Muslim Groups Seek a Redefinition of Terrorism That Doesn't Include Muslims

And Anglican Church Organisations Support Them

Muslim groups are demanding the Australian government redefine terrorism so that it does not include acts motivated by religion.

That’s because the real threat to Australia isn’t terrorism but the definition of terrorism.

How stupid are we?

All these years we’ve spent worrying about terrorist attacks when we could have completely eliminated the threat by simply changing the definition!

Thank you Muslim groups for coming to our rescue.

The nation will be much safer once we all agree that terrorism has absolutely nothing to do with religion, especially the religion terrorists keep shouting about just before things explode.

Fifteen Muslim groups, led by the Australian Muslim Advocacy Network, have called for “religion and ideology” to no longer count as a motivation for terrorist acts.

The reasoning seems pretty clear.

It means that when a Muslim, inspired by the Quran and emulating the deeds of Mohammad, kills infidels while yelling something about Allah being great … it can’t be called terrorism.

Instead, we could just call it … Monday. Or Tuesday. Or Wednesday. Thursday through Sunday are also options.

And just like that, faster than a jihadi can say Allah Akbar, there’s no such thing as a Islamic terrorism.

In a submission the Muslim network argues that current laws marginalise their faith communities.

And it’s easy to see why.

When a member of the Islamic faith community seeks to intimidate or kill members of other communities that the Islamic faith community deems to be an inferior community - like, oh I don’t know, the Jews - it does tend to marginalise the Islamic faith community.

Which is so impolite of the victims, really.

But it’s even worse than that.

The Muslim groups argue that current laws “disproportionately” target their com­munities.

It’s a mystery as to why.

According to ASIO, only 12 of the 16 terrorist attacks in Australia since 2014 were driven by “Islamist violent extremism”.

What are the odds that laws about terrorism would disproportionately touch the people disproportionately doing the terrorism?

Cue the world’s biggest eye-roll.

Australian Muslim Advocacy Network argued …

“The persistence of this association between Islam and terrorism in official discourse – whether through prosecutions, political statements, or legislative design – has lent credibility to the false and dangerous notion that Islam itself is a source of violence.”

Translation: Please stop noticing the pattern.

It has evidently not occurred to these Muslim groups that the persistence of association between Islam and terrorism is due to the persistence of Islam motivating terrorism.

It also apparently never occurred to them that the easiest way to break the association between Islam and terrorism would be to renounce the verses, preachers, and historical precedents calling for - how to put this? - jihad.

But that’s much harder than chanting “Islamophobia” and hoping everyone feels too guilty to ask follow-up questions.

The Muslim groups are being supported in their bid to have the definition of terrorism changed by non other than the Anglican Church.

The Australian Newspaper reports that …

“Anglican organisations supported changes to remove religion as a form of terrorist motivation in solidarity with Muslim groups.”

Jesus said to “pray for those who persecute you”, not to stand in solidarity with them.

How strange that Anglican Church organisations stand in solidarity with Muslim groups trying to downplay jihad rather than with Jews who are typically the target of jihadis.

And if they won’t defend Jews, will they not at least defend their own people?

Or have the forgotten how Al-Shabaab terrorists surrounded a workers camp in Kenya and ordered those who could not prove they were Muslims to lie on the ground before spraying them with bullets.

Most of the 36 people murdered were … Anglicans.

Just weeks earlier they had stopped passengers on a Nairobi-bound bus and killed the 28 Kenyans who could not recite the Muslim statement of faith known as the Shahada.

But don’t worry, says the Anglican Church: Islam has nothing to do with such incidents. Solidarity first, memory second, theology last.

The Australian Human Rights Commission also backed the Muslim groups with its own warning that linking religion and terrorism “stigmatises” faith groups.

Well cry me a river.

We wouldn’t want a particularly religious group to be stigmatised by the 9/11 Twin Towers Attack.

Or by the Charlie Hebdo attacks.

Or by the Manchester Arena Bombing.

Or by the Berlin Christmas Market Attack.

Or by the Bataclan Theatre Massacre.

Or by the Nice Truck Attack.

Or by the Orlando Pulse Nightclub Attack.

Or by the Stockholm Truck Attack.

Or by the Strasbourg Christmas Market Attack.

Or the Crocus City Hall bloodbath.

Or by another 100 bloody massacres - that’s just off the top of my head- committed by men declaring “Allah is the Greatest” while pursuing the 72-virgin bonus plan.

Fortunately we have the Australian Human Rights Commission standing up for the wishes of those stabbed, shot, beheaded and burned that Islam isn’t stigmatised on account of their murders.

God - by which I mean one other than Allah - help us. Because the AHRC certainly won’t.

Removing religion and ideology from terrorism law might make some people feel better but it would weaken the law and make it harder to enact and get justice for victims.

Not acknowledging primary motivations does not make those motivations go away. Pretending doesn’t make it so.

Let’s hope - for once - the Albanese Government rejects the madness and leaves the definition of terrorism to reality, not to lobby groups desperate to escape it.