It’s been a week since the horrific terror attack at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, England which killed 22 attendees, many young teenage girls. We at The Unshackled after every terror attack have reaffirmed our position that the only solution that will work is a complete ban on Muslim immigration, there is not much else we can add to our position, otherwise we would be endlessly publishing the same articles after each attack.
But what is worth responding to is despite these endless terror attacks, the left come up with new way to deny the threat Islam poses, and to distract us from the fact that the attack was inspired by Islam. In response to the Manchester attack the left have been trying to convince us that the threat of dying from Islamic terrorism is statistically lower than other ways of dying and that our fear is irrational and overly emotive.
We saw this displayed on the ABC’s Q&A last Monday night in an exchange between Guardian journalist Mona Chalabi and scientist Lawrence Krauss. Chalabi cleverly downplayed the threat through manipulated statistics by claiming the change of being killed by a foreign-born terrorist in the United States is one in 3.6 million and the chance of being killed by a foreign-born terrorist who was also a refugee is one in 3.6 billion. This cleverly excludes Islamic terrorists who are the children of migrants such as Omar Mateen who was responsible for Orlando nightclub massacre and one of the preparators of the 2015 San Bernardino terrorist attack. Krauss claimed we should be more concerned about killer refrigerators.
This use of statistics to downplay Islamic terrorism was further elaborated in an article on the blog of Ketan Joshi who is a scientist who was worked 6 years in the renewable energy sector (so you can safely assume they are a person of the left). Joshi laments that terror attacks skew our risk perception because of their horrific and random nature. He blames the media and conservatives for blowing the risk of terrorism out of proportion to peruse an anti-immigration argument for no good reason when the solution that will really deter terrorists is showing we are not afraid, and demonstrating community strength and solidarity.
This argument is similar to that put forward by the Independent newspaper that we should carry on the same as before and of course pop singer Katy Perry saying we all just need to love and be united with each other. Of course haven’t we been trying this approach for years now? Western leaders have constantly said terror attacks have nothing to do with Islam and that it’s a religion of peace, we could not possibly think of restricting immigration or better screen refugees.
They have also stated we should not criticise Islam after an attack because it might make then angrier, doesn’t that prove the terrorist acts have been effective? Not to mention the leftists whose main concern after an Islamic terror attack is the backlash against the Muslim community. Last week we had the astonishing claim by the head of ASIO that there was no link between our immigration and refugee policy and terrorism.
The reason why we aren’t persuaded by statistics about dying from Islamic terrorism is because these statistics don’t include the full impacts that the Islamization of our nations bring. It doesn’t include all the terror plots that have been successfully foiled by our security agencies over the past decade. These have often involved massive increases in such agencies budget and also restrictions on our own liberties.
They also don’t include the totalitarian aspects the spread of Islam has on a western country. Especially when it comes to the treatment of women who are subjected to female genital mutilation, the prevalence of child brides in Islamic communities, the acceptance of domestic violence, the treatment of homosexuals and of course non-believers, the fact that in many western countries we now have sharia law no-go zones in their major cities and the exploitation of the welfare system by many Muslim citizens. Just because not many people are dying as a direct consequence of Islam in the west doesn’t mean there are no other negative aspects of it pervading our society.
This is not to mention the fact that Islamic terror attacks in the west are not the norm, or should we accept them as the norm in our society as the Muslim Mayor of London Sadiq Khan has suggested. The same applies to every other cause of the death, if people are dying from a particular cause such as plane or car crashes then we take action to reduce the amount of deaths. We should do the same with Islamic terror, do everything in our power to stop more deaths. It is interesting to note that leftist after every mass shooting are the first to cry for gun control but not for Islam control after terror attacks. Just because more people may statistically die from other causes of deaths doesn’t make terror attack deaths okay. I would also like writers such as Joshi to present these statistics to families of victims of terror attacks to see how that goes down, that your loss is just a fact of life. I doubt they would take kindly to it.
The more major terror attacks there are in the west (which there will be), this statistical argument will become weaker. But in the meantime, it is important to call out the left’s reasoning for why we should not take any action to prevent further Islamic terror attacks as they are still a major influence on our political leaders. Islamic terror attacks should not be acceptable in any form and it is right that we should take action to reduce their prevalence in western nations.