By now everybody has heard the report of a Somali-born terrorist, who stabbed three shoppers in Bourke street Melbourne, and was then shot to death by police. ISIS has claimed him as one of their boys, so that looks pretty much like a clear-cut case of terrorism. Well, one would have thought so.
https://gellerreport.com/2018/11/isis-australia.html/
https://gellerreport.com/2018/11/australia-migrant-stabs.html/
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/bourke-street-attack-scott-morrison-slammed-for-islam-remarks/news-story/ba44bbfaffc6d9cf9662547308f8740d
But, surprise, surprise, when the otherwise quiet, politically correct pm spoke up about it, well, there was the usual response from the usual experts:
“Prime Minister Scott Morrison has been slammed for his remarks singling out radical Islam in the wake of the Bourke Street terror attack. Labor MP and counter-terrorism expert Anne Aly said the PM’s response to the events in Melbourne was ignorant and “politically desperate”, after he called Islamic extremism the greatest threat to Australia’s national security. “There is no country that is immune to the threat of terrorism,” Dr Aly told Sky News. “I don’t care how politically desperate you are, now is not the right time to divide the community.” At a press conference yesterday, Mr Morrison said he could not speak of Friday’s attack in Melbourne, which left an innocent man dead, two others stabbed and a car bomb driven into the CBD, without naming the threat of “radical, violent, extremist Islam” behind it. Somalian-born terrorist Khalif Shire Ali, 30, had links to Islamic State and had been radicalised, according to police. “Here in Australia, we would be kidding ourselves if we did not call out the fact that the greatest threat of religious extremism in this country is the radical and dangerous ideology of extremist Islam,” Mr Morrision said.”
Ok, so stating the obvious is dividing the community. This begs the question as to what it would take to see any religious-based threat. Suppose that instead of a knife attack, the assailant had smuggled an ISIS dirty nuke bomb into say Sydney, and set it off. Shucks, now we are in the swing of it, suppose that ISIS migrants in a super 9/11 attack decided to nuke every Australian city, and succeeded. OK, almost everybody dead, and the others on the way out from radiation poisoning. Couldn’t the same defence be made in this case, that criticism, “divided” the community? Oh, wait, there would be no community, would there? And, what remained would sure be divided then, with no diversity worth reporting home about, before they died.