Over the last few decades, the Islamic menace has proved to be an able adversary of the West.
If one understands our struggle with Islamism as a test of our will, we’ve been failing miserably. We’ve been weak when it comes to the values for which we should firmly stand. In this conflict, this hasn’t served us well.
The most recent Islamic attack occurred at a Christmas market in Strasbourg, France. Last Tuesday night, 29-year old Cherif Chekatt opened fire, killing three people and injuring a dozen others. As the Daily Mail reports, Chekatt had a voluminous criminal record and was a “designated threat to the state.” He was said to have been “well-known in Islamist circles” and was “further radicalized in prison.”
He also shouted the mantra, “ Allahu Akbar,” as he gunned down his fellow Frenchmen. According to the Telegraph, he grew up in a family that apparently practiced the ultra-conservative form of Islam known as Salafism. But neighbours claim that he was “only a criminal who lost his marbles” and that religion likely had no influence on his actions.
His allegiance to Allah was just a monotonous detail.
In Canada, a report on terrorism has surfaced that presents some alarming conclusions.
The report revealed that threat levels in Canada “hover at medium,” meaning that an act of terrorism could hit us “in the near term.”
The future looks grim. But those in the media seem more concerned about propagating our government’s progressivism than being forthright about security threats that may come from radicalized members of a group that Trudeau has protected.
As Anthony Daoud cleverly points out, CBC “swapped headlines for views.” On social media, CBC’s headline is more honest, while on the website the headline simply reads: “ Government not expecting many more foreign fighters into Canada.”
These editorial decisions appear to be a way to distract from the Islamic threat and avoid transgressing Trudeau’s politically correct mandate. All to maintain a focus on “right-wing extremism.”
Dangerous hypocrisy when it comes to Islam
One of the things that have helped religious groups adapt to new social developments is criticism.
Earlier this year, David Haskell wrote a column arguing that criticism has been beneficial for increasing tolerance of things like homosexuality, particularly among Christians.
One can presume that progressives had a hand in these fruitful appraisals of the Christian faith. However, they’re rather tight-lipped when one calls attention to the fact that 43 per cent of Canadian Muslims think homosexuality “should not be accepted by society.”
This double standard can have dangerous consequences. Some of which should greatly perturb those who constantly babble on about a “rape culture” in the West.
The Rotherham scandal shed light on the gruesome deeds committed by an Islamic grooming gang in England. One survivor shared her experiences, describing how she had been “beaten, tortured, and raped over 1000 times” as punishment for being a “non-Muslim” and not “dressing modestly.” Worse yet, inquiries revealed that it took so long for justice to be served due to institutions overlooking details for the sake of being politically correct.
The longstanding debate about Islam and free speech
Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and secularism have all been mainstays of the Western tradition. They’ve enabled us to sustain a civil society with a robust political culture for centuries. Sadly, the perplexing alliance between Islamists and the politically correct Left has been working to ensure these values become anachronisms.
In October, the European Court of Human Rights decided that an Austrian national’s negative portrayal of the Prophet Muhammad’s marriages went “beyond the permissible limits of an objective debate.”
To combat “Islamophobia,” the European Union has suggested such directives like the Television Broadcasting Directive. It’s an egregious crackdown on free expression as it directs EU members to disallow advertising that is “offensive to religious or political beliefs” under the pretext that Islamophobia is linked to “negative representations of Muslim groups” on television.
Ironically, you won’t find anything about demeaning Jesus or Moses in these directives.
This inconsistency was most appallingly displayed in the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo shootings, which saw twelve people massacred by Islamists for publishing cartoons of the Prophet.
Despite being a left-leaning magazine that has lampooned figures from all faiths, Charlie Hebdo was slandered as a racist publication that was bullying Muslims.
Anne Theriault of CANADALAND wrote a contemptible column that denounced the cartoons as “racist bile,” and condemned publications that had republished the cartoons as promoters of Islamophobia.
Reactions like this demonstrated a Leftist impulse to shift the narrative. They seemed to blame Charlie Hebdo first as penning execrations of its “racist” ways superseded any moral obligation to show solidarity with those who were killed for exercising their rights as free citizens in a Western democracy.
This is all reflective of a neurosis with which some have been stricken that convinces them we’re the problem instead of those who’ve often shown their detestation of the West.
The only remedy for the West is forswearing sycophancy and asserting itself. And it must do so unapologetically.