Posted on 03/15/2019 9:19:12 AM PDT by robowombat
New Zealand murders: repercussions and perspective
The savage and heinous terrorist attacks on the mosques in New Zealand are being and will be used to try to silence all criticism of jihad terror and Sharia oppression of women and others. The effort to stamp out such criticism is longstanding, and has gained new impetus now, although few stop to think about the fact that there is a big difference between non-violent analysis of a source of violence and oppression and vigilante violence against innocent people. The silencing will proceed apace. Here, in the meantime, is some perspective.
“New Zealand Attacks: Repercussions and Perspective,” by Srdja Trifkovic, Chronicles, March 15, 2019:
Terrorist attacks against Muslims in the Western world are extremely rare. This morning’s carnage in two mosques in New Zealand, with the death toll currently at 50, is the first major event of its kind since the Quebec City mosque shooting—over two years ago – which killed six persons.
(As for the alleged “Islamophobic incidents” in general, overwhelmingly they are either unverifiable or too trivial to be taken seriously.)
While 56 dead in two years is 56 too many, this regrettable incident will dominate the headlines infinitely more than any comparable carnage involving Christians, notably the 2017 Palm Sunday church bombings in Alexandria; it killed 45 people, and was all but ignored by the Western media and politicians. The developing frenzy of compassion with the victims of Christchurch will result in a number of mathematically predictable consequences:
The ruling elites and their media cohorts all over the Western world will have a field day equating “violent extremism” (which has nothing to do with “true Islam,” of course) with the neo-nazi, right-wing, white, Christian-inspired racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia, and all other traits of the deplorables; and yes, it will be Trump’s fault to boot. Various Islamic activist in the West, such as the sharia-promoting CAIR in the U.S. and its fellow-conspirators elsewhere, will clamor for ever more stringent laws criminalizing “Islamophobia,” effectively defined as any form of meaningful debate of Islam, its scriptural message, historical practice, and current ambitions. Such demands will be promptly translated into legislative proposals by the jihadophile liberal class which will proclaim zero tolerance of “Islamophobia” as defined by CAIR et al. And, of course, they will demand additional Soviet/Nazi style gun laws. Six years ago in these pages I defined jihadophilia as a mental disorder affecting members of the Western (including Anglo-Antipodean) elite class, which is characterized by a breakdown of the ability to name Muslims as perpetrators of the acts of Islamic terrorism, by the tendency to systematically ignore Islam as a factor in terrorist attacks or to deny its relevance in such attacks, and by an acute deficit of the capacity or will to provide appropriate institutional or legal responses to such attacks. This psychosis, hard to cure ab initio, will be let loose now like never before.
For starters, there will be no attempt to place today’s killings “in perspective,” as is invariably the case after Muslim terrorists strike Western targets—in Nice, Paris, Berlin etc.—killing hundreds of people. That “perspective” should include the fact that some 30 million Muslims reside in the Western world today (many more on their own reckoning), which makes the probability of any one of them falling victim to a deplorable attack in any given year roughly one in ten million.
These odds may be higher than being eaten by a great white shark, but they compare rather favorably with the probability of a Frenchman being killed by a Muslim fanatic. Be patient, dear reader; let us recoup with precision, lest we be accused of inflammatory rhetoric:
7-9 January 2015: Charlie Hebdo attacks kill 22 people. 26 June 2015: In Saint-Quentin-Fallavier, a Muslim decapitated a Frenchman and rammed a van into cylinders at a gas factory trying to start an explosion. 13-14 November 2015: The horrendous Paris attacks killed 137 people in the single deadliest terrorist outrage in French history 13 June 2016: At Magnanville, a policeman and his wife were murdered by a jihadist. 14 July 2016: A truck was driven into crowds celebrating Bastille Day in Nice. The driver, Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel, killed 86 people. 26 July 2016: In Normandy two jihadists attacked a church during mass, killing an 86-year-old priest. 1 October 2017: A Muslim stabbed to death two young women at a Marseille train station. Before he was shot dead he shouted Allahu Akbar. 23 March 2018: A Muslim stole a car in Carcassonne, killing the passenger, went to Trèbes, attacked a supermarket, killed three people and injured several others. 12 May 2018: A Chechen-born “Frenchman” stabbed to death one pedestrian and injured several others near the Garnier Opera in Paris. 11 December 2018: In Strasbourg a gunman opened fire just outside the Christmas Market, killing 5 and injuring 11. That makes 261 dead and many more injured, in attacks by Muslims on non-Muslims, in less than four years, in only one country, France (pop. 66 million). With 66 dead a year on average, Frenchmen are exactly ten times more likely to be murdered by a Muslim than a Muslim being killed by a non-Muslim terrorist anywhere in the Western world.
The score is incomparably worse if we look at the situation of Christians in the Muslim world. It is the most egregious example of human right violations in today’s world: according to “Open Doors,” at least 4,305 Christians known by name were murdered by Muslims because of their faith in 2018. Aid to the Church in Need, in its latest “Religious Freedom Report,” warned that 300 million Christians, overwhelmingly in the majority-Muslim countries, were subjected to violence, making it “the most persecuted religion in the world.”
This makes the odds of a Christian in a majority-Muslim country being murdered by a Muslim—simply for being what he is—approximately one in 70,000. This means a Christian living in a majority Muslim country is 143 times more likely to be killed by a Muslim for being a Christian than a Muslim is likely to be killed by a non-Muslim in a Western country for being what he is.
These are some of the facts that need to be taken into account as we face today’s onslaught of massive Agitprop and self-hatred inducement from every screen and every printed page in every Western country. The victims and their families in New Zealand deserve sympathy. So do the victims of jihadism, which is the most murderous ideology in human history, incomparably more lethal than Bolshevism and National Socialism combined
Hmmm....Just like AOC and her "Green New Deal" supporters!!!
Thank God for Jihad Watch. To provide a reasonable perspective to the event in New Zealand.
As opposed to the leftist media and their “white nationalist terrorist” BS and their incessant ties to Donald Trump.
All true! I smell the CIA.
I remember the video of Muslims by the thousands in Pakistan, dancing in the streets after 3000 Americans were murdered.
You will not see Christians doing that.
So, just a thought. When a gaggle of isis or hamas or whoever the flavor of the day is (omar’s pals!) slaughter a bunch of Christians or Jews, we don’t hear anything about guncontrol or screeds against the NRA then. What’s up with that? Oh, silly me. Cultural heritage clause I guess.
bttt
This NZ shooter is EXACTLY like AOC.
See this article.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3734865/posts
He is an eco-fascist calling for “Green Nationalism”.
I wonder if this guy has big bug eyes and huge buck teeth also?
Senator Fraser better don his flame-retardant (and bullet-proof) gear this morning.
And catch the next plane to begin to gain his residency and a Senate seat here!
Thanks for that post. That’s a special man.
Another GUN FREE ZONE MASSACRE.
We need to call these things for what they are. This guy stood there for 15 minutes shooting people in the back. If New Zealanders were not disarmed he not have lasted a minute.
This was a sick individual with a gun who was free to slaughter dozens. Imagine if we had a sick government and an unarmed populace.
Despite that single-minded lense through which he views and addresses dozens if not hundreds of questions, the more you read, the more inconsistent his outlook starts to look. For instance, he makes many references to Christians and Christianity in terms of European culture, talks about smashing down the minarets on The Hagia Sophia, but does not describe himself as Christian. Under that question, (“are you Christian”), he said it’s complicated and he will devote more thought to it later. Furthermore there are Nordic Pagan symbols, imagery, ideas, and direct references sprinkled throughout.
Point being, this kook defies every conventional label except “White Supremacist”.
diversity + proximity = violence. This isn’t the last time we will see this. It’s going to happen more and more. It’s tragic that this person chose violence, and that the recipients of his anger were mere pawns. Sounds like New Zealand needed a wall of sorts.
To the Muzzards of New Zealand:
Where is a Jihadi when you really need one?
If a Mooslim had done this in a Christian church it would be a yawner because it would be business-as-usual.
This is man bites dog, so it’s a big deal.
Rush just read this during his program’s first half-hour.
It doesn't seem like murdering a bunch of people in New Zealand would be a good plan to initiate an American civil war.
CAIR just issued the expected and standard statement about the Muslims being victims of Islamophobic hate in the US. As predicable as tomorrow’s sun rising in the east.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.