Bonn: Clashes Between Hajis and Right-wingers

[Friedrich]

I heard from somebody who watches a lot of German TV that clashes took place between "Salafist Muslims" and the "right-wing" Pro NRW party in the German city of Bonn on the 05-05-2012.

I've struggled to get some English material to share, but it appears the clash itself was mostly between the Muslims and the German police, and two officers were seriously stabbed, and over 20 others injured.

Apparently it began when a local German party had a "drawing Mohammed" competition, and exercised their democratic right to voice their opinions in a legal demonstration. Only thirty protestors gathered to display their posters and critical views on Islam.

However, they were met by an estimated 600-strong force of Islamist counter-protesters, who were armed with clubs (and ostensibly other weapons).

The media now paints it as a case of violence between "extremists" (when the handful of original protestors were encouraged to leave by the police), and that the Salafists responded to "provocation".

That's a novel way of attacking the police in your host country!

Anyway, some of what I've gathered on the event:

Clashes in Bonn.

This article from Jihad Watch explains more, and has a clip with an English translation of the footage.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/05/mu...ee-speech.html

[Germaid]

You may find this thread interesting, it also covers the events in Bonn.

http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=149499

[Friedrich]

Oops, yeah I was wondering why it didn't seem covered on Skadi, and it didn't show on my searches, my apologies.

However it still might provide some insight on the aftermath, and how events are often twisted.
A fight between "extremists" when one side is the aggressor?

What will the liberal mainstream media do when Western ideological and sexual minorities are attacked?
Not necessarily even marching with radical politics, but just wanting to live their lives and contribute to society?
What will the liberals say then?
They're already twisting the discourse to accommodate what they like to call a "small Islamist sect".
A sect that will happily spit on the rights of others.
So who are the "fascist supporters" here?

I bet you the Salafists won't try this crap yet in the US.

What value do the Salafists attach to freedom of speech?
Seemingly none.
And yet the industry that relies on that right supports them in direct and implied ways.

[Friedrich]

Similar reports of twisted media rhetoric came out recently when Occupy Oakland clashed with what the media labelled as "white supremacists".

These "supremacists" were peaceful and had a permit to protest the genocide against South African whites, and in particular against white farmers in SA.

The mainstream media simply labelled the white group from the South Africa Project as "supremacists", and did not interview them, nor did it show their posters.

Instead, a bunch of anarchic and violent rabble justified their violence on the police by claiming "hate" deserves "hate".

What hate?
Protesting the torture and death of women and babies is hardly hate.

They can only be glad that they were not met by the Marxist, black police of the ANC, or Mugabe's Zanu-PF.

Occupy makes a point for white genocide?

[Slivers]

What evidence do they have that the victims of OWS were "white supremacist" as reported?

[Friedrich]

Here's some more footage from the South Africa Project vs. Occupy.
The victims of the violence were actually the police, as the racist blacks and just very dumb white "hippy" rabble kept up running battles after the peaceful SAP protest had dispersed, seemingly just for the anarchic thrill of the violence.
None of them know anything on SA, or the totalitarian and racist Marxism they violently support.

The protestors against white genocide said nothing racist whatsoever.

White realists vs. Occupy