By Caleb Stephen, Editor in Chief
“Melbourne’s concrete bollards could slide 30 metres in a crash, warn experts.”
I wasn’t in the least surprised when I read this headline in the online edition of The Age two days ago.
Why? Because not more than a month ago I had publicly warned that concrete barriers were next to useless and simply a waste of money. And yet the Melbourne City Council still insists on insulting the intelligences of its city dwellers by continuing to rent out and deploy these ridiculous cement blocks.
And now experts are backing up my claims essentially saying that if a standard sedan was travelling at 40 km/h it could push a bollard up to 30 metres down the pavement – in effect multiplying the deadly effect of the weaponised vehicle itself.
And that doesn’t even take into account if the terrorist decided to use a larger vehicle such as a prime mover instead of a sedan and had his foot on the accelerator perhaps going at three times that speed. The distance these blocks would be pushed would be much further and the devastating impact multiplied.
These one tonne blocks, which aren’t even secured to the ground (which really is absurd), are designed as counterweights for holding down marquees at events and so forth, not preventing a jihadist from driving his vehicle into pedestrians on a footpath or in a mall.
This isn’t just some waffle or speculation on the part of experts. No! Their propositions have already been tested out in real life. The German television show Umschau drove a truck into similar concrete barriers and what did they find? The barriers were “close to useless” as in the test which was captured on video, the truck easily pushed the barriers aside. I cited this very test in my opinion piece (“We need more than concrete barriers to protect us from terrorism”) last month.
“Concrete barriers are not the solution to the terrorism problem. In fact, researchers conducted tests proving them to be next to useless. If Andrews really wants to erect some barriers, how about he at least put them where they are most needed: in front of the airport gates where the jihadists behind Australia’s past four terrorist attacks have come through?” I wrote in The Spectator at the time.
To think that the Melbourne City Council has wasted hundreds of thousands of taxpayers’ dollars (with a lot more waste to follow) on these useless bollards and other faux security measures simply beggars belief.
Meanwhile, Premier Dan Andrews and his useless cronies expect Melburnians to feel assured of their safety…
We would end the waste of money, the lives lost, the sheer distrust of our political class if our leaders had the guts to admit that their immigration policies – like that of Europe’s -haven’t worked out so well and that this threat of terrorism is thanks to none else other than large numbers of Islamists who have failed to integrate into our Western society – a society which is in no way compatible with Islamic ideological dogma.
As I have also said numerous times before – and I’m going to say it again: “What we need to see is real action. Real policy change regardless whether it’s deemed politically incorrect or not. And we need to see it right now because enough is enough.”
Because until we quit the nauseating platitudes, the cringeworthy virtue signalling and the politically correct prostration and capitulation to Islam, the blood will continue to flow on our streets.
I know this isn’t going to sound popular or politically correct, but Islam is our enemy. there’s no two ways about that. We’ve been at war with this barbarous, violent and hateful ideology for more than 1400 years. Islam, for its entire existence has been at odds with the Judaeo-Christian values that have shaped Western nations like ours and given us everything that we deem morally right. So this is nothing new at all. Of course, I love Muslims as people but I hate their beliefs which violate our most basic God-given human rights.
Criticising and writing off patriotic individuals such as myself who have sounded the trumpet on the creeping effect of Islamic caliphate domination for a very long time is both foolish and self-destructing. Calling us “racists” or “Islamaphobes” ad hominem isn’t going to solve the terrorism problem. This society would do well to wake up to reality, heed our warnings and get to work pressuring our spineless pollies to stop the train before it goes over the cliff edge. We need to push for extreme vetting and strict quotas on Muslim migrants, impose hefty consequences for those who attempt to smuggle in Muslim terrorists and/or sympathize with Muslim terror groups and enforce solitary confinement of those who would seek to “radicalize” fellow Muslims in prison.
Never has capitulation to a common enemy ever been the solution to preserving our most precious commodity: freedom.
Sir Winston Churchill’s thoughts on this matter come to mind here.
Writing in The River War, his account of the British retaking of Sudan, published in 1899, Churchill noted the threat to Western Civilization radical Islam poses:
Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die: but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytising faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science—the science against which it had vainly struggled—the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.
Churchill also had this to offer:
How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedanism law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property–either as a child, a wife, or a concubine — must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.
Like Churchill, who writing about Britain’s defiant stand against the Nazis during the Battle of Britain declared, I strongly believe that “upon this battle depends the survival of Christian civilisation.”
Will our great, great grandchildren one day say “this was their finest hour”? I truly wonder.