Australia – Van rams into office of Australian Christian Lobby Group and explodes

A man driving a van rammed into the office of the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) organisation in Canberra yesterday at approx. 9.35pm.

The van exploded. It was burnt out and serious damage was done to the ground and upper floor of the building. Mercifully, no-one was in the office at the time.

The Police would not confirm media reports that the van was carrying gas bottles.

The driver was seriously injured but was able to walk to a nearby hospital.

The Police have spoken to him, and, on the basis of that interview, they have (incredibly) already concluded that the attack was not politically or religiously motivated.

So it appears that  it is not being described as a “hate” crime.

Methinks the Politically Correct Police would be very quick to call such an attack a “hate” crime if the target had been a mosque or LGBT hangout!

The Australian Christian Lobby are opposed to homosexual “marriage” and they have received death threats this year and, as a consequence,  had stepped up their security.

There is no proven link (yet) between their opposition to sodomite “marriage” and the death threats they have received, but the attack on their office has eerie similarities to the attempted murder of a Christian Pastor, Chuck McIlhenny and his family in San Francisco in the 1980’s. He had taken a stand against the LGBT lobby and sometime later someone attempted to murder him and his family in a firebomb. Mercifully, the family escaped unhurt.

It takes courage to publicly oppose the LGBT agenda (and other evils) and those who do can expect persecution.

Be that as it may. Silence in the face of evil is not an option!


One thought on “Australia – Van rams into office of Australian Christian Lobby Group and explodes

  1. So with no evidence of anything (which you even admit) you can manipulate any story to bolster your own persecution complex. It is no wonder you can turn any event into a story which proves your point even if it does the opposite. That is called religion – belief without evidence. Methinks is not evidence it is just a way to project an idea you wish was true but have no evidence to support but hope the odd sap will believe – a particularly nasty way to try to bypass being called a liar. It’s a bit like saying allegedly when you accuse someone of something but don’t want to end up in court.

    The police seem very circumspect in calling anything a hate crime until they have evidence to support it, you on the other hand make all sorts of claims without any evidence at all or manufactured evidence you get from discredited websites in America.

    Who should we listen to – those who look for evidence before they make claims or those who make claims without any care for evidence?

    BTW why did you not allow my response to an earlier post – did it not sit well with you and you are afraid that it showed the vacuity of your position.

    You keep saying you are up for any debate because you will win but at the first sign of something you do not want seen you shut down other people – something you accuse others of doing to you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s