London Attack Just Case of 'Mental Illness'?

The public reacts skeptically to mental health explanation for stabbings by London man of Somali descent.

Public’s skepticism regarding mental health explanation for stabbings by man of Somali descent.

Another day. Another vicious attack against innocent civilians. The latest such attack occurred Wednesday evening in London at Russell Square, very near where a bomb detonated during the July 7, 2005 terrorist attack. A 19-year-old Norwegian-Somali man knifed an American woman to death and injured several other people, before being subdued and arrested by the police. The nationalities of the injured victims are British, Australian, Israeli and another American. The police are not completely ruling out that this attack was terror-related. However, in an all too familiar pattern that was demonstrated by the German police reaction to some of the recent attacks in that country, the British police are pointing to the attacker’s mental health as a “significant factor.” Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley of the Metropolitan Police told reporters: “While the investigation is not yet complete all of the work we have done so far, increasingly points to this tragic incident as having been triggered by mental health issues. Indeed at this time we believe it was a spontaneous attack and the victims were selected at random.”

The police added that there was no evidence as yet that the attacker had been radicalized. Witness accounts described the attacker as a madman going after people randomly.

Mental health is becoming the politically correct explanation used to quickly downplay a connection to Islamic terrorism even as ISIS supporters celebrated the latest attack in the “centre of Christendom.” ISIS supporters do not celebrate every random murder that occurs in Great Britain or elsewhere in the “centre of Christendom.”  

At least three details call into question whether the attack was entirely random and spur of the moment, in addition to the attacker’s Somali origin which almost guarantees that he is Muslim. Perhaps it is just a coincidence, but the attack did happen to take place only yards from the horrific 7/7 Islamic terror attack.  Secondly, the attacker’s targets were two Americans, an Israeli, an Australian and a Brit. That hardly seems random. Thirdly, he repeatedly stabbed the American woman who later died of her wounds. This evidences intense hate, not just a crazy man on a spontaneous stabbing spree.

Members of the British public are not buying the official “mental health” explanation. Here are two examples of skeptical tweets, as quoted by Breitbart:

How can you not know a man's name....but be so certain of his health issues @metpoliceuk@BBCNews

There is no such thing a terrorism nowadays only mental health problems. #Islamisnottheproblem

Another tweeter sarcastically surmised that the current media would have reported Germany’s invasion of Poland this way: “Thousands of mentally ill Germans cross border to attack Poles.”

Islamic attacks are becoming so frequent that they are being downplayed or characterized as random attacks that can happen anywhere. For example, there was hardly any publicity regarding an attack on a bus by Muslim migrants in Paris on July 28th in which they reportedly threatened the bus driver and burned down the bus, as one of the jihadists shouted “Allahu Akbar.”   Fortunately, the passengers were able to escape. 

Western Europe has welcomed more than a million asylum seekers since the beginning of 2015, many of them from the Middle East. The response has been a sharp uptick in jihadi terrorist attacks, some directed or inspired by ISIS. We now learn from an investigative report in the New York Times that there exists today a highly sophisticated “global network of killers, built by a secretive branch of ISIS.”  This includes a “secret service for European affairs.” A senior United States intelligence official and a senior American defense official have told the New York Times that ISIS has sent “hundreds of operatives” back to the European Union. A former ISIS operative from Germany who is now imprisoned near his home town of Bremen, told the New York Times that ISIS wants “to have loads of attacks at the same time in England and Germany and France.”

Jihadists have struck recently in Germany and France. It is not unreasonable to suspect that the latest London attack could also be the work of a jihadist. 

What is the response of the politically correct, see no evil-hear no evil crowd? They lecture us why we should open our borders to refugees from countries where Islamic terror is running rampant. They insist that Islam is solely a religion of peace, and condemn any notion of giving priority to those non-Muslim refugees who are the victims of jihadist driven genocide.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is where would-be asylum seekers are first registered and vetted for possible referral to a destination host country for resettlement. UNHCR is the prime international advocate for self-identified “refugees” seeking asylum. While the agency gives lip service to security concerns and the need to weed out terrorists, it operates on the premise that such asylum seekers, wherever they come from, including the Middle East, should be given the benefit of the doubt.

In 2015, the United States contributed $1.35 billion to UNHCR, and is on its way to exceeding that contribution this year. What we get in return is an organization that cannot be trusted to carry out its duties in a balanced and effective manner. Instead we get moralistic lectures, which President Obama, Prime Minister Trudeau, Chancellor Merkel and other politically correct government leaders are only too happy to echo.  

UNHCR seems to think that improved screening measures can be devised to exclude terrorists, “in conformity with the principles of necessity, proportionality and non-discrimination, and subject to judicial control.” It rejects profiling based on such factors as religion, nationality, ethnicity, or race. In doing so, it is helping the jihadists get away with their plan to insert their Islamic terrorists in the refugee flow. And it is not helping enough Christians who are the victims of genocide committed by jihadists in the Middle East, including Syria, precisely because they are Christians. 

The UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide defines the crime of genocide in profiling terms as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group."  The jihadists have profiled their victims based on religion. Christians and other non-Muslims are being slaughtered, raped, enslaved and forced from their homes because of their religion. What’s more, UNHCR’s referral process ends up being biased in favor of Muslims.  Christians and other non-Muslims fear entering the camps where UNHCR registers “refugees” because those camps themselves are not secure against jihadist attacks. In other words, UNHCR is not even taking sufficient protective measures to identify and bar jihadists from the “refugee” camps, and it is not doing enough to reach out to Christians and other religious minorities in places where they feel relatively safe. UNHCR’s failures in this regard end up producing reverse profiling that discriminates against Christians and other religious minorities seeking protection from Muslim jihadists operating freely in Muslim majority countries.

Indeed, UNHCR is not even able or willing to vet and continue to monitor the sources of donations it takes from non-governmental organizations and other private entities. One of its donors is the Saudi-based World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY), which contributed $99,973 to UNHCR so far during budget year 2016 and has engaged in a number of projects with UNHCR. The “Congressional Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001” produced a report in which WAMY is referred to specifically in newly declassified pages that have been released. The report stated that the FBI believes WAMY is “closely associated with funding and financing of international terrorist activities.” 

The Obama administration meanwhile is ahead of schedule towards meeting its target of admitting 10,000 Syrian refugees to the United States before the end of next month. Obama is preparing for a UN summit on large movements of refugees and migrants, which will undoubtedly call for even more open borders.

The London attacker’s precise motivations remain to be determined. It is certainly possible for him to be mentally ill and a jihadist at the same time. Indeed, some would say that the two go together. However, what surely qualifies as insanity are the fantasies about Islam and ISIS held by UN leaders, Obama and other like-minded refugee advocates. They want to admit many thousands more Syrian and other refugees from jihadist havens without a very robust vetting process that does not exist today. That is truly crazy!