“Police officers put themselves at great personal risk every single day on our behalf, and this attack is a stark reminder of the sacrifices they make for the public good,” Trudeau said in a statement Sunday. “While the investigation continues, early reports indicate that this is another example of the hate that we must remain ever vigilant against . . . We cannot — and will not — let violent extremism take root in our communities.”–from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s official statement on the attack in Edmonton here.

When Justin Trudeau, like so many others, calls attempted mass murder by a Muslim a “senseless act of violence,” it is not the attack that is devoid of sense, but the formulaic phrase “senseless act of violence” that is itself senseless and, even worse, prevents us from making sense of what has happened.

For none of the “acts” by Muslim terrorists against Infidels, whether in New York, Washington, Boston, San Bernardino, Fort Hood, Orlando, Minneapolis, in London, Manchester, Paris, Toulouse, Amsterdam, Madrid, Barcelona, Berlin, Munich, Wurzburg, Copenhagen, Stockholm, Helsinki, Moscow, Beslan, Jerusalem, Mumbai, Delhi, Beijing, and in hundreds, indeed thousands of other places, have been “senseless.” Nor is the one the other day in Edmonton, about which Trudeau was speaking.

These acts make perfect sense, for they are based on the Qur’anic directives, and on the example of Muhammad’s own behavior as recorded in the Hadith, to conduct Jihad against the Infidels. The command to make war on the Infidels occurs in 109 verses of the Qur’an; here are just a half-dozen of those 109:

“When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to [Islamic] prayer and render the alms levy [zakat], allow them to go their way. [that is, if they become Muslims] God is forgiving and merciful.” Qur’an 9:5

“Fight against those who do not obey Allah and do not believe in Allah or the Last Day and do not forbid what has been forbidden by Allah and His messenger even if they are of the People of the Book until they pay the Jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.” 9:29

“Kill them wherever you find them and drive them out from where they drove you out. Persecution is worse than slaughter.” 2:191

“When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks.” 47:4

“Oh you who believe, fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you and let them find harshness in you.” 9:123

“Muhammad is the apostle of Allah. Those who follow Him are merciful to one another but harsh to the disbeliever.” 48:29

The specific need to ”strike terror in the hearts” of infidels” is unambiguously stated in many places in the Qur’an, as here:

“Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority.” (3:151)

and here:

“I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them” (8:12).

and in the Hadith, as in Bukhari (4.52.220) where Muhammad is quoted as follows:

“Allah’s Apostle said “I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy)…”

What are we to think when the killers of Drummer Rigby hold up Qur’ans, when ISIS killers intone Qur’anic verses as they behead a line of helpless Infidels, when the black flag of Islam, with the statement of Muslim faith, or Shahada, written on it, is waved by those who belong to ISIS or Boko Haram or Al-Qaeda, when Muslim terrorists shout their battle cry of “Allahu akbar” (“Our God is greater than yours”)? What meaning should we derive from the statement made by the the Ayatollah Khomeini, that immensely learned cleric, when he insists that “those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says: Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by [the unbelievers]? Islam says: Kill them [the non-Muslims], put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]. Does this mean sitting back until [non-Muslims] overcome us? Islam says: Kill in the service of Allah those who may want to kill you! Does this mean that we should surrender [to the enemy]? Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for the Holy Warriors! There are hundreds of other [Qur’anic] psalms and Hadiths [sayings of the Prophet] urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all this mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim”?

To all those, Believers and Infidels alike, who have read the Qur’an and Hadith, the latest attack by a Muslim terrorist, that in Edmonton, was not “senseless,” but made perfect sense. It was an attempt to conduct violent Jihad and to terrorize the Infidels, according to the commands set down in the Qur’an and the example of Muhammad in the Hadith. Muslims may claim that terrorism has “nothing to do with Islam” — an absurdity apparently deemed worthy of being taken seriously, and repeated, by Pope Francis and a dozen Western leaders, but the texts testify otherwise.

When Justin Trudeau calls the attack “senseless,” he wishes not to further understanding, but to prevent thought. He wishes Canadians not to comprehend that the actions of Muslim terrorists — whether ”lone wolf” or in wolvish packs — are prompted by Muslim scripture. It is the duty of those who govern to both instruct and protect. Prime Minister Trudeau has failed at both. Instead of instructing Canadians in Islamic doctrine, Trudeau has not once, in his time in office, referred to any of the Islamic texts that make what is otherwise inexplicable — Muslim terrorist attacks — explicable even to a simpleton such as Prime Minister Trudeau. He has welcomed large numbers of Muslim migrants, insufficiently vetted, if vetted at all, into Canada, and prided himself on this act of suicidal generosity. The Edmonton terrorist had “been on the radar of the authorities” in 2015, but they lacked sufficient evidence to hold him. Was he vetted at all, when he entered the country? What measures has Trudeau put in place to thoroughly investigate these people who claim to be “refugees,” that is, to find out what and who they claim to need refuge from? He might begin with the would-be murderer in Edmonton, a Somali Muslim who claims he is unsafe in Muslim Somalia. If it is a dispute among clans, is there no place in all of Somalia where he might be safe? And why must Canada take him in, when there are, in the immediate neighborhood of Somalia, a half-dozen very rich Arab petro-states where he would be among those who share his religion? Or has he chosen Canada to move to because he knows how generous the Western Infidels are to “refugees” as compared to his fellow members of the umma, in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the Emirates, Qatar? How many Jihadis are now safely ensconced in Canada, waiting for the right time and place?

Whatever else one can say about Prime Minister Trudeau, when it comes to the menace of Islam, he has failed both to instruct and to protect his people. For migration to work, the migrants must be both capable and desirous of true integration. Muslim migrants all over the Western world have shown a great reluctance to integrate, and continue to exhibit hostility to the Infidels who have allowed them to settle, even welcomed them into their countries. But how could it ever have been otherwise, given what is contained in the Qur’an and Hadith? The Trudeau government’s migration policy has consisted of Trudeau appearing to welcome all with open arms; he’s been forced to backtrack somewhat, but neither he nor Ahmed Husen, his immigration minister, have set out exactly how they propose to vet immigrants, including those now coming illegally from the U.S. He should be a lot less celebratory about the migrants, and a lot more solicitous of the anxieties of native Canadians. And he should stop using that phrase “senseless act of violence” to describe Muslim acts of terror. “Violent” they certainly are; “senseless” — never.

Have a tip we should know? Your anonymity is NEVER compromised. Email Email tips@thegellerreport.com