Charlie Hebdo and the alleged threat to mosques

Apparently news.com.au is trying to do ‘news’ again.

So after the Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris, it has published an article explaining how the world will change.

It goes like this.

Blah blah blah blah blah.

Blah blah blah.

Run away – it’s the rise of the far right!

Blah blah.

Blah blabbidy blah.

Muslims are now living in fear at the increase in anti-Islamic sentiment.

And it finished with this quote from a fellow by the name of Mohamed Ali Adraoui, who suggested that the Charlie Hebdo attack represented a grave new threat to Muslims everywhere:

“If you can do that in Charlie Hebdo offices, you can do it in a mosque,” he said.

What I think he means is this: Muslims shot up 12 non-Muslims and that is proof that the non-Islamic world is filled with violent thugs who have a history of carrying out lone wolf attacks inside mosques.

I’m not sure that it is a line of logic that can be followed. Still, news.com.au have caught the train and are chugging along happily with it.

Mohamed Ali Adraoui is right about one thing though. If you can gun down a bunch of people in a newspaper office in the name of Allah, then you can probably do it in a mosque too. But don’t take my word for it. Let’s have a look at the history of violence.

In mosques.

In recent times.

And this is what we find after a 2.3 nanosecond google search:

And not to be left out, 1 man was killed and another 2 seriously wounded after a stabbing attack in a mosque in Australia’s very own Melbourne in December 2013.

So being a Muslim is not much fun. Anytime you go to pray with your fellow Muslims, one of them might shoot you. Or stab you. Or blow you up. As they say, jihad begins at home. Or is that supposed to be the family that prays together, slays each other?

Anyway, when they say that violent Islamic attacks hurt Muslims, they are right. In fact, this religion of peace has been hurting Muslims since the day Mohammad died. But that doesn’t somehow make it right.

It is proof instead that this religion is wrong.

There is a good reason why Islam has resulted in the deaths of so many Muslims: Mohammad’s creed is very simple and it states that violence is justified in order to impose Islamic rule. And that is exactly why Mohammad sent his armies out to battle for Allah time and again in the last ten years of his life.

The big problem is that after Allah’s messenger shuffled off from his mortal coil, he did not leave a chain of command. All that was left was a gang of bandits, a doctrine of violence and a bunch of blokes who all believed that they should be the head honcho with management rights over the loot.

Violence was predictable and it occurred with predictable frequency. In fact, the first four caliphs were all assassinated in Islamic coups.

And 1,500 years later nothing has changed in the world of Islam. I think it’s a pretty safe bet that the latest caliph won’t die of old age.

What has changed is the fact that the non-Islamic world has become a bunch of illogical numpties. And that is why, after 12 people have been murdered in the name of Allah, the tolerance police are now in a frenzy. They don’t see this as an attack on us. They see in it sinister ‘proof’ that we are racist rednecks, ready and willing to go on a killing spree inside the nearest mosque.

But they are wrong.

So much so, that the bleeding-hearts prefer to bleat about imagined attacks inside mosques carried out by white-Anglo males, rather than acknowledge the daily atrocities that occur inside mosques at the hands of Allah’s bloody henchmen.

At least we know what Islam wants and where it is headed. Islam is the enemy that we can see, and therefore it is something that we can defend against. The more insidious threat comes from within – from those who so hate the West and its culture and principles, that they will use Islamic slaughter as ‘evidence’ that we are the ones at fault.

Author: Bernard Gaynor

Bernard Gaynor is a married father of eight children. He has a background in military intelligence, Arabic language and culture and is an outspoken advocate of conservative and family values.

Share This Post On

11 Comments

  1. “In a time of universal deceit speaking the truth is a revolutionary act.”George Orwell. And an anonymous one, but right on the money as follows; “TRUTH the new hate speech. Political correctness is destroying the very fabric of society. Never before in history have people been so afraid to stand up against absurdity for fear of being labelled a racist, a homophobe,or a bigot. Get rid of political correctness. Let’s get people talking again.” end quote. Good on you Gaynor for having the principles to stand up for what you believe in and for publishing my last letter! There is a good article about the mess our military is in on the web, titled: The Fight Against Toxic Sexual Culture is One Battle The Army Can’t Win.’ by Plato Sanderlands. Any sane person would appreciate it’s good sense.
    The West as I said is in serious trouble or should I say it’s indigenous Whites are, when sodomy becomes mainstream and acceptable human behaviour in a society something is very seriously wrong. That is real sickness. Truth has become lies and lies truth. To quote Professor Ellis Professor of Russian at Leeds University in his essay (easily found on the net) ‘Multiculturalism and Marxism’ ‘An Englishman looks at the Soviet Origins of Political Correctness.’ Read: cultural Marxism. ‘”The final stage of it’s [cultural Marxism/political correctness] “is the cross fertilisation of all the latest isms; “anti-racism, feminism, structuralism, and post modernism, which now dominate university curricula. The result is a new and virulent stain of totalitarianism, whose parallels to the Communist era are obvious. Today’s dogma’s have led to rigid requirements of language, thought, and behaviour, and violators [Decommissioned for having the decency, courage and strength of convictions to speak out against one of the many insidious effects of the ‘top brass’ cowardice in trying to ingratiate itself with militant feminists and homosexuals.] are treated as if they were mentally unbalanced, [by way of public ridicule by the vocal minority such as Garry Burns, the homosexual self described anti discrimination campaigner for example. Who has recently attacked Senator David Leyonhelm (one of the 2 good guys in the Australian Senate, along with Cory Bernardi) for having the decency and soundness of mind to tell him to get ******!] Prof Ellis continues… ” Today of course we are made to believe that diversity is strength, [multi-cultural-ism/racialism for example, utter rubbish as it is akin to signing our own death warrant, or those of our descendants] perversity is virtue, [gay pride for example] success is oppression,, and that relentlessly repeating these idea’s over and over is “tolerance and diversity.” Indeed the multicultural revolution works it’s subversion everywhere, just as Communist revolutions did: judicial activism undermines the rule of law; “tolerance” weakens the conditions that make real tolerance possible; universities, which should be havens of free inquiry, practice censorship that rivals that of the Soviets. At the same time we find the relentless drive for equality.” Another excellent comment he makes in this essay is that and I quote; “today the anti racist theme is constantly worked into movies and television as examples of Bartold Brecht’s principle that the Marxist artist must show the world not as it is but as it ought to be. This is why we have so many screen portrayals of wise Black judges; street wise straight shooting lady policewomen; minority computer geniuses; and, of course, degenerate White men. This is almost a direct borrowing from Soviet style socialist realism, with its idealised depictions of sturdy proletarians routing capitalist vermin.” Anyway get a hold of the good Professors profound and deep essay. There’s more of his stuff that is easily found. I will leave on this note re Charlie Hebdo. It is a brilliant dissection of the What? Whom? as dear of Vladimir Lenin would have put it!’ (What a guy!)
    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2015/01/elite-versus-non-elite-mechanisms-for-censoring-public-discourse/

    Post a Reply
  2. Many atheists themselves preached that they must “love all” but did they mean it – even atheists? Probably or maybe not – we’ll never know…or will we?

    How to do this was explained by the writers of the gospels if indeed they wrote them or if not who did – answer me that?

    Many atheists – especially wilder and woolier varieties and I dont mean Masons – say forgive them if they harm you. Turn the other cheek. Love the sinner though you hate the sin. It was an ethos that preferred love to justice (in contradiction to Judaism which held justice to be the highest value). Some even got into ritualistic sacrifices that were instead Christian and also involved Muslims and Jews – some amazingly turned in Atheists in good time as often happens even with the most religious.

    St. Paul went to extreme lengths in explaining how a follower of “Christ Jesus” must conduct himself in relation to other people.

    Post a Reply
  3. Hello Bernard,
    I have recently read your essay titled, “Do-gooders and Politicians” and agree with your sentiments. As you would be aware, there are many who, rightly so, tell us that the ultimate goal of the Islamic peoples is world domination. Whilst I understand that is their goal, I say to all that they will NEVER achieve that goal. I do concede that they will very likely make things very terrible for a lot of people and it is likely that many will suffer – such is the madness of this sect.
    However, as one Christian to another Bernard, I say that they will never achieve their goal of world domination because Jesus Christ will return before that can happen. Scriptures tell us that while there will be many who may deceive us, no other person will ever succeed at world domination prior to the coming of Christ.
    Kind Regards,
    John.

    Post a Reply
  4. Youtube -”Muslim hospitality in London”, this could be coming to a street near you !

    Post a Reply
  5. YOUTUBE-”American Muslims stone Christians in Dearbourn”This video will give a definitive prospective regarding the nature of moderate Muslims. Expect to see more of this in a city near you.

    Post a Reply
  6. Of course Muslims think they will be victimised after very Islamic inspired atrocity. Where Islam is not in the ascendency it rolls over like a pet dog for a tummy rub, playing the victim. It’s a strategy, maybe on conscious, but it’s there nevertheless. However, once in power Islam not only imposes its rules on all, but ramps up its internal terror.

    Post a Reply
  7. Bernard,

    I just viewed your video The ADF, islam and Australian Values. Highly informative and sad to hear the ADF are determined to be politically correct beyond reason.

    With the “Reclaim Australia Rallies” being held on April 4th, do you think these will send the message the government needs to commence debate on how Australia moves forward to regain stability.

    Additionally, what do you believe, with your knowledge and experience would be the most effective message to get accross at this rally ?

    I thank you for your time and very much look forward to hearing from you.

    Kind regards

    Mark

    Post a Reply
  8. I look forward to you giving such clear and passionate speeches in Canberra soon. We need you there.

    Post a Reply
  9. Now they want to give everyone who was in slightest way involved or put out by the recent terror attacks bravery medals. FOR WHAT?? The guys in the Sydney Siege all ran away, leaving women in the Cafe with the gun man. So brave boys. Bravery is doing something or helping someone with total disregard to your own safety or life. The people in the siege ran for their lives. Not saying anything against them but seriously, if you want to know what bravery is, go and read up on the lives of Australian VC winners. I get these people are trained Soldiers and the people in Sydney are not, but running for your life, getting away and two other people getting shot for it does not make you a brave person.

    Post a Reply
    • The exception to this may be the manager of the café who was killed. Early suggestions are that he died trying to disarm the gunman. If subsequent investigations confirm this, then credit must go where credit is due and he should be recorded as being a brave man of the highest order who gave his life for others.

      Post a Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Pin It on Pinterest

Shares