I am fed up with all the pandering to Islam from the woke left

I am fed up with:

*Seeing Palestinian flags in Australia (flags of a nation that actually doesn't exist, but stand for the annihilation of the Jewish people)

*Protests representing Islamic Terrorist Organisations (they should be treated as traitors, in the same way they dealt with Nazi sympathiser & collaborators after WW2)

*The attacks on Israel (without any knowledge of history & facts)

*The lies from the Media about the whole Middle East conflict (Due to fact that most of the media in Australia is woke & far left & representing the red & green alliance)

*Islam being called "a religion of peace" (you must be either delusional or a sympathiser of the most violent religion ever created)

*The spinelessness & cowardice from many in Government (incl. from the so-called "centre-right")

*When concerned citizens bring up the "Elephant in the Room" & are the called "Islamophobic"

Criticism Is Not a Phobia

I’ve seen this image shared many times, and regardless of whether people agree with every word on it or not, it raises a larger question that deserves serious discussion.

In modern society, we often blur two very different things: criticism of an ideology and hatred of people. These are not the same. Questioning a religion, its teachings, or its political influence should never automatically be labelled as fear or hatred. Every major belief system, from Christianity to communism to capitalism, is debated openly, criticised openly, and held to scrutiny, because that is how free societies evolve.

The word Islamophobia is often used as a shield to shut down discussion instead of engaging with the points being raised. Genuine bigotry against Muslims absolutely exists and should be rejected, just as racism or antisemitism should be rejected, but disagreement with religious ideas or concern about political interpretations of those ideas is not the same thing as prejudice.

History shows that progress happens when ideas are questioned, not when they are placed beyond criticism. We question governments, political ideologies, and social systems because power without scrutiny becomes dangerous. Religion should not be exempt from that same standard.

At the same time, criticism must remain fair and focused on ideas, not on ordinary people simply living their lives. The goal should always be debate, reform, and understanding, not division or hostility, however, if like Islam is doing today, it’s overtaken by extremists who are dictating a narrative where millions are being moved to do what Islam instructs, people can’t be expected to sit by and watch it all happen.

Point and case Iran, the Iranian people aren’t tip toeing around being politically correct and the word Islamophobe.

They’re literally fighting for their lives.

In the end, a confident belief system should be able to withstand questions. Free speech is not about protecting comfortable opinions, it is about allowing uncomfortable conversations so truth can be tested openly.

Palestine is nearly free from HAMAS thanks to the IDF

These protesters have no clue about the middle east. Trump has already began to try bring a 20 point peace plan to the region, however. There's only so much you can do when the region is occupied by HAMAS. Now I'm not here to defend what anyone has done. Everyone, everywhere deserves to live safe and free.

Israel is NOT occupying Palestine.

Israel is NOT your enemy.

There is NO genocide.

This is Australia

We have had a gutful of your disgusting protests.

If you really care for Palestine. Shut up, Go there, and stop Hamas.

Oh while I am on this topic, I have my guts full of Islam still being called a religion of peace!

The Paradox of Islam and Islamism

Islam is a 1,400-year-old faith followed by over 2 billion people worldwide. For the vast majority, it remains a personal religion focused on prayer, charity, fasting, moral living, and spiritual guidance.

Islamism is entirely different. It is a modern political ideology that insists Sharia (Islamic law) must become the official law of the state — dictating governance, courts, punishments, family matters, and public life. This is the ideological foundation that drives radical groups seeking to enforce it through any means necessary.

Here is the stark paradox the world keeps avoiding:

We constantly hear “Not all Muslims are radicals” or “The vast majority are peaceful.”

But if so, where is this peaceful majority when radical violence is committed in the name of their faith?

A conservative estimate, grounded in long-term Pew Research trends and related polls on justification of suicide bombings, violence against civilians, or sympathy for jihadist groups (al-Qaeda, ISIS, etc.), places the radicalized fringe — those who actively support or justify extreme Islamist terrorism — at roughly 7% of the global Muslim population.

That equals 140 million people.

140 million is not a vague “support base.” It is an army-sized pool of individuals radicalized enough to sympathize with, recruit for, fund, or directly participate in terror: 9/11-style attacks, October 7 massacres, suicide bombings, beheadings, and global jihadist networks. This number dwarfs the standing armies of most nations and explains how such threats persist across continents despite military defeats.

And that is only the violent, committed core.

The deeper paradox lies in the much larger group: In the biggest Muslim-majority countries (home to most of the world’s Muslims), overwhelming majorities openly favor making Sharia the official law of the land — the precise political objective of Islamism:

• Malaysia → 93%

• Bangladesh → ~90%

• Indonesia → 64–89% (recent surveys)

• Pakistan → 84%

• Nigeria → ~75%

These figures come directly from Pew Research Centre data (with updates through 2025). That is hundreds of millions who want the very system Islamism fights to impose.

How can so many claim to be “peaceful” and reject terrorism while demanding Sharia — the ideological fuel that powers the radicals?

They cannot have it both ways. Supporting Sharia as state law means endorsing the framework that justifies Islamist extremism. Silence in the face of terror carried out for that goal is not neutrality — it is tacit approval. When the “peaceful majority” refuses to confront or reject the ideology in their midst, they enable it. Silence = complicity.

Compare this to other faiths for clarity:

• Christianity has produced political ideologies (historical theocracies, modern Christian nationalism in some corners), but mainstream Christianity today does not sponsor global terror networks, demand canon law by force, or generate 140 million sympathizers for suicide bombings.

• Judaism has no parallel at all. There is no Jewish political movement seeking to impose Halacha worldwide through violence, no Jewish terror organizations operating globally, no equivalent pool of millions ready to die for a theocratic conquest. Israel is a secular democracy with Jewish identity — not a theocracy exporting religious law through jihad.

Only Islamism combines widespread popular demand for religious law + a large radicalized minority willing to kill for it + a majority that stays silent or quietly aligns with the end goal.

This is the hidden darkness within parts of the Muslim world today — camouflaged by slogans, rebranded as “culture,” and shielded from scrutiny.

We must shine a powerful lighthouse beam directly into this shadow.

Ignoring it will not make it disappear — it will only allow it to grow until it engulfs more innocents.

The paradox is not that “not all Muslims” are radicals.

The paradox is that the radicals are enabled by a much larger ideological sympathy and a deafening silence — and the world pretends otherwise.