorials for a long time.

I take exception to the notion that it is culturally inconsistent with American behavior.

Posted by: Pelayo at August 24, 2007 10:52 AM

...the tenants have reacted exactly like the dhimmicrats, leftists and anti-war moonbats who have witnessed Christians and Non Muslims being slaughtered in Muslim countries.....and they probably vote that way...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at August 24, 2007 10:52 AM

Rather than just lament over these increasing incidents of Muslim domestic violence, readers should read about and publicize a useful tool in coping with it. A Canadian psychologist, Dr.Sharifa Alkahteeb, has developed the "Muslim Wheel of Domestic Violence" which illuminates the broad scope of this evil behavior and how it is tied to the Quran and hadith. It can be viewed at
www.lfcc.on.ca/muslim_wheel_of_domestic_violence.html

Posted by: Chris at August 24, 2007 10:56 AM

... witnesses ignored a woman's cries for help for more than an hour as a man beat and sexually assaulted her.

I hope that the rape victim is Somali and that the court system accedes to Sharia custom on this matter.

After all, per Koran 33:21 we know that Mohammed's most excellent pattern of conduct is to be admired and emulated. Given that Mohammed was a serial rapist, it can be deduced that Rage was only celebrating a time honored Islamic sacrament, as was the female person participating in the "rape."

610 * 624 * 632 * 1453 * 1526 *1683 * 1848 * 1917 * 1948 * 1968 * 1996 * 2001 * 2005

Where I am a bit disappointed in Rage, however, is his ham-handed use of Taquiyya when the Infidel police rolled around.

It is not plausible to claim that --- in the process of intervention to stop the woman from driving drunk --- Rage would need to be running up and down the foyer and hallway for and hour and a half with no pants on.

* 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 *

That was no good, no good at all. On the bright side was the performance of the dude from the Somali Justice organization. On camera, he not only looked angry, he looked offended, and seemed to imply that the officers from the St. Paul Police Dept were Islamophobes.

If we could only understand why Rage had to expose himself and take 90 minutes to beat the woman in order to stop her from driving drunk.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at August 24, 2007 10:59 AM

Added comment, I did not look up Kitty Genovese on Wikipedia, I wrote that comment based on my fantastic memory. I remember it because it was a subject of a lot of discussion in high school and was all over the newspapers.

Posted by: Pelayo at August 24, 2007 11:04 AM

"...in 1964. Ms Genovese was brutally murdered while her neighbors heard her screams and did nothing. The discussion of the apparent disinterest from her neighbors was a subject of editorials for a long time.

I take exception to the notion that it is culturally inconsistent with American behavior."

Posted by: Pelayo
---------------------------

Pelayo,

The very fact that everyone heard about Genovese and her case "was a subject of editorials for a long time" is proof that it is inconsistent with American behavior. This callousness was so unique and unheard of that Americans were absolutely shocked and outraged as a nation.

Compare the reaction in 1964 to today when our "multicultural" left will defend these Somalis. Yes, there are many callous Americans, especially compared to certain East Asian cultures, but on the whole, had the neighbors not been Muslim, you can bet someone would have tried to help this woman.

Posted by: Provoslavni at August 24, 2007 11:23 AM

So, rather than American muslims offering assistance to the victim (the female, not the poor misunderstood RAPIST) we have Omar Jamal, the executive director of the Somali Justice Advocacy Center coming to the defense of the RAPIST.

There is NO PLACE IN AMERICAN SOCIETY for islam!

BOYCOTT ISLAM!!! BAN MUSLIM IMMIGRATION!!!

Posted by: tsarbomba29 at August 24, 2007 11:36 AM

The witness behavior in the Genovese case was not considered typical American at the time, but it became, for a time, a stereotype of New York City dweller behavior. Of course New York City has changed a lot since then.

Posted by: Karl Pov at August 24, 2007 12:04 PM

Provoslavni, from our Southern perspective, we considered the Genovese case as a sympton of some Yankee malaise. It was reported that a neighbor said, "I didn't want to get involved." We thought that was typical of life in a big northern city. As for the editorials, they were merely proof that the neighbor's reactions were inconsistent with American opinion.

Posted by: Pelayo at August 24, 2007 12:06 PM

Increasing incidents like this and the much too often disappointing results, make me wonder what kind of society we will be living in, when our soldiers return from fighting islamism in the ME. It is a slap in the face of our brave warriors, to capitulate to muslim demands in America! Are PC and MC really what they are putting their lives on the line for? I think NOT. We need to "support our troops" by ACTIVELY DEFYING sharia creep in our neighborhoods, towns, cities, counties, states, country, and our minds and hearts. I want our military personnel to be able to return to their Apple-pie-American families and the great country that existed when they enlisted. To paraphrase a Mel Brooks character in Blazing Saddles, "We don't need no stinking islam!"

Today, Swift & Co. have made it onto my "List of American things to do."

BOYCOTT ISLAM!!! BAN MUSLIM IMMIGRATION!!!

Posted by: tsarbomba29 at August 24, 2007 12:46 PM

Dhimmitude in St Pete

TV station pulls plug on Keller
The televangelist says complaints from local Muslims are to blame.

http://www.sptimes.com/2007/08/24/Southpinellas/TV_station_pulls_plug.shtml

Posted by: Elric66 at August 24, 2007 12:51 PM

AlarmedPigFarmer, nice to see you, i've missed your comments.

As for this story, as to be expected, the Somali Justice Center (talk about an oxymoron!) has stepped right up and declared 'no rape, nothing to see here'. The victim probably wasn't wearing her 'rape somebody else headdress'. The Somali sopkesman egregiously throws the victim card because the perp has a bump on the noggin. The spokesman for the Somali has told the media this was done by the cops. I doubt it, probably the victim got in a few licks of her own, but to save face the men of Somalia have to blame a man. If the cops really wanted to do a little 'justice', they would have cornholed this scum with a nightstick.

Also, the Pioneer Press in St. Paul has pulled the comments from readers feature on this story. It wouldn't do to have anyone write in about Muslim views on rape, witnesses, taquiah or kitman. Also, it wouldn't do to have any of the multi-culturalist readers sensitivities shot to hell with moralities different from their own.

Posted by: Shakey_Premise at August 24, 2007 1:04 PM

Hey, Naseem's missing from this thread too...

:O

Do you think there's a pattern??!?!!??

Posted by: Miss_Anthrope at August 24, 2007 1:20 PM

From today's Star Tribune:

Though the building's resident manager wouldn't provide demographic breakdowns, the tenant list in the entryway is dominated by Somali surnames -- a segment of St. Paul's population that police say is often reluctant to report crimes.

Posted by: Greg Z at August 24, 2007 1:28 PM

Do you think there's a pattern??!?!!??

Posted by: Miss_Anthrope at August 24, 2007 1:20 PM

Yep. Naseem avoids threads where Muslim men treat women in an Islamic tradition

Posted by: Elric66 at August 24, 2007 1:45 PM

This is just another reason for me to stay out of the inner metro and stick to the suburbs. [I live in the Mpls-St.Paul metro]

Good Lord, I'm beginning to sound like I live in the Baghdad metro or something.

Posted by: SoteriA at August 24, 2007 1:46 PM

I WANT YOU

for the Jihad Awareness Project.

We are in the middle of the eleventh day of posting this request at Jihad Watch, and we are up to 59 volunteers in 33 states.

WE STILL ARE SEEKING CITIZEN VOLUNTEERS FROM ALL 50 STATES, ESPECIALLY FROM THE FOLLOWING 17:

Alabama
Connecticut
Delaware
Hawaii
Kansas
Louisiana
Michigan
Mississippi
Montana
North Dakota
Oklahoma
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Utah
Vermont
West Virginia
Wyoming

I'm looking for at least two people in every state of the Union who would be willing to purchase a copy of Robert Spencer's Religion of Peace? Why Christianity Is and Islam Isn't and mail it, on an agreed upon date, to one of the senators in your state. I'm organizing an effort to get the book simultaneously to all 100 senators, in order to send a strong message. If we get more than two people per state, books can also be sent to the House of Representatives.

If you’d like to be involved, please write to me at traehnam@yahoo.com under the subject heading “Senate,” and tell me the state your senator represents, an email address where I can reach you, and a nickname. No need for your real name. And I will never share your email address with anyone, not even with other volunteers for this project.

And visit www.jihadawareness.blogspot.com to get more info on this project and to leave comments other volunteers can read. You can also see there the growing list of participants in this project, and the states their senators represent. I’ll try to update the list at least once a day. I've also designed a graphic that might amuse. Scroll down when you get to the site.

Once we have at least two people from every state, we can agree on a mailing date and then each of us can mail a copy of the book on that date.

Right before each of us mails the book, we can issue a press release to various media outlets in every state, and in that way announce and explain the mailing. And perhaps we can come up with some other ways of maximizing the effectiveness of this project and gaining as much positive attention as possible.

One of the project's volunteers suggested contacting Rep. Sue Myrick, who started the anti-Jihad caucus in Congress. I'll try to coordinate this project with Rep. Myrick to maximize its effectiveness. I've also been calling various congressional offices to get advice on how best to go about this. And I'll soon contact Regnery, Robert Spencer's publisher, to ask their advice and to see if we can coordinate with them in some way.

Posted by: traeh at August 24, 2007 1:47 PM

OH, man, did I accidentally write "misunderstanding sons-of-bitches". That was a mistake: I meant "misunderstood peace-loving muslims". I think my computer interchanges these sentences often. :)

Posted by: bonncaruso at August 24, 2007 8:39 AM

Well, the keys... they're like right next to each other. it's a common mistake to make.

Posted by: Canadian Christian at August 24, 2007 1:54 PM

Crime commited by 7th century demon must be given a 7th century punishment.

Set up this coward to be raped for 1 hour by the team of Budweiser horses.

I do not allow people to walk in a theater for free when exiting my movie on a weekend.

I would had put this dog down in 90 seconds or so if this happened near me.

I dont allow the smallest, petty crimes happen near me without reporting it or directly stopping it.

Posted by: Hungarian Crusader at August 24, 2007 2:17 PM

So Omar Jamal, the executive director of the Somali Justice Advocacy Center, who spoke on Ibrahim's behalf, explains it this way. "The police report "does not show the truth of what happened that night, and who are you going to believe, me or your own damned eyes watching the security video?"
"After all, there are good reasons for this to have transpired," he elaborated. "You see, the bitch had it coming."
It's real simple. If Rage Ibrahim is convicted, which I'm sure the video will prove, deport his abusive ass back to Somalia. Then explain to all the tenants why he was deported. They may not grasp it, but it's worth a try.
Shalom,
Theosebes

Posted by: Theosebes at August 24, 2007 2:26 PM

After reading Ayaan Hirsi Ali's new autobiography Infidel, this story is both unsurprising and predictable.

As Hirsi writes, in Somalia women are treated like abused farm animals.

And when Ali arrived in the Netherlands, and worked as a translator for other Somali immigrants, it was clear that the same Somali attitudes and behavior toward women were coming right along for the ride--and tolerated by the Dutch out of unwillingness to assert cultural superiority.

Will St. Paul be the future capital of the United States of Amerabia?

Posted by: kamala at August 24, 2007 2:35 PM

traeh -

I'm happy to take Oklahoma, Louisiana, or any state missing volunteers.

Sorry posting here vs. email...but wanted you to know I could volunteer for either, as I have family there, or any state you choose (which you & I have already discussed).

Posted by: Miss_Anthrope at August 24, 2007 3:17 PM

SoteriA:

THOUSANDS live in the suburbs - Eden Prairie and Eagan, to name two.

Posted by: CGW at August 24, 2007 3:35 PM

SoteriA:

THOUSANDS live in the suburbs - Eden Prairie and Eagan, to name two.

Posted by: CGW at August 24, 2007 3:35 PM

"Ibrahim says he is innocent and that the incident was a misunderstanding, according to Omar Jamal, the executive director of the Somali Justice Advocacy Center, who spoke on Ibrahim's behalf."

- - - - -

You infidel pigs just don't understand the nuances of proper Islamic etiquette; this is indeed just a cultural misunderstanding. After all, per the Perfect One, she's "tilth". She probably had the insolence to not want to be "plowed". Why do you fools insist on making a big deal out of this? If an Islamic man lets his property start refusing to serve him, the entire Ummah is doomed. This guy doesn't deserve accusations from the police, he deserves congratulations for outstanding service to the Ummah from the imam at his local mosque.

Posted by: A_Nonny_Mouse at August 24, 2007 3:49 PM

I can't believe anyone would run from a Somali. They can't fistfight their way out of a wet paper bag. One punch to the five-head and on their hind ends they go.

Nonetheless, they all need to be rounded up and booted back to the horn of Africa. They were dumped in our neighborhoods over a decade ago and simply don't know how to act like civilized human beings.

Off with them. They are no good for our society.

Posted by: Prickzilla at August 24, 2007 5:56 PM

Without seeing the surveillance video itself -- which none of the news stories I've seen have fully shown, of course -- it is not really possible to know what happened. We also don't know any details about this case. Did the woman and the man know each other? Had the police been called to the woman or man's apartment in this building multiple times before? Had residents witnessed this kind of physical violence between the victim and the perpetrator on multiple occasions before? Did it really take 90 minutes for someone to call 911 -- or did it take 90 minutes for police TO RESPOND?

Although assault by complete strangers does happen, most frequently violent crimes are committed against women by MEN THEY KNOW. In fact, most violent crimes (whether against males or females) -- even in urban areas -- are committed by people the victim knows. This is a statistical fact; ask any criminologist or anyone who specializes in violent crimes (or violent crimes against women). This is why getting a gun as a woman is pretty useless -- unless you are prepared to shoot TO KILL your boyfriend (or ex), husband (or ex), father (or step-father), brother (or step-brother), uncle, etc. If, as a woman, you are not willing to shoot to kill those people -- because anything less than lethal force may not be enough to stop someone bent on harming you physically -- then you shouldn't buy a gun. I had a female firearms safety instructor tell me that. It is something she tells all women who take her course on the very first day, which causes about fifty percent or more to drop out.

In this case, there are probably a number of factors which all intersected to produce group apathy in the 10 witnesses who did nothing.

First, urban living. I don't care which urban area it is -- for me personally, it is Chicago -- but if you take public transportation or drive through poorer neighborhoods, you will see your share of what I would call (for lack of better terminology) "consensual crime." That is, where a crime is being perpetrated by Person A against Person B, but if you try to intervene, A suddenly starts screaming at you, the Good Samaritan because they consider their altercation with each other to be a "private argument" despite the fact that it is happening in a public place right in front of your face.

Second, male/female relations and behavioral patterns in relationships. I am a 40 year old woman from Chicago who has tried at least five times in the last 10 years to intervene in situations where I thought a woman was being beaten by a man. In EVERY instance BUT ONE, the woman told me, "It's okay -- he's my friend" or "I know him, it's all right" or "He's my boyfriend." In the one instance that was the exception, the boyfriend (I soon realized) was the one being beaten by the woman (as she continued to pummel him while I stood there dumbfounded and he did not fight back). In each case, these were young (and imho stupid) people under 25 or 30. And there is really no cure for this; you can't "save" people from their own stupidity. I finally gave up. I no longer intervene when I see an adult man and an adult woman physically fighting. Based on personal experience, I figure 80% of the time, if it's happening in public right in front of me, it's been happening for a long time privately and that means the woman has been allowing it and tolerating it. The other 20% of the time, it's the man who's being battered. As I've recently started working in a busy Chicago ER, my opinion has not changed; it has only solidified. I'm sorry, it's not that hard to get away from someone in America: a cheap car on Craigslist or a bike or a bus ticket costs a couple/few hundred bucks, and you can buy cheap food at discount groceries for a few bucks, probably even from people who speak your own language if that is not English. What no one can do is free another person's mind. That is up to the individual.

Third, cultural differences or stereotyping. Many people of one culture will not interfere when two people of a different culture are in a physical altercation with each other because they KNOW that they may be misinterpreting what is happening -- and they may also be putting themselves in danger. This is simple self-preservation. I'm not saying it is right, but it is typical human behavior.

Also, bear in mind that the majority of violent crimes also occur between people of the same ethnicity. The cross-ethnic, cross-class crime that is hyped for scare ratings in TV news is the exception, not the rule. Crime statistics locally and nationally also show this. Most recently, we had a serial rapist in Chicago running around the Lincoln Park and Wrigleyville areas -- where all the newly arrived (from other states) young white Chicagoans are. For weeks the local evening news would report on the ominous search or new attacks or near-attacks. Everyone white assumed it was going to be a black guy from the ghetto. But of course it proved to be just a regular-looking white guy who was caught because he was on some surveillance videos using ATM cards of women he robbed after raping them.

Fourth, police response. We don't actually KNOW that the police didn't get called in this case for 90 minutes -- we only know that they SHOWED UP 90 minutes later. In some neighborhoods in Chicago, a woman being raped is just plain a lower priority than someone being held up at gunpoint -- especially when there is a lot of gun violence and there are a lot of guns. I personally just recently saw a 16 year old kid come through our ER who accidentally shot himself in the foot while playing with a gun at a house party. PLAYING with a gun. At a party. Need I say more? Plus, cops in Chicago (I don't know about Minneapolis) are not known for being particularly racially open-minded -- even the African-American cops. Why? Because day in and day out, the majority of the crime they respond to is committed by non-whites. The real reason this occurs is poverty, which is unequally distributed on non-whites in Chicago -- but the most OBVIOUS and noticeable aspect is skin color. And this is what people (and cops) respond to -- or don't. So if the Minneapolis 911 dispatchers got a call about two apparently African-American drunken people, one male and one female, I would not be surprised if it took them 90 minutes to respond through a combination of having more important calls to respond to, racism, and sheer laziness.

In the case with the ten residents who saw what was happening and allegedly did nothing, I would have called the police myself. But I wouldn't have gone to help the woman. Because I have seen too many times that a woman who is being treated cruelly by a man is friends with him, or his girlfriend, and is basically allowing him to do it. And there is no cure for that. Cops will tell you about the domestic calls they respond to only to have the girlfriend or wife refuse to press charges and later bail the guy out.

Given the likely intersection of urban apathy, ingrained domestic violence patterns, and cultural misunderstanding/miscommunication/stereotyping, I'm surprised anyone called the police.

Posted by: decleyre at August 24, 2007 7:57 PM

The real part of this story is that the pants- dropping perpetrator has someone in his community coming to his aid.

The best defense is an offense.

Posted by: CapitalistGig at August 24, 2007 8:28 PM

@Crusader:

Oh, so funny I laughed so hard I had to spit out my sip of my favorite adult beverage.

"Set up this coward to be raped for 1 hour by the team of Budweiser horses."

A quart of female equine pee during estrus, and man, would we have one hour of great video to serve as a deterrent against these bastards.

P.S. I don't condone nor support bestiality (unlike the zombies), but boy, it sure would be funny!

The point: If you have to fight dirty, then let's do it! No more Mr. Nice Guy with these bastards!

Posted by: boneshack at August 24, 2007 10:24 PM

decleyre - interesting points you make.

Perhaps, as with a dog fight, a bucket of cold water (or some similar sort of 'direct and unexpected physical shock') might be the right approach in an immediate emergency, if it's clear that someone might be getting killed.

Point taken that domestic violence usually involves the abusee (whether child, woman or man) 'allowing' the abuser to do it. But I think you do overestimate the strength of character required to up and leave - especially since a great many abused women who HAVE mustered the strength to leave, move interstate, change name, etc., have still been stalked and murdered by their exes.

Chances are that the abused person, especially if they had an abusive childhood, doesn't have a healthy sense of self - that they a. don't have 'boundaries', literally don't know that they can say 'no' and b. have a totally messed-up sense of what is normal or OK and what isn't. Often they have been duped into believing that the abuse is their fault, and that they 'deserve' it. In which case, without SOME carefully considered outside intervention - without something to 'interrupt', challenge or correct the abusee's false perceptions - what hope do they have?

Abuse of this kind occurs all over the world. But there is something else that should be noted. The classic pattern of domestic violence - whereby the abuser manipulates/ deceives/ browbeats the victim into acquiescing in or 'consenting' to the abuse - is a pattern clearly observable in Islam's relationship with non-Muslims under its control, throughout history .

Read Bat Ye'or, 'The Dhimmi' and you will see that 'dhimmitude', the condition of subjugation of a non-Muslim within the Ummah, is a classic abusive domestic violence relationship, writ large and institutionalised. Next time you hear a 'Palestinian' Arab Christian spokesperson loudly proclaiming how wonderfully they get along with their Muslim neighbours in 'Palestine', ask yourself whether you should not be seeing a parallel with an abused woman who insists - in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary - that her husband 'loves' her.

The other thing to remember is that although no human society is free of familial abuse (incest, spousal violence, abuse of children), such abuse is disturbingly pervasive throughout the Islamised world - see Wafa Sultan, Pierre Rehov, and Phyllis Chesler for examples and analyses. Or Ayaan Hirsi Ali and the film 'Soumission'/ Submission. The ideology of Islam, the tenets of shariah law, appear often to function as enablers, not inhibitors, for abuse.

This case in Minnesota might just as well have happened in a non-Muslim community, sure; people have adduced the 'Kitty Genovese' case. But since at least one person involved was a Somali Muslim, one should not exclude the possible influence of traditional Islamic ideology, which inclines people toward violence and fatalism.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at August 25, 2007 12:13 AM

"I can't believe anyone would run from a Somali. They can't fistfight their way out of a wet paper bag. One punch to the five-head and on their hind ends they go."

....the Problem with Somalis fighting is , that like other Muslims when they decide to attack an individual, they usually attack with the odds of 10-1....I suspect the bystanders would have stepped in had the woman actually began to win the fight....to help the attacker...not the victim...no less...

and now we find out this Muslim works on Planes?.....in no way should Muslims be working in or around planes.....

Ban Muslim Immigration

Posted by: exsgtbrown at August 25, 2007 11:03 AM

"The real reason this occurs is poverty,"

....there is poverty in many countries that have a low crime rate....it is not the real reason for a high black crime rate....I suspect the real culprit is the inner social structure blacks have created for themselves, things such as no religious faith (a turning away from GOD), a lack of matrimonial commitment (refusing to marry one woman and to be forever faithful to the one woman and to the children she bears), idol worship, i.e. basketball stars, designer clothes, jewelry, fast shiney cars, drug lords, convicts, rap music, loose women, alcohol, and violence....black violence is further enhanced by poor education...blacks attend the same schools as do whites and other minorities but blacks tend to earn lower grades, suffer more displinary actions, and have a higher dropout rate (why is this?)...I might suspect a lot of uncertainty while growing up (a cause could be single parent households with limited income and internal family strife), causing aniexty, depression, insecurity, and helps bring out violent behavior....

....these are but a few of the things I see....it is also what the Muslims see and Muslims are having a field day recruiting blacks in prison and from young blacks on the streets...The Muslims are offering a way for the blacks to rebel against society and maybe kill some whites along the way....Muslim terrorist organizations feast on the insecure, the weak willed , the uneducated and on those who are found to harbor violent tendencies.....if you follow the arrests in the US of terrorist plotters you will discover the majority are black...

Poverty may contribute to black crime but it is not the real reason....

Muslims robbing our black families for their children is but one more reason we must Ban Muslim Immigration....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at August 25, 2007 11:24 AM

"Set up this coward to be raped for 1 hour by the team of Budweiser horses."

I don't think the horses would consent. They're too gentle-natured.

Regarding the slow response from the police, this does happen. I've been on the phone with a 911 operator for an hour, while a severely injured man was bleeding all over my front porch.

Tip: If you have a real, time-crucial emergency, do not talk to the operator. After he or she answers, drop the phone, literally. Hearing a telephone handset striking a hard surface, brings the cops, pretty quickly.

Posted by: Abscedere at August 25, 2007 11:46 AM

Dumbledoresarmy says:
Point taken that domestic violence usually involves the abusee (whether child, woman or man) 'allowing' the abuser to do it.

Let me stop you right there -- obviously, my statements do not apply to children. Children are clearly not capable of freeing themselves physically, intellectually, or financially.

But I think you do overestimate the strength of character required to up and leave - especially since a great many abused women who HAVE mustered the strength to leave, move interstate, change name, etc., have still been stalked and murdered by their exes.

But the above-mentioned cases are the fault and failure of law-enforcement, not the stalked and murdered women who did all they should have to get away. In these circumstances, a system that can only deal with violent crime after the fact, rather than prevent it, is ultimately to blame.

Chances are that the abused person, especially if they had an abusive childhood, doesn't have a healthy sense of self --[snip]-- Often they have been duped into believing that the abuse is their fault, and that they 'deserve' it. In which case, without SOME carefully considered outside intervention - without something to 'interrupt', challenge or correct the abusee's false perceptions - what hope do they have?

I generally agree with this. I came from an abusive home, and I was fortunate that there was intervention -- a divorce and community mental health services. However, by the time the divorce was finalized, I was almost 18 -- hardly early enough intervention to change a child's outlook on how "deserving" they are of abuse. For myself, there was intervention -- but this is not true of my older siblings. So why aren't they involved with abusive partners? I don't know. Apparently, without having had the benefit of intervention before they reached the age of majority in an abusive household (of course, as soon as each of them did, they left home), at some point in adulthood each of them made a series of decisions and/or choices designed to ensure a future free of abuse. Intervention explains my escape from abusive relationships, but it does not explain theirs. I have no explanation for theirs, other than determination and force of will; at some point, deciding, "I don't have to take this crap anymore, and I WON'T."

Oh, wait! I just remembered something correlational: all three of my older siblings also left behind religion when they left home. Not one of them (or I) regularly attends religious services, and at least two of them are confirmed atheists. (I'd call myself an agnostic.) So: lack of religion in their lives seems to be the common denominator. Of course, correlation is not causality, the scientifically-minded would be quick to point out, and I am not saying that it is. It is, nevertheless, one thing that I think separates my siblings and I from others we grew up with in our neighborhood who have sadly married into relationships that mirror the abusive home environments in which they grew up; the majority of them still go to church. We don't. Also, most of us left "the neighborhood." They didn't...

Abuse of this kind occurs all over the world. But there is something else that should be noted. The classic pattern of domestic violence - whereby the abuser manipulates/ deceives/ browbeats the victim into acquiescing in or 'consenting' to the abuse - is a pattern clearly observable in Islam's relationship with non-Muslims under its control, throughout history .

Point taken. But I don't find much difference between that and the Bible's old Testament Christian God, he of "spare the rod and spoil the child" and who recommended "an eye for an eye." The Old Testament as religious text advised that children and wives were property the same as animals were.

The problem with all fundamentalists, whether Christian or Islamic or any other religion, is that they fail to consider the archaism of the original texts as products of the times and places in which they were written.

Of course, these same fundamentalists would surely not want their gall bladders or appendixes removed by surgeons who routinely move between patients without washing their hands or removing their bloody aprons, as surgeons (and barbers) did in the 19th century and before.

Yet if you were to interpret 19th century medical texts literally, as fundamentalists do their religious texts, medicine would still be in the dark ages. Men like Pasteur (pasteurization and vaccination) and Semmelweis (hand washing) would still be regarded as heretics. And doctors, nurses and surgeons would still be spreading infection and sepsis from patient to patient without disposable gloves, handwashing, or changing surgical gowns and masks between patients.

I'd like to ask all those fundamentalists who interpret religious texts literally, if they'd like their doctors and nurses to refer to medical texts that were thousands of years old. If they would like 911 Emergency Medical Responders to respond they way they would have a couple thousand years ago. Now, some of those ancient Greeks really figured out a lot about early medicine. Not as much as we know now, of course, what with our laboratory tests of blood and urine, X-rays, CT scans, MRIs and PET scans.

But, hey! If you're going to interpret archaic religious texts literally in the 21st century, why not interpret medical and scientific texts the same way? Put your money where your mouth is! In for a penny, in for a pound! Let's have none of this selective fundamentalism. Get out of that damned car and get on a donkey, dammit. And while you're at it, no more indoor heat or plumbing for you, no more dentistry, no more electricity, no more satellite or cable TV -- no more artificial light, for that matter. Work only during the sunlight hours, and sleep during darkness. And you'll walk through the raw-sewage strewn streets in flimsy sandals, not Nikes or Prada. And when you get hit by a horse-drawn cart or Muhammed or God sends you a heart attack, there will be no Advanced Cardiac Life Support for you -- they didn't have that back then when they wrote the Old Testament and Qu'ran! We'll just let you writhe on the ground and die. But first we might apply some leeches, because surely blood letting will get the bad spirit(s) out of you. And we'll be sure to get priests or pharisees and imams to pray and fan incense over you while you writhe and die. So you can have a truly fundamentalist life AND death.

Next time you hear a 'Palestinian' Arab Christian spokesperson loudly proclaiming how wonderfully they get along with their Muslim neighbours in 'Palestine', ask yourself whether you should not be seeing a parallel with an abused woman who insists - in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary - that her husband 'loves' her.

True enough. But I can not think of any large organized monotheistic religion -- except perhaps certain Christian sects, such as the Quakers -- that doesn't institutionalize some form of top-down, heirarchical control and/or abuse (and, again, this has to do with differences in interpretation of religious texts). Perhaps this is unfortunately inherent in monotheism. Or at least in patriarchal monotheism. (We do not have any matriarchal monotheist religions that make up a sizable minority, let alone a majority, for comparison with Christianity or Islam.)

The ideology of Islam, the tenets of shariah law, appear often to function as enablers, not inhibitors, for abuse.

Yes, but this is also true of the Christianity presented in the Old Testament of the Bible. We've had the Crusades (slaughter in the name of the Christian God), the Inquisition (torture and murder of innocent people in the name of God), witch trials (torture and murder of innocent women whose big crime was midwifery and herbalism). Islam is hardly alone in enabling rather than inhibiting abuse.

Let's not let other religions off the hook (Hinduism, Buddhism), either: what about karma, wherein a person supposedly "earns the fruits" in this incarnation of actions and misdeeds done in a previous incarnation? Karma is used (to this day) to justify subjugation of entire classes of people -- yet another example of how an organized religion enables rather than inhibits abuse and a imparts a "they deserve it" mentality to oppressors while teaching the subjugated to docilely accept their oppression.

There appears to be no religious way out of this human tendency to subjugate poorer or weaker or "different" people, or children, women, even animals, at least not if one is going to interpret thousands-of-years-old religious texts literally in the present day.

I'm afraid that ultimately all of the large organized religions succumb to humanity's weaknesses, because they were created by humans. They cannot be anything but flawed because their makers (humans) were flawed. As programmers would say, garbage in, garbage out.

But since at least one person involved was a Somali Muslim, one should not exclude the possible influence of traditional Islamic ideology, which inclines people toward violence and fatalism.

I agree.

Posted by: decleyre at August 26, 2007 4:47 PM

Decleyre -

What are you trying to tell me? That I shouldn't criticise Islam for promoting oppression and violence - as per the incident currently under discussion - unless I first of all agree with you that All Religions (but especially the Biblical Faiths) are Equally Evil. That if I denounce 'allah' as a Tyrant, I must join you in spitting upon YHWH as a Tyrant, a mere manmade rationalisation for Tyranny and Slavery. Sorry. No can do.

After reading your riff on why Christianity is just as Evil as Islam I understand precisely why Robert Spencer had to write "Religion of Peace? Why Christianity Is, and Islam Isn't".

Seriously: have you read the four gospels anytime lately? Have you also read Ibn Ishaq's Life of Mohammed, or Robert's scholarly account of the figure of Mohammed, drawing together all the available Muslim sources, in 'The Truth About Muhammad'?

Everything I know about Jesus, and everything I know about Mohammed, tells me that they were two very, very different men, teaching diametrically opposite things about God and about how humans should relate to one another.

Muslims who have become Christians (often by reading the Gospels) testify, repeatedly, that Christianity teaches love - for wife, husband, child, neighbour, even enemy - and Islam...doesn't. Pretty big difference, I would say. And they should know.

Check out the latest instalment of Robert' s Qur'an blog - he's discussing the passage where the Qur'an tells men to beat wives from whom they 'fear disobedience'. And reflect on this fact: neither the Old Testament or the New, ANYWHERE, contains any comparable command. Qur'an and Bible equally evil? Sorry. No.

I'm not going to bother with your standard 'moral equivalence' accusations about the Spanish Inquisition and Witch-burnings, except to point out that both only happened after Christendom had already been in existence for over a thousand years, and that both were to some extent 'local' phenomena - they never happened equally and everywhere. Look, if you want a thorough in-house critique of the sins of Christendom, read Jacques Ellul, 'The Subversion of Christianity'. But also read his 'The Technological Society' and 'The New Demons'.

As for the Crusades: see Mr Spencer's "Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades" and learn the immense debt of gratitude that you and I and every other Western woman owes to the warriors of Christian Europe.

Had they not fought off the invading Muslim hordes at Tours/ Poitiers in 732; at Constantinople in the 9th century; during the Crusades (launched in self-defence, after centuries of unprovoked violent Muslim invasions, slave raids, pillage and piracy); in Spain, in the 11th through 15th century; and at Malta in 1565, at Vienna in 1529, at Lepanto in 1571 and finally again outside the very gates of Vienna in 1683 (only two years before the birth of Johann Sebastian Bach), you and I would even now be either Muslims in veils and purdah, or dhimmi suffering the misery of humiliation and fear, as the Christian Copts suffer today in Egypt, or as the Greeks and the Serbs suffered for centuries under the iron heel of the Turk.

I deplore the sins of European Christians against the Jews; but I view Europe's long self-defence against, and (in Spain, Greece, Serbia, etc) self-liberation from, Muslim Arab, Muslim Moor, Muslim Turk invasion and occupation, as essentially just. Don't curse the men who fought for Europe at Vienna, for instance: bless their names, for without them, the freedoms you now enjoy could never have come into existence.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at August 27, 2007 9:03 PM

Further note to decleyre, as regards women, abuse, oppression, rape, and the Bible.

You might find it interesting to read Phyllis Trible, 'Texts of Terror', a Christian theologian who tackles the harshest and most frightening Biblical stories head on. Without, I add, losing her absolute conviction that God is the life-giving God of Jesus the Healer.

See also just about anything by red-hot Jewish feminist Phyllis Chesler - visit her website - www.phyllis-chesler.com - and have a look around. Recommended, under 'articles 2003': 'reflections on the sabbath'; Dvar Torah Vayishlach; and especially 'the rape of Dina - on the Torah portion of Vayishlah' [Genesis 34]. Like Trible, Chesler knows in her bones that the Biblical God is bigger than the oppressors and is most definitely NOT their sock-puppet.

The article we were discussing today - that rape of a woman in a hallway while people looked on - is precisely the sort of thing that makes Chesler's blood boil. She denounces rape and oppression of women wherever it happens; but she woke up to the peculiar oppressiveness of Islam decades ago, after she made the mistake of marrying a plausible and romantic Afghan and ended up damn near dying in the harem in Kabul, ca. 1961.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at August 27, 2007 10:56 PM

On-topic.

You know what really stands out from the article under discussion?

The fact that both the rapist (presumably a Muslim, since 99.99% of Somalis are Muslim) and his Muslim defender are flatly denying the video camera record, on the basis of which the police are charging the man with 'several counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct' (is that police code for straightout rape?). I imagine the pictures must be pretty damning for the police to lay charges of that kind.

Can you imagine the average Western offender, confronted with 90 minutes of clear video footage of him or herself doing something, daring to go on denying what they'd done?

But: in Islamic culture objective truth and objective falsehood do not seem to exist. It looks as though whatever someone says loudly enough; whatever they can bully or persuade or trick others into believing, even in flat defiance of the facts, is 'true'.

We see the same thing in the Muslim Palestinian denial that there was ever a Jewish temple on the temple mount in Jerusalem. Archaelogical evidence? Historical/ documentary evidence? Who cares? If they, the Muslims, say there wasn't - that is supposed to suffice.

And so Mr Ibrahim and Mr Jamal are lying through their teeth in the face of the evidence - because, quite possibly, they don't care about the evidence. For them, evidence doesn't exist.

No wonder our postmodernist intellectuals love Islam.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at August 27, 2007 11:34 PM