In Germany, Muslim “Asylum Seekers” Go On A Rampage

Muslim asylum seekers from Tunisia — a country which has no ongoing civil war or internal strife of any kind, so the asylum being claimed as necessary has no basis in fact — have gone on the rampage at an asylum-center in Regensburg, Germany. They have caused all sorts of property damage as well as bodily harm both to other asylum seekers, and to the security guards trying to quell their uprising. More on this latest example of Muslim mayhem can be found here:

Serious riots in an asylum accommodation in Regensburg!

The reason: an asylum seeker was wearing a cross on his necklace! According to Regensburg police, several residents, who are of Muslim faith, were outraged by the Christian symbol – a riot broke out. When the security services tried to calm the commotion, around 30 residents attacked the reception centre’s security staff.

The violence escalated in one room of the accommodation centre on Wednesday evening: Several security staff were attacked and more and more residents joined in. Five migrants from the group attacked with bottles and chairs, and there were also attacks with fists. According to a report in the newspaper Mittelbayerische Zeitung, one attacker even pulled out a knife.

First a little, thence to more — a handful of outraged Muslims soon became a mob of thirty, whipping themselves into a fury, so that they then attacked the security police, starting with fists, then some progressing to throwing bottles and chairs, and one of the rioters even wielded a knife.

Several police patrols were deployed to calm the crowd. Several migrants were provisionally arrested and five Tunisians were brought before an investigating judge at the request of the Regensburg public prosecutor’s office. He issued five remand warrants.

According to information from the newspaper BILD, the suspects, all from Tunisia, are facing charges including particularly serious breach of the peace and causing grievous bodily harm.

Philipp Pruy, the defense lawyer for the main accused, did not comment when asked by BILD. Six members of the security service were injured in the incident, three of whom had to be treated as outpatients. 40 Tunisians are listed as serious offenders and are awaiting trial in custody. Around 270 men live in the reception centre; the asylum seekers from the North African country are housed centrally in Regensburg.

Six security guards were injured by the Muslim rioters. There are 270 men in this Regensburg centre holding only Tunisians. Why are they being held at all, when there is no conceivable need for Tunisians to seek asylum in Germany? They should be promptly deported, and no longer be an expense borne by the German state. If some are now being held in the Regensburg facility while awaiting criminal trials, then after they have served their time, let them be immediately deported without imprisonment, if their criminal offenses are limited to crimes of property, deport them immediately back to Tunisia. The care and feeding of prisoners is expensive; spare the German taxpayers that burden. The government should privilege deportation over prison sentences, except in cases of extreme bodily harm or sexual assault. And let the German state issue a blanket rule: under present conditions in Tunisia, no citizen of that country can legitimately claim “asylum.”

What does this sudden violent outburst at the Regensburg asylum center tell us? We have here one more display of the incredible, fanatical rage so easily whipped up in Muslims, in this case by the mere sight of a single Christian wearing a cross on a necklace. Can something so small cause a reaction so big? Alas, yes. Isn’t this exactly what Winston Churchill in 1899 famously described as characteristic of Muslims? Churchill’s famous description of Islam’s effect on its adherents, which appeared in The River War, his book on the Sudan, is worth revisiting in full:

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property – either as a child, a wife, or a concubine – must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the faith: all know how to die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.

This searing condemnation may be deplored by Muslims, who no doubt wish that these words by Churchill had never been unearthed, but the only legitimate demand to be made of this paragraph is this: Is it true? And you and I know the answer to that.