The journalists and publications which implied the hit and run in Molenbeek this weekend was a ‘far right’ anti Islam attack had no evidence to suggest that it was as they reported, but they knew what story they wanted to write.
That’s why most hesitantly wrote “during” a “far right demonstration” instead of bluntly labelling the driver a “far right activist” as did the Daily Mail, the first publication to report on the story.
Instead of acknowledging the categorical error, or clearly reporting the truth as it emerged, however, the Mail quietly edited their original article, burying the factual change three quarters of the way down the page, and failing to issue a correction or clarification.
Their headline shifted from: “…Muslim Women Is Mown Down By Grinning Far-Right Activist”, to, “…By Grinning Driver…” (see above) and the critical new details only appeared in the sixth paragraph:
“Police later announced that they had arrested two men, believed to have been the car’s driver and passenger, who have been named as Redouane B. and Mohamed B – both of whom are thought to be residents of Molenbeek.”
Numerous other articles in the Independent, Express, New York Post and others are yet to be amended or followed up with the truth. Some, like Evening Standard, only published their misleading story this morning, after all the facts had become widely available.
Journalists who bothered to check with sources in Brussels were able to ascertain the man was not ‘far right’, but a local, Muslim teenager, a fact reported two days ago by those such as Channel 4’s Paraic O’Brien.
More at Breitbart
In the USA, after the Belgian attacks took place, a Muslim woman claimed a man on the bus tried to rip off her head cover then slashed her cheek, cutting her.
Turned out she had done the cutting herself and the rest of her story was bogus.
These men who ran over the woman might have had real car trouble.
I know when I had a power outage on my car, years ago, I grimaced as I tried to wrestle the vehicle out of traffic.