Then there was the guy who preached Islam at his co-workers to the point that they thought he was a pain in the ass, got fired, went home and got his knife, went back to work and started beheading people.
Then there was the Canadian guy who ran over a soldier but they are actually claiming that he was a jihadist. The NY Times is hedging its bets:
little had emerged about why the man driving the car, Martin Rouleau-Couture, became radicalized last year or ran over the two soldiers at a strip mallThen there was the guy who killed a NY City cop with a hatchet. Angry black man, claims the media. They also stick this in part way down:
While there are some Islamic referencesThen there's the guy who shot up the Canadian parliament. According to his mother "wasn’t driven by some grand ideology or political motive, but rather was the “last desperate act” of someone who was not well in his mind and felt trapped," mental health. Forget the fact that he wrapped a kefiyah around his face before going on his shooting rampage. That might be too much of a clue. I'd be willing to put money on what religion they will find him quoting in his video and on the facebook page that will undoubtedly surface.
At least they are starting to mention the word Islam in all these cases, but can you blame the average person if we assume right off the get go that Islam will be the constant?
Given that the jihadists are calling for western Muslims to carry out acts of jihad in the west, including snatching people off the streets in western cities and beheading them, you'll forgive me if I choose not to believe that Islam is the "religion of peace". Oh, and I'll be carrying my gun if and when they try to snatch me off the street. Islamists be forewarned.