Last year, Peter Costello wrote “Alienation” and “disadvantage” simply cannot explain why jihadist Numan Haider tried to kill two Melbourne police officers:
The trouble with explanations like this is that the facts get in the way. The family of Numan Haider left Afghanistan to migrate to Australia. Under the Taliban, Afghanistan was a hardline Islamic state. Coming to Australia meant getting away from that.
And Australia was good to the family. They have a very nice house in a good suburb. The children received a good education. The taxpayers of Australia were pretty good to Numan Haider with schooling and services. The family lived in security and freedom — a lot more than Islamic State would ever give to a minority ethnic or religious group....
Deakin University student Tahmid Mirza, a jihadi propagandist and supporter of Islamic State, was quoted in the weekend press explaining why he has rejected this country, a country that gave him a home and an education: “… many Muslims have been harassed, betrayed and in fact lied to by the government and the so-called ‘security’ intelligence.”
In other words, he is a victim… The victims here are not the Yazidis of Northern Iraq facing genocide and extermination. The real victims are those who were taken in by Australia, given a home, healthcare, a free education and subsidised university places… This idea that Australia’s treatment of Muslims is to blame for terrorism is so fanciful you would wonder how anyone could believe it. But it is standard-issue opinion among university academics, ABC journalists and Greens senators. They act on the principle that “My enemy’s enemy is my friend”. Since they don’t like open liberal Western capitalist society, they feel natural support for those who regard themselves as at war with Western civilisation. The brutality of Islamic State does not seem to worry them nearly so much as the imagined “brutality” of the Australian Government.

What Costello wrote then is true now. Only many foolish people are wanting to fight a different battle to what is described. To them, it is important to characterise the fight between Islam and the West. They believe the West would win such a fight. But they don't really want that bigger fight. They just want to vent against political correctness. But political correctness hampers the fight against Jihadism, the fight we have is not against political correctness, but jihadism. And Costello is right, their victim mentality does not stand up to scrutiny.

We are not defenceless, who live in civilised society. But our tools aren't working for us at the moment. How would it be if a Journalist asked the jihadi's mother "How does it feel that your son brought Islam into disrepute?" No journalist would hesitate were they asking a similar question of a disgraced conservative. Or, how about asking one of the many impotent leaders "Why is it your people are allowed to bring Islam into disrepute?" How long could the impotent leader stand the smirks of their underlings? Of course we know the answer regarding the leaders, they are impotent (as Allah meant them to be?). We also know the mother's truthful reply is she doesn't really care for Islam, her children are devout ones. We must remember the jihadis are disgraceful.

The battle against Jihadism will not be won by sarcasm, or by abrogation of responsibility. We must not accept the lie that it is inevitable. But we need Islamic peoples to end it. And that won't happen while Turnbull refuses to face the issue. Turnbull, the great communicator. Who has seized the PM's position from an effective PM, probably with Costello's help.

For some, at the moment, the Sex Party has more credibility.