As soon as I saw that there was a multi-casualty, multi-death stabbing attack in the German city of Wuerzburg, I knew instinctively that this was not the work of a mentally ill Methodist. When I viewed the video below that Old Holborn reposted and saw the offender waving a knife around and being fought off by brave ordinary German citizens, noted that it was Friday and at a time when the Mosques could be having Friday prayers, I thought, this can’t be anything other than an Islam inspired attack. However I waited for confirmation of my suspicions just to make sure.
It turns out that, as expected, this attack, which took the lives of three innocent German people, was the result of a rampage by a mentally disturbed Muslim. According to press reports the attacker, who is reported to be a Somali who has been in Germany since Chancellor Angela Merkel opened Germany’s borders to so called ‘refugees’ in 2015, entered a department store, asked a female shop assistant to show him where the knives were, grabbed a knife off of the display and killed her. The Somali savage then went on to stab two other people to death. The savage then ran into the street where he was confronted by brave German civilians, some of whom are said to have thrown chairs at him to get him to run into an alley where he was later apprehended by police. The savage Somali was shot in the leg by German police but was not seriously injured.
Although some of the reports state that this Somali savage was under the care of mental health professionals, his mental health may be less of a factor in this attack than his adherence to Islam. Reports of the incident state that the savage stabber shouted out the Islamic war cry of ‘Allah hu Akbar’ during the attack.
This is not the first time that this city has had to contend with one of Germany’s imported Muslims suddenly going ‘full Islam’ and engaging in ‘violence for Allah’. According to Euronews, ‘asylum seekers’ going all stabby has happened here before. Euronews said:
Wuerzburg, an ancient city of 130,000 people some 100 km (62 miles) south-east of Frankfurt, was five years ago the scene of a knife attack on a train by a 17-year-old Pakistani asylum seeker in which five people were injured, two seriously.
Merkel’s decision to allow entry to Germany of some of the worst individuals from some of the worst cultures and nations on the planet has brought and will continue to bring untold misery to Germany and to Germans. You could not want for a better example of the perils of pathological altruism and the bad outcomes of political virtue-signalling for the citizens of a nation that indulges in such things than Merkel’s choice to allow into Germany hundreds of thousands of people who for cultural and religious reasons hate Germany and the West and desire the deaths of German citizens.
The “mental health” issues is still the number one deflection technique to deflect attention away from orthodox Muslims doing what orthodox Islam teaches.
Of course on one level it is true: you must be “sick in the head” to cold-bloodedly murder a bunch of people; but it only ever Muslims who suffer this particular form of mental illness, so provided people do not join the repeated dots (orthodox Islam = mental sickness) yet again Islam escapes censure.
Compare and contrast:
If it was a “far right White supremacist” mental health would not enter – unless they were an escapee from a secure mental hospital – their actions would be *rightly* called racist, evil etc.; their ideology would also, *rightly*, be deemed evil, twisted, etc. and no excuses would be made for them or their beliefs by the MSM or anyone else.
Yet Islamic ideology always seems to get a “pass” on responsibility for its outworkings, whether it is Israel/Palestine or Jihadist terror in Europe, the default position seems to be to blame anyone else but the Muslim perpetrator and the ideology s/he espouses.
I suspect part of the problem is that as a society “the West” in general has convinced itself that such Muslims are “extremists” or (mis-using the terms) “fundamentalists” or “radicals” (as in “nut-job, fruitcake fringe loonies”) and “Islamists” (whatever that means), we describe their ideology as “political Islam” as if this were a separate entity to Islam whereas the political aspects of Islam are intrinsic to Islam and the warp to the weft of the more religious aspects.
One reason for this is probably the atheist/secular nature of much of our societies. If you regard religion as a “fairy story” then you can’t ascribe religion as the motive for anything, the underlying cause *must* be something else; poverty, alienation, drink, drugs, (How many non-Muslims when under the influence go on murderous rampages? Virtually none is the answer.) lack of opportunity, a bad hair day, anything BUT religion.
In reality they are simply *orthodox* Muslims who have decided that the time is right for sword-Jihad (Jihad bis Saif) against the Kaffir.
That is still relatively rare in the UK, but we have seen very overt Jihad-of-the-hand ((jihad bil yad) in the case of the The Teacher at Batley in which an organised “mob” of Muslims intimidated The Teacher out of his job and the school, local and national politicians into grovelling to their demands.
I have little doubt that this most recent of Islam inspired stabbers is mentally ill, there seems to be a solid record that tags this one as a fraggle. But, lots of people are mentally ill and some have religiousity as one factor of their mental illness (if you had met as many Christians as I have who have become deranged from consuming too much of the book of Revelation, then you will know what I mean), but they don’t, on the whole, go out and kill people because of their religious delusions. Yes we have had the odd Christian mental case who has killed people because they believed that person they killed was possessed by a demon, but nothing like the extent we see from the followers of Islam. Mental illness is a factor in some of these jihadist killings but it is not the whole answer, the rest of the answer does I believe lie in Islamic teachings. These teachings permit and sometimes encourage behaviour that in civilised Judaeo-Christian cultures are called madness.
I most certainly and wholeheartedly agree that the authorities in various Western nations, eager to cover up their error of treating Islam as if it was a genuine religion of peace, use the excuse of mental illness to assign a motive to perpetrators of attacks that have their roots not in mental illness, but in Islamic theology and culture itself. I certainly agree that there is a dichotomy in how the State and the media treat attacks according to where they come from. A ‘far right’ violent attacker with known mental illness is in media reports and court proceedings not normally described as a person with mental illness on the contrary the ideology that this person follows is highlighted. The opposite policy seems to be in place when a mentally ill Muslim commits an offence that is plainly and clearly motivated by their interpretation of Islamic theology.
I think that you are 100% correct when you say that Western secularism is part of the problem in assessing religious extremism. If you are secular then it is difficult to understand the religious mind and the motivations that religion can give a person to do acts that are good or ill. It’s quite possible that if there was more religious belief in the West then the West would be better at understanding religious motivation for stuff like terrorism. For example: The average atheist I encounter when I’m out for a drink can’t comprehend why on earth I have a prayer for the welcome deliverance of beer, they just drink the beer and think nothing else of it, but because I have a religious belief it does not occur to me to drink the beer without saying the appropriate blessing for beer. If the average atheist can’t understand why I thank the Eternal One for beer how much more difficult is it for the average atheist to understand the religious motivations for terror?
I agree the Batley situation is becoming extremely worrying and one where the most extreme in the Orthodox Islamic community are calling the shots. The only good thing to come out of the current political shit show which is the by-election there is it has focused attention on how Labour is now an unsustainable alliance between the Metroleft and some quite extreme currents within Islam.
I feel that I need to express my amusement about the title of this post. Now in my sixties, I have been an atheist since my teens, but I come from a family of Methodists. With a nod to Douglas Adams I would describe Methodists as mostly harmless. We did have a great uncle who was a bit of a hypocrite, being as he was both a hellfire preacher and a perv with a penchant for pubescent girls. But yes, mostly they were harmless with their jihadi jumble sales and their slaughter the infidel garden parties. Looking back I think that I took from them a kind and generous nature and a love of pipe organs.
Nice one. The use of the term ‘not a Methodist’ is a riposte to the Left who dishonestly claim that all modern religions are violent and Methodism is mostly harmless and although not a specifically pacifist group like the Mennonites doesn’t seek out or encourage violence.
In the meantime, our EU “allies” seem determined to pile on as much agony onto British holiday-makers, tourists, visitors, while actively exporting as many savages and rubber boat jihadis as possible, and we stupid British facilitate the trafficking of these almost exclusively hostile invaders.
A lot of people are getting more and more angry at the Channel situation a situation that the EU is exacerbating.
There does seem to be a dichotomy there. They don’t want the Britons who might spend some money in the EU nations and are inevitably going to try to make trade more difficult,but have no problem with pushing fake ‘refugees’ across the Channel to the UK. The rubber boat invaders are not refugees, they are grifters searching out the best deal for welfare or a willingness to give them support and freebies. Many of them also, as you say, are supporters of violent religious extremism who can be proven to have brought their extremism to both mainland Europe and the UK. I’ve met enough genuine refugees from conflicts as diverse as World War II through to the Yugoslavian conflict and those who fled,for various reasons, from Uganda to know that these genuine refugees are more than happy and grateful that the UK has given them asylum and have repaid our generosity by not being a burden and making the best contribution they can. There’s a big difference between the genuine refugees and the rubber boat invaders. Genuine refugees don’t whine about the small stuff, the rubber dinghy invaders do and that should tell us a great deal.