Dealing with islamic terror: the London model.
Erdogan is no friend to the West. He is a violent, oppressive dictator, and a supporter of terrorism.
Prime Minister May knows this; hence the “stern warning.” Is the UK so desperate for money it has to resort to selling powerful modern weapons to the enemies of civilization?
There are multiple posts floating around Facebook about the Paris attacks. Some of these make two disturbing claims:
Firstly, that the attacks had nothing to do with the fact that the perpetrators were muslim. That, they claim, is beside the point. What matters is simply that they were a bunch of arseholes.
Secondly, that ordinary Westerners who are concerned about those affected by these attacks, who are praying for them, for France, for peace, who express a desire to stand with the people of Paris, are somehow hypocritical because similar concern is not expressed about other terrorist attacks around the world.
These two claims can be answered together.
There is no doubt that the perpetrators of these attacks were arseholes. You have to be an arsehole to be a cold-blooded murderer, torturer, rapist or pedophile.
Muhammad was all of those things.
Muhammad raped a nine-year-old girl, Aisha, when he was fifty-three.
One of the many women captured in war whom he took and raped was a member of the Banu Qurayza, a Jewish tribe living in Medina. At his command, Muhammad’s fighters checked the boys to see whether they had pubic hair. If they did not, they could be kept as slaves along with the girls and women. If they did, they were beheaded with the adult men – some 900 in a single afternoon – after they had surrendered. This woman, Rayhana, had just seen her husband and her sons brutally murdered, and was then taken and made a ‘wife’ by the messenger of Allah.
In another incident, a group of bedouins killed a shepherd.. “and drove away the camels, and they became unbelievers after they were Muslims. When the Prophet was informed by a shouter for help, he sent some men in their pursuit, and before the sun rose high, they were brought, and he had their hands and feet cut off. Then he ordered for nails which were heated and passed over their eyes, and they were left in the Harra (i.e. rocky land in Medina). They asked for water, and nobody gave them water till they died.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 261)
Muhammad is the perfect man, the paragon, the moral exemplar for all time for all muslims.
The attackers in Paris were arseholes, no doubt. Is the fact that they were muslim irrelevant?
Even after the above, it might be irrelevant. Except for two things.
Firstly, that so many of the arseholes involved in terror attacks turn out to be muslim. There have been over 27,000 terror attacks around the world since 9/11, where, apparently by pure co-incidence, the arseholes just turned out to be muslims. The number of Methodists and Buddhists who blow themselves up in shopping centres, slice people’s heads off with rusty blades in the name of their god, or take schools hostage while raping and torturing the children is, by comparison, remarkably small. Non-existent, in fact.
Secondly, that it is the perpetrators of these attacks themselves who claim that they are acting in the name of Allah. The people who are doing these things say they are doing them because they are muslims, that they are acting as they do to please their god, that they are following the example of Muhammad, and that the koran promises that if they are killed fighting the unbelievers, whom they are commanded to fight wherever they find them, they are guaranteed a place in paradise, a place of unending sex with perfect women:
Ibn Majah, 5:4337 Allah’s Messenger said: “Everyone who is admitted to paradise Allah, the Mighty and glorious will marry him with seventy-two wives, Every one of them will have a pleasant vagina and he (the man) will have a sexual organ that does not bend down during sexual intercourse.”
Yes, but anything besides their pleasant vaginas? “The Prophet said: A houri is a most beautiful young woman with a transparent body. The marrow of her bones is visible like the interior lines of pearls and rubies. She looks like red wine in a white glass. She is of white colour, and free from the routine physical disabilities of an ordinary woman such as menstruation, menopause, urinal and offal discharge, child bearing and the related pollution. A houri is a girl of tender age, having large breasts which are round (pointed), and not inclined to dangle.” [Al-Tirmizi, volume 2, pg 35-40]. Or ever-fresh boys like scattered pearls are also available, if that is your preference.
Everyone agrees the Haj is islamic – Muhammad commanded his followers to make the pilgrimage. Everyone agrees prayer five times per day while facing Mecca is islamic – Muhammad commanded his followers to do this. Everyone agrees fasting during Ramadan is islamic, because it is something Muhammad commanded his followers to do.
Inflicting terror on the unbelievers, taking their women and children, chopping off the heads and fingertips of any who resist, Muhammad did these things and commanded his followers to do the same, so how is it that they are any less Islamic? At the heart of every religion is following the example and teaching of its founder.
There is no islam without Muhammad. There is no Muhammad without brutality, invasion, rape and murder.
Why are we in the West so much more distressed by attacks in Paris than attacks on Mindanao, or in Southern Thailand, or Kenya or Western China or Pakistan or Nigeria? Some journalists of the Guardian and Salon type have been busy telling us this is because we don’t really care for humanity at all, just for selected humans, namely the ones who look and talk like us.
This is pure hypocrisy on their part. The reason most ordinary people are not deeply concerned about terror attacks in non-Western countries is simply that they do not know about them. They do not know about them because Western media outlets do not report them. Given the constancy, number and scale of these attacks, it is hard to believe this is not a deliberate choice. Because if people were made aware of the extent of islamic terrorism, there could be no more pretending this was just random arseholes, no more pretending Islamic terrorism was just a minor irritation and no big deal.
To take the last month, October, as a random example, there were 194 terror attacks in the name of Allah and Muhammad, in 31 different countries. resulting in 1564 deaths and over 1700 serious injuries. These are people whose lives will never be the same again. Mutilation, loss of limbs or sight, family members tortured or murdered.
That does not include figures from the conflict in Syria and Iraq, or “honour” killings, or plain ordinary murders, just attacks against civilian targets carried out in the name of Allah and his messenger.
In the last week there have been 47 attacks by islamic terrorists – nearly seven every day – resulting in 392 deaths and over 900 serious injuries.
Moderate and careful Western leaders have a duty to recognise the problem, call it by name and develop a plan to deal with it. If they can’t or won’t, then ordinary people will eventually elect leaders who will. No problem can be solved until the problem is recognised. A hashtag and singing “Imagine” won’t do it.
ISIS, who planned and co-ordinated the Paris attacks, have said that Rome, London and Washington are next. There is a German proverb: Work as if no prayer would help, pray as if no work would help. Let us pray, and work, for a world in which attacks like those in Paris, Beirut, Baghdad, Kenya, etc, etc, etc …. are just a distant memory.
Last November Herbert London wrote an article about Israel and just war theory. It is worth reading in full; it perfectly summarises the difference in the philosophies of Israel and its enemies.
A few paragraphs:
There were even times when the Israeli soldiers put their own lives at risk to avoid killing an innocent person. Time after time a known terrorist hiding behind “human shields” in an apartment complex was spared to avoid the death of people who were innocent. Rockets launched from a school roof remained untouched until children had left the premises. In the heat of battle Israeli forces maintained a level of moral behavior that was exemplary.
Many commentators on this subject point to an Arab boy of about fifteen crying as he approached a checkpoint. Soldiers on the scene went into high alert. It seemed clear that this distraught youngster was recruited to be a suicide bomber. One Israeli soldier, recognizing the boy’s agitation, called out to him, “Brother” in Arabic. He could not be sure when or whether the boy would set himself ablaze. Nonetheless, the IDF soldier continued to walk to the boy, took him in his arms and disarmed the explosive device around his waist — all the while knowing that often the Palestinians use a remote control device to explode suicide bombers. The episode also tells a great deal about the Israeli military psychology.
Arab attempts to paint a different picture of the IDF have been successful. Many in the Arab world see these well-trained and disciplined troops as amoral. That, however, is far from the truth. These Israeli eighteen and nineteen year olds are told from the first day of national service that they carry the banner of a civilization that puts a premium on life. Their job is to protect and defend. They are given a green light to kill only when other methods to stop an enemy fail.
At a training session for IDF entrants at Ammunition Hill in Jerusalem, teenagers drafted into military service discuss the roots of war, the conflict in the Middle East, the history of this new nation. But most significantly, they study just-war theory and a moral stance for fighting those who rely on terror methods. Of course, no system is foolproof; occasionally a soldier will act improperly. This, however, is the exception. Israel is in a daily struggle. After all, 250 million Arabs in 22 Arab and Muslim countries want to destroy this nation. But Israeli leaders do not modify their moral code one iota. As the commander of this training center noted, “If we altered our approach, what effect would it have on soldiers when they leave military service?” One fights not only to save a nation, but to save values.
What, you didn’t know?
Hardly surprising, since attacks on Israeli civilians get short shrift in the Australian media.
From Times of Israel:
Gaza-based terrorists fired 25 rockets into southern Israel on Saturday, causing damage to a school and factory. The latest attacks bring the total number of rockets and other projectiles fired from the Strip to approximately 150 over the past six days …
Sderot mayor David Buskila convened a special meeting Saturday morning with police and Home Front Command officials. He demanded that the government restore calm to his city. “We have known this reality for 11 years already.”
During a visit to Sderot and neighboring towns surrounding the Gaza Strip on Saturday, Home Front Defense Minister Matan Vilnai said “Israel cannot remain silent following the events in the South in recent days.” He said Israel holds Hamas fully responsible for everything happening around the Gaza Strip, and that Israel will continue to use a heavy hand against anyone who tries to escalate the situation.
Interesting that when Syria shoots down one Turkish fighter jet, no one suggests that Turkey would not be within its rights to respond with force.
UK Foreign Secretary William Hague said Syria’s actions were “outrageous” and underlined “how far beyond accepted behaviour the Syrian regime has put itself”.
“It will be held to account for its behaviour. The UK stands ready to pursue robust action at the United Nations Security Council.”
But when Israel responds to relentless attacks on its people within its own borders… well, that’s different.
The best tribute to the despicable and admirable Christopher Hitchens is to read, hear and inwardly digest his words.
This interview taped in 2002 for Uncommon Knowledge is brilliant. Two highly intelligent, eloquent men, with deep knowledge of history, talk about something that is still critically important.
In the war on terror, who are our enemies?
Why is the world silent on the constant terrorist attacks on Israel?
From the Chicago Tribune, by Ron Prosor, Israel’s Permanent Envoy to the UN:
Silence. Just silence from the U.N. Silence from Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. And silence from major media outlets throughout the world.
Imagine for just a moment if this were happening to cities in, say, Texas. Imagine that the citizens of El Paso, Laredo and San Antonio have to stay inside their homes. Schools are closed, businesses are shut and people have to suspend their lives. Not because of some natural disaster or a nuclear or chemical accident, because groups in Mexico have purchased and are firing thousands of deadly missiles at Texans across the border. Sometimes a school is hit, sometimes a grocery store, and every so often someone is killed.
Imagine a similar occurrence in Seattle, Detroit or Cleveland — with rockets raining in from Canada.
Your reaction to this imagined scenario is, no doubt, incredulity. The very thought of terrorists in another country attacking Americans at random is ludicrous. You know the president would immediately order the U.S. military to respond, root out the terrorists and make sure that the Canadian or Mexican governments clearly understood that this behavior would not be tolerated. The United Nations Security Council would immediately condemn this infringement on a country’s sovereignty and the safety of its citizens. The U.N. charter makes a country’s self-defense as legal as it is logical. This is universally understood.
So if it is natural to be outraged and support the defense against terrorists who attack Texas, or England or Russia or China, why is it not natural to support the same for Israel? Since the beginning of October, more than 70 rockets and missiles have rained down on southern Israel from the Gaza Strip, which remains under the control of the Hamas terrorist organization. Last week, Israel’s densely populated northern towns were hit by rockets fired from Lebanon.
Hamas deliberately fires rockets into the heart of Israel’s major cities, which have exploded on playgrounds, near kindergarten classrooms and homes. Last month, a man was killed when a rocket struck his car on his evening commute home. Many more people have been injured. In the last month alone, more than a million Israelis had to stay home from work and more than 200,000 students were unable to attend school. You don’t read about this because if it’s covered at all, it’s buried in the back pages of newspapers.
Although these horrific attacks should appall good people everywhere, not one word of condemnation has come from the Security Council in the United Nations. Peace activists that regularly criticize my country are silent on this one as well.
Underlying the violence that continues to emanate from Gaza is a deeply rooted culture of incitement. Last month, would-be Palestinian suicide bomber Wafa al-Biss was released from prison as part of an exchange for kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Schalit. Al-Biss offered a breathtaking challenge to cheering schoolchildren at her Hamas welcome-home rally. She said, “I hope you will walk the same path that we took and God willing, we will see some of you as martyrs.” Her crime? She tried to kill doctors, nurses and patients by blowing herself up in an Israeli hospital. Luckily, she failed to detonate.
These are the poisonous values that are being fed to the next generation of children in Gaza. When Israel looks at children, it sees the future. When Hamas looks at children, it sees suicide bombers and human shields. If only incitement were confined to Gaza. It also pervades the official institutions of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank — and many other corners of our region. In schools, mosques and media, generation after generation of children across the Middle East have been taught to hate, vilify and dehumanize Israelis and Jews.
The intolerance all too common in the Middle East finds its way around the world, even entering the halls of the U.N. Today the U.N. is home to a triple standard: one standard for democracies, a different standard for dictatorships and a special, unobtainable standard for Israel. So I pose this ethical question, not from a philosophy course at a great university but based very much in the real world: If it is not OK to fire deadly rockets at the citizens of any of the other 193 member states that make up the United Nations, why is the world silent when the victims are Israelis?
Jennifer S Bryson notes the high proportion of captured terrorists who have had large amounts of pornography in their possession.
Pornography makes women and men masturbation aids. The actors cease to be human. Their only purpose is to provide physical stimulation. If they don’t do their job, they disappear – the page is turned, the next website clicked.
Pornography de-humanises both actors and users.
If we want to understand the inner workings of terrorists and would-be terrorists, we must seek to understand their entire person, including the relationship—or inconsistencies—between their words and actions. In the case of the 9/11 hijackers who visited strip clubs, and in the case of Abdo and among what seems like an increasing number of terrorists, actions include sexual perversions and pornography use that cannot be squared with what these ideological terrorists and their supporters espouse.
Terrorist acts rely on the ability to dehumanise planned victims. Victims are less than real, less than people. They are to be blotted out.
Are there security costs to the free-flow of pornography? If so, what are they? Are we as a society putting ourselves at risk by turning a blind eye to pornography proliferation?
I wonder further: Could it be that pornography drives some users to a desperate search for some sort of radical “purification” from the pornographic decay in their soul? Could it be that the greater the wedge pornography use drives between an individual’s religious aspirations and the individual’s actions, the more the desperation escalates, culminating in increasingly horrific public violence, even terrorism?
And no, that’s not jihad in the sense of the inner struggle against sin and weakness. It means the use of violence to achieve the impostion of sharia law and the establishment of a caliphate.
“The Soldier’s Prayer,” written in 1912 by Turkish nationalist poet Ziya Gokalp:
The minarets are our bayonets, the domes our helmets, the mosques our barracks and the faithful our army.
During August 2007, the New York City Police Department (NYPD) released “Radicalization in the West — The Homegrown Threat.” This insightful 90-page report evaluated the threat that had become apparent since 9/11/2001, analyzing the roots of recent terror plots in the United States, from Lackawanna in upstate New York to Portland, Ore., to Fort Dix, NJ. Based upon these case-study analyses of individuals arrested for jihadist activity, the authors concluded that the “journey” of radicalization that produces homegrown jihadists began in so-called “Salafist” (“fundamentalist” to non-Muslims) mosques characterized by high levels of Sharia—Islamic Law—adherence.
The landmark study just published, “Sharia and Violence in American Mosques” (Kedar M, Yerushalmi D. The Middle East Quarterly, Summer 2011, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 59-72) sought to expand considerably upon the NYPD’s post-hoc, case study approach—systematically gathering objective survey data, with much greater methodological rigor—and address these two a priori questions: I) Is there a robust association between observable measures of religious devotion, coupled to Sharia-adherence in US mosques, and the presence of violence-sanctioning materials at these mosques?; and II) Is there a robust association between the presence of violence-sanctioning materials at a mosque, and the advocacy of jihadism by the mosque’s leadership via recommending the study of these materials, or other manifest behaviors? …
In brief, survey data were collected from a nationally representative, random statistical sample of 100 US mosques, covering 14 states, and the District of Columbia. …
The study’s results provide clear—and ominous—affirmative answers to the a priori questions posed. Sharia-adherence was strongly associated with the presence of jihad-violence sanctioning materials, and the presence of jihad-violence sanctioning materials was in turn robustly associated with advocacy of jihadism by mosque imams—religious leaders. This key summary finding was highlighted by the authors:
…51 percent of mosques had texts that either advocated the use of violence in the pursuit of a Shari‘a-based political order or advocated violent jihad as a duty that should be of paramount importance to a Muslim; 30 percent had only texts that were moderately supportive of violence like the Tafsir Ibn Kathir and Fiqh as-Sunna; 19 percent had no violent texts at all.
Thus 81% of this statistical sample representative of US mosques were deemed as moderately (30%) to highly (51%) supportive of promulgating jihad violence to impose Shari’a.
Even more disturbing is the fact that only 4.7% of regular Muslim worshippers attend a mosque where no violent jihadist materials are available, because the Sharia/Caliphate/Jihad supporting mosques are better attended.
It would be interesting to see a similar survey of mosques in Australia.
A roundup of Islamist violence from the last few days from The Religion of Peace:
March 12th 2011 (Kandahar, Afghanistan) – Four civilians are cut to shreds by a roadside bomb.
March 12th 2011 (Baghdad, Iraq) – Seven Iraqi soldiers on their way to work are brutally machine-gunned in their car at point-blank range.
March 12th 2011 (Itamar, Israel) – The Fogel family including a baby and two young children are stabbed to death in their sleep at home.
March 12th 2011 (Hairdin, Pakistan) – A married couple and their four young children are turned into debris by an Islamist mortar attack on their home.
March 11th 2011 (Karachi, Pakistan) – A seminary teacher is assassinated by sectarian rivals.
March 10th 2011 (Peshawar, Pakistan) – Mujahideen fire on a car containing a peace committee contingent, killing the driver.
It is hard to imagine anything more revolting than sneaking into a house at night and stabbing a baby to death. Though vile, brutal and cowardly, acts like the murder of the Fogel family are not uncommon, as the above list shows.
Especially concerning was the celebration of this family’s murder by Palestinians, and the distorted coverage, or non coverage, of these events in the mainstream media.
Binyamin Netanyahu is right to note that the incitement of violence and hatred against Jews is part of the daily life of Palestinian arabs, and something approved of by Israel’s ‘peace partners’ Hamas and the PA, despite their claims to the contrary.
As Israel on Sunday was mourning the slaughter of the five members of the Fogel family in Itamar, members of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah faction named a town square after Dalal al-Mughrabi, the leader of the 1978 bus hijacking in which 37 Israelis were killed and 71 were wounded.
“We stand here in praise of our martyrs and in loyalty to all of the martyrs of the national movement,” Fatah member and Abbas adviser Sabri Seidam said at the unveiling of a plaque showing Mughrabi cradling a rifle against a backdrop map of Israel, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The square was festooned with Palestinian flags.
Pamela Geller has more on the Fogel murder, including photos of the family, a video, commentary on the press coverage, photos of Palestinians handing out sweets on the street in celebration, the glorification of past family murderers by the PA, and quotes from the Koran and hadith showing how this murderous hatred and violence is justified.
US Department of Justice statistics show that although they constitute only 1% of America’s population, Muslims have been responsible for 186 of 228 terror cases investigated since 9/11.
The Tamil Tigers and Columbian FARC are next with 32 cases between them.
And, no, of course we shouldn’t blame all Muslims for this. And we don’t. Despite scare stories about Islamophobia, Jews in the US are ten times more likely to be the victims of a hate crime than Muslims.
Why are Muslims in America and Australia so over-represented in terror related offences?
It is a question I would have thought moderate Muslims were as anxious to answer as the rest of us.
Yet the response to Republican Peter King’s investigation of the extent of radicalisation of American Muslims and the response of the Muslim community to this radicalisation has been protest rallies and personal attacks including death threats.
A little more from Rick Moran at Frontpagemag.com:
Why this has developed into such a wildly controversial matter says more about those who are threatening, smearing, and hysterically criticizing King than it does about radical Islam. When the left allies itself with extremist groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in order to wave the flag of political correctness in America’s face, you realize that the problem is bigger than simply rooting out extremism. The exaggerated, over-the-top, self-righteous posturing coming from media outlets like The New York Times bespeaks a refusal to face up to the challenge of radical Islam in America and how to combat it.
And if we’re not prepared to address the threat of extremism in our own country, how can we possibly fight it overseas?
Leftists and their Muslim grievance-monger allies are deliberately seeking to block efforts to discover the extent of the problem of terrorism by viciously attacking the New York congressman. They are opposing King in the name of some misguided belief that because terrorism comes from a specific religious group, we must blind ourselves to the danger, else we would be guilty of “bigotry.”
The technologies are interesting and certainly work. But what seems to make the most difference is the thinking.
“Israel concentrates on the passengers and not their luggage so we have a real edge over the rest of the world in protecting travelers,” says Rafi Sela, a top security consultant and former chief security officer at the Israel Airport Authority. “This is in addition to us protecting the whole airport, while the others merely try to achieve aviation security.”
In other words, it’s about the people, not the bags, and it’s about the whole airport, not just the planes.
“You can’t do security with political correctness. As long as you are doing it without a real plan, it will never work.”
I remember seeing a guy a guy who had been asked to leave several supermarkets interviewed on TV.
He objected to being told ‘Have a nice day’ by checkout operators.
Fair enough. It is a silly, empty phrase.
But he responded by abusing the employees. These were mostly teenage girls in their first jobs, who were doing what their employer had asked them to do.
Abusing them was pointless bullying.
I feel the same about airport employees who are now required to implement intrusive and embarrassing security measures, incuding full body scans or searches.
Ann Coulter writes incisively (as usual) about this, and how silly and misguided these airport security measures are:
After Muslim terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab of Nigeria tried to detonate explosive material in his underwear over Detroit last Christmas, the government began requiring nude body scans at airports.
The machines, which cannot detect chemicals or plastic, would not have caught the diaper bomber. So, again, no hijackers were stopped, but being able to see passengers in the nude boosted the morale of airport security personnel by 22 percent.
This is amusing, but unfair. It is like blaming checkout operators for ‘Have a nice day.’
They are not responsible for the utterly ridiculous policies implemented by their political masters.
Ann Coulter again:
It’s similarly pointless to treat all Americans as if they’re potential terrorists while trying to find and confiscate anything that could be used as a weapon. We can’t search all passengers for explosives because Muslims stick explosives up their anuses. (Talk about jobs Americans just won’t do.)
You have to search for the terrorists.
Fortunately, that’s the one advantage we have in this war. In a lucky stroke, all the terrorists are swarthy, foreign-born, Muslim males. (Think: “Guys Madonna would date.”)
This would give us a major leg up — if only the country weren’t insane.
Terrorists are not all foreign born. And I wouldn’t be surprised if islamists started using 3 year olds to carry explosives onto airplanes.
But the key word in that sentence is ‘islamists.’
There are no Jewish, Presbyterian, Baptist or Buddhist groups which have an announced policy of destroying the West, and who have proven their seriousness by repeatedly blowing up embassies, churches, and schools.
Targetting Muslims may be unfair to the majority. But as long as a substantial number of muslims living in the West believe suicide bombings and violence in the cause of Islam are acceptable, and as long as Muslim leaders do not consistently, clearly and frequently denounce such violence, the rest just have to wear it.
Is that unfair? Yes.
But it is less unfair than implementing security procedures which humiliate everyone while achieving nothing.
Bombs found on planes in Dubai and Britain were large enough to have destroyed the planes mid-air, killing all on board, and causing further casualties if the bombs exploded over populated areas.
A woman named Hanan al Samawi has been arrested in Yemen. The Telegraph headline says she is an engineering student, while later in the text it reports: She was arrested at a house in a poor area in the west of Sana’a, where she is studying medicine at the university.
Engineering, medicine, whatever. These are not areas of study which the poor usually take up.
There are three points here.
First, the Telegraph needs to get some new copy editors. Accuracy is important. It is not good enough in a major national daily to have a headline contradicted by the text immediately below it.
Second, the female of the species is as dangerous as the male. There is no justification for policies which discriminate against men in relation to being held in detention centres, for example, on the basis that they are likely to be terrorists whereas women are not.
And finally, terrorism does not have its roots in poverty. There is a great deal of talk about understanding the causes of terrorism. The commonly identified causes in such talks are Western imperialism and Western monopolisation of consumer goods.
This is nonsense. The major source of terrorist activity is radical Islam. Thai Buddhists, African animists, and Orthodox believers living in Siberia, all of whom suffer poverty compared with the West, are not burning down schools and blowing up planes.
Osama Bin Laden, of course, is a multi-millionaire. Terrorism has nothing to do with poverty.
It has everything to do with what its perpetrators keep telling us is the reason for their actions: They hate infidels, and believe they are commanded to destroy them.
I like Julie Bishop. She has been a loyal and hard working deputy leader of the Liberal Party under three different leaders. It is not often I disagree with her.
But she said today that she thought it was important that Australia support India’s hosting of the Commonwealth Games.
No. It’s not.
Or at least, it is less important than the safety and health of athletes and other visitors.
India has had seven years to prepare for the games. The games begin on October 3rd – a week from today. But athletes are arriving to filthy conditions, collapsing beds, non functioning taps, toilets and other basic amenities.
National teams could stay in hotels in the city, at substantial additional expense. But it would not be safe for them to do so. The Indian government has said it cannot guarantee the safety of visitors outside the games village and games venues.
I’m surprised they think they can guarantee a safe location anywhere.
There have been at least fourteen major terrorist attacks in New Delhi since the year 2000. Hundreds of people have been killed.
There have been clear threats from islamic terrorist groups to kidnap athletes and other games visitors. These threats are not new. They have been made by al-Qaeda for the last several years.
Given the high level of risk to games visitors, it is simply inexcusable that India does not have adequate facilities in place a week before the games, and as athletes are arriving.