Evil once again stalks the globe. The horrific murders at Bondi Beach outrage us all, just as we thought we were inured to further distress. Innocent people were slaughtered. Families were shattered.
What should have been a public celebration became a scene of terror simply because the participants were Jews celebrating Hanukkah.
After tragedies like this, we search for answers and causes. We talk about freedom of speech, about radicalisation, and about religion.
But where freedom of speech becomes disputed is at the point where freedom ends and incitement to violence begins. Even the most avid free speech campaigners draw the line at incitement to violence.
But if violence follows speech that is still legal, where does responsibility lie? Speech that expresses anger, grievance or political opposition remains legal.
It is, in my view, incorrect but lawful to say you do not support the State of Israel or that its founding was an illegitimate seizing of land from existing communities. Equally, it is clearly and rightly illegal to support Hamas, a prescribed terrorist organisation committed to eliminating Jews and dissenters through extreme violence.
Article Seven of the Hamas Covenant of 1988 states that the Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews, when stones and trees will say, “Oh Muslim, oh Abdullah, there is a Jew behind me — come and kill him.”
Article Fifteen states that when enemies usurp part of Muslim land, jihad becomes the individual duty of every Muslim in the face of the Jews’ usurpation of Palestine, and that it is compulsory to raise the banner of jihad.
Jacob Rees Mogg shared his opinion on the Bondi Beach attacks this weekend
|
GB NEWS
But does belief in the former principle inevitably lead to the second? Does holding a divisive political view cause someone to pick up a gun and murder strangers simply because they are Jews or of a different religion?
Millions of people hold strong political and religious beliefs and never commit violence. The step from belief to murder is not inevitable. It is a moral choice.
Since the Bondi attack, and others including the Heaton Park synagogue attack, attention has quickly turned to Islam. Is Islam compatible with Western society? Can Islam ever be peaceful? Is it a threat to the West itself?
The latter attack was committed by an Islamist terrorist, and the gunman in the former pledged allegiance to Islamic State. The vast majority of terror incidents in the West over the past few decades have been driven by Islamic extremism.
Two gunmen opened fire at Bondi beach during Jewish celebrations | X
So does the Quran incite violence? The Quran contains passages such as: “When you meet the disbelievers in battle, strike their necks until you have thoroughly subdued them.”
And: “Those who disbelieve in Our verses, We will drive them into a fire. Every time their skins are roasted through, We will replace them with other skins so they may taste the punishment.”
But the Old Testament of the Bible also contains passages such as: “Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant.” Both texts contain violent language, yet billions of Jews, Christians and Muslims read these books without any desire to harm anyone. We do not ban the Bible because most people understand ancient texts are read with context, ethics and restraint.
The problem is not speech or scripture alone — it is actions.
Importantly, the person who bravely intervened and disarmed one of the attackers was a Muslim of Syrian descent.
Ahmed Al Ahmed, a 43-year-old fruit shop owner and father of two, ran towards the gunman, wrestled away his weapon and forced his retreat. He was shot multiple times for his bravery.
His father said Ahmed was driven by sentiment, conscience and humanity.