Islam · Islamic apologism and the persecution of dissenters

How not to respond to terrorism


Although this smug response came after the London attack in March, and this self- righteous cretin might have changed his mind by now, the following demonstrates precisely how not to respond towards Islamic terrorism.

Evidently, a few of Adam Hill’s basic misunderstandings at best, and deliberate obfuscations at worst, need clearing up.

As contrary to his implications, Islamic terrorists don’t possess some random desire to aimlessly kill innocents, with their end goal being simply to ‘divide us’. Rather, jihadists who draw their inspiration from the Quran and Hadiths, aim to ultimately subjugate the Dar- al Harb (non- Islamic world) under the rule of religiously derived law, in which women, apostates, blasphemers, gays and disbelievers live as second- class citizens. Fervently opposing an ideology which has repeatedly slain Westerners, does not equate to winning for Islamic terrorists. Instead, attempts to silence critics of Islam and changing Western values represents victory for terrorists, as these developments are small stepping stones on the path to institutionalized sharia law.

Further, these insulting insinuations from Adam Hill and the like that Westerners should carry on life as normal, need to stop. After 30 000 Islamic attacks since 9 11, the time for inaction is over. I also doubt that the apologist establishment would be carrying on in such an apathetic, carefree manner, if it was their family members who had been so callously murdered.

Leave a Reply