Short Description
In a way that BBC reporter I mentioned above has done us all a favour: he has gone to the scene of one of Islamist terror’s worst recent atrocities (in the West at any rate), with the bodies barely cold, and captured verbatim the all-too-typical Muslim response: victimhood;
In a way that BBC reporter I mentioned above has done us all a favour: he has gone to the scene of one of Islamist terror’s worst recent atrocities (in the West at any rate), with the bodies barely cold, and captured verbatim the all-too-typical Muslim response: victimhood; buck-passing; fatalism.
Hence the frustrated tone of Douglas Murray’s concluding paragraph:
Here is a different suggestion: do everything you can to stop people called Mohammed committing mass slaughter in Europe on a bi-monthly basis. Get the hatred out of the mosques and the books, get the bigotry out of the community and the slightest tolerance of it identified as a major part of the problem. Of course most Muslims can’t do anything themselves to stop somebody like last night’s attacker carrying out such a deed, but they can at least have the decency to look like they’re taking part in the kind of criticism and introspection the rest of us would take part in if someone sharing even a jot of our identity had carried out such an attack.
He’s right. I’ve experienced it for myself on a 2014 debate programme on BBC Three – laughably called Free Speech – where my fellow panelists were: a Muslim Conservative MP; a trendy gay Muslim; a groovy young female feminist Muslim to whose Afghan parents Britain had most generously given asylum. In many parts of the Umma, one of them would be executed by being pushed from a high building, one would be behind a veil and gagged from venturing a public opinion, and one definitely wouldn’t be a politician. Yet all three of them, when asked about the “Islamist” problem, insisted that it had nothing to do with Islam but rather that it was the product of “Islamophobia” and “foreign policy.” Neither the audience nor the presenters challenged this lie. I was the only person to do so.
So it’s really no wonder that atrocities like the one in Nice continue to proliferate. As far as the majority of the Muslim community is concerned it’s just not their responsibility. And they are buoyed in this view by organisations like the BBC and CNN and the liberal media generally – not forgetting the wankerati and all those useful idiots on Facebook – who reassure them: “No it really isn’t your fault. It’s all just a perversion of your wonderful peace-loving religion. And if anyone suggests otherwise we’ll send the police round to arrest them…”
Can you imagine what would happen if, say, these terrorist incidents were being done in the name of Judaism or Christianity or Hinduism? Sure there’d be lots of protestations from believers that these terrible acts represented a hideous perversion of their religion. But there would also be absolutely zero tolerance for or sympathy with the perpetrators. There’d be no sympathetic priests or rabbis giving doctrinal justification for such murders. There’d be no think pieces in the Guardian, explaining it in terms of poverty and injustice. There’d certainly be not a single Jew or Christian quietly celebrating a blow struck for the faith.
I wish the same could be said of Muslims. But does anyone actually believe this is the case?
source:
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/07/18/muslims-were-the-real-victims-of-the-nice-terror-attack-the-bbc-explains/
Comments
Send your comment