An unusual outbreak of common sense in the mainstream media.
“We must accept that terrorist acts are religiously motivated,” by Rodger Shanahan, The Australian, October 10, 2015:
The desire to airbrush religion from terrorist and foreign fighter recruitment activity has seen politicians and public figures tying themselves into knots.
Trying to avoid using the R-word, NSW Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione noted during his press conference about the Parramatta police shooting last weekend that “we believe (teenage gunman Farhad Jabar’s) actions were politically motivated and therefore linked to terrorism”. There was no mention of the nature of that political motivation or why religion wasn’t considered to be a motive.
The federal Criminal Code Act 1995 defines a terrorist act as advancing a political, ideological or religious goal.
The following day, Fairfax Media columnist Tim Dick spoke of the shock of the act and that it was not so much the murderer’s “obscure political purpose”, but his age that was of concern.
Without doubt his age was concerning, but again there was no mention of what that political purpose was, or any thought that it could equally have involved an obscure religious purpose.
Assistant Minister for Multicultural Affairs Concetta Fierravanti-Wells recently claimed that some young people were attracted to becoming foreign fighters because they had been lured with promises of drugs, women and weapons, while others went with criminal intent so they could rape, plunder and pillage.
Nowhere in any of this is there a sense that the motivation may be religious, or that most videos glorifying the fight in Syria and Iraq are about helping Islam to victory over the unbelievers, idolators and apostates the jihadists claim are arrayed against them, and to impose Islamic law over the lands it conquers.
The unpalatable reality is that the actions of domestic terrorists and foreign fighters and their facilitators are not politically motivated, they are religiously motivated.
People aren’t attracted to fighting in Syria or Iraq because they’re Arab nationalists or Syrian-Australian dual citizens or would-be humanitarian workers or because it’s cool. They’re attracted because it gives them a sense of empowerment through their religious identity. Recruiters portray such jihad as part of a distorted sense of religious obligation and social media is awash with religious references to the fighting….
If it were really all that distorted, would it really be as appealing to young Muslims as it is?

Dave J says
Look at that picture of jihadists. They are scarier than SS stormtroopers, at least you could see those faces. Their ideology and stated intent of genocide is even worse than the Nazi’s goals.
The only thing worse than a war is a religious war – and that’s what we’ve got here.
Curse you Mohammed for unleashing the most evil force the world has ever seen.
Shane says
The warlord, rapist, slave trader, and pedophile Muhammad is considered to be the perfect example for Muslims to emulate! It is no wonder that Islam is the most violent, misogynistic, and evil religion of all the major religions.
Azacque says
I would say curse you Satan for using these weak people to further your’ attack to discredit God.
Pong says
Another example why “The Australian” is the best newspaper in the country and possibly in the world. It is not without flows, but quite often produces articles, which combine good jurnalism and honesty.
Azacque says
Right on Pong.
This is from Canada
TheBuffster says
It’s my preferred Aussie newspaper, absolutely.
somehistory says
All terrorist actions are essentially *political* in that they are committed with the objective of causing a group. organization, agency, or government to change policy or law. Actions taken against citizens are usually for the purpose of causing the government to change its policies.
Certain ecological groups carried out acts of terrorism…usually arson or monkey-wrenching….that were meant to cause change in the actions or policies of businesses and government oversight and/or laws.
The motivation can be just political, but more often it is ideological which includes those committed by religious groups or individual members of those groups.
If there was an atheist democrat, for instance, and he took a bomb into a government office where only republicans worked and killed those he could, one might say it was purely political. No religious or specific ideology…such as the eco-terrorists exhibit.
This boy had religion as his motive…and used terrorism to influence the community, the police, the government…to cause fear and a change in government policy or community attitudes, etc. It was a political move, with a religious motivation.
If he had killed a pastor at a local church, it could be said to be religious only as he was intending to put fear in the congregation of the pastor and cause them to cease their religious activities.
The target and the motive. Both need to be investigated in most terror actions, but when the perp is moslem and shouts the war cry they always do, it is a religiously motivated act of terrorism.
Angemon says
That’s an understatement…
Michael Copeland says
Excellent article. Just one point:
“Recruiters portray such jihad as part of a distorted sense of religious obligation.”
Here is a useful tip from the Manual of Islamic Law, “Reliance of the Traveller”:
“Jihad means to war against non-muslims (o9.0)
“Jihad is a communal obligation” (o9.1).
Nothing has been “distorted”.
The Manual is available as a free download.
mortimer says
Jihad cannot be understand by POLITICAL SCIENCE ALONE…any more than the Dalai Lama (head of state of Tibet) can be understood by POLITICAL SCIENCE ALONE.
ISLAMIC RELIGION CREATED THE CULTURE THAT CREATES THE TERRORISM.
Many Muslims (such as the ultra-popular teacher Dr. Naik) have claimed that EVERY MUSLIM SHOULD BE A TERRORIST!
Western politicians and JOURNALISTS have been trying to understand jihad as a merely POLITICAL phenomenon. Thus, ALL their theories (…e.g. Muslims just want more socialism or financial aid) are INADEQUATE.
Westerners must read the Islamic trilogy of PRIMARY SOURCE DOCUMENTS: the Sira, the hadiths and the Koran before they have the SLIGHTEST HOPE of comprehending jihad.
Jeff Lardizabal says
Life is uncertain and it is my hope that they would read Ephesians 6:12 first, whereby they might more firmly understand the great context of the war they are in.
Afterwards, they should read the Gospel of John as their first step, if it is so, into the Bible.
Only thereafter might I suggest they’d at least be somewhat equipped to read anything contrary to such scriptures.
As Archangel Michael outnumbered Satan and his minions by 2/3rds, so too our time spent with our Lord.
By grace are we saved, life is short and therefore our eternal matters need be shored up before we go into battle.
Mark A says
Few people who have actually read the Koran and hadith would doubt the idea that jihad is religiously motivated. The Koran makes the religious justification and obligation to jihad unambiguously clear for anyone who cares to read it.
I won’t quote suras and verses; Robert Spencer has done so repeatedly and is far better at it than I am.
To anyone who doubts all this, pick up a copy of the Koran and read it. It’s all there in plain language.
Koran At A Glance says
“To anyone who doubts all this, pick up a copy of the Koran and read it. It’s all there in plain language.”
Well, not exactly. It’s all there in garbled, confusing language which will take months of study to isolate and decipher. On the other hand you can find all the jihad verses highlighted (in pink) here:
http://www.koran-at-a-glance.com
David says
Yes Jihad was for that age not for this. The Teachings of Muhammad were for a barbaric age where there were no laws, no constitution, no courts, no police, no prisons to stop repeat rapists and murderers who if let go free would only rape and murder again!!
Jihad was meant to stop oppression and serial killers in another time and establish a set of laws and a system of government for barbarians but what was a medicine for that age is clearly a poison for ours
Every religion is only meant for a time not forever. Even the Buddha said that in time…
There is no disappearance of the true Dhamma as long as a counterfeit of the true Dhamma has not arisen in the world, but there is the disappearance of the true Dhamma when a counterfeit of the true Dhamma has arisen in the world.
Saddhammapatirupaka Sutta: A Counterfeit of the True Dhamma
The religion now being taught by the Mullas is not what was taught by Muhammad.
Why do Christians await the second coming because their religion was only meant for a time and the same with Islam.
Krishna says in the Bhagavad Gita…
Krishna; Chapter 4, verses 1–2; The Times of India translation
Whensoever there is the fading of the Dharma and the uprising of unrighteousness, then I loose myself forth into birth.
For the deliverance of the good, for the destruction of the evil-doers, for the enthroning of the Right, I am born from age to age.
So too Islam is in decline. What you see is not true Islam but Islam in its death throes taken over by evil minded Mullas and madmen.
The prophecies of the Quran speak of Two not One Prophets to appear if you’ve studied the Quran but the Muslims clinging to the term Seal of the Prophets not understanding that this is only referring to Muhammad being the last Prophet of the Adamaic Prophets believe anothe Prophet will never appear for eternity.
At all times when a religion is in decline God renews it with new teachings for a new age and the new teachings for this age is the oneness and equality of all people, that we are all one human family and that no one race, nationality, religion, culture or race is superior to another and that the next stage in the evolution of mankind is world unty. And the Prophet Who brought these teachings is called Baha’u’llah.
Buy my point is that Islam, the Quran and Muhammad were from God but for another age not ours.
Koran At A Glance says
What nonsense!
There is absolutely no reason, either in the Islamic scriptures or the commentaries of the mediaeval scholars or the sharia, to believe that the teachings of Mohammed were not intended for all time.
To claim that jihad was only intended by Mohammed for that time is wishful thinking of the most self-deluding kind. It seems very clear to me, and most people here, that the Islam currently being practised by the evil minded mullahs and madmen is the authentic Islam produced by Mohammed and Allah who “this day perfected for you your religion” not “who this day gave you something to be going along with until the world has changed enough to produce an improved, more benign, version”.
voegelinian says
“Jihad was meant to stop oppression and serial killers in another time and establish a set of laws and a system of government for barbarians but what was a medicine for that age is clearly a poison for ours …”
Whoa, Nelly. David seems to be saying that Islam started out okay, but went wrong later. And that word David uses to translate fitna — “oppression” — should be a red flag, with all it’s vaguely Leftist connotations. In fact, it wasn’t “oppression” in the modern liberal sense that Muhammad and his Ikhwan were fighting and killing against — it was the “oppression” caused by anyone disagreeing with the fanatically megalomaniac psychosis of Muhammad and his goal of world domination. A psychosis that motivated Muslims to besiege and assault and terrorize Europe for 1,000 years (until Europe became so superior, after the 16th century, that Muslims could no longer torment her as it did before) — a psychosis that remains unchanged today, 1400 years later, as Muslims are undergoing a global revival of their deranged and deadly (when not deceitful) jihad.
Mirren10 says
”The religion now being taught by the Mullas is not what was taught by Muhammad.”
What crap.
What is the koran ?
What are the hadiths ?
Your bahai whitewashing of islam is tedious in the extreme. No-one here is falling for your bs.
gravenimage says
The appalling apologist for Islamic savagery David wrote:
Yes Jihad was for that age not for this. The Teachings of Muhammad were for a barbaric age where there were no laws, no constitution, no courts, no police, no prisons to stop repeat rapists and murderers who if let go free would only rape and murder again!!
………………,,.,………….
What absolute rot–and on so many points. Firstly, pious Muslims consider the texts and tenets of Islam, the model of the vicious “Prophet”, and the barbarism of Shari’ah law to be ideals *for all time*, not just for the Dark Ages in which this savage lived.
Secondly, Jesus himself lived during a violent period–yet he was not the brutal savage that Muhammed was–just the opposite.
And then, the idea that no better model existed at the time is also quite false–I am hardly uncritical of Roman law, but it was *much* more civilized than is Shari’ah.
And there are much more civilized models available today in the free West–but what pious Muslims want to impose is *still* the barbaric code that sacralizes amputating the limbs of petty thieves, throwing gay people off tall buildings, and stoning rape victims to death.
More:
Jihad was meant to stop oppression and serial killers in another time and establish a set of laws and a system of government for barbarians but what was a medicine for that age is clearly a poison for ours
………………,,.,………….
What crap. The Qur’an and Hadith never once posit Shari’ah law as a way to stop serial killers–instead, it is intended to stop any resistance to the hegemony of Muslim oppression.
More:
Every religion is only meant for a time not forever. Even the Buddha said that in time…
………………,,.,………….
More rot. The practices of Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, Christians, and those of most other faiths are not incompatible with civilized life–would that that were true of vicious Mohammedans.
More:
The religion now being taught by the Mullas is not what was taught by Muhammad.
………………,,.,………….
Here David trips himself up–he has just posited that what was taught by the “Prophet” was supposedly just intended for a barbaric age–but now he castigates the Mullahs for not teaching exactly that.
The truth is that the problem is that what the Mullahs–and Imams–are teaching is *exactly* what Muhammed taught.
More:
So too Islam is in decline. What you see is not true Islam but Islam in its death throes taken over by evil minded Mullas and madmen.
………………,,.,………….
Islam has been unspeakably brutal and oppressive ever since the days of the “Prophet”
More:
The prophecies of the Quran speak of Two not One Prophets to appear if you’ve studied the Quran but the Muslims clinging to the term Seal of the Prophets not understanding that this is only referring to Muhammad being the last Prophet of the Adamaic Prophets believe anothe Prophet will never appear for eternity.
At all times when a religion is in decline God renews it with new teachings for a new age and the new teachings for this age is the oneness and equality of all people, that we are all one human family and that no one race, nationality, religion, culture or race is superior to another and that the next stage in the evolution of mankind is world unty. And the Prophet Who brought these teachings is called Baha’u’llah.
………………,,.,………….
Of course, David will not tell you that pious Muslims oppress and murder Baha’i for these very views.
But that does not prevent them from fawning over the sanguinary “Prophet” of Islam, nor whitewashing his foul deeds.
More:
Buy my point is that Islam, the Quran and Muhammad were from God…
………………,,.,………….
In which case God–really, the vicious “Allah”–was an unhinged psychopath, just like his bloody “Prophet”…
Aardvark says
I find the koran quite hard to read. So much of it seems to be meaningless and/or repetitive gibberish!
I would recommend that rather than trying to plough your way through the raw Islamic crap on your own you click on the ‘Blogging the Koran’ link at the top of every JihadWatch screen. For ever is Robert Knowing and Learned.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
I wonder what percentage of the world’s Infidel population have read the Holy Ko-Ran. One tenth of one percent, maybe. When it comes to the Ahah-Deaths the percentage would tumble. This is a big problem. Fitzgerald in here years ago suggested that people read a commented version of the Koran, where a member of the Ulema expert in the Book intersperse explanations of key verses.
There should be regular 30 second blasts of verse & comment going into every commercial break on, say, Fox RINO. Doing that would literally change the world in a matter of months. But that is not being done because things are basically going ok with Moslems now, they are just going through a rough patch is all.
Raja says
Alarmed Pig farmer,
Islamist are under the impression that THIS is the revival time of Islam in “end times” but for us in JW it is a case of Islam rearing its ugly head.
If Islam is doing OK and is just going through rough patch there would not be so much hatred for Islam and protest against the same. Could you please throw some more light on your comment? Thanks…
voegelinian says
“Fitzgerald in here years ago suggested that people read a commented version of the Koran, where a member of the Ulema expert in the Book intersperse explanations of key verses.”
Ibn Kathir’s tafsir did just that.
http://quran4u.com/Tafsir%20Ibn%20Kathir/047%20Muhammad.htm
And Ibn Kathir was no Habibi street corner preacher — he remains one of the great, respected scholars of Islam, who flourished in the 14th century (that’s just day before yesterday to the typical Muslim mind).
Particularly instructive is reading his exegesis of Sura (= Chapter) 9 of the Koran (the “Sura of the Sword”). His exegesis meticulously lays out, like the threads of a Persian carpet on a loom, the argument that the fundamental casus belli commanded by Allah through His Prophet Muhammad is not physical attack, but rather, disbelief. I.e., the mere act of not submitting oneself to Allah and His Prophet makes one the enemy of Islam, against whom Muslims are obligated to fight and kill.
David says
When you get used to it its very beautiful and as you study it more and more and familiarise the historic significance of the passages you’ll realise it’s a Book from God not man made and not what the ignorant claim it to be.
I see with my own eyes and not through the eyes of others and know of my own knowledge and not through others knowledge.
I’m not a sheep. I know for fact that in truth the Quran is the Holy Word of God and Muhammad is His Messenger from my own investigation that can withstand any attack or criticism.
We’re all free to believe what we will but we were all given our own mind to use it not follow blindly. My investigation unequivocally and without any doubt whatsoever has led me to acknowledge that both the Quran and Muhammad were sent by the same God that sent Jesus and Moses.
Terrorists have no true knowledge of the Quran and follow a corrupt politically motivated indoctrination taught them by evil leaders and because they follow blindly they are misled to commit cold blooded murder which has nothing whatsoever to do with God or any Prophet.
Koran At A Glance says
Yes, I think we’ve all been struck by the beauty of the Koran, such as this for instance:
“…But as for those who disbelieve, garments of fire will be cut out for them; boiling fluid will be poured down on their heads, Whereby that which is in their bellies, and their skins too, will be melted; And for them are hooked rods of iron. Whenever, in their anguish, they would go forth from thence they are driven back therein and (it is said unto them): Taste the doom of burning.” (22:19-22)
Westman says
Nice try, David.
We appreciate the attempt of the Baha’i Muslim faith to reform Islam, but it isn’t going to work unless the vicious descriptions af a sadistic Allah who delights in the torments of others in his Hell, the condemning of Jews, and the second class value of women are removed from the Quran and Sunnah.
Then, David, there is this little problem that mainstream Sunnis and Shias want to annihilate your fellow Baha’i. If even 10% of Muslims believed as you the world would be improved. They don’t.
voegelinian says
Aha. I knew something was fishy when David in another comment above referred to what Muhammad and his Ikhwan fought against as “oppression”. Only Islamopologists (either the Useful Idiot PC MC and/or Leftists, or the deceitful Muslims) refer to fitna and fasad and shirk as “oppression”.
gravenimage says
More from the disturbing David:
When you get used to it its very beautiful and as you study it more and more and familiarise the historic significance of the passages you’ll realise it’s a Book from God not man made and not what the ignorant claim it to be.
……………………………………
Of course–what could be more “beautiful” than calls for amputations and beheadings? Like all devout Baha’i, David is forced to adopt a morally compromised view of “beauty”.
More:
I see with my own eyes and not through the eyes of others and know of my own knowledge and not through others knowledge.
I’m not a sheep. I know for fact that in truth the Quran is the Holy Word of God and Muhammad is His Messenger from my own investigation that can withstand any attack or criticism.
……………………………………
In other words, Baha’i have to regard the bloody Qur’an as “beautiful”, despite all evidence to the contrary…,
More:
We’re all free to believe what we will but we were all given our own mind to use it not follow blindly. My investigation unequivocally and without any doubt whatsoever has led me to acknowledge that both the Quran and Muhammad were sent by the same God that sent Jesus and Moses.
……………………………………
Even though that book tells its followers to enslave and murder Jews and Christians…
What David means, of course, is not Jesus and Moses, but the vicious “Muslim prophets” Isa and Musa–which are *very* different characters.
The role of the Muslim “Isa”, in fact, is to murder Christians in the last days.
More:
Terrorists have no true knowledge of the Quran and follow a corrupt politically motivated indoctrination taught them by evil leaders and because they follow blindly they are misled to commit cold blooded murder which has nothing whatsoever to do with God or any Prophet.
……………………………………
Notice that David never presents any specifics–and how could he? Then he would have to acknowledge that such terrorists–really, pious Jihadists–are acting *exactly* on the texts and tenets of canonical Islam, and on the model of the “Prophet”.
Baucent says
“People aren’t attracted to fighting in Syria or Iraq because they’re Arab nationalists or Syrian-Australian dual citizens or would-be humanitarian workers or because it’s cool. They’re attracted because it gives them a sense of empowerment through their religious identity.”
Refreshing clarity from an industry who can’t see the obvious if it hit them between the eyes.
Raja says
Baucent,
yes “EMPOWERMENT” you said it right. But with all deception and lies / propaganda with Satanic tinge.
islam :- the hateful religion of peace says
“The following day, Fairfax Media columnist Tim Dick spoke of the shock of the act and that it was not so much the murderer’s “obscure political purpose”, but his age that was of concern.”
You don’t think waving a gun around, shooting an innocent person and yelling “Allu Akbar” was of concern …
Not mention the parents who didn’t know what their kid was doing and of course played the victim …….
John says
No S_IT..!!! What was your first clue…?
The euro-liberal mindset at its finest… complete vacuous mind when it comes to reality of what the West is facing with these moslem barbarians… who live to kill, rape & destroy. The ONLY thing they understand is the power of the sword… and we in the West MUST bring it down on them with a vengeance OR we will inevitably succumb to their evil schemes of conquest.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
… actions were politically motivated and therefore linked to terrorism.
This is some real confused thinking. The murderer’s actions were religiously prescribed and therefore linked to politics.
Rev. Bill Romansky says
My concern is that The Beast will get ahold of this statement and turn it against Christians. We are already on the DHS watchlist for believing in the resurrection and imminent return of Christ.
Theb Nyip says
After the murders of innocent picnickers in Australia 100 years ago at Broken Hill on 1/1/1915 by treasonous resident jihadis, Australia took firm action within weeks to prevent any further such attacks by detaining all foreign nationals regarded as a threat.
As a result, there were no further deaths of Australians on home soil from treasonous resident action during WW1.
This was repeated in WW2 with similar success and again there were no deaths of Australians on home soil from attacks by treasonous resident action.
Australia has now had numerous attacks by treasonous resident jihadis over the past few years with innocent Australians killed as a result this year – 100 years after the Broken Hill attack.
How many more innocent Australians have to die before the government learns from history and takes appropriate action to protect its population from further attacks by these treasonous resident jihadis?
TheBuffster says
That’s a great question, Theb.
Maybe we should write letters to Malcolm Turnbull about that.
Raja says
This newspaper is lot more clear minded and honest than other Western media who shamelessly lie about religion of hate.
Hope they are the torch bearers of the world in this otherwise dark world !
voegelinian says
“The desire to airbrush religion from terrorist and foreign fighter recruitment activity has seen politicians and public figures tying themselves into knots.
Trying to avoid using the R-word…”
The reporter for The Australian hereby reflects the curious phenomenon of the closer-and-closer-but-still-no-cigar dynamic I have referred to as “asymptotic”. While noticing the R-word as significant (and, Problem-of-the-Problem-wise, the mainstream myopia to the R-word) represents one small step for Kuffarkind, we canaries-in-the-coalmine here in the Counter-Jihad trenches cannot help feel annoyed and frustrated that our little canary feet apparently can traverse the broader jump that is the logical conclusion screaming to be made — to the I-word (Islam — Islam straight, no chaser; Islam, the whole Islam, and nothing but Islam). Perhaps in October of 2002 one could congratulate Rodger Shanahan and pat him on his head (“Very good Rodger Dodger! You made it to the R-word! I’m so impressed! You get a red lollipop and go to the head of the class!”); but for fucking Crikey’s sake, it’s Two Thousand and Fucking Fifteen now and Muslims in the name of Islam are rampaging all over the planet — and when they are not exploding, stabbing, beheading, shooting, vehicularly homiciding, or throwing acid in women’s faces, they are lying about it all.
richard courtemanche says
Search and destroy ISIS