With the visibility that Islamic terrorism has been getting on the world stage lately, there’s been a lot of debate about Islam and whether it’s really all bad. The politically correct position is that only the socially unacceptable extremist are doing acts of terrorism, and that even the bulk of the other Muslims around them think it’s wrong.
If that were the case, it would stand to reason that the majority that we’re talking about would elect people to represent them who would stand up against terrorism and killing and the recruitment from within their ranks for radicalization. Because this theory has gained popularity, one Australian news reporter did an interview with and influential spokesperson for the Muslim community in Australia. The answers (or rather not answers) to the questions she put to him are very telling.
One of the first things that jumps out about this interview his the extreme disdain that he has for his interviewer. He not only talks to her like she’s dirt (which is objectionable, but not actually wrong) but he also over and over again tells her that the questions she’s asking shouldn’t be asked.
It’s like he doesn’t get that we’re allowed to ask any question we want, and his answer or lack of answer is something that will be factored into future decisions. The obvious attempt to bully his interviewer into backing down speaks to the culture that he obviously accepts and lives in.
One question that it seemed like she was on the verge of asking before she was cut off was when he said something to the effect of “we don’t kill innocent people.” The giant gaping loop hole that you could fit an elephant through is what their definition of innocent is. Sadly, guilty could include: disrespecting their god, not converting upon request, disrespecting a man/your elder etc etc.
Basically if they want to say that you’re guilty of something, you’ll be found guilty. To say that their legal system is like a kangaroo court would be an insult to the kangaroos.