To read Part 1 Click on the link below.
Now first off, if you read Part 1, you’ll notice that in Avi’s video he stated that the interview had actually been filmed, a few months prior to being aired. I did not mention this because I saw no time stamp on the footage from the hidden camera. I say this now to point out that I have no intention of confirming or denying any element by which I can find no real point of reference. That went for his claim that the interview was filmed months prior to, but that will also include what some may try to argue against Avi. This argument is strictly based on what we see in the evidence presented. For instance he has a connection to far right activist Tommy Robins, Facebook had stated that he had urged violence in a post he was warned about as a reason for him getting banned. He denied making such claims, and try as I may to even find some manner of screenshot of the exact post Facebook was referring to in there statement, I could not find any. As such, the notion that Avi is hypocritical in his statement of being against violence through his connection to Tommy Robins is a point that I have yet to find evidence of.
What Avi is most guilty of is a tactic known as fear mongering. He cites the violence of the Muslim religion and the growing numbers of Muslims migrating into Australia. Yet here is a little known fact. There have been 5 terrorist attacks in Australia since 2016 and this term is used loosely as the leading to 3 deaths committed by people who had been inspired by the Islamic state. Another fact and this may surprise you, is that there has only been a single terrorist act committed in New Zealand since 2016 and that was the shooting at the ChristChurch Mosque last month. These numbers come from Esri Story Maps focusing on terrorist attacks.
Indeed for a religion that accounts for 1.8 billion people the world over The majority of the 35,244 fatalities caused by Muslim inspired attacks since 2016 have been against other Muslims and tend to be centralized in the Middle East and Africa. A case can be made for Europe however that number has had a steady decrease over the last 3 years.
Over all the number seems to be going down in general. But for one who claims a willingness to debate and change his arguments if proven wrong. This video displays the very opposite behavior. In fact you might argue that he makes the same type of blanket statements, that many of us argue over the mainstream media making and with the same lack of intent to take much of anything said to the contrary seriously. You can even see his mannerisms and actions in this interview as being of the same type of antagonistic vein as his hidden camera video revealed Jim Jefferies to be.
So here is my argument to BOTH. I don’t know what either of these guys do, but it ISN’T Journalism. It’s undisciplined, unruly, and when it isn’t emotional based leaving doubt as to it’s integrity, it’s cold and calculated, but both operate with the same goal in mind. Not to inform, but to affirm our biases. They are both guilty, of caring less about giving the truth than they are about trying to manipulate how people take it in.