Knockout in Oosterhout

Last month a 25-year-old man was set upon by “youths” in Oosterhout, a town near Rotterdam known for its cultural enrichment. The rambunctious youngsters knocked the unfortunate man to the ground and kicked him in the head until he was unconscious.

Four suspects have now been arrested, but as you can see from a quick glance at the news stories (even if you don’t read Dutch), the teenage perpetrators are not named, so no Mohammed Coefficient can be assigned to the case.

Anyone want to take bets on the amount of cultural enrichment involved here?

The following video was broadcast on Dutch TV before the suspects were apprehended. Many thanks to SimonXML for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Transcript:


00:04   This is the Klappijstraat, the street for going out in Oosterhout.
00:08   The youth in the white shirt and open jacket is the victim.
00:12   Now pay attention to the youth behind him; the first blow has already struck.
00:16   One of the youths around him gives a sign to the others that it’s about to start.
00:20   The youth is more or less trapped by the group. And then it all goes wrong.
00:24   He gets more heavy blows to the head, but that’s not all.
00:28   The blows come raining down. The youth still tries to defend himself,
00:32   but he has no chance against this much violence. He’s pushed,
00:36   kicked and hit from all sides. But now watch this.
00:40   While he’s lying on the ground,
00:44   someone stamps on his head and kicks him. And then it’s all over.
00:48   The youth tries to stand up again, and then loses consciousness.
00:52   Lots of people saw this happen. If you are one of them,
00:56   please call us now.

6 thoughts on “Knockout in Oosterhout

  1. The Rotterdam story sounds like the way news is being manipulated by the new PC clique in Australia. The media have been running with the story ‘aboriginal youth bashed by police’ for weeks. As if a person’s race matters in an assault case. You wouldn’t even pick him as an aborigine!

    If I was the victim they wouldn’t write ‘a white man was assaulted…’ No, the clock is turning the other way downunder.

    http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/candid-camera-video-footage-shows-police-accused-of-attacking-youth-20130218-2enj7.html

    http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/candid-camera-video-footage-shows-police-accused-of-attacking-youth-20130218-2enj7.html

  2. This and other clips you’ve shown before seem to resemble an activity we saw
    occasionally in the UK in the 1970s called Paki-bashing, although it was more like
    a fight then , unlike this which is pure blood-sport, hunting people down. The attackers looked like Afghani / Paki / Turk types and they clearly attacked a
    weedy looking guy. There’s probably a sexual angle to this, like gay-bashing. It was clearly a racial attack also as the guy was White. We all know the racial angle won’t get a look in in court and the gang will be dealt with lightly. Shame really, I thought it was immoral to attack a weaker person. [Expletive], I was forgetting, Moslems don’t bother with irrelevancies like morality.

  3. This video bears close analysis for it discloses a textbook modus operandi of group attackers upon a solo individual. People in law enforcement or working in the criminal justice system in Australia watching it would immediately assume FROM THE MODUS OPERANDI ALONE (sorry, I would prefer to italicise or underline as upper-casing is generally the mark of the, shall we say, overexcited) that the attackers were Lebanese Muslims: the social and behavioural equivalent of the Netherlands’ Moroccans. This exact type of ambush-attack is played out every day and night in urban Australia. It is always a hyena-like pack of many targeting a solo man or, less frequently but more ominously, a couple (especially if the woman is attractive). And whether the man is craven or defiant matters not.

    A tight knot of three largish males, with some smaller ones at the periphery, follow a largish solitary man who walks down the street with some confidence, indeed something of a slight swagger. Contra one of those messages above, he is not “weedy” and his body language is not stereotypically that of a “gay” man. One of the three runs at the solitary man and executes the classic hit and run strike from behind. That first assailant then runs ahead and turns around to challenge the oncoming solo man who plainly intends to defend himself against his assailant, not necessarily immediately aware he is being ambushed by a gang.

    The first assailant bounces around in poor mimicry of “shaping up” in boxing terms as if he is welcoming a one-on-one fight. In reality he is marking time until his second and third associates can casually form up behind the assaulted man to box him into a triangle. The victim sees numbers two and three and moves to the side evidently searching for an exit strategy. Number One advances upon him throws a wide-swinging thus ineffectual punch at the victim. The victim throws a more skilled punch back at him, only to be kicked from behind by Number Two. Number One tries (again after Number Two pushes the victim in the shoulder and calls up the rest of the gang ) then Number Three kicks the victim from behind – typical. Numbers One, Two and Three then set upon the victim. A fourth, slightly smaller than the other three, man now joining in – confident in the overwhelming numbers that he is at no risk of harm. Whilst he is still standing the victim is knocked to the ground by a smaller again fifth assailant by means of a run up and flying leap. With the victim now on the ground and damaged an even smaller sixth man runs up and jumping stomps on his head. Thereafter lying motionless on the ground and seriously injured – not least by the running and jumping head stomp which alone could have killed him – the victim is kicked repeatedly by several of the pack. The cowardice is almost as sickening as the callousness of the overall attack.

    Under the traditional criminal code of the Anglosphere, the one who jumped on the victim’s head should be charged with infliction of grievous bodily harm if not attempted murder (this assumes that the victim lives, often the brain swelling and bleeding after such vicious assaults results in the victim’s death) – the former attracting a maximum 25 year jail sentence. And all of the gang charged with malicious wounding. Those that kicked him whilst he lay prostrate getting higher sentences. Let’s wait and see how few years jail the six assailants get.

    If the Netherlands permitted people to carry firearms, the victim could have, after being first struck, pulled his weapon out and threatened the gang. It is possible he became aware a minute or so earlier that he was bring followed down the street by an ethnic gang, in which case he could have turned, produced his weapon and told them to leave him alone and go away. They would have most likely scattered to the four winds in either case. Gun control proponents would argue:

    a) In my first case the victim, in anger, might have shot the man who hit him. This is extremely unlikely as the vast majority of people would be happy just to have deterred a gang assault (thereby protecting themselves from further violence) and being able to continue on with their evening unmolested. Shooting one of the gang would open up a whole arduous, time-consuming and expensive involvement with police, probable criminal charges which may lead to conviction and jail term.

    b) In my second case the intended victim might produce gun and fire it without being hit. However only a mentally unstable person would shoot anybody in that scenario. The vast majority of people would would be happy just to have deterred a gang assault and being able to continue on with their evening unmolested.

    c) the assaulting gangs may also be carrying weapons and all that may well result would be a shoot out resulting in multiple deaths and woundings. The flaw in this is that it is our victim who first produces a gun so he has the advantage in time so to speak. He has the opportunity to shoot the first person who he sees going for a weapon. True he may be shot at wounded, possibly killed, but one must ask themselves: would you rather be subjected to that sort of CERTAIN horrific assault or run the risk of POSSIBLY being shot. Those that answer the latter without a moment’s pause simply have no concept of how horribly painful and damaging the physical and psychological results of being subjected to such an vicious pack assault can be. Often victims have to deal with the results of the physical wounds and the psychological consequences for the rest of their lives.

    If one’s concern extends to the welfare of the members of the gang that attacked him, ie reasoning that they don’t deserve to be shot just because they go out at night in packs searching the streets to find and ambush innocent strangers and kick/beat them into unconsciousness (with reckless disregard as to whether the victim dies or not). My simple answer is: think that through carefully and you are likely to arrive at the conclusion that yes they do.

    The reality however is that these type of gangs roam the streets looking for easy victims who they can kick and punch, not to engage in firearms fights with them. Its all machismo highjinks and youthful fun for them. The reason for the prevalence of ethnic gangs terrorizing the native populations of European cities is precisely because it is a low-risk activity for the terrorizers – the native populations being unarmed is a major factor in their risk assessment as there is only a small chance of being apprehended and even if convicted short jail sentences in comfortable prisons.

  4. Julius makes good points there. The ethnic gangs are rapidly learning to fight us using our own ‘liberal’ weapons of tolerance mixed with politically correct strategies. Here in Australia our police in Melbourne and Sydney are constantly under fire for ‘racial profiling’. There’s an enquiry going on now in Melbourne as I write.
    In certain areas with high crime rates police are constantly alert to young ethnic men carrying knivers, congregating in parks and entertainment centres, planning mischief or worse. It’s natural for police to prefer pre-emptive strategies before someone gets hurt, so they pull these people over for a frisk search. That’s profiling!!!!
    It’s only ‘profiling’ because of the high proven risk of trouble in those particular areas by those particular ethnic groups.
    Of course, the human rights fifth column lawyers feed off these complaints as they deliver ‘per diem’ fees for otherwise unemployed professional petitioners. The lefty media love it cause they attract a larger audience. Everyone wins…except common sense which is being dunned into the ground!

  5. Expect more of these “events” in the Netherlands. Penalties being handed out for earlier beatings (no, this wasn’t the first) are laughably lenient (often no more than giving the perps house arrest overnight for a few weeks. “you’re grounded” is not exactly something you’d expect a judge to tell someone, but that’s what’s happening).

    I almost hope one of the victims dies and there’s a public outcry over the way police and courts are treating this, but I’m afraid even if a victim dies people will be too scared for their own safety to dare to speak out openly.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>