This footage went far and wide (warning: it’s graphic), and was trumpeted everywhere, as you can see below, as evidence of “Islamophobia.” And so yet again we see that an “anti-Muslim hate crime” was perpetrated by…a Muslim. Will we see retractions and apologies from those who spread this footage globally? Don’t hold your breath.
“EXPOSED: Molenbeek ‘Far Right’ Hit And Run Was Muslim-On-Muslim Attack,” by Liam Deacon, Breitbart, April 4, 2016:
A hit and run on a Muslim women in Molenbeek this weekend, blamed on ‘far right’ anti-Islam demonstrators, was in fact perpetrated by an allegedly drunk local youth named “Mohamed”.
The revelation comes after news websites across the world – including the Daily Mail, the New York Post, EuroNews, the Evening Standard, Russia Today, the International Business Times, the Sunday Times, the Huffington Post, the Metro, ITV News, the Daily Caller, the Independent, the Sun, the Mirror and more – lumped the blame onto “far right” protesters in the no go zone of Brussels.
Tensions in the notorious district of the capital city of the European Union (EU), now know as the ‘European capital of Jihad’, were exceptionally high over the weekend. The mayor had banned a planned protest by the nationalistic Génération Identitaire (GI) group, but left wing counter protests and local youth were out on the streets en mass.
The Mayor said nationalistic groups should not “express themselves” because they were “extremists” akin to the Islamist terrorists hailing from district, who were behind both the Paris and Brussels attacks.
So, a few days later when an innocent hijab wearing Muslim women was stuck by a speeding car, which had just evaded armed police, the media were quick to label it, or imply, that it was an anti-Muslim hate crime.
“Muslim woman is mown down by grinning far-right activist who then stops to take a PICTURE during anti-Islam rally”, touted the Daily Mail.
“Muslim woman was purposely run over… during a far-right protest”, and, “Muslim woman ‘mown down’ by car during far-right protest…” echoed the New York Post, the Evening Standard, the Express and others.
However, the two men arrested for the attack have now been named as “Redouane B.” and “Mohamed B.” in multiple local news reports.
Another Belgium news site, DH Net, reports the men are 20-year old “local youths” who were “under the influence of alcohol and drugs”, and their vehicle had been rented out by a friend.
The hit and run, therefore, is very unlikely to be ‘anti-Muslim’ or ‘far right’, but none of the mainstream papers have yet corrected their reports, or even reported the development including the arrested and their names.
The two young men driving the car were pictured filming and laughing at armed police – who were aiming their weapons at their car – seconds before the impact.
They sped off from the initial hit and run, but were arrested later after hitting a motorcyclist and several parked vehicles. DH Net claims they “reeked of alcohol”….
No Way says
Nowhere did they tell the truth. Muslims are not the victims, they are the executioners. They only know one thing hate and they are currently destroying everything around them even killing their own daughters for so called “honour” that they never had.
Jayke says
Mohammedans only create victims and the victims may be coreligionists but that is all right with their blood thirsty god.
Shane says
The main point is that the left wing news media accused right wing, anti-Muslim guys of this crime and did not correct the lie when it was found out that the perps were Muslim guys. This is the story that the left is peddling – Muslims are basically peaceful and right wingers are the real problem.
Fessitude says
The Breitbart story says:
“The mayor had banned a planned protest by the nationalistic Génération Identitaire (GI) group, but left wing counter protests and local youth were out on the streets en mass.
“The Mayor said nationalistic groups should not “express themselves” because they were “extremists” akin to the Islamist terrorists hailing from district, who were behind both the Paris and Brussels attacks.”
Here’s a manifesto of the Génération Identitaire from 2012. They certainly seem boldly anti-Leftist (without explicitly using the term “Leftist”) and provocatively defiant (and thus ipso facto a threat to the established order of the EU which is markedly Leftist — and this is coming from me, who often has counseled the Counter-Jihad to tone down its anti-“Leftist” rhetoric”).
http://gatesofvienna.net/2012/10/generation-identitaire/
However, to say the Génération Identitaire is anywhere even close to being on a par with the Muslims who perpetrated the Brussels and Paris attacks (or with any Muslims, for that matter), is of course preposterous and typical rhetoric indulged by both Leftists and PC MCs.
While I mostly like the Génération Identitaire manifesto I linked above, I found it interesting — and dismaying — that they seemed to scrupulously avoid the I and M words (“Islam” and “Muslim” — the closest they got was saying “We no longer believe that “Khader” could ever be our brother..” (“Khader” being an obviously Muslim name)). However, the manifesto does have a top-heavy flavor of a Real-Problemer worldview (whereby the “real problem” is the hegemony of Leftists-slash-Socialists, while Islam & Muslims just reflect some peripheral manifestation, among many, of that “real problem” — which may be the case, but I think is distracting from our pragmatic exigencies now while the house is on fire).
Their website, at least, has an article titled —
25 Mar Grande manifestation européenne le 2 avril à Molenbeek : « Expulsons les islamistes ! »
— “March 25 Large European demonstration on April 2 in Molenbeek: “Expel the Islamists!”
“Islamists” is slightly better than no mention of the I or M words at all, I suppose…
Fessitude says
correction:
« Expulsons les islamistes ! » more accurately translates as:
“Let’s expel the Islamists!”
خَليفة says
Maybe this was nothing more than an honor killing.
Stephen says
خَليفة, if your serious your a depraved homicidal piece of trash. If its an attempt at a joke your a depraved individual. If its an attempt at sarcasm its a bad bad attempt. Which is it?
Honor killing is nothing more than a coward imitating Satan in the best way he knows how because the notion of such an oxymoronic thought could only come from his depraved mind first. So at least we know who the author behind the author of the Quran is.
gravenimage says
Probably not any attempted Honor Killing. The driver was running through a police road block, and it is unlikely he realized this woman would have been crossing the street at the time.
On the other hand, he clearly didn’t care that he hit her, not only failing to stop, he was also photographed laughing and taking selfies.
davej says
Outrageous manipulation of the news by the dhimmi media.
No corrections. Why not?
Muslims tell everyone else “no alcohol, no drugs, no music” then consume massive amounts when they go to clubs prior to yet another cowardly and sadistic attack.
nicu says
anyone surprised ?
and shame that our media support (or create ) these lies !
ICH says
how can they laugh after they hit someone?
I would be devastated !!
Charli Main says
Of course you would. You belong to a society that believes women are human beings.
Muslims laugh, because to them women are worthless, sub human animals.Less than dogs and goats.
gravenimage says
I’m sure you would not just be devastated, but would stop to help, ICH–just like any other decent person, as Charli notes. But most Muslims only care about this if they think it can be used to fuel the fake “islamophobia” industry.
Jay Boo says
Off Topic gravenimage
Follow up on Bernie Sanders link about Christopher Hitchens
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/04/sanders-brings-up-holocaust-discussing-trumps-intolerance-of-muslims/comment-page-1#comment-1410873
gravenimage says
Thank you, Jay Boo. I’ve replied to you on that thread.
Thanks for the head’s up here–and thanks for the corrective. Information I did not have. Thanks to Mirren, as well.
Jay Boo says
I read your follow up there.
You are welcome gravenimage
Carolyne says
But then, you are not a Muslim, ICH.
davej says
Because they are moral imbeciles who live in an upside down world where murder and sadism are considered to be “holy”. They not only have no Golden Rule, they have the opposite rule: “Slay them wherever you find them” and then cheer and laugh about it afterwards.
Their vile cult has robbed them of both their intelligence and their humanity.
Jerry says
Maybe he’s one of the reformers we hear so much about.
Champ says
Oftentimes muslims murder their own it’s in their DNA. The ‘perfect man’ muhammad was in fact a hardened criminal, so muslims are following in his evil footsteps. Some ‘perfect man’, eh? Riiiight.
islam is wholly evil!
gravenimage says
Very true, Champ. Muslims murder Infidels and their fellow Muslims–“heretics”, “apostates”, the “insufficiently Islamic”, any family member who gets out of line, and–as here–just anyone who gets in their way.
God, I hate Islam.
Champ says
Indeed, Graven.
“God, I hate Islam.”
Yes–me, too. As a Christian I also hate evil islam …
“Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good.” — Romans 12:9
quotha raven says
It’s worth it to click on some of the links provided to see what these newspapers did say about the occurrence. Huffingandpuffington Post is interesting; so are the comments. Some of the commenters are SO DETERMINED to blame non-Muslim “protesters”, even after the reports have in some media been corrected to reflect the fact that this was most definitely NOT the case..
Cheers!
quotha raven
gravenimage says
Quotha, I read the article at HuffPo, but for some reason could not access the comments.
It looks like other news outlets besides the Daily Mail–including The Independent and New Zealand-based TVNZ–also came out with the brazen lie that the victim was run down by a “far-right activist” or “anti-Islam protester”, while the Huffington Post and Evening Standard strongly imply it. *Disgusting*.
http://pamelageller.com/2016/04/graphic-video-savages-who-hit-and-run-muslima-were-muslims-not-anti-muslim-far-right-protesters.html/
cathyleeman@yahoo.com says
A gruesome event, that had a possible intent of enraging muslims, and stopping protests, if this is confirmed they were 2 drunk pious young men, they have just confirmed the worst depravity, which shows they had no value for human life of other muslims either. Then went on to do more damage. When they sober up, I wonder if they will say it’s allah’s will or will regret their actions. Did this person survive?
TheBuffster says
“the men are 20-year old ‘local youths’ who were ‘under the influence of alcohol and drugs'”
I don’t think there’s enough information in this article to be able to tell whether these two drunk AND drugged 20-year-olds were out to deliberately hit somebody, to enrage Muslims or to stop protests. I doubt they were out to enrage Muslims, as they’d know that the truth would come out.
Were they intending to do terrorism against the protesters, using booze and drugs to enable them to do the deed? Or were they just a couple of delinquent young people who had gotten so drugged (I wonder what the drug was?) and drunk that, with no goal in mind, got into a car and proceeded to drive like the drugged drunks they were. Naturally, when police saw them, they gave chase. The intoxicated driver drove faster, and in his mind-altered state he ran into a couple of people.
In that mental state, it could be that everything – everything – seemed unreal and funny. I note that they didn’t point guns at the police. They took photos. They were off their heads.
I also note that the article says they were laughing and photographing police BEFORE the accident – while their car was moving.
It’s just as possible for young Muslims to do ordinary, i.e., non-terrorist, crime as non-Muslim youth. So it’s possible that this hit-and-run was a totally mindless, religionless, stupid, unintentional criminal act.
The real story here is the way the media drew a totally unjustified conclusion before investigating the facts – or perhaps in spite of having investigated – and decided that since a Muslim woman was run down near a “far-right” protest, it surely must have been done by an Islamophobe. The lesson to be learned is the necessity of gathering all the facts and considering all the alternatives that the facts suggest, the value of asking questions, the importance of seeking to be accurate and *objective* instead of jumping to conclusions.
Fessitude says
DUII — Driving Under the Influence of Islam
Alan says
What I can’t help but notice is that where Muslims are suspected or the perps the media bends over backwards to verify and be sure they have every conceivable fact before reporting but they simply jump to conclusions and run with it in the event they have even the most minuscule shred of a possibility it is someone other than a Muslim they go hog wild! Bad journalism!
gravenimage says
A hit and run on a Muslim women in Molenbeek this weekend, blamed on ‘far right’ anti-Islam demonstrators, was in fact perpetrated by an allegedly drunk local youth named “Mohamed”.
………………………………
Except for the incidents that were faked outright, this sums up most supposed “islamophobic” attacks. How many times has the attacker turned out not to be some “filthy Infidel”, but just another violent Muslim?
More:
The Mayor said nationalistic groups should not “express themselves” because they were “extremists” akin to the Islamist terrorists hailing from district, who were behind both the Paris and Brussels attacks.
………………………………
Uh huh. And yet, these “extremists” who are supposedly just like the Jihad terrorists who have mass murdered victims in Paris and Brussels, have never done anything at all like this. Just more calumny.
More:
So, a few days later when an innocent hijab wearing Muslim women was stuck by a speeding car, which had just evaded armed police, the media were quick to label it, or imply, that it was an anti-Muslim hate crime.
“Muslim woman is mown down by grinning far-right activist who then stops to take a PICTURE during anti-Islam rally”, touted the Daily Mail.
………………………………
Well, this is not journalism at all–it is utterly false. I’m actually shocked that the bias from the Daily Mail would be *this* blatant. They didn’t even hedge by saying something like “suspected far-right activist”. Good God.
And how many people will have read that initial article and have missed the subsequent ones where it is proven that the victim was run down by a Mohammedan?
This is unethical in the extreme.
Mirren10 says
”This is unethical in the extreme.”
*Is* there any ethical journalism in the world today ? Rare as hen’s teeth.
But I agree with you, the sheer *blatant* lie from the DM is appalling. There again, that’s the sort of rag it is.
gravenimage says
Yes, Mirren–ethical journalism has becoming increasingly rare. Very disturbing.
This seems a low point even by current standards, though.
Jayell says
“The two young men…..were pictured filming and laughing at police…”
Gutter-level criminal behaviour…….or gutter level criminal behaviour? Take your pick.
Shmooviyet says
If these “men” were normal starting out, I’d say they might get their shot of non-existent courage from the booze.
But the impetus to maim and shed blood is already programmed, so it’s more akin to chumming ‘frenzied-up’ sharks.
How disappointing for the media, who thought they finally had a good ‘backlash’ story to report.
Jayell says
You’re actually going to give him two thumbs up? You’re going to amputate them yourself? (Well, that would be properly Islamic, wouldn’t it?)
Lesley says
–Sigh– The media’s narrative that Muslims are eternal victims is loudly shouted from every media outlet— and when Muslims commit violence as clearly directed by their religious texts, they’re all magically deranged and not responsible for their actions and certainly not doing it in the name of their faith.
I have mixed feelings about this article. On the one hand, I’m waiting for the people of Europe to have enough and start fighting back (though most people with dignity would choose fighting the rapist menfolk rather than running over one of their covered breeding cows from behind).
On the other hand, it figures that Muslims are so low as to run over a woman and laugh about it, and that our ridiculous mainstream media is chomping at the bit to blame those right-wing Islamophobes. After all, most people with common sense enough to understand and Islam must be capable of senseless murder, right?
I don’t know how true it is, but I found this info that the Associated Press had some kind of special relationship with the Nazis:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/03/31/associated-press-nazi-collaboration/82457620/
gravenimage says
Lesley wrote:
I don’t know how true it is, but I found this info that the Associated Press had some kind of special relationship with the Nazis
………………………….
It was not just the AP, Lesley–there were actually numerous news outlets–including many American newspapers–that regularly whitewashed Fascism, often up through the late 1930s.
There were exceptions, of course–brave and savvy journalists who exposed the rising Nazi threat–but they often had their stories heavily edited or censored outright, and were criticized as “hysterical” or–even more grotesque–“warmongering”.
On the one hand, this is terribly disturbing that the very people who are supposed to be keeping us informed are so slow to recognize evil, so quick to whitewash it, and–in the worst circumstances–even working in tandem with the evil itself.
On the other hand, since the parallels with today vis-a-vis the Jihad threat are so clear, it should also give us hope–no matter how reviled and marginalized the warners about Fascism were at times, they *did* eventually win through–and we may well be able to do the same with warning about Islam.
gravenimageg says
By the way, USA today does not see the irony of exposing past shortcomings of the press–here they are whitewashing the threat from Islam today:
“Voices: No, we’re not all terrorists in Molenbeek”
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/11/18/voices-no-were-not-all-terrorists-molenbeek/75982142/
Not all that different from American magazines like National Geographic running “cute” stories about the Hitler Youth from the 1930s.
quotha raven says
To Gravenimage – I’m again blown away by the breadth and scope of your knowledge, Graven! Yours above hit just the right emotional note, too – cautious optimism, but optimism, nonetheless!
Cheers!
quotha raven
gravenimage says
Thank you. There’s an excellent book on the subject, by the somewhat unfortunate title of “Hitlerland”, by Andrew Nagorski. You can get it at most well-stocked bookstores, or here:
http://www.amazon.com/Hitlerland-American-Eyewitnesses-Nazi-Power/dp/143919100X
And here is a good article on the book–and the subject in general–at The Atlantic Monthly:
“Early Warnings: How American Journalists Reported the Rise of Hitler”
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/03/early-warnings-how-american-journalists-reported-the-rise-of-hitler/254146/
Of course, The Atlantic Monthly itself has been uneven at best on reporting about the Jihad threat, including a truly disgusting article soon after 9/11 whose title I can’t recall off the top of my head.
I suppose they–like so many–are better at assessing the past than the present. That’s the best spin one can put on this phenomenon, in any case.
But we must persevere, just as the warners of our grandparent’s generation did.
And so good to see you posting again, Quotha!
quotha raven says
To Gravenimage – Thank YOU for the helpful response and kind words – I will certainly avail myself of the Atlantic article and may follow up with a search over at Amazon books for second-handers of Hitlerland (yikes, you’re right, what a title!)
I’ve always been interested in the craft and power of journalism and how it is practiced – especially when I held the job of sole reporter of a weekly local newspaper in NYS, after I’d retired from my real career! The power of the pen is indeed mighty, and it is hard for a thinking person to avoid exhibiting bias in one’s reporting. So I can well appreciate how second-nature bias would be for an ideologically-submersed NON-discerning reporter, especially a young person even more vulnerable to that sort of conditioning.
But the type of mendacious reporting addressed in the Molonbeek hit-and-run is far more pernicious than what one normally encounters as bias.
Cheers!
quotha raven
quotha raven says
I meant “addressed by the article here on the Molonbeek hit-and-run…”
Stephen says
The article asks a most important question, “Will we see retractions and apologies from those who spread this footage globally? ”
If I may venture an answer? Yes, we will on the back page of some unread magazine in a country not subject to Sharia Law 20 years from now. If that country doesn’t exist, NO! we will never see a retraction!
WHEN WILL WE WAKE UP? PEOPLE THIS IS NOT A DREAM AND THERE IS VERY LITTLE DIFFERENCE IN PRINCIPLE BETWEEN THE DHIMMI TAXES OF THE MOHAMMEDANS AND THE CARBON TAXES OF THE GLOBALIST WHO CONTROL THE MEDIA. WAKE UP.
Tom from Brussels says
The mayor of Brussels, Yvan Mayeur, was outraged that the police had arrested the same day 99 lefties for Illegal assembly. He had issued an injunction against all assemblies in Brussels that day, which was in his mind only aimed against the “right wing”. He accused the police of excess zeal; publicly castigated them; and, announced he would open an enquiry into the arrests. Police unions said that politics should not interfere with policing and that they would file a formal complaint against him. Mohammed and Co; are still laughing.
Tom from Brussels says
The two guys in the car that ran over the women are called Redouane and Mohamed. Traditional Belgian names, of course.
dumbledoresarmy says
Thanks for the info, Tom.
If you have links from local media feel free to supply them, even if there is no English version. Not a few jihadwatchers – and that includes a contingent of Canadians – can read French (*I* can) even if not always very fluently.
By the way – welcome to jihadwatch, ‘Tom from Brussels’. Have you been reading here long? How did you find this site? And are you able to persuade others to visit? Another good site is ‘New English Review’ which focuses a little more on UK and continental-European stories, though without forgetting all the other countries that are afflicted by the Global Jihad.
I hope that one of the unexpected side-effects from the dreadful jihad massacre in Brussels will be an influx of curious Belgian Infidels to this and other counter-jihad sites, and a rapid increase in the ranks of the Resistance, right across Europe.
Mirren10 says
”I hope that one of the unexpected side-effects from the dreadful jihad massacre in Brussels will be an influx of curious Belgian Infidels to this and other counter-jihad sites, and a rapid increase in the ranks of the Resistance, right across Europe,”
Hear, hear, dda.
I am always thinking, OK, you’ve seen and experienced the horror, now, for God’s sake, bloody well find out *why* it’s happening.
Fools are everywhere. But there are always, amidst the marshmallow puffnonsense, *some* who have eyes to see, and ears to hear.
The thing is, of course, is that those of us who have eyes to see etc,, have always been in the minority. We always have been. We are the **Remnant**.
Charli Main says
@M10
The problem is that, after EVERY Muslim committed atrocity, the western brain washing media leap into action with lengthy diatribes about ” these terrorists are not Muslims” “Islam is the religion of peace” ” the Koran preaches love” blah—blah—blah and the general public fall for their nonsense.
Muslim puppet masters control the western media and thereby control what people read and then believe.
Mirren10 says
Very true, Charli.
”Muslim puppet masters control the western media and thereby control what people read and then believe.”
Possibly, but I think it’s far more the *left* that control the media. The left and mohammedans are, of course, cosy bedfellows.
Tom from Brussels says
dumbledoresarmy, I’ve been visiting the site for more than ten years. Commentaries on local newspapers have now all been cut off, because over the last five years, the remarks have become more and more “politically incorrect”. Ninety per cent of journalists here are more or less socialist, green or communist; never question the islam problem; and, always find social economic reason for the violent “minority” of “peaceful loving muslims”. In private conversations, I would say that a great majority of Belgians are viscerally against islam but say nothing in public. Belgium has been a crossroad of European wars for the last 500 years and Belgians have developed a low profile life always looking for compromise rather than confrontation. Although it is nominally a Catholic country most people here are not very religious and therefore cannot understand a group that fully live their religion every minute of every day; and, understand nothing about islam except what the media tell them. Since Charlie and the Paris and Brussels attacks, there has been a breach in the “official” version and even editorials from serious newspapers are questioning the real nature of islam.. This has been relayed into the political sphere and politicians are saying things that would have branded them “racist fascists” a few years ago. To illustrate the fact that Belgian surrealism is not dead, the Capitol published an article that revealed that jihad families, not ill, are housed in the public hospital Saint Pierre,next to victims of the Brussels attack. The story came to light because of outraged staff who said these families were not under guard and received uncontrolled visits.The hospital did not comment because of “medical secret” and officials said the families had been placed there under a court order. Nice to see where my tax money goes. http://www.lacapitale.be/1529637/article/2016-04-04/plusieurs-familles-de-djihadistes-logees-et-nourries-au-sein-de-nos-hopitaux-alo
Mirren10 says
”To illustrate the fact that Belgian surrealism is not dead, the Capitol published an article that revealed that jihad families, not ill, are housed in the public hospital Saint Pierre,next to victims of the Brussels attack. The story came to light because of outraged staff who said these families were not under guard and received uncontrolled visits.The hospital did not comment because of “medical secret” and officials said the families had been placed there under a court order.”
Dear God. That is *horrific**.
” … officials said the families had been placed there under a court order.”
What court, what judge, could do such a thing ? He/she should be disbarred.
gravenimage says
Thanks for the view on the ground in Belgium, Tom. Grim–but it’s good to know more Belgians are waking up.
Fessitude says
1) “In private conversations, I would say that a great majority of Belgians are viscerally against islam but say nothing in public. ”
2) “Although [Belgium] is nominally a Catholic country most people here are not very religious and therefore cannot understand a group that fully live their religion every minute of every day; and, understand nothing about islam except what the media tell them.”
An interesting paradox.
The sentences that follow describe not the ordinary civilian demographic but what are often in sloppy fashion denoted as “elites” —
“Since Charlie and the Paris and Brussels attacks, there has been a breach in the “official” version and even editorials from serious newspapers are questioning the real nature of islam.. This has been relayed into the political sphere and politicians are saying things that would have branded them “racist fascists” a few years ago. “
Angemon says
The MSM take on this? No, wait, let me guess: “Drunk. Not a true muslim. Nothing to do with islam”. The version spreading among local muslims? No, wait, let me guess: “false flag mossad cia american zionist plot to make muslims look bad”.
Also, the woman had no visibility in that street, with the parked cars – would it have killed her to walk slowly and look at both sides?
Stephen says
Even worse than the cowards who perpetrated this evil act are the cowards who refused to protect the common good, as those monsters sped by intent on destruction, by refusing to pull the triggers that would have saved an innocent life at the cost of the guilty. A fair, just and charitable exchange. But we’ll all hold hands and pray that it never happens again while we refuse to perform the actions which alone can stop it.
gerard says
Do we really all hold hands and pray that it will never happen again?
Many of those who are most active in resisting Islam are people of Christian or Jewish faith. Those who bend to Islam, I think, are mostly those who have no Faith and therefore regard Islam as just another religion of nonsense. They lack discernment. Throw the baby out with the bath water?
Stephen says
I was just trying to make a point to those who sit on the sideline, the majority, and either do nothing or wait for others to do something.
gerard says
I was too quick with my reply. Those vigils after a terrorist attack and we wait for the next attack and the next vigil…
gravenimage says
Unfortunately, Gerard, there are all too many Jewish and Christian people who are just as apt to play the dhimmi as anyone–there are also some brave Atheists who are staunchly opposed to Jihad. Think of people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Hugh Fitzgerald.
We have Anti-Jihadists here are Jihad Watch who are devout Jews and Christians, Hindus and Sikhs, Buddhists, Wiccans, Agnostics, and Atheists.
The real problem is “political correctness”–and that cuts across faith lines and permeates Western societies.
Shmooviyet says
@gravenimage: Wholly agree.
PC continues to infect, even voices that at one time seemed reliable and unwilling to bend down or over. As mentioned before, a ‘strong conservative’ personality recently stated, “We ALL know there is good and bad in ALL religions!” (his emphasis) while defending himself to an offended caller. The desperation to prove his ‘non-racism’ was loud and clear. The sad thing was, he HAD NOT been speaking derisively of anyone; the caller was obviously listening for ‘racism’ and heard what he wanted.
It’s really frightening to think of the realities we’d never hear of, if not for voices and writers at sites like this one.
gravenimage says
Agreed, Shmooviyet. We are (almost) as likely to hear this willful denial from “Conservatives” as from Liberals these days.
gerard says
local youth named “Mohamed”.
Wow! There’s a surprise!
somehistory says
Was this filmed by a camera on the street or by someone holding a camera? If the answer is in the article, I apologize for asking, but I did not see where it said.
It looks pretty strange for a regular day of traffic. Maybe it’s just my eyes.
It’s truly sickening that they ran her down, laughed about it, and it was blamed on innocent objectors to islam, rather than the guilty being named in the original *news,*
Judith Newman says
A muslim trips over on the street and we hear instant cries of islamophobia. I’m totally fed up with this protected species
Jay Boo says
Glenn Wilson said,
“I give Muhammad two thumbs up.”
——————————–
Well isn’t that special?
I assume either you carelessly overlooked the following sentence or you are a moron.
“So, a few days later when an innocent hijab wearing Muslim women was stuck by a speeding car”
Aardvark says
“an innocent hijab wearing Muslim women”
If she was wearing a hijab she was a active supporter of Islam, deliberately and arrogantly parading her political stance in the faces of the infidel, and in no way could she be described as innocent. It is the tacit support of people like her that enables the terrorists.
Jay Boo says
Wrong Aardvark
I do not believe this website promotes running over a woman at random simply because she is wearing a hijab. — 2 thumbs down
Aardvark says
I wasn’t saying that I promoted running her over, Jay. I was objecting to the word ‘innocent’ being applied to a person who is obviously nothing of the sort.
Angemon says
“If she was wearing a hijab she was a active supporter of Islam, deliberately and arrogantly parading her political stance in the faces of the infidel, and in no way could she be described as innocent. It is the tacit support of people like her that enables the terrorists.”
Or maybe she just wanted to move around without being harassed by hordes of muslim men.
Jake says
They were Muslims and the police knew they were Muslims during the event itself. That is why they let them break through the police line and did not shoot. The police simply watched them pass through. Had they been non-Muslim, the police would have immediately opened fire. Instead, seeing they were Muslim locals, the police were terrified to do their jobs. And this is the result.
TruthOfLife says
The lies of Leftism never cease to amaze and bemuse in equal measure.
gravenimage says
Glenn Wilson wrote:
I give Muhammad two thumbs up.
……………………..
A Mohammedan running a police roadblock and then callously running down a woman?
It seems to me this is a large part of the problem we face, *not* something to give two thumbs up for.
As for her wearing a Hijab–a few things. Yes, this very much means she is a part of the problem we face, as well–but she did not deserve to get hit by a car. Moreover, this thuggish Muslim didn’t care that she was one of his own–she just got in his way.
This is how Mohammedans treat anyone weaker than themselves–women, pedestrians, and Infidels when they can.
Does *anyone* here think that Mohamed B. would have had the least compunction about running down an Infidel woman? Or a child? I don’t think so.
Fessitude says
The Muslima hit by the car, and all other Muslims killed by Muslims over the years, decades, and centuries, are Stockholm Syndrome victims who, as such, are perpetuating the jihad against us — the latter of which is, or should be, our priority.
While the comment by “Glenn Wilson” is unseemly, no less unseemly is the impulse to consider as innocent of jihad the innumerable Muslims whom we currently have no evidence of their carrying out either the jihad of the sword or the tongue (i.e., , respectively, of killing us or of lying about the killing in order to aid and abet the killing). Indeed, the latter is no less unseemly, and positively reckless for our ongoing safety into the coming decades of this century.
This vehicular murder is a manifestation of the reason why Islam is evil and dangerous — manifested both by the perpetrator and the victim’s Stockholm Syndrome (and saying she has Stockholm Syndrome is the minimum degree of generosity we should accord her; for after the mountains of data we have been learning about Muslims over the years, she could well have been (and we in the Counter-Jihad should reasonably assume and push the meme of considering her) more or less actively involved in any one of the various styles of jihad pursued by innumerable Muslims among us.
The Multifarious Strategy of Jihad
http://glossaryhesperado.blogspot.com/2015/12/the-multifarious-strategy-of-jihad.html
quotha raven says
to Fessitude, who sez “… saying she has Stockholm Syndrome is the minimum degree of generosity we should accord her; for after the mountains of data we have been learning about Muslims over the years, she could well have been (and we in the Counter-Jihad should reasonably assume and push the meme of considering her) more or less actively involved …”
Did you mean “maximum” degree of generosity (as she may have been tangentially or directly involved in one form of jihad or another)?
….Voeg …that you?))))…
Cheers!
quotha raven
gravenimage says
Fessitude wrote:
…no less unseemly is the impulse to consider as innocent of jihad the innumerable Muslims whom we currently have no evidence of their carrying out either the jihad of the sword or the tongue (i.e., , respectively, of killing us or of lying about the killing in order to aid and abet the killing).
………………………
Which, of course, I did not do.
Jay Boo says
Good Grief — Fesse
Running over a defenseless woman and speeding off is not just unseemly it is cowardly.
Haven’t you ever heard of carefully choosing one’s battles?
Champ says
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Fessitude says
I guess I said “minimum” because I was thinking of the typical Jihad Watcher who probably would think that maximum is too minimal and that we need to have more compassion for the female victim here.
Fessitude says
…no less unseemly is the impulse to consider as innocent of jihad the innumerable Muslims whom we currently have no evidence of their carrying out either the jihad of the sword or the tongue (i.e., , respectively, of killing us or of lying about the killing in order to aid and abet the killing).
………………………
Which, of course, I did not do.
********************
There are two ways to do something — overtly & directly; and tangentially & indirectly.
Angemon says
Fessitude posted:
“There are two ways to do something — overtly & directly; and tangentially & indirectly.”
You were always one of the “indirect” kind of people. You know, the cowardly ones who are incapable of saying things straight to others. You overwhelmingly, if not always, go like “gravenimage did such and such” instead of “gravenimage, are you doing such and such? If so, why?”. Let me guess: it’s much easier to set a narrative and a strawman than address what others actually say, right?
Angemon says
Fessitude psoted:
“The Muslima hit by the car, and all other Muslims killed by Muslims over the years, decades, and centuries, are Stockholm Syndrome victims who, as such, are perpetuating the jihad against us”
Well, Fess, it seems you know all of them individually. Could you tell me of a specific situation or five where this particular muslimah perpetuated jihad against us?
“While the comment by “Glenn Wilson” is unseemly, no less unseemly is the impulse to consider as innocent of jihad the innumerable Muslims whom we currently have no evidence of their carrying out either the jihad of the sword or the tongue ”
Well, Fess, that’s the core of Western law: innocent until proven guilty. If you have a problem with that, go join the leftist ranks – they certainly share your distaste for “due process”, “facts” and “evidence”…
“This vehicular murder is a manifestation of the reason why Islam is evil and dangerous — manifested both by the perpetrator and the victim’s Stockholm Syndrome (and saying she has Stockholm Syndrome is the minimum degree of generosity we should accord her; for after the mountains of data we have been learning about Muslims over the years, she could well have been (and we in the Counter-Jihad should reasonably assume and push the meme of considering her) more or less actively involved in any one of the various styles of jihad pursued by innumerable Muslims among us.”
“She could have well been”? Why are you backing down right after chiding others for thinking “innocent until proven guilty”? Why are you not doubling down on your “muslim therefore guilty with no chance of being proven innocent because we can ‘reverse-engineer’ a story to explain the lack of damning evidence” mindset? Are you getting soft?
Angemon says
Let’s see:
“The Muslima hit by the car, and all other Muslims killed by Muslims over the years, decades, and centuries, are Stockholm Syndrome victims who, as such, are perpetuating the jihad against us”
And later on:
“she[the woman above] could well have been (and we in the Counter-Jihad should reasonably assume and push the meme of considering her) more or less actively involved in any one of the various styles of jihad pursued by innumerable Muslims among us.”
In like a lion (“She was waging jihad against us!!!”), out like a lamb (“she could well have been waging jihad against us, I suppose. I mean, it’s definitely not entirely outside the realm of possibility, I guess”)…
Shmooviyet says
The workers at the Nazareth Restaurant (Columbus OH) had the sheepdog in them that day, and likely didn’t realize it until they confronted the maniac.
gravenimage says
Yes–kudos to them!
And the Sheep/Wolves/Sheepdog analogy–I’m not sure who coined it–is a very apt one.
And remember–the role of the Sheepdog is not just purely physical–I would characterize most people here at Jihad Watch as Sheepdogs of a sort, as well.
UNCLE VLADDI says
What actually happened is….some muslims tried to run over the anti islam protesters, swerved when the police drew weapons on them, and accidentally hit another muslim.
gravenimage says
Most likely.
UNCLE VLADDI says
From:
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/brussels-muslim-woman-knocked-down-molenbeek-hit-run-during-far-right-protest-1552892
“Police said they arrested the driver, who was from Molenbeek, and the passenger. Both were in possession of smoke bombs, local media reported.”
Sounds like they had it in for the “far-right protesters” and had criminal intent!
abad says
I saw that video and thought it was an ad for a new video game.
Something called “Run over Suicide Bombers” – object of the game was to run over a suicide bomber before it could detonate the suicide belt. Otherwise the car blows up. Kind of like Space Invaders
R Cole says
Another heralded “Islamophobia” attack fizzled!!
Though it does demonstrate how easily we can be lied to.
It was widely reported that it was someone from the far-right or assumed to be anti-Islam rally goer.
But these kinds of ‘assumptions’ are happening more and more frequently.
Tommy Robinson the former head of EDL once said – time and time again EDL members have been accused of damaging Muslim property, etc, and virtually every time a Muslim ends up being the perpetrator.
::
I think it speaks to a devaluing of large swathes of western society. On first appearance it seems to be pointed at the far-right – but look at what we hear after every terrorist attack – the blanket accusations of ‘Islamophobia’ – that these Muslim attacks were somehow the west’s fault – for being western essentially.
And really what it is doing is emboldening Muslims – who want to get up to no good. In the most extreme cases – a Muslim man kills his wife – because she doesn’t want the daughter to marry his cousin back in places like Iraq. When the police are called – he knows all he has to say is an “Islamophobe” did it.
It points to a trend that seems to wish to move those who criticize Islam or some of the objectionable Muslims cultural practices – into a lower class status – one where their civil rights would not be upheld.
The right to protest – is a human right
So what starts out as the undermining of rights of the more marginal nationalist or those deemed far-right groups – that same net ends up being cast wider and wider – to control the expression of more and more ‘objectionable’ opinion.
Remember though what people are objecting to is the Islamization of western society – and the violence enacted by the terrorists to impose Islam further through fear.
::
In any Islamic society anyone who publicly disagrees with Islam – would be imprisoned. And as a non-Muslim – even though you have not publicly questioned or criticized Islam – as a Christian or other – you can only enjoy a portion of the rights awarded to Muslim citizens [and there is often no race distinction.]
In a western society attempting to appease Islam – would start with a lessening of rights for citizens who criticize Islam – moving to a fully operational Islamic society – where full citizenship would only be granted to the Muslim – who adheres to Islam – and second class citizenship awarded to those who don’t.
No doubt the Left are deluding themselves into believing that there is some special place for them as non-Muslims under the Muslim rule they seem to be willing to usher in.
Loring Loding says
If the police had done their jobs and emptied their magazines as soon as the car started to pull away the only people hurt would have been those in the car.