Joe Hildebrand: Usual suspects prove ‘weaselish’ as they condemn terrorism or violence but …
ISIS is seeing opportunities in a world where terrorism is arguably attracting unprecedented levels of sympathy, writes Joe Hildebrand.
National
Don't miss out on the headlines from National. Followed categories will be added to My News.
One Christmas just over 850 years ago, King Henry II uttered the infamous phrase: “Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?”
Henry was venting his frustration at Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Becket amid a dispute over a handful of senior clerical appointments. Needless to say things escalated quickly.
The problem was that a group of knights took Henry at his word and promptly set off for Canterbury, where they slaughtered Becket in his own cathedral.
During the years of penance Henry was forced to undergo afterwards, he always insisted his words were never an order: He was merely mouthing off.
But that hardly mattered. The King’s words gave licence to those who wished to do violence and that was all they needed to commit murder.
Recently we have seen plenty of similar mouthing off from people in positions of power. People who, like Henry, should have known better.
Activists, academics, politicians and even the odd restaurant owner all spouting the most vicious anti-Israel hatred – literal calls for its elimination – while indignantly perishing the thought that they are anti-Jewish or in any way condone violence.
Likewise, Henry II was equally aghast at the suggestion that he had in any way condoned violence. That didn’t matter much to Becket though.
Thus we have heard since October 7, 2023, the most weaselish of words from the usual suspects about how they condemn terrorism or condemn violence (typically with the convenient catch-all “of all kinds” or “on all sides”) … but …
And then comes the justification for said terrorism and violence: It didn’t happen in a vacuum, the struggle didn’t start that day and countless caveats that essentially amount to “Israel had it coming”.
It’s a bit like the old movie trope of the exasperated police captain and his rogue detective: “Look, I don’t like his methods but you have to admit he gets results!”
Indeed, just apply that line to all the supposedly progressive commentary about alleged health insurance boss killer Luigi Mangione. It is a perfect fit.
I condemn murder but the guy had a point; I condemn murder but this is why we need to fix our healthcare system; I condemn murder but the healthcare companies are killing people too. And on and on – token platitudes condemning violence amid a tsunami of commentary effectively justifying it.
Would any of these commentators actually commit violence themselves? Almost certainly not. And yet they signal to the world, send messages out into the ether, that it is understandable and rewardable.
And of course the most disingenuous thing about such disclaimers is that this is the precise goal of violent extremists: To commit shocking acts in order to attract attention and sympathy to their cause.
Hell, the extremists don’t even expect their methods to be endorsed, they are just a means to an end. And the doe-eyed commentariat and political establishment delivers that outcome in spades.
This not only rewards the violence they are so careful to condemn but it incentivises the next extremist, and the next one and the one after that.
This is why the UN has been so profoundly naive to effectively allow October 7 to be a springboard for the advancement of Palestinian statehood.
I, like the Australian and US governments, fully support a two-state solution but to accelerate that goal in the aftermath of the deadliest attack on Jews since the Holocaust sends the worst possible message to every extremist on the planet on how best to achieve their aims – let alone to Hamas itself.
And, of course, it retrospectively applies the fig leaf of legitimacy to the attacks themselves. Of course the UN condemns all terrorism and violence but you have to admit it gets results!
Little wonder the sleeping dragon of ISIS is emerging from its slumber, seeing exciting new opportunities in a world where terrorism is arguably attracting unprecedented levels of sympathy. It turns out they are the oppressed ones.
Because that’s the funny thing about terrorists – they don’t think they are. They are usually deranged, obsessive or just bone-stupid types who think that what they are doing is perfectly justified in order to avenge their suffering or achieve their ideological nirvana.
And every sliver of indulgence from the mainstream establishment only legitimises their grievances and goals.
This brings us to Macquarie University academic Dr Randa Abdel-Fattah and her rather macabre New Year’s wish: “May 2025 be the end of Israel.”
No doubt the good doctor also condemns terrorism and violence. But how much comfort and cause has she given the violent terrorists who are determined to do her bidding.
Henry II couldn’t have said it better himself.
Download The Real Story with Joe Hildebrand wherever you get your podcasts
Originally published as Joe Hildebrand: Usual suspects prove ‘weaselish’ as they condemn terrorism or violence but …
Dutton set to hammer Albo in first 2025 speech
Opposition leader Peter Dutton will seek to channel his predecessor's political messaging as he uses his first major appearance of the year to urge voters to turf Labor from government.
‘Monstrous’: Fire attack on Sydney synagogue
Another Sydney synagogue has been vandalised with anti-Semitic graffiti before police believe an attempt was made to burn it down.