The Brussels Journal’s Paul Belien reports serial rioting in Brussels, in a post titled “Third Night of Ramadan Rioting in Capital of Europe”:

….Around 8:30pm last night violence erupted again in Brussels, the capital of Europe. The riots centered on the Brussels Marollen quarter and the area near the Midi Train Station, where the international trains from London and Paris arrive. Youths threw stones at passing people and cars, windows of parked cars were smashed, bus shelters were demolished, cars were set ablaze, a youth club was arsoned and a shop was looted. Two molotov cocktails were thrown into St.Peter?s hospital, one of the main hospitals of central Brussels….
The immigrant youths claim that they are upset by the death of Fay?al Chaaban, a 25-year old criminal, in a Brussels prison last Sunday. Yesterday morning the authorities announced they would hold a meeting with the youths to hear their grievances about security in prison, but the meeting, which was due last night, could not take place because of the riots.
The authorities are especially nervous since the Belgian municipal elections are being held on Sunday October 8th. It is likely that the elections will be won by anti-immigrant, ?islamophobic? parties. Since ramadan will not be over on October 8th and many immigrants might perceive a victory of the indigenous right (as opposed to their own far-right) as an insult, Muslim indignation over the election results in major cities may spark serious disturbances. According to a poll published today the Vlaams Belang party is set to win 38.6% of the vote in Antwerp (compared to 33,0% in the previous municipal elections six years ago).

Via Michelle Malkin, who said that her Yahoo search revealed nothing, but who links EU Referendum’s “When is a riot not a riot?” (Such questions tend to attract me as the smell of meat attracts a dog.) Apparently, a riot is not a riot when it:

  • “involves Muslims in Brussels, at Ramadan”;
  • occurs on the eve of an election; and
  • is “in its third day and has spread to torching shops and other buildings, including firebombing the local hospital.”
  • Whether this non-reporting is understandable in Europe can be debated. Perhaps those “in the know” don’t want the rioting to have an effect on the election, and perhaps they consider it the business of the news media to decide on what should be allowed to influence people’s thinking, and what should not be. I don’t think that’s the role of those entrusted with keeping the public informed about current events, but then, I grew up in the American tradition of fearless investigative journalism, Watergate, and all that stuff.
    I mean, there’s no way to keep things out of the paper in this country with all its fearless journalists, right? That’s why I was so surprised that Malkin’s Yahoo earlier search had turned up nothing.
    Anyway, as of today there is a Reuters report which has now made it into the Washington Post as well as Yahoo. However, the apparent news blackout earlier reminded me that I had read nothing about the riot in the Philadelphia Inquirer over the past few days. Hmmm…
    I thought maybe I had missed it (I did spend a day traveling to DC to attend the Pajamas Media panel on partisanship), so I gave them the benefit of the doubt. But when I searched “Belgium” at their web site, nothing came up.
    So now I have to ask a basic question.
    What is it that would make a riot — in the EU capital, shortly before an election — unworthy of being considered news in this country?
    I’m trying to be fair here, but I’m realizing that the question I just asked looks like a rhetorical question. Should it be? Or should we have a right to assume that relevant news will be reported?
    Who in hell gets to decide if and when things get reported?
    I know I’ve asked this before, and I know I’ll ask it again, but whose news is it?
    I’m still trying to figure out why there’s zero reported information on the identity of a bearded man with acne who took female hostages in a Colorado school and killed one plus himself. Considering that the shooting took place yesterday and the gunman is dead, seems highly probable that there are reporters who know the details but aren’t providing them. I don’t see how this could involve privacy, as they’ve identified the victim of the shooting, but not the shooter. More here.
    Not knowing is frustrating. Maybe I should just assume everything will eventually be reported, and chalk it all up to the slowness of the news cycle.
    UPDATE: The shooter has been identified as Duane Morrison, a 54 year old man who lived in his car. It would not surprise me if the man has had a long history of mental illness. (He obviously has some sort of record, as the picture is a mug shot showing the man in the usual orange jumpsuit.) Plenty of people like that who used to be in hospitals now fester on the streets until they explode.