Knives Don’t Stab People, Black People Do

3,517 words

On Saturday 1 November, there was a mass stabbing on a London-bound train in the southern English town of Huntingdon. As news broke, the authorities braced themselves for the bad news that it would probably turn out to be yet another instance of jihadism. Yet within a matter of hours, the authorities were loudly broadcasting the police’s exceedingly hastily arrived at conclusion that there was “no evidence” the attack was terror-related.

Even better, the main suspect wasn’t an asylum seeker. Why, he wasn’t even foreign-born. He was actually a “Black British” individual, with a capital ‘B’ for each word, later identified as Anthony Williams, a name which wouldn’t have looked out of place in the Domesday Book. Thus, according to official modern ways of thinking, he was every bit as English as Jack the Ripper had once been considered, a fine example of assimilation with one’s own historic host-community and their traditional way of life.

The sigh of relief from the government was audible. No need for anyone to criticize Islam, the guy seemed just a lone lunatic, who had allegedly told one passenger “The Devil is not going to win” before carrying on with his stabbing-spree. As nobody reasonable could ever blame the government for someone going mad, it seemed the authorities were off the meat-hook. But were they really?

Black the Knife

Not especially. Examined from an immigration-skeptical perspective, the situation may even be in some ways worse for those who presently misrule us. Williams’ reported actions fit in with a far wider pattern of black people carrying out mass stabbings across Great Britain which are simply not widely replicated amongst the original indigenous white population—nor, indeed, amongst most other incoming non-white demographics, radical Muslims excepted.

The thing is, though, radical Muslims have an obvious comprehensible ideological motive for committing such atrocities. Blacks do not. Instead, the problem would appear innate—and thus, innately ineradicable. As far as official reassurances about the matter go, “Muslims will stab you for Allah, but blacks will stab you ‘cos they’re mad,” isn’t really all that soothing, is it?

Here in the UK, people are finally starting to notice that a disproportionate number of mad knifemen are black. And, even better, some are even starting to risk potential hate-crime prosecutions by saying so in print. Conservative-leaning outlet The Critic ran an interesting piece in which author Ben Sixsmith observed that, following some post-Huntingdon research of his into the matter, “Unless we count the Peterloo Massacre [an 1819 incident in which cavalry waved their sabers into a protesting Manchester crowd], I have found no cases of mass stabbing incidents in the UK prior to the 1990s.”

And then, on 8 December 1994, Britain got its first such outrage: and it was committed by a black man. Here in the UK we are always being exhorted to celebrate the first “Black British” individual to perform some achievement of alleged note—the first black man to captain the England soccer team, the first black woman to marry into the Royal Family, the first octoroon to reach the rank of Field-Marshal—so I would like here to add to that fine and ever-growing roll-call of melanated fame the eternal name of David Morgan, Britain’s first mad black mass-stabber.

To aid any English schoolteachers who may be reading, and wish to incorporate David’s story into their lessons plans for our next Black History Month, I shall recap his strange tale (which has nowadays become curiously almost entirely forgotten, most unlike the stabbing of St Stephen Lawrence by some dastardly white men the previous year) in some detail.

Morgan Free Man

Rackhams was an upmarket Harrods-type department store in the formerly English city of Birmingham, a place where white natives are now a minority, probably because they’ve all been stabbed. Innocent white Englishwomen (the only specific demographic Morgan actually assaulted) were doing their 1994 festive shopping nice and early, when the then-30-year-old maniac Morgan pulled out a 10-inch butcher’s knife and a 12-inch breadknife, and began slashing them across their throats like turkeys on a chopping-block. He injured fifteen victims, one of whom was a disabled 85-year-old pensioner, and three of whom required serious surgery.

Morgan was a known schizophrenic, with several prior arrests for randomly attacking unknown women in the street. Seemingly, he blamed the fairer sex for constantly rejecting him—which they would, if he kept on randomly attacking them in the street. Despite previously having been hospitalized before visiting his doctor and complaining of having “evil thoughts” of femicide, he was conditionally discharged and permitted to walk the streets of Birmingham freely.

Morgan’s initial reputed planned target was a Birmingham grammar school, whose students surely had the excellent excuse for rejecting his unwanted advances of being underage children, but eventually David settled on carrying out his massacre in the posh, well-polished aisles of Rackhams because, he said, “You kill a better class of people there.”

In 2004, Morgan was controversially temporarily released from the loony bin by overgenerous and overtrusting doctors to undergo tentative community rehabilitation exercises. Specifically, they sent him out on unsupervised shopping trips to local department stores. How did psychiatrists judge whether these exercises were successful or not? By how low the subsequent body-count was, presumably.

Supposedly, Morgan was sorry for what he had done. If so, this rather contradicts the reply he gave to a police psychiatrist in the immediate aftermath of his knife-spree, when informed none of his wounds had yet proved fatal to his victims: “Oh bloody hell, some serial killer I am. I knew I’d used the wrong side of the bloody knife… Any chance of them dying?”

And so the era of mass-stabbings in the United Kingdom began. At the time, it all seemed unique and surprising. Three decades on, the only element of the case which now seems remotely startling is that, at this happier pre-Tony Blair point in time, the investigating detectives still felt legally free to ask Morgan the following question during interviewing: “We’d like to know why it was only women. We’d like to know why it was only white women.”

“No comment,” the negro knifeman replied. [2] In the years since, “No comment” has been the general mainstream media line on such matters too. But now, at last, this is finally beginning to change.

Spot the Difference

In his article discussing mass-stabbings in The Critic, Ben Sixsmith said he had found four such incidents suddenly sprouting up in the 1990s UK, whereas, so far as he could tell, there had been none before—or, at least, no mass-stabbings of random innocent people by random guilty strangers. [1]

Ben also noticed something about the pattern of such crimes. Have a look at the photos of the perpetrators of the four identified 1990s incidents, and see if you can spot the odd one out.

That’s right. Only one of them was bald. There’s also something else probably slightly relevant about them all there too, though. Um…what could it be? Perhaps we need an additional sample of suspect-photos from more recent, post-1990 years in order to gain a more rounded picture of who it is that is disproportionately committing this sort of offense nowadays. Bring on the ID parade!

Now we have enough data finally in to draw a conclusion about the prevailing common factor here: most of these men have stupid names. But the reason they have stupid names is because most of them are black. But it is obviously not tenable to say that simply having black skin makes you more likely to go on a knife-spree. It can’t be their skin-color per se which makes black people overrepresented in such crimes. Instead, it seems to be their inbuilt relative predisposition to suffer from schizophrenia or psychosis.

Horrett Campbell attacked small children and female nursery staff with a machete at a teddy bears’ picnic in 1996, after he heard voices telling him the toddlers were all taunting him (how did he know it wasn’t the teddy bears?). Eden Strang stripped naked and chopped up parishioners with a samurai sword in a London church in 1999, after thinking he had been told by God that they were all demons in disguise.

We could go on and on; all the above men were complete and total nutcases, including the lone white one, Stephen Wilkinson. Yet white people still make up the majority of the population of the United Kingdom, at least amongst older age-range cohorts. Black people (officially) only make up 4 percent of it. Yet the photographic evidence above alone indicates that they clearly make up substantially more than 4 percent of its present-day psychopathic mass-stabbers, don’t they?

This is only to be expected. UK Government data clearly demonstrates black people are way more likely than any other race to find themselves sectioned (i.e., imprisoned in the loony bin) under Britain’s Mental Health Act. According to the most recently available figures from 2022/23:

The standard Establishment “explanation” for this is “racism”. Black skin as such can’t make you nutty, this line of reasoning goes, so white supremacist doctors must be just locking Africans all up in Broadmoor for a laugh. Unlikely, as many doctors in England these days are actually Pakistani, Indian and African themselves.

Schizophrenic Reasoning

Some actual head-doctors think otherwise. One 2008 paper purports to demonstrate the relative rates of schizophrenia—the very malady mad knifemen who hear the voice of God inside their head telling them to stab white women are likely to possess —amongst persons of black Caribbean descent in the UK are disproportionately high. The median global rate of number of schizos per 1,000 people was estimated to be 4.6 individuals. But, amongst every 1,000 black Caribbeans in the UK, 5.8 were likely to be so. That was measured to be a full nine times as many as the number of schizophrenics per 1,000 UK white people. Why might this be so?

The paper’s authors provided several suggestions. Maybe it is just genetic? After all, the biggest known risk-factor for developing schizophrenia yourself is having another schizophrenic in the family; madness seems somewhat inheritable, including racially.

Oddly, some studies have shown a higher rate of schizophrenia specifically amongst black migrants, as opposed to blacks back in their original homelands. This could be interpreted variously. Possibly being mad just makes you want to up sticks and become an immigrant elsewhere in the first place, maybe because people back home oh-so-bigotedly reject you due to your harmlessly eccentric, public-stabbing ways. But, against this idea, is data showing that second- and third-generation black immigrants, etc, are more likely to go schizo than first-generation ones are.

Therefore, quite possibly the consequent culture-shock of winding up living in a completely different society than the one you originally evolved to be brought up in is what makes some black immigrants (and consequently their descendants) go mad; to be fair, I’d probably feel like stabbing someone if I was suddenly dropped down to live in Trinidad & Tobago myself. It would be very interesting if this latter possibility really was the key factor, as then it could legitimately be argued to Africans that immigration was seriously bad for the health of them and their children, and therefore ought to be officially medically discouraged, just like smoking.

Speaking of smoking, ingesting cannabis and other such drugs is also frequently linked to various forms of psychosis, and blacks have historically been more likely to do so than other races like whites. For Caribbean-origin Rastafarians, it is even a part of their actual religion; that’s not the case for the good old CofE.

Alternatively, some bleeding hearts (soon to be bleeding necks) prefer to make endless excuses for loony blacks, noting how an excessive number tend to live in inner-cities, with inner-urban life also being associated with psychosis, due to all the stresses it stereotypically involves (e.g., living amongst urban black people). Therefore, poverty makes them go crazy and stab people, and evil white racism is of course the only thing that makes them live in poverty in the first place, so don’t judge them too harshly, goes this line of do-gooder argument. As the 2008 paper observes:

When migrants from countries where the majority of the population is black settle in countries with a white host population, they have a higher incidence rate of schizophrenia (relative risk, 4.8) than migrants from predominantly white countries (relative risk, 2.3) and also than migrants from the Middle East, defined as ‘neither black nor white’ (relative risk, 2.2). These findings suggest that migrants whose skin color is substantially darker than that of the native population are more vulnerable to schizophrenia. Racism based on the darkness of skin color rather than merely on ethnic grouping may account for these findings, and perceptions of racism have been found to increase according to skin darkness. Larger visible differences between an ethnic group and the host population may enhance an ‘outsider status’ [which helps cause mental problems].

In a Moral Straightjacket

Of all these potential explanations, I think we all know which one has ended up being the most likely to be adopted by contemporary society at large: the last one, because that makes the stabbing of white people by black people entirely white people’s fault, just like everything else is meant to be these days. Amusingly, though, this very attitude upon behalf of their wannabe social and medical ‘white saviors’ may in itself help drive Jamaicans bananas, argues the paper:

Adversity in many forms appears to contribute to higher rates of schizophrenia, but attitudes to adversity are also likely to play a role. For example, despite there being no difference in the frequency of adverse life events [compared to some other ethnicities], African-Caribbeans with psychosis are more likely to perceive their adversity as part of a pattern of racial discrimination or as being caused by others and intended, rather than being merely the result of ill-fortune without any personal dimension. These attitudes may make individuals more prone to develop schizophrenia by generating a paranoid or defensive outlook on life.

How ironic that a supposed attempt to help black people by training them up to think and act like perpetual victims may only help make them mentally unwell. Arguably blacks are the victims of white racism, therefore, but white racism counterproductively emanating from white anti-racists.

Possibly white liberals of this particular black-pandering mindset are also mentally ill, however – namely, suffering from that characteristically Caucasian strain of brain-sickness known as ‘pathological altruism’. There is a general reluctance amongst UK mental health workers to lock patients away in straightjackets, preferring to be ‘kind’ and release as many out into the community as possible: and if such patients happen to be non-white, then this tendency is amplified tenfold. Many of those black mass-stabbers illustrated in the mug-shot parades above had shown obvious and repeated homicidal tendencies long before they ever actually killed anyone.

And yet, still their doctors refused to bang them up, lest this be perceived as ‘backwards’, or ‘racist’, or ‘unprogressive’. Zephaniah McLeod, for example, a black paranoid schizophrenic who stabbed seven people and killed one man in 2020 had told his psychiatrist he was hearing voices saying “Kill ‘em, stab ‘em, they’re talking about you.” Eventually, Zephaniah listened to these voices’ instructions. If only McLeod’s psychiatrist had been a good old-fashioned ‘racist’, none of this bloodshed need ever happened.

Instead of acknowledging this embarrassing fact, however, the present left-wing Labour Government, stuffed to the rafters with schizophrenic identitarian black MPs like David “I’m English, no wait, I’m a Tuareg” Lammy have concluded the only possible reason more black men are sectioned under the Mental Health Act is that their doctors are Nazis. Arguing the present hospitalization system “discriminates against black people”, Lammy’s Labour is currently introducing legislation designed to “modernize” the Act so that fewer blacks end up in asylums.

But if more black males really are psychotic than any other demographic, as all known figures suggest, then the only practical way this can actually be done is to let loose all those potentially violent black lunatics regardless. Labour may paint this as an anti-racist measure, but in reality it is actually racist against all those persons of other races who will inevitably end up sliced and diced by the next Zephaniah MacLeod on the streets of Great Britain.

A Stab in the Darkie

In the aftermath of the Huntingdon train-stabbing, a fascinating article appeared on The Daily Sceptic free speech website (for which I write myself). It was by an NHS nurse, Dr Niall McCrae, who once taught mental health students. His classes largely consisted of two main groups: stupid sheltered white middle-class lefty libtards, and black immigrant Nigerians who, having been raised on the rough streets of Lagos and Abuja, possessed far more common sense when it came to issues like how to treat big fat mad black men running through town waving machetes at babies.

Dr McCrae showed his class photos of a man murdered by a mad knifeman on the streets of London in 2015 – the problem being that the victim, Jeroen Ensink, was white, and his killer, Femi Nandap, was black.

McCrae’s white students simply could not handle the sheer explicit truth of this image, he wrote, something exacerbated by the fact the photo came from UK tabloid The Daily Mail, which is often stereotyped in England as being “far-right”, even though it isn’t.

The kind of ‘racist’ Daily Mail headline today’s white liberal medical students just can’t cope with.

Wrote Dr. McCrae:

The topic of the lecture was assessing and managing risk – a priority for practitioners. My emphasis was on students understanding that their focus should not only be the patient but also public safety: care in the community requires eternal vigilance, and it is better to err on the side of caution than to face a coroner’s court. By referring to Ensink, a tragedy that had occurred a few months earlier, I intended that students would feel for the unfortunate deceased and bereaved, and be motivated to learn how danger can be reduced by safe practice. Instead, I was criticised by some white students. In their view I was reinforcing racial stereotypes by presenting a white victim and black perpetrator. I had also committed the cardinal offence of using a Daily Mail report. They railed against the politically incorrect message on the screen and briefly turned the lecture into a media studies course. The Nigerian students, meanwhile, did not see any problem with my training material: they know the violence of their homeland and would not pretend otherwise. They probably regarded the white students as well-intended but naïve. But I feared for the near future of such students, who appeared so indoctrinated on institutional racism that they might, as registered mental health nurses, put such sensitivity before safety. And the lack of emotional reaction to the tragic death was astounding – similar to the behaviour of H.G. Wells’s Eloi when one of them is taken by the Morlocks … Warped middle-class ideology is a danger to us all.

This is all part of a wider pattern. Eden Strang, the nut who went on a naked rampage with a samurai sword in a London church in 1999, but today a “softly spoken computer programmer”, is now held up and lionized by Britain’s left-wing press as an admirable and heroic campaigner against knife-crime.

Who are the real mass-murderers here? The psychotic black men like Femi Nandap, who I suppose cannot mentally help what they are doing, or the cretinous, white, but supposedly fully sane, medical students who seek to let them wander freely around our streets in the name of diversity, regardless of how many innocent people they may then kill?

The evidence is quite clear that black people are more likely to be violently psychotic than white people are. Most likely, genes play some part in this. If the general public begin realizing this fact en masse – and, as more and more previously virtually non-existent mass-murders begin to pile up in British towns, they eventually will – the UK authorities may ultimately come to wish the Huntingdon train-stabber had been a jihadi after all.

In a way, that would have been easier for them to explain; he was just some poor confused soul who had come under bad outside influences. If black people are inherently more predisposed, on average, to be violent schizophrenic lunatics, however, then the matter becomes rather different. At least jihadists can, in theory, be successfully deradicalized. How can black people be successfully deracialized?

They can’t. They can, however, be successfully deported.

Notes

[1] Obviously there must have been some previous multiple stabbings committed against strangers by white people in the British Isles, but I take it that what Sixsmith is effectively saying here is that, prior to the 1990s, they were so incredibly rare as to be in effect traceably non-existent.

[2] All the above quotes from Morgan and his captors are from a 1996 documentary, online here; head 18-and-a-half minutes in to see his inadvertently amusing interviews.

For a previous article of mine about black knife-crime and its supposed remedies in the UK, see here.

STOP PRESS! On the very same day I submitted this article for publication, look what’s just happened in Birmingham …