Rainbow Radical Bomb at Australian Christian Lobby Cover Up

The Australian Christian Lobby headquarters was hit last year by a car bombing carried out by Rainbow Radical Jayden Duong. Duong, drove a van to the doorstep of the Australian Christian Lobby in Canberra, and on December 21 at 9:30 he detonated his van full of 8.5kg LPG bottles, causing serious damage to the lobby groups headquarters.

Duong, is facing charges of arson and damage of property, but the charges Duong should really be facing are charges of domestic terrorism. The definition of terrorism according to the Oxford dictionary is the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

Moreover, the legal definition of terrorism as stated by the Attorney General’s Department is in the Criminal Code Act 1995:  a ‘terrorist act’ is an act, or a threat to commit an act, that is done with the intention to coerce or influence the public or any government by intimidation to advance a political, religious or ideological cause, and the act causes: death, serious harm or endangers a person serious damage to property a serious risk to the health or safety of the public, or seriously interferes with, disrupts or destroys critical infrastructure such as a telecommunications or electricity network’.

Duong caused serious damage to property (causing upwards of $100,000 dollars in damage to the Australian Christian Lobby) in trying to intimidate and terrorise the public, and the ACL to stop them campaigning against homosexual marriage.

Despite extensive damage to the building, police initially described the incident as a “car fire”, to avoid charging this Rainbow Radical with an act of terrorism.

The next day, ACT Deputy Chief Police Commander Mark Walters said: “As a result of our conversations with this man, we’ve been able to establish that his actions were not politically, religiously or ideologically motivated.”

The words of Walters are complete nonsense, he needs to call a spade a spade, no matter if ACT Police hold the politically correct view on homosexual marriage or not, the police need to be as tough as nails on terrorism, as they are on ‘evil losers’ that threaten our very way of life.

Duong himself confessed that he committed this heinous act because he did not agree with the ACL’s Christian stance on ‘sexuality’, in other words he didn’t like the ACL’s socially conservative view on marriage, and homosexual relations. He tried to blow up the Australian Christian lobby headquarters because he didn’t like what they stood for as a religious lobby group, damaging property, potentially hurting someone and attempting to silence the lobby into submission through intimidation.

Sincerely, this was an act of terrorism and it is a clear example of double standards that exist on this debate. Now I ask you to think, what would happen if a member of the religious right blew up the headquarters of a gay lobby group, would he or she be charged with arson, or terrorism?

Let me be clear, I hate extremism of any kind, but to paint all the ‘no’ voters as the intolerant and the bigoted is ludicrous. We have not seen any violence, or intimidation from the ACL, or any other groups or people that are campaigning for the ‘no’ vote, as we have seen from the ‘yes’ vote people. The worst we have seen is Qantas CEO Alan Joyce being pied in the face at a business breakfast.

But instead we see people being prevented from entering a Liberal party fundraiser in Melbourne with Margaret Court in attendance as a guest speaker because of her beliefs on homosexual marriage.  Yes, there may be some uneducated people for ‘no’ spouting silly comments on Facebook, but they are not actively trying to prevent people from their right to free speech. If I see terrorism, intimidation or violence from the ‘no’ side I’ll call it out for what it is, un-Australian, and un-democratic.

Speaking of undemocratic, and un-Australian, the far-left activist groups in Australia are beginning to mirror some of the same tactics of Antifa who have used violence and intimidation to stop conservative speakers at University of California, Berkeley in the US.

Antifa, the modern-day equivalent to the red shirts believe in the doctrine of intersectionality which directly equates words with violence. So they say that we need violence to ensure peace, to prevent the next Hitler, or they say you can’t be tolerant of ‘intolerance’, and you need to stand up to ‘intolerance’ though violent means to ‘stop the Nazi’s’ taking over again’. But quite frankly that is Orwellian newspeak, it is rather reminiscent of ‘War is peace’ a phrase that Winston was indoctrinated with in George Orwell’s ‘1984’.

The rhetoric and actions occurring with the same-sex marriage crowd who believe that using intimidation shut down people who have differing opinions is ‘preventing gay suicide’, is very similar to the Antifa thugs in the US, who believe they are preventing tyranny, but in fact they’re the ones instituting it.

Now, I call on all to stand up and say no to fascism and terrorism, and yes to free speech and liberty.  We must call out the Marxist LGBTQIA crowd for their intolerance, that tries to coerce Christians and people with ethical objections to homosexual marriage into silence.

Enough, is enough.

  • Damien Smith

    Gay Asian Terrorism has arrived on our shores. You think he’d be more motivated to blow up an islamic building though considering they’re far less tolerant than any christian.