Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

France: Attacker Shouting “Allahu Akbar” Beheads 70-Year-Old Woman in Church

France: Attacker Shouting “Allahu Akbar” Beheads 70-Year-Old Woman in Church

Three killed, several injured in “Islamo-fascist attack,” French official says.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_ISEtmsoPU&t

A knife-wielding jihadi beheaded a woman and murdered two others at a church this morning in southern France.

“A man wielding a knife at a church in the French city of Nice killed three people, slitting the throat of at least one, and injured several others before being apprehended by police,” French news agency AFP tweeted, citing officials.

The  “Allahu Akbar”-shouting attacker decapitated a 70-year-old woman and stabbed the church sexton to death. Another woman, who was stabbed inside the church, managed to seek refuge in a nearby bar where she later died from her wounds, initial media reports said.

The city’s Mayor Christian Estrosi described the heinous incident as an “Islamo-fascist attack.” The attacker kept chanting “Allahu Akbar” after his arrest and left “no doubt… about the meaning of his action,” the mayor added. The man was shot by the police at the scene and is currently in custody.

TV channel France24 reported the deadly attack:

A knife-wielding attacker shouting “Allahu Akbar” beheaded a woman and killed two other people at a church in the southern French city of Nice on Thursday, according to police officials. The city’s mayor described the incident as an act of terrorism.

Nice Mayor Christian Estrosi said on Twitter the knife attack had happened at the city’s Notre Dame church and that police had detained the attacker.

The attacker had shouted, “Allahu Akbar”, or God is greatest even after he had been detained, Estrosi said.

A police source said three people were confirmed to have died, including a woman who was decapitated in the attack. One of the people killed inside the church was believed to be the church warden, Estrosi said.

The French interior ministry said on Twitter that security and rescue forces were at the site and urged residents to avoid the area.

The assailant was arrested after the attack and taken to a nearby hospital after sustaining injuries, a police offic[i] al said. He was believed to be acting alone, the official said.

The city of Nice has witnessed several Islamic terror attacks in recent years. A Tunisian-Muslim immigrant drove a cargo truck into a large crowd celebrating the 2016 Bastille Day, a French national holiday, killing 86 people, including 10 children.

Islamic attacks on Christian places of worship in France have surged. In July 2016, two terrorists belonging to the Islamic State beheaded an 84-year-old Catholic priest, Jacques Hamel, in front of the altar during a mass in Rouen, located in northern France.

The French Catholic Church responded to the attack saying that “Christians must not become symbols to be slaughtered.”

The attack took place amid an atmosphere of growing hatred and incitement against France in the Muslim world. Demonstrators in Muslim countries have been staging angry protests over the recent clampdown on Islamist organizations by French authorities following a teacher’s beheading. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan accused French President Emmanuel Macron of “Islamophobia” for comments following the beheading in Paris. Erdogan was joined in condemnation by Iran’s Ayatollah Khamenei, Pakistan’s Prime Minister, and other Muslim leaders.

Terrorist attacks follow Islamist anger. In the French city of Avignon, police took out an Islamic terrorist on Thursday after he tried to attack passers-by while shouting “Allahu Akbar.” Another attacker was arrested on the same day for stabbing a guard at the French consulate in Jiddah, Saudi Arabia.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

It’s those darn Amish, again.

This shouldn’t be a surprise. It happens after a hundred generations of religion sanctioned inbreeding.
.

Friggin’ Eskimos! I swear, it’s always something with them Eskimo Liberation Front terrorists. Go back to the north pole where you belong!”

Apparently, there is no place in Christendom for Christians

The Friendly Grizzly | October 29, 2020 at 10:32 am

Are the French blaming the Jews yet?

Damn. And here I thought Kerry and James Taylor had eliminated all the hatred.

The city’s Mayor Christian Estrosi described the heinous incident as an “Islamo-fascist attack.”

I’m sure Paris will get right on it; the Mayor will be bundled off to a re-education camp, and the government will assure us that the motivation for the attack is undetermined. End of problem.

    henrybowman in reply to tom_swift. | October 29, 2020 at 4:19 pm

    “The attacker kept chanting “Allahu Akbar” after his arrest and left “no doubt… about the meaning of his action,”

    Is it possible that this ancient mystical Arabian incantation is losing its magical power to cloud men’s motives?

While wringing their hands and gnashing their teeth, progressives everywhere screech “Why does ANYONE need to own a gun!?!”

    Milhouse in reply to Paul. | October 29, 2020 at 12:48 pm

    And if you must own a gun you certainly shouldn’t bring it to church.

      Strelnikov in reply to Milhouse. | October 29, 2020 at 5:24 pm

      Absolutely agree. After all, what could happen in a church? Am I right? Huh? Huh?

        JusticeDelivered in reply to Strelnikov. | October 29, 2020 at 7:51 pm

        If someone had been present and armed, Muslim scum may have been dispatched before three people were dead.

        France needs to take drastic action,promptly start expelling Muslims and killing those who object.

        Also, we must either relieve France of their nukes, failure to do so will eventually lead to the necessity of destroying them.

Additional funds required for French police target practice.

There’s two other attacks: one in Avignon (knife-wielding attacker shot by police) and in Jeddah (Saudi-Arabia, Mekkah province) at the French Consulate…

Why? Today is “Mawlid an-Nabi” – the ‘Birth[day] of the Prophet’, an important, religious Muslim holiday. And the (birth)day is not over yet…

The Muslim foxes are already inside the hen-house. Impossible now to effectively control the situation. This is then predictable end result of decades of delusional and idiotic dhimmitude, with regard to the ideology of “Submission.”

If Winston Churchill was running France, there would be hope in implementing a wholesale ban on Submission’s practice, in razing every mosque and madrassa to the ground, in declaring Submission as a transparently subversive and destructive threat to secular democratic norms and values and the values of the Enlightenment.

CNN (almost certainly): “Motive Unclear in French Attack”

Hey! No problem, Islam is a religion of peace. Say it over and over until you believe it. It’s the media mantra just like Biden is ahead. Say it over and over.

Hieronymous Machine | October 29, 2020 at 11:30 am

To be fair, God is, indeed, really big.

    Different God. Allah has nothing, I repeat nothing to do with the Almighty as revealed in the OT and NT.

      Milhouse in reply to bobtuba. | October 29, 2020 at 12:50 pm

      You are a fool or a liar. It is exactly the same God.

        alaskabob in reply to Milhouse. | October 29, 2020 at 2:17 pm

        Mohammed’s household worshiped over 100 gods until his enlightenment.. on one god.. the moon god. Islam links themselves to Ishmael and so claim the moon god is Jehovah. You may wish to make them the same but I wouldn’t start praying to Allah rather than G_d… just to be sure. Something about a jealous G_d and no other gods before Him.

        gmac124 in reply to Milhouse. | October 29, 2020 at 2:22 pm

        “You are a fool or a liar. It is exactly the same God.”

        Somebody is a liar. Muslims try to pass off that Allah is the same god but how do you account for the satanic verses?

        DSHornet in reply to Milhouse. | October 29, 2020 at 2:36 pm

        No, Milhouse. “Allah” is an updated “Illah,” the ancient Arab moon god, which explains much of their symbolism. Allah is NOT to be confused with THE Almighty God, the creator of the universe and the first person of the Holy Trinity.
        .

        bobtuba in reply to Milhouse. | October 29, 2020 at 9:10 pm

        Sorry, Milhouse. Islam isn’t even a religion. It’s a hostile, fascist, totalitarian political system disguised as a religion. It has enough pseudo-religious trappings to fool the feeble-minded, but it’s a political ideology for the control of populations invented by a bloodthirsty paedophile and spread at the point of a sword.

        Arminius in reply to Milhouse. | October 30, 2020 at 2:12 am

        Once again you are spouting off on subjects you know nothing about.

        The Allah of the Quran is definitely not the God of the Tanakh or the New Testament. Surah 3:54 alone is enough to demonstrate that fact. If that were all we had it would be enough. Unfortunately for Muslims, we have far, far more “statements against self-interest” in the Quran that torpedo any claim that the Quran is simply the final revelation dating back to Adam and Eve.

        Surah 3:54 “And the disbelievers planned, but Allah planned. And Allah is the best of planners.”

        Ayah 54 is in the section of Surah 3 that describes the crucifixion of Jesus. It’s a fascinating story, according to the Quran the Jews knew Jesus was the Messiah AND wanted to kill their own Messiah. As the saying goes, I s*@$ you not.

        OK, in any case it seems harmless. The root Arabic word that is most commonly translated as plan or planned, schemed, or plotted is Makr (from the three letter consonantal root MKR).

        The above is the Sahih International transliteration. Here are three other most popular English transliterations (note: not necessarily the most accurate as I will demonstrate).

        Muhsin Khan
        “And they (disbelievers) plotted [to kill ‘Iesa (Jesus) ], and Allah planned too. And Allah is the Best of the planners.”

        Pickthall
        “And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers.”

        Yusuf Ali
        “And (the unbelievers) plotted and planned, and Allah too planned, and the best of planners is Allah.”

        It isn’t wrong per se to use the words above for makr, as long as the author makes it clear that makr is always done to cause harm or evil to a person or group of people. You’d never use the word makr to describe someone who is planning a surprise birthday party. You would use it to describe someone hiring a hit man to kill his wife for the insurance money.

        The “Allah is the best of planners/schemers/plotters” in the second clause in phonetic Arabic.

        “waAllahu khayru al-makireena.”

        Makr itself means “DECEIT, GUILE, or CIRCUMVENTION, desiring to do another a foul, an abominable, or an evil action, clandestinely or without his knowing whence it proceeded.” (Lane’s Arabic-English Lexicon). In his book, “The Quran and Its Interpreters – The House of Imran” [State University of New York Press [SUNY], Albany 1992]; in volume II on p. 165 Dr. Mahmoud M. Ayoub asks and then explores the issue raised by the question, “how the word makr (scheming or plotting), which implies deceitfulness or dishonesty, could be attributed to God.”

        Of course Ayoub waters it down when he claims makr merely implies deceitfulness or dishonesty. It doesn’t imply anything; it’s part and parcel, central to the words meaning. Ayoub even cites the renowned Muslim expositor ar-Razi who makes that clear (a scholar who immediately goes into a state of denial). “scheming (makr) is actually an act of deception aiming at causing evil. It is not possible to attribute deception to God.” (Ibid, p. 166). But not only does the Quran attribute makr to Allah, but per Islamic theology the Quran is the undiluted, uncreated, eternal word of Allah. So it isn’t some third party or hostile unbeliever who is claiming Allah practices makr. Allah himself says he practices makr. And not only does he practice but Allah is khayru al-makireena; the best of all those who practices makr.

        In fact in Surah 13:42 Allah claims for himself all makr.

        “And verily, those before them did scheme (makara), but all scheming is Allah’s (falillahi al-makru). He knows what every person earns, and the disbelievers will know who gets the good end.”

        In Christianity the best of all deceivers, who deceives to do evil; to cause harm to others, is Satan. Satan is the father of lies, “And when he lies he speaks his native tongue.” That’s also my takeaway from the Old Testament. Or did I get that wrong, and do Jews worship the best of liars and deceivers.

        As I said there are other parts of the Quran in which Allah insists he has attributes that are in opposition to the attributes of the God of the Bible, and rejects attributes which the Bible attributes to God. Allah is a completely different god.

        But then you were also wrong about jihad. So wrong. You demonstrated you have no clue about the Islamic legal doctrine of Qisas, or personal retribution. There is no requirement for Muslims to leave even capital punishment to the authorities. They should, if there is a judge or a legally constituted authority who can mete out the hudud (divinely ordained) punishment. In fact, the very first hadith in Ch. 2 “The ruling regarding one who the Prophet” in volume 40, Prescribed Punishments (Kitab Hudud) in the canonical Sunni hadith collection Sunan Abi Dawud is an example of an individual Muslim doing the deed on his own authority.

        “A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet was informed about it.

        He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.

        He sat before the Prophet and said: Messenger of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.

        Thereupon the Prophet said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.

        Grade : Sahih (Al-Albani)
        Reference : Sunan Abi Dawud 4361
        In-book reference : Book 40, Hadith 11
        English translation : Book 39, Hadith 4348”

        Why didn’t Muhammad respond with shock? “What, you took the law into your own hands and killed her? Don’t you know you’re supposed to report the crime to the lawful authorities and let them handle the punishments!”

        After all, the guy was talking to the most perfect Islamic judge who ever walked the earth, Muhammad himself. Note he didn’t rebuke the man for having sex with his slave woman. After all, before she became the slave-mother of the blind man’s children she was the sex slave of her master. So much for the liars who claim that it is un-Islamic for the Islamic State or Boko Haram to make sex slaves of the Christian or Yazidi girls who they have taken as “war captives.” In fact, while not in this hadith from the same sources we know that Muhammad and the “rightly guided” Khalifs (Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and Ali) all had sex slaves of their own.

        Your analogy in the previous comment r.e. the guy who beheaded the French school teacher couldn’t have been more wrong. Just as self-defense under our laws is not murder, and indeed no crime at all, killing someone who ridicules the prophet is no crime at all. Hence according to Muhammad’s own ruling in this matter, there is no “blood-for-blood” retaliation as there would be if the man had committed a crime by killing the slave mother of his children. Since he didn’t commit a crime, as Muhammad’s ruling makes clear he suffers no legal consequences.

        “The reliance of the Traveler,” the English language transliteration of the Shafii legal manual Umdat al-Salik, makes it clear that Muslim parents and grandparents don’t commit a crime when they commit honor killings.

        “01.2 – The following are not subject to retaliation: (4) a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring”

        They’re not subject to retaliation because they’re not crimes. Honor killing is fourth on the list. I found the first one interesting. A subject Christian or Jew who kills an apostate suffers no consequences.

        You don’t find the justification for killing on a Muslim’s inherent authority to defend the Ummah or take personal retribution in one nice, tidy little pile. It’s spread out throughout the Quran and ahadith. For instance Sunan ibn Majah – The Chapters on Legal Punishments:

        “It was narrated from `Ubadah bin Samit that the Messenger of Allah said:

        Carry out the legal punishments on relatives and strangers, and do not let the fear of blame stop you from carrying out the command of Allah.

        Grade : Hasan (Darussalam)
        Sunnah.com reference : Book 20, Hadith 8
        English reference : Vol. 3, Book 20, Hadith 2540
        Arabic reference : Book 20, Hadith 2637”

        This is clearly not referring to some entity called “authority.” Lawfully constituted “authority” doesn’t have relatives, nor does lawful authority have to fear getting blamed. Individuals have relatives, and individuals have to fear getting blamed by lawful authority.

        But that didn’t stop Michael Adebolajo from killing Fusilier Lee Rigby outside the British Army barracks in Woolwich, London. In fact, he wanted to get killed. It’s why recent attackers “fighting in the cause of Allah” wore fake suicide vests. If the vests look real enough then the responding cops will have no choice but to shoot them, and they get to Paradise and their virgins all the more faster.

        Fortunately, Sheikhs have done the work for me in their various fatwas on the subject. Such as:

        “Defaming the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is a kind of kufr. If that is done by a Muslim then it is apostasy on his part, and the authorities have to defend the cause of Allaah and His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) by executing the one who defamed him. If the one who defamed him repents openly and is sincere, that will benefit him before Allaah, although his repentance does not waive the punishment for defaming the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), which is execution. If the person who defames him is a non-Muslim living under a treaty with the Muslim state, then this is a violation of the treaty and he must be executed, but that should be left to the authorities. If a Muslim hears a Christian or anyone else defaming the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) he has to denounce him in strong terms. It is permissible to insult that person because he is the one who started it. How can we not stand up the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)? It is also obligatory to report him to the authorities who can carry out the punishment on him. If there is no one who can carry out the hadud punishment of Allaah and stand up for the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) THEN THE MUSLIM HAS TO DO WHATEVER HE CAN, so long as that will not lead to further mischief and harm against other people.

        ‘It is essential to respond to those who defame the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)’ (archived)
        Shaykh ‘Abd al-Rahmaan al-Barraak, Islam Q&A, Fatwa No. 14305.”

        By “other people” the Sheikh merely means “other Muslims.” Islamic law is clear. If a Muslim can mete out a hudud punishment by his own hand, then it is his obligation to do so as long as 1) he is capable of doing so and 2) it will not do further harm to members of the Ummah; the Muslim community.

        Our own institutional stupidity guarantees condition no.2 will be met. As soon as a Muslim kills while shouting “Allahu Akhbar” our western “Imams” such as Obama, Tony Blair, Angela Merkel, Pope Francis, et al, race to the nearest microphone to announce that, “This has nothing to do with Islam,” “The perpetrators hijacked a wonderful religion,” “Islam is a religion of peace,” and (my favorite) “We may never know the motive.”

        Not only don’t these acts of murder in the name of Islam NOT harm other Muslims, our non-Muslim leaders and commentators put on a recruiting drive for the demonic creed. Every time there’s a terrorist act their is a boost in the numbers of people professing to be Muslim because for weeks all we hear is how wonderful “True Islam.”

        These murders have everything to do with Islam, Muslims have a duty to commit them under certain circumstances, and we know perfectly well what their motives are.

          randian in reply to Arminius. | October 30, 2020 at 3:50 am

          An excellent exegesis, thank you.

          The right of a subject dhimmi to kill an apostate is an interesting one, because I’m not sure it would actually be safe for said dhimmi to do. Yes, it’s technically permitted, but would the community’s Muslims refrain from immediately killing him for doing it? He has after all killed a Muslim, albeit an allegedly apostate one.

          Arminius in reply to Arminius. | October 30, 2020 at 5:18 pm

          Randian, in general it would be safe to for a subject dhimmi to kill an apostate, secure in the knowledge they won’t be subject to any legal consequences or extra-legal lynching. After all apostates are renegade former Muslims, no longer Muslims. And all Muslims know that apostates must be killed.

          Sunan Abi Dawud – Volume 40: Prescribed Punishments (Kitab al Hudud) Ch. 1: Ruling on one who apostatizes:

          “‘Ikrimah said:

          ‘Ali burned some people who retreated from Islam. When Ibn ‘Abbas was informed of it, he said: If it had been I, I would not have burned them, for the Messenger of Allah said: Do not inflict Allah’s punishment on anyone, but would have had killed them on account of the statement of the Messenger of Allah. The Apostle said: KIILL THOSE WHO CHANGE THEIR RELIGION. When ‘Ali was informed about it he said: How truly Ibn ‘Abbas said!

          Grade : Sahih (Al-Albani)
          Reference : Sunan Abi Dawud 4351
          In-book reference : Book 40, Hadith 1
          English translation : Book 39, Hadith 4337”

          I enjoy citing this hadith because it’s a gold mine of information. Note Abbas’ weak reaction when he learns Ali burned apostates alive (and Ali wasn’t the first “rightly guided” Khalifa to impose that punishment). Abbas basically says, “Meh, I wouldn’t have killed them that way because Muhammad said fire (hellfire) is Allah’s punishment alone.” But nobody really cares beyond suggesting, “Next time, Ali, just behead the apostates.” Moreover, there are other Sahih ahadith that attest to the fact (as established by Islamic historical “science” and hadith “studies,” the absolute worst methodology ever cobbled together by a group of people) that Muhammad also wanted to burn apostates alive. A lot of early Muslims didn’t respond to the call to the fajr (dawn) prayer. They slept through it. Muhammad normally led the prayers, but he wanted another to lead one day, and he and a select group of his sahaba (companions) would burn their houses down around those who’d rather sleep in than show up for prayer (missing a single prayer, according to Muhammad, made a Muslim an apostate). The sahaba talked him out of it, but it isn’t as if Muhammad admitted he was wrong for wanting to burn people alive. By definition, he can’t be wrong on matters of religion.

          This goes to whether or not the Islamic State was “un-Islamic” when they burned Jordanian A.F. pilot Lieutenant Moath Youssef al-Kasasbeh alive in that cave. I’ll stop pulling on that thread after pointing out the IS terrorists weren’t making things up out of thin air; they didn’t pull the idea that they can burn apostates (that’s what they judged LT al-Kasasbeh to be) out of their @$$es.

          The point is you’ll find other Sahih ahadith commanding Muslims to kill apostates in other (I believe all the other but at least four) of the six canonical hadith collections in Sunni Islam. Of course, the reason it has to be specified that a dhimmi can legally kill an apostate is because of the slim chance that some group of Muslims didn’t get the word; apostates are not only no longer Muslims, but by apostatizing they have become the lowest life form on earth.

          As a practical matter I don’t believe any dhimmis ever put themselves in the position to test this legal exemption from the blood whit. Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians who didn’t convert despite all the oppression, humiliation, and poverty that the Islamic social order imposed on them had to really believe in their religions. And consequently they rejected Islam as a false religion. So it’s inconceivable to me they would kill an apostate. After all, it’s only Sharia that claims apostasy from Islam is a valid reason to kill. If you’re a believing Christian or Jew it isn’t and under your own religious tenets you’d be committing the sin of killing an innocent. And after all, why would you kill someone who agreed with you; Islam is a false religion.

          It’s a law that only makes sense if you’re a Muslim; it’s nonsense to anyone else.

It’s too bad he wasn’t “shot and killed” by police.

these aholes generally pick soft targets–lord–a woman in her seventies, in her church no less–requires significant cojones and training to go hand-to-hand against an opponent armed with an edged weapon, especially close quarters with innocents all around–lord

should give each of us pause to consider situational awareness–it can happen here

condolences to the victims/families

    Such bravery to murder a senior citizen in church. Here’s hoping his virgins are men. (Yes, I know he’s not dead . . . yet.)

      JusticeDelivered in reply to hrhdhd. | October 29, 2020 at 9:30 pm

      I favor doing sex change operations on captured Muslim terrorists, then allow them to do penance for a few years, followed by termination.

      The point being propaganda that all terrorists will suffer that fate for eternity.

First it was: Je suis Français
Then: Je suis Charlie Hebdo
Then: Je suis prof
Now: Je suis Mohammed
Soon: Nous sommes Mohammed

Good God, how awful! It seems too late now for France to fix this and they, like other European nations, are doomed to fall to Islam. Very tragic, and so avoidable. They imported their own conquerors.

    TX-rifraph in reply to SafeTea. | October 29, 2020 at 12:35 pm

    “They imported their own conquerors.”

    And we elect our own Marxist conquerors when we vote for Democrats, i.e. Minneapolis, Portland, Seattle, Chicago, etc.

We imported the voters which will lead to the same result as France. The time to stop this is running out.

We may never know what the motive was. Or something.

Islamist attackers may or may not have any direct co-assailants, but they NEVER act alone…

Funny how the things done by “Islamo-facists” are always justified by regular old Islamic teachings.

There is no “radical” or “moderate” Islam. There is only Islam, and it is at war with the West, whether the West wants it or not.

Any reason why there isn’t armed security at churches? These churchgoers are sitting ducks.

Knife? I think not, you can’t decapitate somebody with a knife, not without taking significant time to do so. Plenty of time for him to get rushed by the crowd and taken down, unless these idiots just stood around and watched him hack away. This guy must have had a sword.

    Arminius in reply to randian. | October 30, 2020 at 9:32 pm

    Oh, you can decapitate someone with a knife.

    https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=19950724&slug=2133109

    “Boy Says Father Beheaded Brother Because Of Devil
    Jul 24, 1995

    Eddie Pells

    AP

    ESTANCIA, N.M. – As trucks whizzed past on Interstate 40, 13-year-old Larry Smith watched his father cut off his older brother’s head, terrified he would be next…”

    I remembered this story for a number of reasons. One is that he decapitated his 14 y.o. son with not much of a knife (he had two knives; I doubt he used both).

    “…They found a 4-inch knife and a pocketknife, both covered with blood, but no sturdier knife.”

    If I can butcher a deer or a hog with nothing more than a four inch drop point blade then you can decapitate a 14 y.o. boy with one. Or a 70 y.o. woman.

    Of course dollars to donuts we’re going to find this guy used a 6 or 8 inch chef’s knife. Still eminently concealable, cheap, and available.

      randian in reply to Arminius. | October 30, 2020 at 9:51 pm

      Sure you can decapitate somebody with a 4-inch knife, but it’s going to take a good long time to do. It isn’t a one, or even two, swing thing to accomplish. Now maybe when the French authorities say “knife” maybe they’re actually referring to something like a butcher’s cleaver. That would have the heft to chop things with alacrity. Even a chef’s knife is going to take some work to decapitate somebody. You can cut their carotid instantly but fully severing the spine and throat, which decapitation implies, requires work. Work which takes time. Time that the congregation didn’t use to interrupt or attack him.

        Arminius in reply to randian. | October 30, 2020 at 10:16 pm

        “…but fully severing the spine and throat, which decapitation implies, requires work.”

        Not really. It’s not difficult to cut through a deer’s esophagus or trachea. To sever the head you cut connective tissue between vertebrae; you’re not cutting through bone. It really doesn’t take much time, just a few swift cuts.

        I guarantee you that a deer during the rut (mating season) has a much tougher neck than a 70 y.o. woman.

    Arminius in reply to randian. | October 30, 2020 at 9:53 pm

    BTW, if the knife is sharp it doesn’t have to be big, and it won’t take long to do the job.

    It probably takes an outdoorsman or a professional chef to appreciate just what a huge difference a really sharp edge makes. Or an AQ/IS murderer.

    Not to be macabre, but one of Khalid Sheikh Muhammad’s interrogators asked him if he found it difficult to behead Daniel Pearl. The CIA interrogator, I forget if it was Jose Rodriguez or Dr. James Mitchell, was thinking about emotionally. Did KSM have to choke down any vestige feelings of humanity when confronted with actually beheading a fellow human being.

    The interrogator needn’t have been concerned; the thought never occurred to KSM. Not when he did it, not when he was asked later about it. He said, “No, it wasn’t hard. My knives were really sharp.”

    Just because I as an outdoorsman know how much it means to keep my knives, axes, and broadheads (for my hunting arrows) appropriately sharp please don’t put me in the same category as KSM or “the Beatles,” the IS executioners with British accents. That’s like confusing surgeons with hit men simply because both use knives, or pharmacists with drug dealers, or jewelers with diamond thieves.

      randian in reply to Arminius. | October 30, 2020 at 10:02 pm

      Infidels are the worst of created beings per the Quran, so KSM’s response isn’t surprising. One doesn’t empathize with beings having the same status as offal and feces. If your goal is to create a society of psychopaths Islam is an excellent tool.

        Arminius in reply to randian. | October 31, 2020 at 8:59 am

        We’re lower than cockroaches, according to Allah. Pigs and dogs may be unclean but they don’t reject Allah, his messenger, and the “religion of truth.”

        Meanwhile, Muslims are the best of peoples.

        Surah 3:110 “You [true believers in Islamic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad SAW and his Sunnah (legal ways, etc.)] are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma’ruf (i.e. Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islam has forbidden), and you believe in Allah. And had the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) believed, it would have been better for them; among them are some who have faith, but most of them are Al-Fasiqun (disobedient to Allah – and rebellious against Allah’s Command).”

        Can somebody point to the passage in the Bible that spells out my xtofascist supremacism as clearly as the Quran spells out Muslim supremacy?

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend