.. as John Allen Muhammed is executed, the BBC are puzzled by the motives of the perpetrator(s) of a shooting spree.
Sniper’s motive remains a mystery
They weren’t always so baffled. I distinctly remember the ‘angry white male’ theory being aired on the Today programme.
I know it’s difficult to distinguish between a racist murderer (of their ten murder victims, eight were white, one black and one Asian) who happens to be a Muslim (admittedly a member of a Muslim sect that could be considered racist) :
John Allen Muhammad, 45, and his accomplice, Lee Boyd Malvo, 21, brought America’s capital to a standstill in 2002 as they picked off white targets at petrol stations and shops in the city’s prosperous suburbs. Malvo testified that Muhammad, driven by hatred of America because of its “slavery, hypocrisy and foreign policy” and his belief that “the white man is the devil”, planned to kill six whites a day for 30 days.
Or an Islamist-inspired murderer :
(drawing by Lee Boyd Malvo presented in evidence – exhibit 65-057)
but you’d think the BBC might be able to give us the evidence and let us decide for ourselves.
BBC headline the day after Muhammad and Malvo were arrested.
I’ve got most of the rest of Malvo’s drawings over at the blog, including one that refers to ‘white f*ckers’. Nice.
Okay, so if we accept for the sake of argument that both Mohammed and Hasan are/were mentally ill, and that’s the only real blame for these acts, how far can we go with that excuse? Where are we supposed to draw the line between something the BBC and the rest of them can call “mentally ill” and an act of mass murder inspired by something else? If they act alone, they’re mentally ill? Is it the kind of mass murder they commit that makes the difference?
Is the BBC honest and unbiased enough to ask these questions?
BBC Report,
WHERE DO BEARS SHIT?
Yesterday we were still left none the wiser as to where Bears actually shit.
‘Bears are naturally clean creatures who always take their excrement them’ stated Prof of sociology John Dhimmi From the school of the Cant See The Obvious at londons New Socialist University.
‘Daddy Bear and Mummy bear have always been model citizens’ says their social worker Tarquin TreeHugger.
jack Straw declined to comment about the Daddy Bear Case only stating that many animals espescially white middle class humans defecate in the woods daily and this scourge should be stopped.
Also he said that he had been long associated himself with the Bear community and that he descibed the spectre of Bearism as appaling.
‘People irrrationally blame the Bears and yet there is no evidence linking them to any soiling of the Arborial areas.
Hariet Harman explained that if some bears did actually defecate in wooded areas it was due to the oppression of their Ursine Brethen by the Israelis.
On a seperate note more piles of excrement were found in wooded areas yesterday still Nulabour and the Beeb are none the wiser
The BBC spout this Muslim backlash EVERY time Muslims murder non Muslims in large numbers. It never happens, WE are the tolerant ones, the bushy bearded idiots are not. Remember Teddygate? “Behead the one that insults Islam with a teddy”. Wow tolerant or what.
Good point. And almost every time some media type starts wringing their hands over the possibility of a “backlash”, they always preface it with something about how the British are the most tolerant people in the world. You’re the most tolerant, but you might react inappropriately when some Islamo-nutter starts killing you.
It really is like the BBC speaks to you as to little children.
A few in the MSM are beginning to break out of the hold that PC holds them in.
Dr. Phil and the Fort Hood Killer
His terrorist motive is obvious to everyone but the press and the Army brass.
It can by now come as no surprise that the Fort Hood massacre yielded an instant flow of exculpatory media meditations on the stresses that must have weighed on the killer who mowed down 13 Americans and wounded 29 others. Still, the intense drive to wrap this clear case in a fog of mystery is eminently worthy of notice.
The tide of pronouncements and ruminations pointing to every cause for this event other than the one obvious to everyone in the rational world continues apace. Commentators, reporters, psychologists and, indeed, army spokesmen continue to warn portentously, “We don’t yet know the motive for the shootings.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704402404574525831785724114.html
As another matter of interest, Hasan was doing his level best to wage low level war on America. He was doing this on soldiers suffering from PTSD. The question is – how many Muslims are waging low level Jihad in America, and the West in general, but have not cranked up their actions to Fort Hood levels? 1000, 10,000, 100,000? If the latter, damages could be much greater then at Fort Hood. If this wide spread and low level Jihad is sustained over decades, how long will it take for such activities to damage the state to such an extent, that it collapses?
As in the case of Hasan at Fort Hood, so in Muhammad’s murder spree, the MSM/BBC is being deliberately obtuse. There is no other reason why normally intelligent people are thinking up such extravagent and innovative non-Islamic reasons for actions that are obvious to anyone with common sense, or pretending that “they just do not know”.
As I posted on another thread…
The way I see it is there are a great number who see progress as anything other than the home (Oikophobia: An exaggerated or irrational dislike or fear of home surroundings). This is why they look to the east for answers and therefore have a blind spot when it comes to Islam.
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1126
Martin
There has been backlash.
Police arrested 22-year-old Abdul Walid Hamid of Hayward on the evening of Wednesday, Nov. 4, after he reportedly tore a crucifix from a person’s neck and scared others at Stoneridge Shopping Center.
Hamid, an employee at a mall kiosk near Starbucks, has been charged with battery, terrorist threats and grand theft.
According to reports, Hamid was yelling “Allah is power” and “Islam is great” while holding a pen in a fist over his head. Witnesses said he shouted anti-Christian comments, said police.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/11/backlash-in-california-muslim-at-mall-kiosk-tears-crucifix-from-shoppers-neck-shouts-allah-is-power.html#comments
http://en.rian.ru/crime/20091112/156804670.html
A Russian-born German has been handed a life sentence for murdering a pregnant Muslim woman in a courtroom, a case that sparked outrage in the Muslim world.
On July 1, Alex Wiens inflicted at least 16 stab wounds to a 31-year-old Egyptian woman, Marwa el-Sherbini, who was to testify against him in a defamation case. El-Sherbini, who was three months pregnant with her second child, bled to death in the courtroom.
…
Last year in October, Wiens harassed the woman in a playground, calling her a “terrorist” and “Islamist” because she wore a headscarf. El-Sherbini filed a defamation suit against him, and the court sentenced Wiens to a 780-euro ($1,170) fine.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/11/12/gay_panic/
Jason Bruce, a Marine reservist in Tampa, Fla., attacked an innocent Greek Orthodox priest with a tire iron. Bruce has initiated a shameful legal defense: the priest grabbed his crotch.
The actual story is quite different. Apparently, Father Alexios Marakis, who speaks little English, became lost after his car’s GPS system led him astray. Marakis followed several cars into the parking garage of a condominium in order to seek instructions. He approached Bruce, who was retrieving items from the trunk of his car. Bruce responded by chasing Marakis and hitting him several times with a tire iron. Video footage shows a tire iron-wielding Bruce chasing Marakis. Marakis’s GPS records confirm his assertion that he came to the area while trying to reach another destination.
Police arrested Bruce after he gave several inconsistent explanations. According to the St. Petersburg Times, Bruce said that:
The man tried to rob him.The man grabbed Bruce’s crotch and made an overt sexual advance in perfect English.The man yelled “Allahu Akbar,” Arabic for “God is great,” the same words some witnesses said the Fort Hood shooting suspect uttered last week.“That’s what they tell you right before they blow you up,” police say Bruce told them.
I can find more, you know. If you want. Just to balance shit out. Otherwise you might be biased in the news stories you select.
DP111 In answer to The question is – how many Muslims are waging low level Jihad in America, and the West in general, but have not cranked up their actions to Fort Hood levels?
Survey of British Muslims, Channel 4, aug 2006 (also here)
24 per cent agreed or tended to agree that the 7/7 bombings were justified. 45 per cent think 9/11 was carried out by the US or Israel. 36 percent said they wanted Sharia law in the UK. Half said British people who insult Islam should be arrested and prosecuted. Almost 80 per cent said those who published cartoons of the prophet Mohammed should be punished.
Just think, if 24% of the Muslims polled were willing to admit that they thought the 7/7 bombings were justified, how many more are there who decide not to admit it, prefering instead the guise of a moderate to achieve their aims? Perfidy is justified in Islam to achieve their aims.
Teddy Bear
Thank you for that answer.
Well they have their army over here – a million at the least and are waging an underground war on us. Fair enough. We have our forces in Afghanistan, and they are taking the light of freedom for all, women included, and democracy, to where it is required.
It is a noble mission. We never asked for it, but it has been thrust on that fateful day of September 11, 2001. So far, the mission is yielding all the expected results.
this blog is getting muslim obsessed. snap out of it :/
Good point. And they spent too much time obsessing about the Nazis in the 1930s too.
yeah but the nazis invaded several countries….at best, al qaeda run the rule over some mountainous hell hole region in pakistan. not comparable really is it?
Yes the Nazis did – but not immediately they came into existence. If we had isolated the Nazis before they built up their powerbase (as Churchill argued in his wilderness years), they too may have just had a few bases in Bavaria.
Events, dear boy. Events.
What a shock. The Ashes are set to return to terrestrial TV (read the BBC) along with other live events. So just WHO made this decision? Why David Davis of course who headed the review. Anyone want to guess who Davis worked for for many years? Why the BBC of course, so no impartiality there.
Funny that if you read this article on the story the BBC ‘forgets’ to mention he’s an ex beeboid. The article also fails to mention the BBC didn’t even bother to bid for the live coverage of the Ashes, so why should the BBC get it for free? Can I get to watch the BBC for free as well?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/front_page/8356391.stm
If you look at Sky’s sports output it has lots of minority interest sports, in particular womens’ sports like Cricket, Netball & Football that the BBC isn’t interested in showing. Surely the BBC should be showing this stuff as part of its charter?
But no, the beeboids want the big stuff so no doubt hundreds of them can go an infest 5 star hotels and run up large bar bills.
The BBC probably won’t bid for the ashes – it hasn’t shown much of an interest in cricket recently. Plus, its about damn time our national sports were free to air. There should be tougher laws on these pay channe;s gobbling up our sports.
What crap. If you want to watch the sport pay for it you cheapskate. Why should I subsidise over paid footballers?
All sport should be pay for view, if you want to watch it enough then pay for it.
Please explain why Sky happily shows plenty of minority sports (like Netball) yet the BBC doesn’t?
Sky has done more to boost sport in the UK than a bunch of drugged up rent boy addicts at the BBC.
How old are you pingu?
Siince sky MOTD now gets highlights from every premiership game. Before sky it only had 3 at most.
Before sky the only free to air footie was highlights on MOTD or occasionally some 2nd div game on itv. You got european cup for as long as brit teams lasted but you still get that now.
Cricket you got the test matches but they were always interupted by racing from wetherby or some othe rubbish.
Rugby you got the home nations which you get now and on ITV you got wrestling with giant haystacks.
There were no halcyon days of universal coverage of anything except maybe the snooker.
Like it or like it not Sky’s influence has resulted in more sport on terestrial not less.
Martin,
An excellent analysis. Just a few small quibbles:
1. They’re only recommendations. David Davies does not have the power to decide.
2. It’s 15 years since Davies worked for The BBC. That does not add up to a conflict of interest.
3. BBC won’t automatically get The Ashes if it happens. The cricket authorities will still have the right to auction them, but the bids will be limited to free-to-air channels.
4. By the same token, no-one would get it for free. It’ll go to the highest bidder. Last time round that was Channel 4.
5. There will not be hundreds of BBC staff infesting 5-star hotels.
6. BBC does cover minority sports, but it doesn’t have a mandate to fill hours of dead time with cheap live coverage from minority pursuits, unlike Sky Sports, which does have hundreds of hours to fill with sport-related coverage.
Otherwise, as insightful as ever.
Utter rubbish.
1. Davis is the chair AND the last time this decision was made (to quote your drug addits at the BBC) it was rubber stamped.
2. It doesn’t matter once a beeboid always a beeboid, plenty of you lot infest the Liebour party and I’m sure you are wrong Davis has done stuff for Radio 5 I’m sure of that in recent times.
3. The BBC are not interested in the Cricket, but neither is C4 or C5 and why should the ECB be forced to take a lower quote just because a bunch of corrupt politicans say so? We live in a free market economy.
4. The highest bidder? You mean the only bidder?
5. Yes there will be hundreds of beeboids infesting 5 star hoetls there always is. The Cocaine count in the local area goes sky high when you lot turn up.
6. The BBC should cover minority sports, millions of girls and women play Netball, I appreciate you’d prefer to see the 100 metres arse buggering of 10 year old boys covered by the BBC but most of us wouldn’t.
are you saying theres no dead air on bbc3 and bbc4.
THey can send 40 staff to china but not one OB man with a small camera and tripod to womens footie or netball. Has the beeb not offered the chance for minority sports to occupy the dead air themselves.
Like it or like it not al beeb has millions to waste on filming watervoles on some riverbank but does not even cover womens hockey.
Before the digger bought into footie you only saw a handfull of live games of footie on tv but now you get to watch every night.
Auntie couldnt wait to dump the cricket on 4 when england were crap. Now their ranked second its a whole different story.
Apart from tennis and athletics what womens sport does the beeb regularly cover?
oops should read 400
Martin:
If you look at Sky’s sports output it has lots of minority interest sports, in particular womens’ sports like Cricket, Netball & Football that the BBC isn’t interested in showing. Surely the BBC should be showing this stuff as part of its charter?
There’s a commercial imperative on the part of Sky and its associate companies, who operate in other places in the world like… well, just about everywhere, where these sports aren’t minority sport but are the majority sports. As an example, netball is the most popular sport for women in New Zealand and Australia, and so Sky and Fox have a commercial interest in outbidding people for the rights. What’s the public interest to match up that kind of money for the BBC if it’s a minority sport in the UK?
Similarly, with cricket, because Sky has so many markets in which cricket is a popular sport and because the ICC sell the rights as packages of matches and match series, it’s not economically sound to try and outbid international commercial broadcasters on these grounds. Added to which, News Corp also own large stakes in Asian TV infrastructure, so again, the commercial power Sky have on tap outstrips the BBC by many factors…
…whose remit is to broadcast for the interests of the British public, insofar as they’re not outstripped in financial capacities by truly global commercial interests. In the case of minority sports – and although they may be in the minority in the UK, they aren’t elsewhere – they are outstripped by more than the financial.
Aren’t some missing the point here? – this is not about the BBC, it’s about free-to-air rights, it’s about ITV, 4 and 5 just as much, and there are lists such as these in countries like Australia – it’s about culturally important sporting events being available to the vast majority of people
true. but dont beleive there were some pre satelite days where there was any more sport on free to air channels.There wasnt. There is more free sport on tv now than there ever was before bskyb.
and if auntie cant afford it its because they’ve wasted it on 500 to glasto and £40,000 moves to manchester
true – although one could point out the rise of technology and channels from around the same time, and that in those days sports such as horse racing and athletics were a staple – now there is virtually none on tv, but certainly if it wasn’t for global televising both english football and cricket would be a lot poorer
I’d be interested to see any free to air sport figures over the decades actually – see the stuff like racing and darts
The BBC should not be broadcasting any sport whatsoever !
Hi,
Could it be possible for a new open thread board please? 😀
Excuse me, but that’s a red herring. Hasan chose his victims because they were sitting there in his workplace. He wanted to kill people who were about to be deployed to fight against his Mohammedan brethren – whom he chose allegiance to over his countrymen and colleagues. The easiest place for him to find that kind of victim would be in the medical offices, where people about to be deployed are going through final processing.
That’s also where Hasan worked. He murdered not only soldiers, but his own medical co-workers. There is simply no mystery whatsoever about why he killed whom he killed. His motive was because they were there, and who they were.
If the ‘mystery motive’ is meant to refer to his choice of victims, that’s just as much BS as the rest of it.
Excuse me, but in case you missed the great Western invention called “reading”, they’re not talking about Hasan. They’re talking about John Allan Muhammed, the Beltway Sniper.
Oops my mistake. This guy only talked about his motives all the time.
but you’d think the BBC might be able to give us the evidence and let us decide for ourselves.
Unsure if that would sit comfortably with the dual requirements of a) enhancing the narrative and b) interpreting events
I listen to Michael Savage, the radio host who Jacqui Smith banned from Britain, and this is all he’s been talking about. The way he exposes the vermin in the media for what they are makes me chortle; but it’s actually quite disturbing how they make excuses for Islam, especially when you consider that Islam should be everything that these whiney pinkos hate, e.g. subjugation of women, flogging of rape victims, etc.
The West seems to be trying to commit suicide.
Are you any relation to Michael Foot?