The past few days have been pretty rough for Germans, who witnessed a spate of three violent terrorist attacks over a short span of three days.

On July 22nd, David Ali Sonboly, a 18-year-old holding dual nationalities in both Germany and Iran, opened gunfire and killed nine people at a McDonald’s mall location in Munich, leaving nine dead and more than fifteen injured. Two days later, on July 23rd, a 21-year-old bearded Syrian refugee, who was known to authorities for previous acts of violence, stabbed and killed a pregnant Polish woman with a machete and injured two others in the southwestern German city of Reutlingen (and the human baby in her womb also died). That same night, a 27-year-old Syrian who was denied asylum by German authorities blew himself up outside of a music festival in Ansbach, injuring fifteen people. And these attacks only come about a week after a 17-year-old Afghani refugee, Muhammad Riyad—who we now know was incontrovertibly inspired by ISIS—went on a bloody knife rampage that left eighteen people injured on a train in Würzburg.

The following are some points to bear in mind regarding these recent events:

There is a trend of Muslims of foreign descent committing high-profile crimes in Germany. At least two of the above attacks (the Wurzburg and Ansbach attacks) were indisputably Islamist attacks that were inspired by ISIS. It is not yet clear whether the Syrian refugee responsible for the machete attack was an Islamist, nor is it is clear that the Iranian-German Munich shooter was; though it is not implausible that these two attackers also turn out to be Islamists.

1. There is a trend of false or misleading information being disseminated about recent high-profile Islamist-perpetrated attacks.

One is reminded of, for example, the Omar Mateen Orlando nightclub shootings, which left forty-nine people dead and about fifty people injured. Reports that Mateen was a closet homosexual were widely circulated; indeed, the mainstream (liberal) media flirted with the idea that he may have perpetrated the attack because he was a self-loathing closet homosexual. But the story later turned out to be false, with the FBI stating that, contrary to all the reports, there was no good evidence that he was a homosexual.[1]

Regarding the Munich shooting, it was initially reported on the authority of the German police that David Ali Sonboly did not have a connection with Islamist militants and may have been inspired by Anders Brevik (the far-right terrorist who, in 2011,  killed 77 people and injured more than 300 others in Oslo, Norway). However, recent reports specify that on Monday, Bavarian officials announced that the 18-year-old gunman had been in touch with the Afghan knife attacker over the smartphone application, “WhatsApp.” Also, the BBC apparently scrubbed “Ali” out of the name of the Munich attacker in its reporting.

Perhaps the relevant BBC authority behind this scrubbing believed that disclosing his name would precipitate unnecessary animus towards Muslim refugees.[2] Furthermore, in regards to the Ansbach bombing, the BBC published a headline that read “Syrian migrant killed in German Blast.” Although the headline is technically true, it seems to insufficiently credit the Syrian migrant with the attack. One would think a more apt title would have been something like “Syrian migrant injures fifteen (or many) people in German Blast,” with the active voice being used, not the passive.

2. European authorities may be suppressing some evidence of Islamist ties or motivations in these recent (and even future) attacks.

They have a motivation for doing so, and it is to reduce the amount of violent (and perhaps non-violent) backlash against Muslim refugees in Germany. Furthermore, we also have proof that German authorities did suppress evidence vis-a-vis the actions of Muslim refugees; leaks revealed that German police had greatly underreported the sexual harassment that took place in Cologne, Germany during the last New Year’s celebrations. So it is not implausible that they would choose to suppress the amount of evidence that they release to the public if such evidence points to Islamist motivations.

As three of the above mentioned attacks prove, some of the Muslim refugees seeking asylum are either Islamists or homicidal maniacs.

If, for example, the machete attacker with a previous history of violence turns out to have been a homicidal maniac and not an Islamist, this would be more evidence that the refugee vetting process is faulty, and cannot adequately  screen people with nefarious motives. After all, one would think that homicidal maniacs should be screened off. But in any case, we know that there are more Islamist refugees in Europe operating at the moment. Indeed, Angelika Merkel admitted that Islamist terrorists had been “smuggled” in with the massive influx of refugees. Europe has been infiltrated by Islamists.

3. These recent attacks show the crucial value of profiling.

It can no longer be denied that young and single male-Muslim refugees are at the greatest risk of committing such crimes than other members of the refugee population. Because of this, greater scrutiny should be applied to such refugees. This is a commonsensical position that one can only hope that European authorities are implementing. It is simply silly to give the same level of scrutiny to an elderly Jewish, Christian or Yazidi female refugee as to a young and single Muslim male refugee. Profiling needs to be done. Israel, e.g., profiles and its security forces are the most skilled at dealing with Islamic terrorism in the world. Profiling for high-risk groups would definitely decrease the probability of Islamist terrorist attacks on European soil.

German authorities are not very efficient at containing refugee violence. Why did German authorities not deport or keep under heavy scrutiny the Syrian Muslim migrant who perpetrated the machete attack? After all, he not only fits the profile outlined in the above point, but he has a history of known violence. This should have been a red flag for the German authorities. Commonsense legislation needs to be enacted here, if it is not already enacted—refugees who have been recently given asylum and who perform well-evidenced acts of violence should be quickly deported from Germany. This should be a rule all across Europe.

4. Guns, machetes, trucks, or knives are not the problem—it is the individuals who use them for nefarious purposes.

After all, Germany has one of the strictest gun laws in the world. But that did not stop some in the German legislature from proposing even stricter gun control legislation after the Munich shooting. Just like some American officials after the Orlando shooting, some German officials do not want to face the realities of the situation—and one of those realities—the primary reality—consists of radical Islam, a destructive ideology which disproportionately affects young Muslim males and which teaches the forceful subjugation of non-Muslims.

5. Although Merkel and her fellow multiculturalists in power are not personally responsible for these savage attacks, they do hold responsibility for opening the refugee floodgates.

Germany is clearly feeling the effects of its “open-door policy,” which has turned out to be a national security disaster. The refugee populations contain a significant amount of latent Islamist sentiment, sentiment that is fueling the anti-assimilation and violence that we are now witnessing across Germany and Europe. The multicultural enterprise has failed, and the evidence of this failure is all across Europe, in plain sight for all who have eyes to see and ears to hear. But a sizable amount of Europeans have yet to acquire eyes to see and ears to hear, as they still want to continue the refugee flow, even if it is marginally stemmed. Such is the insanity of those who would welcome the very people in their homes who would, if given the power, be the first to exterminate their caretakers.  It is a frustrating and melancholic form of naïveté.

Germans are rightly getting tired of all the Islamic terrorist attacks on their soil. The spate of recent attacks has caused many to come out with the slogan “Merkel Must Go.” Regardless of whether she must go or not, as I mentioned in my article on the Islamist infiltration of Europe, there are some practical steps that Germany and other European countries can take in counteracting the jihadist threat. They bear repeating.

Europeans should severely limit the number of refugees to whom they grant asylum. They should aggressively pressure the refugee populations already residing in their territories to assimilate to their native Western cultures.

In addition, Europeans, especially European lawmakers, need to realize that not all cultures are created equal, and that the German culture is superior to an Islamic culture like that of Saudi Arabia.

Furthermore, as suggested above, profiling of asylum seekers should be actively implemented. Non-Muslim refugees from places like Iraq and Syria should be given priority over Muslim refugees from these regions—this is for the simple probabilistic reason that a Muslim is more likely to pose a terrorist threat than a non-Muslim. In addition, refugees who are approved for European citizenship should first be granted probationary European citizenship for a certain period of time; if during that period of time they commit crimes, then their application for permanent citizenship should be revoked.

As I write this today images of an 86-year-old French Catholic priest in Normandy are plastered all over the news—he had just been brutally beheaded and filmed by two ISIS supporters, both of whom were known to authorities and who had previously tried to travel to Syria to join ISIS.

It is okay to wonder when the madness will end, but it is not okay to do nothing about it.

The very least one can do is to educate oneself about the threat of radical Islam and how Islamic law, the Sharia, is not compatible with Western Civilization. Remember that as the late great Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the Christian pastor who was executed by the Nazis for refusing to bow to their ideology and actively working to bring about their fall, once said: “Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.”

So let us not remain silent, let us speak, and let us act.

[1] The narrative never made much sense from the beginning, as Mateen had been married to women twice.

[2] Note that ‘Sonboly’ still gives information about the attacker’s background, since Sonbol is a city in the Iranian province of Khurusan; but this would be lost on most of BBC’s readership.