"Killers are trying to 'sow division' and we musn't let them succeed." Um...what??

You may not have noticed yet, but you're going to start seeing a phrase repeated endlessly over the coming months.  It'll be offered in the context of "explaining" why Islamic murderers kill kids with nail-bombs at concerts.

That phrase is "to sow division."  Let's see some examples:

A member of Manchester's city council opined on what he called "the incident" at Manchester Arena (he really used the term "incident"--SO much less offensive than "murderous bombing"):

We will not allow terrorists who seek to sow fear and division to achieve their aims.

Likewise the British Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, was sure she knew the intent of the attack:

Its intention was to sow fear - its intention is to divide.

The president of the European Commission joined the chorus:

Once again, terrorism has sought to instil fear where there should be joy, to sow division where young people and families should be coming together.

The London press weighed in:

Those who perpetrated this attack hope to sow division.

And the Canadian press:

To state the obvious: Terrorist attacks are meant to terrorize and sow division.

And the American press:

... purveyors of terror are gradually succeeding in sowing division...

Yes, but who are the bombers and throat-cutters trying to divide from whom?  Let's ask the experts:

Paris (AFP) - By targeting children at a pop concert in Manchester, the Islamic State group aimed to cause maximum outrage and sow divisions by turning people against Muslims, experts say.

Ah, NOW it makes sense:  If you thought it was simply a coincidence that all the "elites" seemed to be reading off the same cue card, now you see the objective: you deplorable victims musn't be upset about Muslims.

As your self-annointed betters see it the real problem isn't guys like Salman Abedi waiting with his nail bomb at the door of the pop concert, but divisive types like you suggesting that our respective governments stop importing more and more Islamists.

In Britain and Europe division was sown years ago, be a corrupt and virtue-signaling political class that insisted their policies not be questioned.  That crop is now being reaped by hapless citizens.

A 2013 poll for the BBC reported that 24 per cent of British Muslims believe that "violence against people who publish images of Mohammed can be justified" (see here - and enjoy the non-divisive BBC headline). A 2006 poll for Channel 4 found that 28 per cent of British Muslims wanted the United Kingdom to become an Islamic state.

By contrast, the only unifying philosophy for the elites is: Diversity is strength.

Mark Steyn summed it up this way:

In a decade it will be worse, and in two decades worse still, and then in three decades people will barely recall how it used to be...

The point of time is that it passes, and what is gone fades from memory.  Everyone younger than you will believe that life in the past was always like it is now.

As Muslims take over, the freedoms of the past will be forgotten.  For awhile a few remnants might be found in museums--but eventually they'll destroy the museums, too, just as they dynamited the archeological treasures of Palmyra and beheaded its curator.

They smash all evidence of the pre-Islamic past so that there remains not even the dimmest sense of any alternative to Islam.

But remember citizen:  The most important thing is we don't let their murderous attacks turn us against Islam.

Postscript, from a commenter:

We are the men Nietzsche warned his readers about with the death of God. We are Nietzsche's "last man"--tired of life, risk-averse, seeking only comfort, security and amusement.

The Muslim sees the Westerner for who he is - a hollowed-out shell. And despises him.

===
H/T to the great Mark Steyn.