Horror is really the only word to describe the murderous rampage that took place in the early hours of yesterday morning in the city of Nottingham. Three people were killed and others were injured in the attack with one of those injured still reported to be in a critical condition in hospital.
Two of those murdered by this savage killer were 19 year old university students whilst the other was a van driver who was attacked by the savage in order to steal the vehicle which he then used to mow down innocent people. Police turned out in force quite swiftly once the initial reports of the crimes came in and managed to arrest the alleged perpetrator. The perpetrator is alleged to be a 31 year old male from West Africa who had come to the UK as a teenager and who it has been reported has a history of violence.
It’s not clear at the time of writing what the motivation of this savage was. We do not know whether this scumbag was merely yet another thug who Britain has allowed in but failed to remove or whether there was some political or religious motivation behind it. Although more information will no doubt emerge over the coming days and weeks and, of course, at the trial of the alleged murderer, it would probably be good to remember that West Africa is a place where Jihadists run wild. West Africa is the scene of a slow motion genocide of Christians in places like Nigeria, where jihadists have an enormous amount of power. Although much of Britain’s prior Islamic terrorism problem has been centred on extremists whose heritage is in Pakistan and North Africa, the involvement of West Africans in terror attacks is not unknown, indeed Fusilier Lee Rigby was murdered by two Nigerian heritage converts to Islam. We don’t know that the Nottingham Horror was the result of jihadism but this incident should certainly cause us to consider the too often ignored problem of Islamic extremism in West Africa and its nations.
None of those afflicted by this outrage would never have expected and should have never expected that that they or their loved ones would die so horribly or be injured by such a worthless and contemptible savage, which this murderer is. If the reports that the alleged murderer was a West African who had been let into Britain legally are true then the British political and administrative Establishment should share some blame in this horror. Maybe if the UK government had kept this man out of the UK there would not have been the horror and grief that he has caused. At the very least we should ask why this man was still resident in the United Kingdom even though he was known to have a history of violence. If it is true that this individual came to the UK as a migrant and then picked up a record for violence then we need to ask why was not he removed from the UK once this violent tendency started to be noticed? If I rocked up in Israel as an immigrant, was given citizenship or the equivalent of leave to remain and then engaged in criminal violence then I would expect it to be the case that the Israelis removed me from their country. Unfortunately that is not the case for the United Kingdom. In the UK a person can come here, commit violent offences and not be removed from the nation as they should be.
Every country and every society has its violent elements or anti-social elements and these are issues that the criminal justice and policing systems have to deal with and manage. Controlling these violent elements is a tough job for the state to do and is something that requires considerably amounts of resources to do so. But the big question here is why should we tolerate the violent rubbish from the rest of the world as well as having to protect the law abiding British subject from Britain’s home grown and home produced savagery? The answer is that we should not. Those who migrate here and who garner a record for violence, should be removed as soon it is clear that violence is not something that is going to be easy to remove from such an individual.
Three people have lost their lives in truly awful circumstances and others have been injured in the horrific Nottingham attack. If it turns out to be the case that the killer was someone whom the government let in and then failed to remove once his record of violence became known, then there’s no way on earth should Britons take the ‘don’t look back in anger’ route, as has been encouraged by the Government and media following other terrorist atrocities, but instead call the government to account about what looks like yet another immigration failure by the British government. This is especially the case should it emerge that the motivations for this case are not based in the moral failings or mental health of the alleged assailant but are instead religiously or politically motivated.
I conclude by praying that the memory of those killed be for a blessing and may those hurt either mentally or physically or both by this savagery visited on the streets of Nottingham find healing and wholeness.
He had a history of mental illness and was known to the authorities. This sounds more like a mental health failure and has absolutely nothing to do with his race, colour or country or origin.
The ‘mental health’ claim still does not take away from the fact that person who Britain allowed in (and could have been just about anybody from any race or culture or nation) garnered a reputation and a record for violence yet was not removed. Maybe if he’d been removed earlier when the his violent nature started to be noticed then three people might not be dead. The reason for bringing up West Africa is that is the site of what has been called the forgotten jihad a jihad that has been mostly ignored by the mainstream media in recent years. It was always a possibility that one day West African Jihadism would make its presence felt in Western nations like the UK. We shall have to wait and see to find out whether this murderous rampage was the result of a person doing evil for the sake of it or a person doing evil in order to advance a cause.
I’d be more willing to accept the mental illness excuse if it had not been so overused in connection to similar incidents. I tend to agree with a comment made recently by a security specialist who appeared on GB News who said that these incidents are the result of multiple factors and to concentrate on the MH aspects of them is insulting to those living with MH issues and who are generally a threat to nobody but themselves. The MH excuse is trotted out all too often by those who don’t want to see the motivations of mass killers like this to be looked at too closely especially in countries such as the UK that faces an Islamic terror threat that is out of proportion to other threats.
BTW my comments have nothing to do with race and everything to do with culture. Individuals are of course equal but the same cannot be said for cultures. Some cultures are better than others.
Julian – you have neither the knowledge nor the authority to start issuing blanket denials. It’s quite a leap you make from a theoretical “sounds like mental health” to a categorical assertion that it’s “nothing to do with”. I note that you carefully leave “religion” out of your list of things that it “has absolutely nothing to do with”. I don’t care whether it was Islam OR mental health – as a violent foreign criminal he had absolutely no business being here.
It appears to me that a “history of mental health problems” is Police code for “capable of random acts of extreme violence coupled with a very short fuse”.
Actually its a standard trope that is trotted out when an orthodox Muslim goes full Jihadist.
And arguably it is true: you must have “mental health problems” to murder random people, even if the root cause of them is orthodox Islamic ideology.
Agree that the term ‘suffers from mental health problems’ has been used to describe jihadists. That’s not to say that some jihadists are not insane, the Enfield beheader was a madman who converted to Islam, they are but that doesn’t mean that the MH problem and not Islam was the the key detonator for the violent outburst.
Why should we take basket cases from the third world?. We have enough home grown mental illnesses We send more than enough aid to these hell holes. If someone comes in legally and commits a crime they should be removed. If they are here illegally they have committed a crime and should be removed.
If we can’t remove them for any reason a prison in the Shetlands, one of the uninhabited islands, should be built. We can make it open and they can stay there until we find a country that is stupid enough to take them or the decide to move home.
Fuck em all. I’ve had enough. Just got my P60 and seen how much tax I am paying and that doesn’t include all the tax I pay just on day to day living.
Yes, but we also need to consider I think that the other three injured in the attack are in an NHS hospital being possibly cared for by legal migrant medical staff working within the NHS. I do not see how this possibility and probability can be ignored?
That’s like arguing that we shouldn’t be too hasty to denigrate pitbulls because of all the good that border collies and Labrador guide dogs do…
That’s a very good analogy Julia. Just because we have legally migrated and law abiding medical staff from overseas, doesn’t mean that the sort of imported dross that come here to take the piss or commit crime or terrorism doesn’t exist. Whilst I accept the commandment to ‘love the stranger because you were strangers in the land of Egypt’ that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t use common sense when interpreting it. We should not be welcoming the strangers that want us dead we really should not.
Agree that the concept of being humane does not extend to taking in violent madmen from violent societies. All the effort that has been extended on managing the imported violent fraggles is resources that we can’t spend because they are not available, on dealign with our own home grown problematic individuals.
I gather that this particular head case should have been got chucked out of the UK years ago. Be interesting to see what comes up when the trial starts.
The more this goes on the more my suspicions are raised that the perp is of the “beared savage” variety.
We now know his ethnicity, age, mental condition, length of stay in the UK, residence status etc., but NOT – I repeat NOT – his name.
Add to that that at the vigil [quote BBC] Mr Webber’s mother Emma, who said: “Please hold no hate that relates to any colour, sex or religion. … The “monstrous individual” responsible for the deaths … this evil person is just that. He is just a person.” [Unquote]
Now why did she mention religion, when no other mention of this has been made and why state “he is just a person”? Is this latter to dissociate him from any group(s) to which he belongs?
Compare and contrast: In the murder of Chloe Mitchell the perp (a white male) was Identified as soon as he was charged – I think on the day of his arrest in fact.
So why the difference, why are the Police being so coy about the identity of this multi-murderer?
Doesn’t seem to be bearded savagery yet. We’ve got his name and it’s not a typically Islamic one. Yes I have also noticed language used in post attack speeches that seem primarily concerned with stopping people getting angry and possibly kicking off and getting people to cry instead.
Re naming, I’ve got a theory that this violent fraggle has not been being that cooperative with the police. Also his name might have been withheld because the police were searching for other potential accomplices.
I certainly agree that the police can be selective about how quickly they release names although names normally come out when the suspect is charged.
Well you should be grateful that the government is taking its responsibility to ban supermarkets from doing BOGOF deals that make us all too fat seriously.