Terror Incognita

blindfold IIJust suppose it were possible to shoot people in the name of a religion and have the leader of the Free World, together with his media sycophants, deplore gun ownership among potential victims. Just suppose it were possible to shoot people in the name of a religion and have the leader of the Free World, together with his media sycophants, refuse to blame and name the religion. Just suppose it were possible to shoot people in the name of a religion and have the leader of the Free World, together with his media sycophants, mainly fret about a potential backlash against followers of the religion.

That, indeed, would be cunning plan of Baldrick proportions. And it would, of course, be completely fanciful to imagine it would ever work. Wouldn’t it?

One “expert” on CNN explained that the attack in San Bernardino was likely to be workplace violence. But the interviewer asked how come Syed Farook’s wife, Tashfeen Malik, having left their 6-month-old baby at home, was with him, gun in hand? He responded smoothly that he may have enjoined her in his disgruntlement. But the interviewer, who inexplicably continued to take this nincompoop seriously, asked how come they attacked in combat gear? That is unusual, the nincompoop agreed, without this at all affecting his opinion that the massacre was most likely work-related.

In company with the President, CNN — and almost certainly most other mainstream media — and also the FBI, held out for as long as possible in the face of the evidence. They did their politically-correct best to put off conceding what was bleeding obvious from the start to anyone of average common sense. According to a Fox News reporter on the ground, the FBI even flirted with describing the event as work-inspired terrorism before settling on terrorism.

But still conjoining the descriptor “Islamic” with terrorism proved a step too far. And, just in case FBI Director James Comey stepped out of line and upset his President by mentioning Islam at his media conference, Attorney General Loretta Lynch sat by his side with a cattle prod resting on his sensitive parts. Figuratively speaking, I think.

Born in America, Farook had recently become devout and grown out his beard. He had travelled to Mecca, where he met Malik in person, having ‘wooed’ her over the internet. She was a Pakistani national living in Saudi Arabia. She entered the US on a visa reserved for intended marriage partners of American citizens. She subsequently shunned American values beneath a full burqa and helped gun down the same people who had given her a ‘baby shower’. It is disgusting and sickening and could only emerge from malignant ethos.

Eventually the IEDs which the pair had made in their garage, their destruction of communication devices, Farook’s social media liaison with extremists on an FBI watch list, and Malik’s pledging of allegiance on Facebook to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi probably, just barely, gave the game away. Apparently, none of Farook’s three siblings, or his mother who lived with Farook and Malik, noticed anything amiss. Not a thing! According to the family’s lawyers they are all shocked. Hmm, might have heard that before.

Reportedly, a neighbour saw what she thought were strange goings on, with numbers of young, Middle-Eastern young men repeatedly going in and out of Farook’s garage late at night. She also saw lots of boxes being delivered. Apparently she was afraid to contact the authorities for fear of being branded a bigot. I don’t know, but if Farook had been investigated, he might, like ‘clock boy’, have been able to claim Islamophobic victimization, have been invited to the White House, and sued for a huge amount of money.

We are in trouble; big trouble. The trouble is not that some people want to destroy us and our civilisation in the name of their morbid religion. That is as plain as the tumbling Twin Towers. The trouble is that significant numbers of commentators and political leaders and masses of Western self-hating leftists, greenies and borderless-world creeps are determined to look the other way, even to the extent of looking ridiculous.

In another time ISIS would have been destroyed by now. Mosques would have been infiltrated and the trouble makers rooted out. And, populations of Muslims – if, in the first place, such large numbers had ever been let in — would have been actively encouraged to integrate rather than set up separate cultish communes in the suburbs of major Western cities. Mind you, then multiculturalism hadn’t been invented and foisted on Western societies, patriotism and national pride were not openly despised by the mainstream media, and the aforementioned creeps were no more than an eccentric fringe group.

10 thoughts on “Terror Incognita

  • gardner.peter.d says:

    ‘ ..nd the aforementioned creeps were no more than an eccentric fringe group.’

    True. However, the aforementioned creeps now dominate our politics and our political leaders, with a few ‘notorious’ exceptions, are now the eccentric fringe group, quite divorced from the rest of us.

  • Peter Brewster says:

    Good piece thanks agree will send it on

  • bemartin39@bigpond.com says:

    One has ran out of words long ago trying to express the frustration and, increasingly, fear for the future, caused by the attitude and demeanour of western leaders, journalists, commentators and the like. All the more gratitude to Peter Smith for finding fresh ways of expressing it for us.

  • en passant says:

    When the San Bernardino murders were first reported (while it was going on) I was watching it on CNN (sometimes switching to the BBC). I made a totally bigoted remark to my wife (against the initial reporting) that ‘Betcha muslims did it.’ At that point CNN had reported that:
    1. the perpetrators were two white males (CNN).
    2. then it was three white males in what appeared to be a ‘workplace incident’ at an ‘end of year party’ – Christmas being unmentionable (CNN).
    3. the BBC finally mentioned that it may be ‘related to terrorism’ as one of the suspects was an American citizen.
    4. CNN persevered saying it was most likely a workplace incident as there had been a dispute at the party and one man had left it.
    I will not bore you with the details, but even after a devout muslim and his devout muslim wife had been killed in a shootout with police the CNN reporter hung in there with “It’s too early to tell.”
    10-hours later after the police had found 1,600 rounds of ammunition (probably baby shower presents), guns, bombs, bomb-making equipment, booby-traps, remote control bombs, suspicious travel, pledges to IS and The Prezzie Poodle blaming guns you would think it was over, but no. The piece de resistance was Attorney-General Lynch (she must have been picked for her name alone) declaring that any offensive ‘hate language toward muslims would be investigated and prosecuted’ [Hell, No, we don’t need no right to Free Speech as stated in the Constitution]. She was good enough to correct the Founding Fathers words concerning Free Speech.
    There is no need to lampoon media denial about Islam anymore, because the MSM is busy satirizing itself every day. You get three guesses as to which one of the following is a spoof:
    https://youtu.be/Rd8cRvZZv44 or https://youtu.be/wY8Rke6saqc

    I think that clarifies PC news reporting and explains everything.

  • brian.doak@bigpond.com says:

    Why does Barak Obama always seem to be covering for Mohammedanism? Could it be because his own African father was a Mohammedan with an

    enduring influence indicated by the title of Barak Obama’s memoir published in 1995 titled ‘Dreams from My Father?

    • bemartin39@bigpond.com says:

      There is no doubt about it, he is a closet Muslim. He was reported to have said that the sweetest sound in the world was the muezzin’s call to prayer. The most inspiring one, he probably thinks, is “Allahu akbar”, particularly just after a kuffar was beheaded.

      • jenkins says:

        Apart from his administration’s attempts to stymie any criticism of Islam, the scary thing is that Obama would have access to the details of anyone who has criticised Islam online.

      • ian.macdougall says:


        “There is no doubt about it, he is a closet Muslim. He was reported to have said that the sweetest sound in the world was the muezzin’s call to prayer….”
        The prominent atheist Sam Harris believes much the same thing, but that does not make him an Islamist. He says:

        I have long struggled to understand how smart, well-educated liberals can fail to perceive the unique dangers of Islam. In ‘The End of Faith’, I argued that such people don’t know what it’s like to really believe in God or Paradise—and hence imagine that no one else actually does. The symptoms of this blindness can be quite shocking. For instance, I once ran into the anthropologist Scott Atran after he had delivered one of his preening and delusional lectures on the origins of jihadist terrorism. According to Atran, people who decapitate journalists, filmmakers, and aid workers to cries of “Alahu akbar!” or blow themselves up in crowds of innocents are led to misbehave this way not because of their deeply held beliefs about jihad and martyrdom but because of their experience of male bonding in soccer clubs and barbershops. (Really.) So I asked Atran directly:

        “Are you saying that no Muslim suicide bomber has ever blown himself up with the expectation of getting into Paradise?…..”

        “…First, by way of putting my own empathy on my sleeve, let me say a few things that will most likely surprise many of my readers. Despite my antipathy for the doctrine of Islam, I think the Muslim call to prayer is one of the most beautiful sounds on earth. Take a moment to listen…” (Islamic music follows)

        Check it out at http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/islam-and-the-misuses-of-ecstasy

  • gcheyne@bigpond.net.au says:

    Sadly, they resent us because they envy our freedom, lifestyle and consumer goods. I’d envy your double-fronted brick veneer, if I came from a country that produces little more than camel-dung.
    I heard some “refugees” interviewed in Denmark, saying they wanted to go to Sweden, because “Salary for refugees no good in Denmark. Better in Sweden”.
    My own comfortable lifestyle came after a lifetime of hard work, and it depended on separating folklore and religion from reality.
    Muslims want to go to Europe to enjoy the welfare, and then impose their archaic beliefs on society? It won’t work.
    Does Pete Smith need to follow-up his book on “Bad Economics” with one on “Bad Religions”?
    Or should I wait for the Monty Python team to come up with a “Ministry of Silly Religions”?

Leave a Reply