Muslims rush to play the victim card

The Islamic Council of Victoria huffs off from talks with the Prime Minister, citing ‘inflammatory and ill informed’ comments.

So what else is new?

Islamic Council of Victoria pulls out of meeting with Abbott

‘My flag is the flag of Allah. That’s my flag.’

Doesn’t sound very ‘Team Australia’, does it?

Read my post on Aussie Madness here.

New blog: Aussie Madness



I appreciate that a climate blog isn’t the best place to discuss general Aussie politics (except in relation to climate), so I would very much like to point you to my new politics blog, Aussie Madness. You can find it here:

You can follow on…

Twitter: @aussie_madness


‘Has Australia gone mad, or is it just me?’

Are we heading towards a third global conflict?



If so, it will be, like the second, between civilised men and an evil, savage political ideology, the aim of which is to take over the world.

This post was prompted by the photo (right) which appeared in today’s Daily Telegraph, and shows a 7-year-old boy, allegedly the son of ‘Australian’ jihadist Khaled Sharrouf, holding a severed head. His father proudly tweeted it. Read the full article here and ask yourself in disbelief, as I did, how we could possibly find ourselves in this situation in the 21st century.

The US have admitted that the Islamic State (IS) is now more powerful than Al-Qaeda at the time of 9/11, and it’s only a matter of time before the existence of IS emboldens its supporters throughout the world, many of whom are now deeply embedded in Western democracies, with potentially frightening consequences for domestic security.

Did we try to negotiate with the ‘moderate’ Nazis in 1939? Chamberlain’s policy of appeasement, sacrificing Czechoslovakia in exchange for an empty promise of peace, failed, and succeeded only in strengthening Hitler’s resolve. Churchill, however, got it right: you don’t feed a crocodile hoping it will eat you last.

Anyone who believes that this is just some remote issue, in a far away country which won’t affect us, needs to wake up fast.

A genuine existential threat – and it’s not climate change



This post was prompted by the story on the front of today’s Weekend Australian.

I think it’s time to stop worrying about climate change and focus on something that is genuinely an existential threat to Western democracies.

While climate change is not making its presence felt in any significant way, the soldiers of Allah are marching across the face of the planet, in Africa, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan and plenty more, murdering and butchering everything and everyone that stands in their way.

The threat posed by Islam is a subject that I have followed for about 8 years, from back in the day when it was a geeky, minority interest, and everyone thought I was just some racist lunatic. That was despite 9/11 several years earlier, which singularly failed to galvanise public opinion on the matter.

I have heard all the excuses over the years, and every one is complete bullshit:

  1. “Islam is a religion of peace”
  2. “It’s just a tiny minority of extremists”
  3. “The Koran says…”
  4. “You’re just a racist Islamophobe…”

As for (1), Islam is only a religion of peace when the whole world is Islamic, ruled by Sharia law and everyone submits to the will of Allah. Until that time, Islam’s sole aim is to achieve that state of affairs by violent means – jihad. Not by accident is the world divided into the “House of Islam” and the “House of War” – there is no third alternative.

This is what we see happening before our eyes in Iraq. Islam mandates that non-Muslims have the following options:

  1. convert to Islam;
  2. live a humiliating and degrading life as a third-class citizen (dhimmi), whilst paying a tax (jizya) prescribed in the Koran, to ensure they ‘feel subdued’ under Islam; or
  3. death.

ISIL in Iraq didn’t bother giving terrified Christians options 1 or 2. They went straight in with 3.

Similarly, the Middle East problems are all down to the aggression of Islam. The situation between Israel, Gaza and the West Bank is not about borders, or territory, or occupation or anything else. It is purely about the Islamic mandate to exterminate the Jews. Simple as that. Islamic nations surrounding Israel bring up their children to develop a visceral hatred of the Jews, whom the Koran describes as ‘descendants of apes and pigs’.

This isn’t me being a filthy Islamophobic bigot, go to Memri TV and watch actual videos of sickening indoctrination of children for yourself.

And this is why there will never be any negotiated settlement in the Middle East, and anyone who draws any equivalence between the situation in Gaza and Israel defending its people against a genocidal neighbour, has a moral compass that is seriously off-beam.

As for (2) a tiny minority of extremists, that is true – in a sense. The vast majority of Muslims living in the West are law-abiding citizens, but there is a stark difference between Islam and Muslims. Individual Muslims can choose how they live their lives, but there is no spectrum in Islam – it’s binary, on or off.

Again, this isn’t Islamophobia, that comes from Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, a devout Muslim who should know what he’s talking about when he said,

The term “moderate Islam” is ugly and offensive – Islam is Islam.

That said, however, there is still a large number of Western Muslims who remain conspicuously silent at the atrocities carried out in the name of their religion. At the indiscriminate rocket attacks on Jews, there is silence. At the genocide of Christians in Iraq, there is more silence. At the kidnap of schoolgirls for daring to try to get an education (education for girls is banned under Sharia law in case you weren’t aware), yet more silence.

But as soon as the Australian government takes steps to strengthen anti-terrorist measures to prevent such people threatening our cities, suddenly they find their voice – and it’s the victim mentality that is wheeled out: ‘we’re being picked on’.

You would have thought ‘moderate’ Muslims would wish to distance themselves vocally and forcefully from ISIS and Boko Haram and all those other extremist groups, and defend actions taken by Western governments to deter such groups from carrying out attacks at home. But no, it’s all weasel words and shouts of Islamophobia.

Sorry, folks, but this does not inspire much confidence in ordinary people about just how committed ‘moderate’ Muslims are to stopping terrorist attacks. Would they dob in a neighbour they knew was involved in a terrorist plot? Would they report hate preaching at their local mosque to the Australian police? Do their loyalties lie with their country of citizenship, or with the global Muslim umma?

As for (3), Western apologists for Islam will claim that violent exhortations to kill infidels are ‘taken out of context’. If that is true, then why are there so many Muslim ‘scholars’ who seem to get Islam wrong over and over again? Why is it that those who are the most intimately acquainted with the teachings of the Koran and the Hadith are the ones that always seem to misunderstand the ‘true’ peaceful nature of Islam?

Why is it only New York Times columnists and liberal academics who seem to understand this obvious truth, so apparently invisible to the scholars?

The simple answer, of course, is that the scholars are the ones who have got Islam right, and the rest of us are just deluding ourselves, because it’s easier than facing up to the truth – that Islam is a violent, genocidal, supremacist political ideology that is incompatible with Western democracy and values, and which threatens the very fabric of our societies.

As for (4), I am sure many who read the above will shout that I am a bigoted, racist Islamophobe. Those are all ad hominem attacks, to which I am completely inured, having written a climate blog for six years. But that is, unfortunately, the expected response. If you can cut the abuse and respond to the assertions above, then please do.

The vast majority of terrorist attacks carried out worldwide are carried out by Muslims. That is a simple fact. Why? Because their religion mandates the killing of infidels. That too is a simple fact. Christians, Buddhists, Sikhs, Hindus and Jews all manage to live in peace alongside one another. Only Islam mandates the conversion or death of unbelievers, and unlike other religions, it has not been through any moderating reforms – Islam is a time machine back to the 7th century.

And before we get the usual guff about the Crusades, and how Christianity was violent in the past, let me just say that the Crusades were a defensive operation to regain Christian lands that had been invaded by Muslims. And yes, there are some violent passages in the Bible, but how many terrorists do you see holding up Bibles and Kalashnikovs and using Deuteronomy to justify acts of terror in the 21st century?

But don’t take my word for it.

If you are still cynical about what I am saying above, I suggest you follow a site like or the Religion of Peace for a week, read every article, and then see if you think the same. If you do, well, good luck.

If any good can come out of the horrific and shocking events in Iraq, it will be the West’s awakening, finally, to the threat of Islam to world peace, and that Western democracies, which have for so long played a shameful and cowardly game of appeasement, will at last begin to develop a concerted response.

So in conclusion, my question is this. Climate is such a trivial matter compared to the real dangers we face, that I feel that it is almost not worth wasting my energy on. There are bigger battles to fight. Your thoughts?

You’ve got (hate) mail!

Warm mail

Warm mail

The dazzling reasoning and logic behind the following email was enough to make me reflect and repent upon my sins. From the wittily entitled “Mike Hunt” (not real name, I imagine):

MATE! you are a fucking squeezer.

You need to re consider everything you have done with your entire life and go get your tubes tied to prevent any chance of your making more outspoken fuck wit children like yourself.

When the worlds dead – you and only you will be entirely to blame. [Really? Only me? - Ed]

Your [sic] gay.

Sorry, “MATE”, but a response like that just announces to the world that you’ve lost the argument. And probably the plot.

Actually, given the abuse, the swearing and the lack of grammar, perhaps it’s Mike Carlton…

US: “Billionaires’ club” controls environmental movement and EPA

All the money goes to the alarmists

All the money goes to the alarmists

But, but, but… it’s the sceptics that are bankrolled by the rich, right? That’s the only way they could possibly outwit the billions spent by governments on propping up the consensus.

Well, er, no.

It appears that the environmental movement is the one benefiting from the wealthy’s largesse, with a report by the US Senate Environment and Public Works Committee shedding light on the shady goings-on:

This report examines in detail the mechanisms and methods of a far-left environmental machine that has been erected around a small group of powerful and active millionaires and billionaires who exert tremendous sway over a colossal effort. Although startling in its findings, the report covers only a small fraction of the amount of money that is being secreted and moved around. It would be virtually impossible to examine this system completely given the enormity of this carefully coordinated effort and the lack of transparency surrounding it.

The failure to openly acknowledge this force and the silence of the media with whom they coordinate further emphasize the fact that until today, the Billionaire’s Club operated in relative obscurity hidden under the guise of “philanthropy.” The scheme to keep their efforts hidden and far removed from the political stage is deliberate, meticulous, and intended to mislead the public. While it is uncertain why they operate in the shadows and what they are hiding, what is clear is that these individuals and foundations go to tremendous lengths to avoid public association with the far-left environmental movement they so generously fund.

Some of the most valued services activists provide the Billionaire’s Club includes promulgation of propaganda, which creates an artificial echo chamber; appearance of a faux grassroots movement; access to nimble and transient groups under fiscal sponsorship arrangements; distance/anonymity between donations made by well-known donors and activities of risky activist groups; and above all – the ability to leverage tens of millions of dollars in questionable foreign funding.

Foundations finance research to justify desired predetermined policy outcome. The research is then reported on by a news outlet, oftentimes one that is also supported by the same foundation, in an effort to increase visibility. In one example, a story reporting on a Park Foundation-supported anti-fracking study was reproduced by a Park-funded news organization through a Park-funded media collaboration where it was then further disseminated on Twitter by the maker of Park-backed anti-fracking movies.

Another service provided to the Billionaire’s Club is the manufacturing of an artificial grassroots movement where it is not the citizen’s interest that drives the movement; rather, it is part of a well-funded national strategy … (link – PDF)

I’m sure we can all look forward to the imminent outrage from ‘the Cause’ about this highly distorting and politicised funding of alarmism and environmental extremism, can’t we? Er…



Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 8,731 other followers

%d bloggers like this: