James Taranto, of the Wall Street Journal, suggested that Enright’s attack may very well have been a “false flag” operation of his own making. In other words, the Depraved Leftist may have intended to slash the driver’s throat, then escape, leaving the impression that a Conservative / Tea Party Member / Republican had done the dirty deed. He was caught though and so this has changed everything. You can listen to the entire segment here and decide for yourself.
Come now; I like conspiracy theories as much as any and all but I think this is a bit much.
After all, to have carried out a really good false flag operation, there ought to have been, ahh, inadvertently, some Beck or Fox or Palin brochures left behind in the cab. Or a well-thumbed copy of some Tea Party rally poster. Something. Anything.
Is it the case that the left cannot accept that anyone on ‘their side’ has any objections to Muslims? That they and they alone, are the embodiment of tolerance, purity and whatever else? That they are..ah..infallible?
Difficult to tell if it was an oorly executed/planned amateurish false-flag or just a zealot trying to silence an enemy….or both……
Either way it is further evidence that lefties are basically violent and un-principled.
ET, I believe you have it right. Furthermore, those who do not agree with leftist liberal values in Canada are considered bad Canadians.
I think ET hit the nail on the head, but it’s reasoning that is far to succinct for any leftist to accept. If the false flag theory becomes accepted, the right is giving the left a free pass.
The lefty radicals are well known for “false flag” operations. From Tea Party Nazi’s to throwing rocks at Dem campaign centers.
Who said this guy was smart? Sounds a little looney to me actually, enough so that it’s quite conceivable that he would have attempted a “false flag” event and not had the faculties to do it right.
Maybe the guy is just bat*h&t crazy. It would explain his political views as well.
Steven>
Point taken. I know if I was an Asian cabby I’d poop my pants if I found the leering patronizing smile of Warren Katskilla in my rearview mirror!
This one is as simple as Stephen says, IMHO.
I’ll be very surprised to find out otherwise.
There are some things that can be over-analyzed and Michael’s reason for his attack is one of them.
With you ET. While I wouldn’t die of shock if it were true, all we have here is speculation in the absence of any proof.
It would seem that his action is totally out of character, unless the false flag option is raised and at that point it makes sense.
That having been said, his comments, assuming them to be accurate, would indicate the Nutso Factor.
Perhaps this little leftist twit was angry at Muslims for making his president look bad.
Maybe it was just some bad drugs.
Perhaps he is too stupid to realize that Muslims, especially the radical violent ones are good friends of the left.
Not all leftists are politically sophisticated and so no one can understand their politics. It’s all too stupid for anyone who thinks logically.
Gellen,
Simple possibly.
But narrow the coincidences a little. This guy was a well known lefty activist, currently embroiled in the “fight FOR the mosque” controversy.
Snapping in true lefty fashion is not remarkable, but his target was. Granted its not hard to find a Muslim driving around New York, but an unradicalized one would be.
My bet is that either the guy had it planned out as a false flag or he snapped if he found this cabby wasn’t radical enough.
Imagine this liberal twinks horror if when riding around expecting some sort of kiss ass thank you for his efforts in fighting “the man” for Islam, this cabby said something like “I could give a shiit about this mosque, I have kids to feed”?
The claim that because he was in A’stan as an outreacher he has PTSD will follow. The horror he saw made him into an invader American soldier and he acted as such. Bet that would sound good in legalese, in entitlement country.
Michell malkin has a good rundown of lefty false flags, and wingnuttery.
http://michellemalkin.com/2010/03/26/how-the-left-fakes-the-hate-a-primer/
I am with Speedy on this. The whole thing, although carried out by a leftist supporter of the mosque, will be twisted around and made to b ethe fault of the right
There is another fact that hasn’t been mentioned yet. That Muslim NYC cab driver opposed the building of the mosque:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/the_cabby_attack_VpY81VsHp8ryhO46pIxGzN#ixzz0xjB732Pg
We already know that the Left Wing Whacko asked the cabby a series of questions dealing with the cabby’s faith. Maybe besides that, the Whacko brought up the building of the mosque and when the cabby said he was against it, that set the whacko off.
The guy most likely is a bit unstable, potentially mentally ill. That’s all.
This is not as stupid as it sounds. In fact its the logical end to Liberal progressive thinking.
Kill the thing you support to sow the winds of chaos among your enemies. Than justify it by the “ends Justify the means” Marxist mantra. By one sacrifice he could make a dream happen. His dream of Tolerance. Than he can count himself as an agent of Change.
Instant Hero, of course only to himself.
We had a guy at work who tried to burn down one of our parks. Why? He thought he would be called back to work earlier.
He was caught red handed. Fired.
These nut jobs never figure out, no good ever comes from evil.
JMO
You can see the trailer of the film he was working on which will give you an idea of what he was doing in Af’stan.
Cut and paste if you’re interested:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLPAAIJWIBo
From the N.Y. Post:
The documentary he was working on was “completely nonpolitical,” Enright told the newspaper. “It’s just showing the young people who are spearheading our foreign policy. They’re doing what I don’t have to do.”
He was supposedly known by fellow students to have a serious drinking problem.
On politico.com, Ben Smith said:
The alleged anti-Muslim cabbie stabber made “nonsensical” statements to police after his arrest, a law enforcement source told me just now, adding to the puzzle over what drove Michael Enright to the apparent hate crime.
A photo of him with an Af’ghan child is on http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/what_we_know_about_michael_enright.php
and he looks like a perfectly normal young man.
I know demon rum does strange things but turning you from someone that normal to someone that mad? Is it possible?
“I could give a shit about this mosque, I have kids to feed”?
Posted by: Knight 99
Sounds about right to me. The whole thing. It would have been the regular human reaction. Cabby’s are notoriously opinionated.
Sultan Knish’s Friday roundup provides some very good coverage of this strange event and the despicable political opportunism the despicable Bloomberg has engaged in.
I must say, I rather like the theory that this young liberal [film school student, after all] mosque-supporting nutter may have been unpleasantly surprised to encounter a muslim who thought outside the ghetto-box. As we all know, liberals tend to see all official victim groups as monolitic in their ideological orientation and can be extremely angry when they encounter an off-narrative specimen of the group. The left’s view of muslim apostates A Hirsi Ali and Wafa Sultan, and the NAACP’s view of black conservatives spring to mind.
All I know is, whatever this punk’s motivations or malfunctions may be, there’s this story on AlReuters:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE67Q5BW20100827
“Ground Zero Muslim center may get public financing”.
So the continuing media focus on Michael the nutjob is probably an attempted diversion. The city government of New York may be doubling down on “F- U!” to the people of NYC. Whose interests does that serve, I wonder?