From a failed airline hijacking to riots in France, our inability to name causes and motivations is undermining our ability to respond to reality.
There seems to be one five-letter word that much of the mainstream media cannot simply bring itself to say: Islam.
As you know, in recent days, yet another Islamic terrorist has sought to bring death to innocents. On this occasion, it was an attempt to hijack an aircraft and then use it as a flying bomb into Tel Aviv. Had the terrorist succeeded, hundreds, if not thousands, would have died.
I’ve actually flown this route from Dubai to Tel Aviv on Fly Dubai,
and we can now expect major changes around security
and other procedures.
Listening to mainstream media on the matter was excruciating. One News talked incessantly about an ‘extremist’ and even of a ‘religious extremist’ yet refused to mention the specifics of this extremism. It was not a Catholic nun or a Hindu brahmin; it was an Islamic extremist. This was known and yet media made the conscious and deliberate choice to exclude this information.
I’ve always contended that if you cannot define an issue, there is no way you can resolve it. This goes for every issue.
The same is true of when police release statements about searching for a woman and yet it turns out it is actually a man who identifies as a woman. Police and media in these instances prefer to adhere to ideology rather than apprehend the offender.
Running alongside the inability to identify the motivations of the attacker was the very clear decision by some media outlets, and I am thinking of the New York Times in particular, to downplay this act of terrorism. It was simply an ‘altercation’ or ‘fight’. It reminds me of the ‘mostly peaceful protest’ claims of a CNN reporter during the BLM riots.
Listening to mainstream media on the matter was excruciating. One News talked incessantly about an ‘extremist’ and even of a ‘religious extremist’ yet refused to mention the specifics of this extremism. It was not a Catholic nun or a Hindu brahmin; it was an Islamic extremist. This was known and yet media made the conscious and deliberate choice to exclude this information.
I’ve always contended that if you cannot define an issue, there is no way you can resolve it. This goes for every issue.
The same is true of when police release statements about searching for a woman and yet it turns out it is actually a man who identifies as a woman. Police and media in these instances prefer to adhere to ideology rather than apprehend the offender.
Running alongside the inability to identify the motivations of the attacker was the very clear decision by some media outlets, and I am thinking of the New York Times in particular, to downplay this act of terrorism. It was simply an ‘altercation’ or ‘fight’. It reminds me of the ‘mostly peaceful protest’ claims of a CNN reporter during the BLM riots.

Had this hijacking attempt been targeting any other country or group of people, it would be front page news for days. As it stands, there is some reporting but quickly pushed to the periphery.
Sadly, but not unpredictably, we see a flood of conspiracy theories already including that this was a false flag operation. It would be lazy thinking to dismiss such claims if they were not usually a cover for antisemitism from elements of the radical left and Islamists. This fusion between Islam and the radical left is a growing and a manifest challenge to Western society.
The same reluctance to clearly identify causes and motivations can be seen elsewhere, including in the reporting around the latest riots in France. The idea that these are spontaneous student protests is ridiculous. Are we really to believe that students were poring over budget documents, or inexplicably for teenagers, demanding more teacher supervision than less?
It is even more absurd when you hear these claims and then consider that the rioting students are simultaneously attacking teachers and burning down their schools.
These protests are being fuelled, funded, and rallied by the radical far left in France. In many ways, I suspect this is a test run before the upcoming presidential elections which the left will likely lose.
As an aside, these riots stand in stark contrast to the visit of the Pope only a few days earlier. Nearly a million French people turned out to see him. No violence, no attacking police – just calm, dignity, and beauty.
The example of the attempted hijacking of Fly Dubai and the troubles in France share the same narratives and tactics. They are also the same tactics and narrative that has followed Israel since the horrific and barbaric attacks by Hamas and Gazans on October 7th, three years ago today.
It is what I call the abuser’s profile. Put simply, the abuser acts as you would expect – abusively, violently, and aggressively, but as soon as there is any pushback they immediately switch to being the victim. They cry foul, declare the response disproportionate, claim that they are in fact the victim of violence, and ensure there are plenty acolytes around to film and then curate the content to manipulate the narrative.
The days since October 7th are the clearest case in point. Western sympathisers with Islamic terrorism and antisemitism have spouted hatred on the streets, week after week. They have reimagined Hamas as the victim and not the abuser. That Israel pushed back is argued as unfair, unjust, and disproportionate. When activists use this latter word, what they really mean is a preference for inaction and preferably capitulation.
When it comes to the riots in France, headlines are busy decrying the police pushback on the violent students and their far-left and Islamic supporters. Headlines and images used imply the police are at fault, not those instigating the escalating violence. Again, the word ‘disproportionate’ is used as if there is some magical way for authorities to respond to such disorder. Importantly, use of this word is designed to undermine authority. Whether Israel or the French police, the implication is they are not acting justly and fairly, and that it is the terrorists and rioters who are the true victims.
in the headline, to the choice of student, and the large
overbearing police officer.
The pro-Hamas crowd in New Zealand follows the same pattern. Violent, abusive, property damaging – yet the moment anyone challenges them, they switch to be the crying victim.
Sadly, far too many supposedly intelligent people fall for the performative nature of these abusers. This demonstrates not only an intellectual weakness, but a moral one as well.
Not only do we need to speak openly and freely about what is happening, and define who and what is behind various actions, we must also have a sufficient moral grounding to discern between good and evil.

We no longer recognise evil
Simon O'Connor 1 Mar Read full story
And so we can say, the co-pilot of the Fly Dubai plane is not some misguided Omani, but an Islamic terrorist.
The rioting French students and their radical supporters are not victims, but the instigators of violence and destruction.
And Hamas are not freedom fighters, but embracers of a culture of death.
The pro-Hamas crowd in New Zealand follows the same pattern. Violent, abusive, property damaging – yet the moment anyone challenges them, they switch to be the crying victim.
Sadly, far too many supposedly intelligent people fall for the performative nature of these abusers. This demonstrates not only an intellectual weakness, but a moral one as well.
Not only do we need to speak openly and freely about what is happening, and define who and what is behind various actions, we must also have a sufficient moral grounding to discern between good and evil.

We no longer recognise evil
Simon O'Connor 1 Mar Read full story
And so we can say, the co-pilot of the Fly Dubai plane is not some misguided Omani, but an Islamic terrorist.
The rioting French students and their radical supporters are not victims, but the instigators of violence and destruction.
And Hamas are not freedom fighters, but embracers of a culture of death.

As many will know, I visited Israel and the Gaza border after October 7th. This image is the one that has impacted me the most. The door handle of a shelter for Israeli civilians, being held shut by a father, until Hamas terrorists shot through the door. All those within died and the evidence of this remained clear to see.

Just one of the many civilian vehicles shot up by Hamas and Gazans who crossed the border.
Simon O'Connor a former National MP graduated from the University of Auckland with a Bachelor of Arts in Geography and Political Studies . Simon blogs at On Point - where this article was sourced.



13 comments:
I listened to the TVNZ News report on the French riots last night and was dismayed by how inaccurate it was.
The problem with adding 'good' and 'evil' to reporting is that 'we' are invariably the 'good' ones while 'they' are invariably the 'bad' ones. What it boils down to is that the ones who think most like we do are necessarily in the right and those who think differently are necessarily in the wrong. What parades as an analysis then comes down to a tautology.
The same rule applies to IRNA (Islamic Republic News Agency) reporters and some other non-Western commentators - 'the West' is the 'evil' one and everything else then falls into place.
I have a lot more time for IRNA, al-Manar and similar news agencies than I do for the Western rent-a-crowd halfwits who wouldn't know what 'sea' and 'mountains' they were sloganeering about. Given the acceptance of their initial premises, they are being consistent and even morally 'right'.
Understanding where someone else is coming from is a crucial first step in resolving confrontations. Adding value judgements about their 'wrongness' puts that process in reverse mode.
@Barend Vlaardingerbroek 944am Good luck using 'hug-a-hijab' to resolve confrontations with a bunch of medieval death cultists.
Anon1044 presents us with an excellent example of the puerile mindset that many Westerners portray with regard to this issue. My bet is that s/he wouldn't be able to pass a test on basic knowledge of Islam or the Middle East. I wonder whether s/he realises that the hijab is only a headscarf....... no,. I didn't think so.
The Israeli/Palestinian issue can be resolved, but it will take understanding and hard work on both sides.
Egypt, Jordan, UAE and Bahrein have long officially recognised the State of Israel as defined by its 1948 borders. Saudi Arabia has signalled a willingness to do so once the 'Palestinian problem' has been equitably resolved.
Israel needs to come to the party by closing down those illegal extraterritorial settlements and withdrawing to its internationally recognised borders.
With good will, any problem issue is soluble. Hopefully Anon1044's attitude - the diametric opposite of good will - will not prevail.
Wake up NZ.... zzzzzzzzzz...... this will be your future.... And listen to news actually from the world, not NZ TV /media...
This discussion on the Israel territorial rights to the settlements is quite a frequent area of debate on BV.
So I typed into AI .' What is the Israeli view of their legitimacy over these territories? After reading several thousand words in the answer to this AI question I am convinced Israel does have grounds for claiming these lands. They have proven historical roots there including the Cave of the Patriachs where Abraham , Isaac and Jacob are believed buried and Shiloh , the first site of the biblical tabernacle. Judea and Samaria are the literal heartland of the Jewish people. A significant portion of the settler population views living on this land as a divine mandate and fulfilling Jewish prophecies by reclaiming and restoring Jewish life to their ancestral heritage .This is pre 1948 stuff.
The Israeli justification for the settlements is therefore deeply rooted in historical , biblical and ancestral beliefs.
The ICJ and the 4th Geneva Convention are viewed by Israel as foreign or international bodies . Rather , Israel believes resolution should be by direct bilateral negotiations .I
>"The Israeli justification for the settlements is therefore deeply rooted in historical , biblical and ancestral beliefs."
What a surprise, I'm sure.........
>"The ICJ and the 4th Geneva Convention are viewed by Israel as foreign or international bodies "
As indeed they are. That's what gives them their legitimacy in international law.
'Divine mandates' don't cut the mustard in international law. Anyway, Muslims can claim a 'divine mandate' as well. I won't go into that here as I regard their claim on that basis as vacuous as the Jewish one, but interested readers may wish to look this up starting with Surah Al-Anbiya (21:105).
>"Israel believes resolution should be by direct bilateral negotiations."
Israel has rejected the notion of a Palestinian State outright. What is there to negotiate, and with whom?
But then again, a christo-fascist would say this, wouldn’t he?
.Well I don't see any easy solution to this at all. It is Palestinians who argue that purely bilateral talks are inherently unfair. They are the ones who assert that international participation are necessary to level the playing field. and hold Israel accountable to international law.
It is true that bi-lateral talks are framed by Israel as a mechanism to security and administrative boundaries under strict Israel oversight, rather than as a path to a sovereign Palestinian statehood.
Unsolvable. Calling claims 'vacuous 'and divine mandates 'not cutting the mustard ' to International courts is exactly why Israel doesn't and never will accept judgements from that sector .Why should a theocratic state abide by secular rulings ? .
>".Why should a theocratic state abide by secular rulings ?"
Israel is not a theocratic state. However, there is a powerful ultraorthodox bloc in the Knesset and they can make or break a government.
Not being officially a theocracy, the fact that the ICJ is 'secular' (a term that you won't find in the way it is described in academic literature on international law) is neither here nor there.
What really matters here is that Israel, like its principal backer the US, can thumb its nose at international law when it doesn't suit because they can get away with it.
Note how the mood in Europe is swinging away from the guilt trip-induced unquestioning support for Israel. Sooner or later that will happen in the US as well. Israel will have to rethink its attitude and policies at that time.
Israel is currently facing intense debate over 'creeping theocracy' and moving towards a quasi -theocratic state embedding Torah and halacta - Jewish law- into state Institutions .Secular sections are protesting against creeping theocracy.
It is entirely a personal opinion on what will happen to Israel when USA and Europe, inevitably no longer support it .There are other scenarios besides abiding by International Law.
You're right on both counts, Anon 1044.
Israel is indeed moving towards a quasi-theocratic state and it is a matter of conjecture what will happen when Europe and the US cease their unconditional support of Israel.
One can only hope that the secular Jews will successfully oppose the first and will get their government to start abiding by the rules of international law in deed and in spirit.
I'm not sure what 'other scenarios' you have in mind but I have a funny feeling they don't bode well for anyone.
I believe Israel will stand strong on its hard fought years of religious tradition. The West needs it .
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.