Allowing Terrorism, Absolving Its Perpetrators

Covering up Islamist terrorism is not how we should proceed:

Terrorism is real, and religious violence is real. However, some religious-inspired violence is much more real than that of other faiths. For example, there are not many – if any – Buddhists going around Australian and Western cities killing people who are not Buddhists.

There are not many – if any – Christians going around Australian and Western cities killing people who are not Christians. However, there are far too many Muslims going around Australian and Western cities killing people who are not Muslims.

Indeed, just which particular religious group is in mind when many European cities either have to cancel their Christmas markets or put in place massive security, with bollards, barricades, extra police presence, and so on. The authorities are not doing this to ward off zealous Baptists or to deter overly-excited Hare Krishnas.

Those are the hard cold facts that we must deal with. One important site that has been tracking Islamist terror attacks – especially since Sept. 11 – is found here: https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

Simply look at the stats on their home page: Since the horrific attack by Muslims on America back in September of 2001, guess how many deadly Islamic terror attacks have been carried out worldwide? If you say a 1000 or 5000 or 10,000 you are way off the mark. There have been 48,557!

I bring this up because you might have heard that Australia’s Human Rights Commission wants to basically leave us in the dark as to which ideology or religious group is most likely to engage in acts of terrorism here. Muslim groups are urging that religious identification of terrorists be dropped, while Jewish groups are worried this will make attacks on them even more likely.

The Victorian Human Rights Commission also wants to remove religion from discussions of terrorism. One can rightly ask if groups like this who cannot even tell you what a woman is are best placed to be discussing what terrorism and religion are!

Many have already spoken out on this. One report says this:

Former NSW police minister David Elliott criticises the Human Rights Commission for pushing to change the definition of terrorism in this country. “The whole definition of extremism is people who have ideological and religious views that are beyond the pale or beyond what a reasonable or a sensible person would consider appropriate,” Mr Elliott told Sky News host Danica De Giorgio. “Every religion has an extremist… the I in ISIS stands for Islamic, so we can not walk away from that.”

Quite so. And again, when a terror attack is about to be committed by some religious zealot, how often do we hear “Praise Jesus” being shouted first by the attacker? Or how often do we hear, “All glory to Moses” when a vehicle plows into a crowd of shoppers, or a person is beheaded? What we DO hear time and time again is the Islamic war cry, “Allahu Akbar!” It is saying Allah is great, and this act is being done in his name!

Others have also spoken out about this. Family First National Director Lyle Shelton recently shared this:

ERASING RELIGION FROM TERROR LAWS? ARE THEY SERIOUS?

Family First is calling it out: political correctness is now putting Australians in danger.

Muslim groups and the Human Rights Commission want to REMOVE “religious motivation” from terrorism laws — even though the data from ASIO and the courts could not be clearer.

ASIO’s own figures:

-13 of 16 terrorist attacks since 2014 were religiously motivated

-12 linked directly to Islamist violent extremism

Court records:

-78 of 83 terrorism convictions since 2002 involved Islamic fundamentalism

-22 of 28 disrupted attacks came from the same ideological stream

These are facts, not opinions.

He went on to say this in the media release:

To pretend religious ideology has nothing to do with modern terrorism is to deny reality.

Removing the religious-motivation test would blindfold ASIO and police at the very moment Australia needs clarity the most.

Common sense must not be sacrificed on the altar of political correctness.

Family First rejects bid to erase religious motivation from terrorism laws.

Family First has warned that removing “religious motivation” from Australia’s counter-terrorism laws would put public safety at unacceptable risk and would amount to political correctness trumping common sense.

Yes quite right. Jewish groups and ordinary Australians have every right to be concerned about how these groups and their Muslim promoters are trying to change things in this way. It is all part of ignoring the reality that overwhelmingly in the West terrorism is an Islamic problem.

As far as I am aware, Pentecostal Christians are not going around in Sydney with machetes killing people. Last I heard, Sikhs are not planting bombs in public places in Melbourne. But those from the political ideology of Islam are the ones mainly involved in such activities.

I already mentioned the gender wars here. We also have to worry about the race issue as well. We can tie all three together: If a black male jihadist from Sudan commits an atrocious attack in a Western city and then flees, are the police supposed to refuse to offer a full identification of the assailant? ‘We do not want to assume its gender, now do we? We do not want to be seen as racist. We do not want to be Islamophobic.’

This is all sheer nonsense, and the ones paying the price for this are the victims. We have seen enough of the grooming gangs in the UK and the diabolical horror they have inflicted on so many young female victims. But the authorities have long played down the fact the Islamic males from places like Pakistan were overwhelmingly involved in doing this.

We do not need that madness here in Australia. Forget the moronic political correctness and stick to actual policing, to real justice, and to appropriate punishment and sentencing. Ordinary Australians have had enough of the crime waves and the terrorist incidences.

We want to be safe in our own cities. And related to this, we must ask hard questions as to why Labor is allowing the mass migration of those from third world countries, including so many Muslims. Yes, they will become a useful voting bloc for Labor, but the truth remains: importing masses of people from the third world will mean importing third world problems.

Not all cultures are the same. Not all religions are the same. Three concluding quotes help to solidify my case:

Commentator Alyona Genkin said this:

Every season we hear how “Islamophobia” is out of control, yet synagogues harden their entrances and Christmas markets brace for attacks. Must be the ornaments causing trouble. If the victims aren’t the problem, why is naming the perpetrators considered taboo? Isn’t that backwards?

Matt Walsh from the Daily Wire recently posted this:

This is why we say, import the third world, become the third world. Because the thing nobody wants to say is that the reason why third world countries are the way they are is because third world people are the way they are. At the end of the day your country is a reflection of its people. Every country is, when it comes down to it. Somalia is totally dysfunctional and corrupt because scam and fraud and piracy is part of the lifestyle, part of the culture. Bring it over here and you get the same stuff.

And when a Wall Street Journal writer opined that Afghan refugees shouldn’t be blamed for the violent act of one man, US Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller rightly replied this way:

This is the great lie of mass migration. You are not just importing individuals. You are importing societies. No magic transformation occurs when failed states cross borders. At scale, migrants and their descendants recreate the conditions, and terrors, of their broken homelands.

If Australia and the West are serious about dealing with crime and terrorism, the first order of the day is to clearly identify the perpetrators and call them out. Otherwise, we are all doomed to experience more of it.

[1338 words]