Endeavour Hills: Would-Be Cop Killer No “Martyr”

AN 18-YEAR-OLD terror suspect — who on Tuesday took two knives to a Melbourne Police station and hospitalised two officers with serious injuries, only to be shot dead for his trouble — is not a hero nor, as one senior Islamic State figure described him, a martyr; this was a criminal thug posing a clear danger to Police and being dealt with accordingly. Enforcement of the law transcends the wounded sensitivities of apologists for illegal acts.

A report in Sydney’s Daily Telegraph today — that Muslim terror suspect Numan Haider, who was shot and killed by Police after what can only be described as the attempted murder of two Police officers, has been hailed as the “first martyr” on Australian soil — is disturbing for many reasons, and emblematic of much that is wrong with attitudes in some quarters of Australian society to the real and growing risk brainwashed thugs pose in everyday Australian life.

It goes without saying that Haider is not “a martyr,” nor a hero of any kind; his actions were those of a criminal thug operating from a position of complete contempt for the lives of others and for Australian law, and whilst the death of any young person is a tragedy, the nature of the wounds he inflicted on the Police officers now recovering in hospital suggests the use of force against him was proportionate, reasonable, and warranted in the circumstances as they stood.

The fact that anyone — of any race or religion — would seek to uphold the death of an attempted murderer as any kind of victory or clarion call based on any set of formalised principles is indicative of the indecency and perversion of those principles; yet Abdul Salam Mahmoud has done precisely that, and it is to be hoped this dangerous “leader” of Islamic State is ignored by the impressionable and/or disaffected young Muslims his hateful creed is targeted to.

Mahmoud — who (surprise, surprise) also goes by a number of other names — claims not to belong to any militant Islamic group. Yet he has travelled to (and remains in) Syria, where he claims to be undertaking “humanitarian” work in an Islamic State-controlled city, and along with his rally call to others to emulate the deeds of Haider is believed to be working to mobilise violent reprisals in the wake of the opening US bombing sorties against Islamic State targets in the Middle East.

First things first: there are those in Australia who argue it is a violation of international law and human rights to advocate that someone like Mahmoud should be permanently denied re-entry to Australia; yet sovereign governments (including ours very recently) are within their rights to enact legislation designed to protect their people, and stripping someone like Mahmoud of his passport and/or his Australian citizenship (if he holds it) is the very least, literally, the Australian government can do.

For one thing, his utterances on the Haider matter, and on Islamic State actions more widely, show that he is more than capable of operating contrary to Australian interests, even from the confines of his Syrian bolt hole; for another, if he were to be left “stateless” as a result of rescinding the means for him to re-enter and/or subsequently remain in Australia, then it’s apparent that where he is, right now, is a destination of choice: not one of coercion.

And there are enough lawless types in Australian jails — and on Australian streets, courtesy of Courts that release dangerous offenders who should never be released — without adding to the problem by knowingly allowing those bent on destroying the Australian way of life to return here once they have left.

So let’s not entertain any delusions that the kid killed on Tuesday was “a martyr;” and let’s not allow the favoured mythology of the Left that he was “the real victim” in the piece to take root and fester.

I have been reading Piers Akerman’s piece — also in the Tele this morning — and he makes the case that Australia’s “publicly funded media” (read: the ABC and SBS) have portrayed violent Muslim bullies as victims on every occasion to date on which radicalised Muslim thugs have either engaged in violent rioting or other outrages in Australia, or whenever international terrorist atrocities linked directly to the likes of Al-Qaeda, such as the September 11 attacks and the Bali bombings, are committed.

Readers know that I ripped into the ABC over its #QandA programme this week; in that article I included a link to another from Miranda Devine, who pointed out that the entire debate on #QandA had been shanghaied and then dominated by two overbearing Muslim women, who exploited the platform gifted to them by the ABC with the unmistakable objective to either hoodwink viewers into believing that Muslims had no case to answer in relation to the escalation of domestic terrorism activity, or — if that failed — to plead victimisation and misunderstanding as absolving factors.

I don’t know how many times I can say that the proportion of the Muslim population in Australia that constitutes a problem is a small minority; it’s a case made by even those commentators in the mainstream who the Left and the apologists for this kind of outrage brand as the least tolerant people in Australia for calling a spade a spade: Piers Akerman is one of those, and — as usual — he nonetheless reiterates the same point in the article I have linked to this morning.

But minority or not, what happened in Endeavour Hills on Tuesday in the mortgage belt on Melbourne’s south-eastern outskirts cannot be considered in isolation from the points made by Piers, Miranda and so many others like them.

Piers in particular makes the point today that just as the Islamic Council of Victoria has refused to condemn Haider, political leaders have been reticent to state that Islam (or, at the minimum, elements within it) constitute a problem, and I would simply say that if the peak body of the Muslim community in this state refuses to condemn the attempted murder (or, if we’re dishing out any benefit of doubt, aggravated assault and grievous bodily harm) of two people by one of its members, then there is a very real problem here indeed.

This country is regularly (and rightly) described as a “nation of immigrants” and, to be sure, the tide of newcomers from all parts of the world continues; this is the best country in the world and it has made many, many people of different backgrounds welcome, but with the welcome mat comes obligations that simply aren’t being met by some of those who should stand to lose the most from failing to do so.

There is nothing to explain away when it comes to those who seek to thumb their nose at Australian law; there is no tolerance or sympathy due to those who would foment violence and terror in our society.

It is unfortunate that the majority of Muslims who want to do the right thing are unfairly tarnished by the deeds of those in their midst who refuse to do so, but if their communities harbour murderers and terrorists, then those unsavoury characters must be rooted out and dealt with — and without fear, favour or remorse.

Just like any other criminal miscreant, in any other branch of Australian society, would be.

Other groups who have come to this country have found little trouble in observing our laws and ways of life, and in times past those in immigrant communities who have fallen foul of the law have been punished by it: and their communities, far from seeking to excuse themselves from any connection to the wrongdoings of their members, have supported and co-operated with Australian authorities to the hilt.

If the Islamic Council of Victoria chooses not to condemn the 18-year-old Haiden, then that is its own choice.

But it cannot then subsequently complain with any credibility that its members are being targeted, and harassed, and vilified; it can’t have it both ways.  It is this very double standard that fuels resentment in the wider community, and fuels the notion that “minorities” like the Muslim community receive special and differential treatment to the majority. “Tolerance” and wilful blindness are not the same thing. The chardonnay drunks and compassion babblers of the Left are culpable in this regard.

And whilst it doesn’t make it right of course, when even the peak bodies in Australia’s Muslim communities refuse to stand in complete lockstep with Australian authorities when their members break the law, there is no moral high ground for them to occupy in the denunciation of the alleged misdeeds of others.

I’m sorry if that offends anyone but it’s that simple.

There is every indication that the rise of Islamic terrorism — which in reality is merely a pretext for vicious animals to rape and torture and kill whoever they like, using “Islam” as the pretext for doing so, and has nothing to do with the moderate Muslim community — will become a permanent and worsening feature of Western societies such as ours unless it is stamped out now, and stamped out quickly.

There is a disgusting irony in Mahmoud’s call to arms in retaliation for US bombing raids on Islamic State positions in Syria based on an exhortation about “how many more (Muslim) sisters should we wait to be abused, how many more lands do we want to see bombed, how many more children do you want to hear cry” when Islamic State, in establishing the territorial foothold it now occupies in the Middle East, raped the women and children, tortured the victims and killed anyone who stood in the way of their doing so.

It makes any pretence to legitimacy of the propaganda flowing out of insurgent Muslim mouthpieces in Syria and Iraq, and intended to fire up Islamic fervour to do the same thing in countries like Australia, ring very hollow indeed.

Was the would-be cop killer a victim? I’d argue any 18-year-old knows the difference between right and wrong. He is said to have been from a good, middle class Afghani family. None of the media coverage of the Endeavour Hills incident suggests he was otherwise mentally impaired. If he was motivated to try to kill a couple of policemen as a result of attempts to radicalise Muslim youths, I would contend he was capable of making his own choice.

The last thing this kid was is a victim.

Those who would hold him up as a martyr — or seek to emulate and expand on this “first strike” against the West in Australia — should be rounded up and either jailed or thrown out of the country; and steps taken to ensure that those cheering this enterprise on from the distant sidelines of the Middle East never set foot on Australian soil again: irrespective of whose feelings get hurt in doing so.

Faced with a heightened threat of terrorist atrocities on Australian soil, the rule of law takes precedence over the finger-shakers and outrage merchants of the Left who would leave the perpetrators well alone because “minorities” deserve “tolerance.”

And far from the denialist position of downplaying the actions of Haiden, the Islamic community taking the lead — rather than being prodded into mild and reluctant statements of reprimand of its own — would do more good than harm.

 

Muslim Terror Arrests: Round Them Up, Throw Them Out

WHEN TERRORIST REPRISAL is threatened against law enforcement agencies for doing their job, Australia has an urgent problem to deal with; dozens of arrests in Sydney and Brisbane yesterday are likely to be the tip of the iceberg, with retribution threatened against Police, the military and ASIO and reports of a foiled plot to infiltrate Parliament House. No tolerance should be shown to lawless, vicious thugs plying their wares in this country.

Sometimes in this column, it seems I’m playing a broken record: making the same arguments once again, in this case after yet another chilling reminder that the menace of ISIS/Islamic State/Al-Qaeda is not confined to the Middle Eastern war zone it seeks to establish a terrorist Islamic state upon, but rather threatens the free world.

And in talking about terrorists, jihadists, mujahideen or whatever they want to call themselves, it’s a mark of the impact those on the hard Left in Australia have had that any disclaimer at all needs to be attached to a discussion of “radical Islam,” “Muslim terrorists” or similar: as one writer opined in Sydney’s Daily Telegraph this morning, the perpetrators of this growing outrage — especially those “home-grown” adherents seeking to join the “fight” — actively seek to be recognised as the warriors of Islam, and in acknowledging this elementary truth no slight should be inferred by the vast majority of Australian Muslims who simply want to live in peace.

Yesterday’s anti-terrorism operation, the largest in Australian history, poses more problems than it solves, but Australians can at the very minimum be reassured that those agencies charged with their protection — ASIO, the various Police forces across the country, and the military — are possessed of sufficient mettle to discharge the obligation that becomes them.

It’s a valid point; already, military personnel have been advised to be vigilant on the basis of a heightened threat of attack by terrorist groups that extends to their families; ASIO is said to be targeted, too, over its thwarting of a plot to penetrate Parliament House in Canberra (to achieve God only knows what, but it’s not too hard to guess). We’ll come back to that in a bit.

But calm and sober voices can be heard amid the seething reactions of those who would strike at Australia, Australians and the symbols of our way of life, and amid the entirely justifiable outrage of ordinary Australians who did not ask for the “Islamic State” to have any place in this country, and who are affronted by the determination of those who now seek to see to it that it does.

Voices like Tim Priest‘s in the Tele, who makes the compelling case that defects in governance on Australia’s part, as well as those elements of the Muslim community who cannot and/or will not live by Australian laws and standards, are equally to blame for the rise of the so-called “home-grown” Islamic terrorist.

Or that of a favourite of this column, Piers Akerman, who eloquently argues the case that our all-things-to-all-people, risk-averse, “offend nobody” politicians commit a grave injustice against law-abiding Australians — including the vast bulk of the Muslim community — by shying away from any mention of the Islamic and/or Muslim colours of those seeking to commit their obscene outrages on Australian soil; Piers is also one of the many opinion writers today who acknowledge that Police have been assisted by law-abiding individuals from the Muslim community, and his views can hardly be decried as bigoted or discriminatory.

Yet calm and sober discussion of what promises — literally — to wreak untold carnage and mayhem in Australia is entirely compatible with ruthless, relentless and determined action to identify and round up those who would participate in such things, root them out of Australian society, and to the extent allowable under Australian law, throw them out of the country.

And in spite of what some of the chardonnay drunks, compassion babblers and self-styled do-gooders with their bleeding-hearted bullshit might protest, those who participate in the planning of terrorist atrocities on Australian soil are every inch committing a crime as those who, unhindered and/or undetected, actually go ahead and do it. So no nonsense in comments today from anyone at the Communist Party Greens, thanks.

Those of us who know people who suffered the misfortune to be caught up in the London bombings, or the September 11 attacks in the US, or the Bali bombings know too well that terrorist outrages are no trifling matter to score political points from, nor a vehicle to assert some purported moral superiority that doesn’t exist: those who seek to do so should be ashamed, and the misty-eyed sentiment that “it could never happen here” echoes perfectly similar sentiments in other free countries whose innocence of such crimes has long-since been violated.

Two of the insidiously barbaric plots foiled by yesterday’s raids and arrests are horrific: one murderous storyline was apparently set to feature terrorist snipers picking off the security detail on the ministerial wing of Parliament House, allowing straightforward access to the Prime Minister’s courtyard and, as one report rather euphemistically described the consequent vantage point from which to keep shooting, “a line of sight into the Prime Minister’s office.”

Another involved Islamic State terrorists randomly snatching and abducting a tourist from Sydney’s Martin Place, beheading the victim on camera, and then sending the footage to what we’ll call the Islamic State press office in Syria for broadcast and propaganda purposes.

This kind of thing — or anything like it — has no place in Australia.

In a way, Australians had a foretaste of this two years ago, as Muslims rioted through Sydney on the flimsy pretext of being “offended” about a nonsense film made in America by an Egyptian Coptic Christian — in breach of parole conditions applied to him at the time — which saw these undesirable Muslim miscreants call for (among other things) beheadings to occur in Australia in accordance with a strict interpretation of Sharia law.

It was unacceptable then, and it is unacceptable now.

I have been criticised in the past for advocating the deportation of these specimens of human filth from our shores wherever possible, and to reiterate — again — the degraded human state to which I refer has nothing to do with their religion, but everything to do with the fact these are bad people who simply do not belong in this country: irrespective of what religious beliefs they hold.

But the problem with throwing them in jail stems from the very characteristic that makes Islamic State such a dangerous presence in Australia in the first place; these networks are comprised of people who are first-class networkers, recruiters and brainwashers, and their recruitment practices tend to focus on angry, disaffected and marginalised people who believe the world — and the country — have grievously wronged them.

How many martyrs and wounded souls are potentially available to such groups within prison populations?

Yesterday’s raids, arrests and associated counter-terrorist operations are merely the first step in what is likely to be an incessant process of finding those who plot against Australia; and those charged with undertaking them — in intelligence gathering, operations and initiation — are to be congratulated rather than criticised or condemned.

Sadly, however, Australia is proving to be a fertile hiring ground for the terrorist machines wreaking havoc in other parts of the world, and the prospect of similar violence and atrocities being carried out on our shores is not hypothetical at all: it is real, imminent and deadly, as the plots thwarted yesterday chillingly demonstrate.

Lock these barbarians away by all means, and get them off the streets, but I reiterate the position on this issue I have held throughout: if they travel abroad to participate in terrorist activities, their Australian passports should be cancelled; those of them holding another citizenship in addition to that of Australia, their Australian citizenship should be rescinded and those affected thrown out of the country.

Let’s be honest: anyone caught planning or executing their savage outrages in this country don’t belong here; and the simple legislative change to citizenship arrangements would merely see those caught in its web either marooned in or deported to countries they profess to want to set up their own state in anyway.

Frankly, our government should do everything in its power to help them get there; and if they find the going a bit too rough once they arrive — like the so-called “Cream Puff Brigade” we looked at a week or two ago — then really, that’s too bad.

 

Terror And Reality: Those Who “Hail War With The West” Are Not “Aussies”

WITH THE elevation of Australia’s official terror threat from “medium” to “high” — meaning a terrorist attack on Australian soil is considered likely — has come greater media coverage of locally-based Muslims bent on “jihad” against the West; from threats against military personnel and plots to carry out terror strikes in this country, to travelling to fight “jihad” in the name of ISIS, those who do so have no right to call themselves Australians.

Until very recently, with the advent and apparent entrenchment of ISIS and Al-Qaeda in a rapidly expanding tract of “Islamic Caliphate” territory in the Middle East, this column has mostly avoided talking about issues primarily based on Islam; such matters have become an incendiary sore point in Australia, with those who (rightly) point to problems of spiralling religious violence in other Western countries potentially becoming replicated in Australia slapped down — and armed with a pile of legislation designed to outlaw their grievances — by an army of chardonnay-swilling, politically correct trendies determined to ram “diversity” down the throats of whoever dares as much as question it, let alone voice any opposition to it.

I have steered clear of such things because in many respects they are arguments you can’t win; there are Muslim people who simply want to be left alone and to live in peace (in Australia and elsewhere) and there are those who want to kill infidels, wage “jihad,” and rape and murder and pillage — all in the name of Allah, of course; it’s religion and faith that is used to justify such slaughter.

Those who defend the rights of the Muslims in the first category to live in Australia are shot down by those determined to round up and deport all Muslims in order to ensure the complete removal of those in the second category from Australian shores, and the paradoxical truth of the matter is that the arguments of both carry some merit.

But those Muslims who live in Australia and who have become “radicalised,” to use the current jargon — and who want to either mount terrorist attacks in Australia, or skip the country to fight alongside “brethren” in the Middle East in a “jihad” against the Western world — have no right to call themselves Australian, and as far as I am concerned should not be welcome in this country under any circumstances.

The official escalation this week of Australia’s terror threat to “high” for the first time ever — and taking it to the second-highest level on the four-tiered scale adopted a decade ago — comes as the issue of radical Islam and the threat it poses globally is arguably the most prominent it has been since Muslim terrorists flew hijacked aircraft into various landmarks in the USA on 11 September 2001, killing thousands.

What is now clearly two rival complements of radical fundamental Muslims — Islamic State and Al-Qaeda (the latter initially thought to have spawned the former) — are busily laying waste to a rapidly growing tract of the Middle East, and the obscenity of the crimes being committed against humanity in the process are too revolting to countenance.

In the three and a half years I have been publishing this forum, I have posted articles devoted to Islam just four times, and it speaks volumes that one of these — an angry piece penned in the wake of Muslim riots in Sydney two years ago — remains, to this day, the most widely read article ever published here (although a pre-election expose last year about Communist Party Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young comes a very close second).

And it says much, too, that of the other three, two of them have been in the past ten days, both dealing with ISIS: those who didn’t see these can access them here and here.*

But I read yesterday, among other things on the subject, an article in the Weekend Australian that demands comment for the simple reason that anyone who “hails war with the West” might well possess Australian residency or citizenship — although those things can be changed — but they have no moral or social right whatsoever to categorise themselves as “Australian.”

To put it bluntly, these are not the kind of people this country either needs or wants, and they should be deported. But more on that later.

One of the more disturbing aspects of the fundamentalist terror advocates that have at least partly underpinned the Commonwealth’s heightened state of terror alert is the fact their activities are so open; these people are either extremely careless or extremely cavalier, conducting their campaigns of recruitment and propaganda in full view of anyone who cares to look.

The Australian‘s story features “Australian Islamic State fighter” Abu Khaled, who it seems maintains an easily accessible propaganda presence on Twitter and Facebook; Khaled — said to be a “former Melbourne man” of Fijian and Cambodian ancestry, neither of which are typical of Islam — is apparently also the “star” of a soon to be released propaganda video from Islamic State.

I’m not going to drone on about every detail carried in these reports (although a selection may be accessed here, here, here and here for those wishing to read further). Suffice to say, however, Australia — thanks to immigration policies that are either inadequately rigorous and/or too easily circumvented when it comes to rooting out religiously motivated troublemakers — now finds itself at risk from the local adherents of these murderous groups who hate everything about liberal democracy, freedom and the rule of law, and anything that doesn’t fit with their extremely strict conservative interpretation of the Islamic holy book, the Qur’an.

For once, one will say something favourable about the Fairfax press; it’s obsession with the hobby horses of the Left (such as “tolerance” and “inclusion”) has seen it publish today a piece focused on Ibrahim Abu Mohammad, the Grand Mufti of Australia, who not for the first time presents as the reasonable voice of the moderate Muslim community (which — as I have repeatedly noted in this column — is actually most of the Muslim community).

But Muslim voices such as Dr Ibrahim’s are all too infrequently heard: it may be that comparatively little attention is paid to them, it may be because of prejudice, or it may be that they simply don’t speak up to the degree they ought to. But what seems indisputable is that those who seek to act in the name of Islam to perpetuate mass killings and other outrages pay no heed to responsible leaders in their communities like Dr Ibrahim whatsoever.

I am not a bigot or a redneck, and I disagree with those whose “answer” to the threat posed by violent religious jihadists is to throw every Muslim out of Australia; to do so (were it even possible) would be to respond to a local threat posed by the comparative few in a fashion utilising the polar opposite extreme to tar the many — wrongly — with the same brush.

By the same token, however, I am on the record in my view that nobody should be permitted to come to Australia and seek to change the place to what they think it should be, and in this sense the Muslim community does have to be singled out. The fact bacon is not sold in some mainstream food establishments for example, or that some multinationals sell halal meat only to avoid giving offence, is a nonsense that has no place in this country at all.

And the suggestion that arises periodically from some sections of the Muslim community that Australia should adopt Sharia law is an insult to more than 20 million Australians who are not of the Islamic faith, and frankly, those who advance the calls for it to be introduced have no place in Australia either.

Australia is a very welcoming country, perhaps the most welcoming in the world; as a nation of immigrants, one of our strengths is that we reflect the very best of many cultures alongside the primary roots of British settlement and, for those to whom it is important, Aboriginal custom.

Yet if one group wishing to come here wants Australia to adopt their laws in place of ours — in this case, Sharia — then they shouldn’t come here at all; they should stay where they are instead, however horrible they think their lot is, or go somewhere else that might be more sympathetic to their demands to overthrow the system — literally.

But with a welcoming and tolerant country also comes responsibilities.

On one level, I don’t really care if all of these so-called “jihadists” want to go off somewhere secluded and blow each other to kingdom come. In a macabre sense, if they want to do this to each other in a place nobody else has to be affected by it, they’d be doing the rest of the world a favour.

But on another, I think it is a moral and human outrage that in choosing to do so they are content — nay, happy — to rape and torture and kill civilians, innocents, women, children, the helpless and the unsuspecting.

And it is particularly disgusting that these atrocities are done in the name of “God,” “religion,” or any other justification based on exploiting and perverting a developed system of theological values.

The reason I have posted links to a broad sweep of what has been published on Islamic terrorism in Australia in the past couple of days (and there is plenty more; I’ve merely used the first few articles I encountered on my daily sweep of the news portals yesterday) is because nobody can seriously argue that there is no problem posed by violent, radicalised Islamic groups in this country, or by the gullible and dislocated individuals they are recruiting to their ranks.

I have said previously that any permanent Australian resident or citizen who travels to the Middle East to take part in the fighting going on in the name of Al-Qaeda and Islamic State should have their passports and citizenship revoked, and permanently denied re-entry to Australia.

If it leaves them stateless and consequently stranded in the middle of a war zone then frankly, so be it: life is full of choices, and choices come with consequences.

Australia cannot — despite the fervour and zeal of the Left — tolerate and diversify and compassion itself to the point that it becomes a haven for the murderous, the lunatic and the despotic.

Especially when the target of such people and the groups to which they belong is the way of life we enjoy in this country, and everything it stands for.

And I note that the problems that are now starting to really become apparent in Australia — even to those who, for whatever reason, have chosen to avert their eyes in denial — are not unique to this country; all over the Western world, in the USA, the UK and Europe (and even in places like Russia), organisations based on this radical brand of Islam are growing in strength and prominence, with everything they find disagreeable in their crosshairs.

Clearly, it is not possible to speak for those in other Western countries, although the sentiment probably holds good irrespective of whether we’re talking about Australia, the UK, or somewhere like the Netherlands, which is notorious for rising levels of Islamic violence and social trouble.

The escalation of Australia’s terror threat level is not something done on a whim, or for purely political reasons; indeed, the decision to do so stems from ASIO, not the Abbott government, and Bill Shorten must be given his due for publicly falling into lockstep with Prime Minister Tony Abbott in response (even if some of his less-principled colleagues see it as an opportunity for political point scoring).

And there’s no diplomatic way of saying this, so let’s call a spade a spade: the reason for the change in terror alert, very simply, is due to a threat posed by violent Islamic fundamentalists.

If any of the people involved in these terrorist cells — like Khaled who, of course, is long gone — possess the citizenship by birth or ancestry of any other country, then as far as I am concerned their Australian citizenships must be rescinded.

If they are off fighting overseas, then they will never return; if they continue to dwell on Australian shores, their tenure should be summarily and abruptly terminated, and they should be deported along with their vicious ideas and violent intentions.

There are too many compassion babbling voices peddling bleeding-hearted bullshit about being tolerant of diversity: this isn’t an issue of racial or religious diversity, per se. It is an issue of terrorism, of murder and brutality, of rape and torture and slaughter. Whatever the basis for such monstrosity can and should also form the basis upon which this country rids itself of the threat.

I’m happy for Muslim folk who go about their business peacefully to call Australia home for as long as they are prepared to join our way of life, and provided they do not expect to turn the place into a Sharia society: there is a place for that, and it isn’t here.

But those who revel in death and destruction — indeed, those who “hail war against the West” — have neither the right nor the entitlement to call themselves Australian. They do not belong here and they are not welcome. And by whatever means possible, now Australia faces a heightened risk of terrorist indecency being carried out on home soil, it warrants the removal of those who would perpetrate such horrors from our midst.

 

*The fourth was a piece opposing the establishment of a dedicated Muslim enclave in Sydney a couple of years ago; all I will say on the subject today — and no, I don’t want a debate on it now — is that most Muslim nations would look very poorly indeed (to put it extremely mildly) at a bunch of white Australians setting up closed enclaves in their own countries, and there’s no more justification for them to do it here as for us to do it there. Enough said.

Greste Travesty A Pointer To Muslim Clash With West

THE JAILING IN EGYPT of Australian journalist (and Al-Jazeera reporter) Peter Greste is an outrage; this indecent act by a Muslim regime against the free press is to be deplored, yet it stands as the latest pointer to fundamentalist Islam flexing its muscles against dissidents, factions within its ranks, and toward the West. Condemnation is mandatory, but it is incumbent on the free world to recognise the growing danger of the Middle East.

I intend to keep my remarks circumspect on this issue; not because of any particular sensitivity or reticence about discussing issues with the brutal face of Islam at their core, but simply because I don’t think the jailing of Peter Greste is the end of the issue by any stretch, and I think we’ll be discussing it again soon enough.

I will however admit to an aversion to covering issues involving Islam that has seen such matters avoided here; ever since a piece almost three years ago advocating the deportation of fundamentalist Muslims in Sydney who rioted — and I’m not even going to repost the link — that article stands as the most-read, by a country mile, of anything I have posted on this site since it started.

I understand there is a great deal of angst and anger in Australia (and elsewhere) over the apparent rise of Islam and I am very reluctant to stoke that; yet even discussion of such fraught matters in the calmest and most even fashion is enough to set passions and tempers alight, and the objective of this column is to provide a conversation forum over political matters, not to act as a lightning rod for religiously based (and/or bigoted) abuse.

Today, however, we will just have to run the gauntlet.

We take a lot for granted in Australia, and it frustrates me enormously that at times, those who take the greatest liberties with the freedom this country confers on its people are those whose words and deeds stand the greatest prospect of irretrievably compromising it.

I am singling out the hardcore Left, with its advocacy of open borders, its calls for “tolerance” of customs and creeds utterly alien to and at odds with the Western democratic society Australia is, and its penchant for running around the world lecturing others on the “moral” shortcomings of their ways — even going so far, as Communist Greens Senator Lee Rhiannon did, as to deploy this dubious practice in the face of the military junta running Sri Lanka. And for good measure — just to really tempt fate, as if her stupidity in doing so weren’t enough to compromise her safety — the Senator didn’t even bother to get her visa arrangements sorted out properly before she arrived in Colombo to do it.

I begin my remarks thus for the simple reason that in stark contrast to such idiocy, the single most important cornerstone on which democracy rests is the freedom of the press, and its ability to report without fear or favour; it’s freedom that has been censored and regulated out of existence in scores of countries, and it’s a freedom the Left has recently had its go at emasculating in Australia as well.

Fortunately, the Gillard government’s media “reforms” were abandoned by Parliament, but for a country as free as Australia to have come as close as a vote of 76 Senators to fatally compromising this basic tenet of a democratic society is a stark illustration of just how delicately poised freedom really is, even in a great and robust democracy such as ours.

It is particularly sickening, therefore, to have learnt last night that Australian journalist Peter Greste — a correspondent working for the Qatar-based Arab news network Al-Jazeera — was sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment in Egypt on charges of producing false news to “defame Egypt.”

According to the charges, Greste — along with colleagues also sentenced to imprisonment — were alleged to have “aided terrorists” and “endangered national security.”

I will admit that I have followed the Greste matter only loosely since his arrest in December: not through lack of interest or sympathy, but simply because this year (as readers know) has been extremely busy for me away from this column, with matters of business obviously having to take precedence over what is, in the end, an extra-curricular activity.

But I have followed it closely enough to know there is a deep wrong that has been visited upon Greste and his colleagues, who have been spoken of across the (free) world as having been jailed for simply doing their job: reporting the news, investigating the facts of matters they were in Egypt to report on, and conveying those findings to their audience.

Instead, they have been accused of plotting with the Muslim Brotherhood — a radical organisation behind Egypt’s deposed former President Mohamed Morsi — and jailed.

The sentiments expressed on all sides in Australia in the ensuing hours has been singular in its unity, and correct in its message: that journalism is not a crime, and that every avenue possible must be explored and exhausted to undo what is not just an outrage against Greste and his colleagues, but a spiritual attack on a pillar of the freedom our way of life is predicated on.

I note that the ALP under Bill Shorten has pledged bipartisanship in this enterprise; it must observe this pledge in its deeds, and politicians, opinion leaders and other prominent figures across the spectrum in this country ought desist from internecine, petty political muck-slinging on this issue: the sobering truth is that what has happened to Greste would have occurred irrespective of who sat in government. It is best the politicians get on with doing something constructive about it, rather than bickering about who might be to blame or who could make a better fist of what.

For the Greens, it is an opportunity to display some maturity and some decency.

But as unpalatable as this may be — or as awkward a time as it is to raise it — I think one of the reflections that has to be shared on this event is that it’s a very big signpost to what is increasingly growing into a very big problem: namely, the radicalisation of fundamentalist Islam in its heartland, and the danger it poses to free societies around the world.

Whatever else may have motivated the obscenity of Greste’s jailing, the “charges” themselves all but concede the fact they are rooted in the struggle between competing, religiously based factions for control of Egypt — and, by extension, for the kind of fundamentalist Islamic society that emerges under the tutelage of whichever of these is ultimately triumphant.

This is a relevant — and increasingly unavoidable — consideration when viewed against what is happening elsewhere in the Islamic world.

In Afghanistan, the hardline, aggressive Taliban movement — which harboured and nourished Muslim terrorists in their jihad against the West — stands on the brink of reclaiming control of its country, barely a decade after being driven from power by US forces in retaliation for its part in the atrocities committed on American soil on 11 September 2001.

In Iraq and in Syria, the so-called ISIS movement has all but achieved the dissolution of those countries in its quest to create a radical, fundamentalist Islamic state, with the objective its borders will then expand, consuming — and converting — everything before them.

Any opposition, as the storyline goes, will simply be erased from existence.

The aspect of ISIS’ activities that made me sit up straight was the arrest of the Iraqi judge who condemned former dictator Saddam Hussein to death for crimes against humanity: the judge was tortured for two days and then executed, according to the best available reports. As a symbol, it is difficult to find anything more powerful, or more ominous as a signal of this murderous movement’s intent.

But the problem is bigger than even that.

Pakistan — a Muslim state supposedly allied to the US, despite mountains of anecdotal and hard evidence to suggest it is anything but — already has nuclear arms; there is ample evidence to show that at the very minimum Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria and Saudi Arabia have all variously either sought to acquire these or remain actively committed to doing so, and some of these countries are no friends to the free world.

Iran — whose Islamic rulers are sworn to destroy the USA in a religious jihad — is troubled by the emergence of ISIS, and is said to now be ready to co-operate with the US after years of obfuscation over its own nuclear weapons aspirations. But the motivation is not to be a responsible world citizen: it’s simply to protect its own interests against the quagmire quickly developing in its own back yard; its feud with Uncle Sam might be deferred, but it isn’t being abandoned.

For years, there have been suggestions that Saudi Arabia would become a hotbed of radical Islamic terrorism if the House of Saud were to be overthrown. And elsewhere in the Middle East, smaller, pro-Western countries such as Jordan are being lined up by ISIS to be overrun and subsumed into the radical Muslim state it seeks to create and to perpetuate.

Already we have seen Australian citizens with dual nationality travel to some of these regions to fight; Foreign minister Julie Bishop is to be commended for announcing their Australian passports are to be cancelled, preventing them from returning to Australia.

Of course, such an action deals with the symptom, not the disease; that — to be sure — will continue to fester and spread. And it goes without saying that I haven’t included everything here that belongs on a long list of pretty frightening geopolitical items.

But all of this makes it very easy to see why incidents such as the Muslim riots in Sydney in 2012, or even the uproar in the Victorian city of Bendigo last week when the construction of a mosque was approved by the local city council, provoke such extreme passions among those who are not Islamic, are not necessarily what the Left likes to brand as bigots, but who see what is happening elsewhere in the world and do not wish to see it replicated here.

And these problems, to be sure, are common to the Western democracies of Europe, Britain, the US and Canada: all places in which even 20 years ago there were few or no Muslim communities to speak of, and which all now house Muslim communities that are exploding in size — with great uncertainty and anguish over whether the religion-based horrors unfolding in the Middle East could ever happen in their own countries.

To be emphatic, the problem isn’t with moderate Islam, and a great many decent people are unfairly tarnished with the brush their radicalised brethren — no pun intended — have thrust into the hands of those who “hate Muslims” for no better reason than they feel they can.

But what is happening in the Middle East is truly a cause for alarm.

And with Egypt squarely in the middle of this mess — literally — it is an inescapable consideration in making comment on what has happened to Peter Greste overnight, Melbourne time.

Yes, it is an indecency against free speech and an outrage that should be met with the fiercest of counterpunches, up to and including any and all diplomatic options open to our government, and if that includes measures such as trade embargoes and sanctions if they may assist in securing Greste’s release, then so be it.

But as I said, there is a bigger problem here: the rapidly growing problem of radical, fundamentalist Islam, and the threat it may ultimately pose to the very existence of our way of life.

If there’s one bit of good to come of these events, perhaps it’s that Australians might soberly, and rationally, start to properly discuss an issue over which any kind of dissent has almost been legislated (and “anti-discriminated”) out of existence.

At some point, the issue is going to have to be confronted. And with the Middle East a powderkeg at risk of exploding — with a high-profile Australian in the middle of it, and the imminent and unsavoury prospect of a united, radical Islamic state expanding well beyond the bounds of the Middle East — it might as well be confronted now.

 

 

Muslim Rioters In Sydney: Deport Them

Something happened in Sydney today that has angered me deeply: a riot by Australian Muslims. It is not their right to demonstrate that I question, but why and how they did so, and what it was over. And frankly, those who “love Osama” and call for beheadings in Australia should be thrown out of this country.

At the outset, can I just say to the lily-livered compassion babblers, bleeding hearts, assorted do-gooder types and the like who may have stumbled across this article to actually read it in its entirety before running off on the usual half-baked tangents that people in such groups are wont to do; in any case, I’m no less entitled to my views than they are, which is the whole point of this column.

And sometimes, a line has to be drawn.

Today’s riot in Sydney appears to have been some kind of rally on a “brothers in arms” basis that spiralled out of control; a local mob going out in sympathy with its brethren elsewhere in the world. The pretext — flimsy as it is — emanates from a film, made in America by a radical Christian group, and condemned by the US government and other governments across the world.

This film — reportedly produced by a US religious group called Media for Christ, and entitled Innocence of Muslims — is said to “mock” the Muslim religion, and according to a report from the Fairfax press portrays the prophet Muhammad as a womaniser and paedophile.

A small detail that seems to have been overlooked in the mad stampede of the hordes of rioters is that the film was made by a Coptic Christian from Egypt, who violated conditions of his parole on release from a US jail to do so, and who seems to have produced the film under false pretences and overdubbed the finished result with anti-Islamist propaganda.

(According to a report from the Murdoch press, the casting call lists the leading roles as George, Condalisa (sic) and Hillary, but in the finished version, the script was doctored to make them represent the Prophet Muhammad and figures from the Koran).

I’ve seen bits of the film, and it’s ridiculous: zero credibility, zero factual or intellectual basis whatsoever, and absolutely zero point in watching any more of it than the bare minimum required to see that it is utter crap.

So let’s get the most important thing into perspective first — contrary to the wild and delirious claims of today’s group and others like them elsewhere in the world, this was no state-sanctioned, anti-Muslim piece produced by the US government. This was the work of a group overseen by an individual, and not a very clever one at that.

Yet the whole point of today’s riot — as with the others that have preceded it elsewhere — was to protest against the US infidel and its alleged violation of the Muslim prophet Muhammad.

And this begs the rather obvious question: why the need to wreak pandemonium in central Sydney, if Uncle Sam is the target in the first place?

Don’t misunderstand me; I don’t think the Muslim riots that have gone on in the US and elsewhere are justified, either; but even if they were, Australia — by the rioters’ own admission — was not their target.

So why do it?

To be completely candid, I think the furore surrounding Innocence of Muslims is simply an excuse to cause religion-based trouble.

People have died in the riots that have been staged over this; indeed, in Sydney today many people were injured, including Police, who at one stage were pelted with bottles and other missiles by the rampaging crowd.

To be fair, the vast majority of the Muslim community — be it here in Australia, or elsewhere in the free world — are responsible and peaceful people, who obey the laws in this country and who do add to our society on account of their presence here.

However, there is also a faction of radical Islam that is not and should never be welcome; as far as I am concerned, today’s little stunt in Sydney represents an opportunity to round some of these people up and to get rid of them.

Residency and citizenship in Australia impose certain responsibilities in return for the privileges they confer upon the recipient. Responsibilities such as obeying Australian laws, respect for Australia’s system of governance and institutions, and participating in mainstream Australian society.

Australia has been very openly welcoming to people of Muslim faith, as it has to people of many other faiths and from a diverse range of nationalities.

But it annoys me to hear anecdotes that fast food outlets in parts of the country now stock only halal meats to avoid offending the Muslim minority; that sporting centres in Sydney are operating segregated facilities for men and women out of “respect” for Muslim patrons; and it infuriates me that any Muslim resident should dare to make the suggestion that Sharia law be adopted in Australia under any circumstances whatsoever.

Yet all of this — and many other occurrences like them — happen with increasing regularity; in return, we get the sort of violence occurring that we saw in Sydney this afternoon, staged on religious grounds that are at best spurious, and over an issue that does not involve Australia, the country these men now purport to call home.

Yes, young Muslim men — hundreds of them — marching through the Pitt Street mall, chanting slogans such as “Obama, Obama, We Love Osama” and carrying placards bearing slogans like “Behead All Those That Insult The Prophet.”

Can I just say that people who think and operate along these lines have no place in Australian society?

That people who want to run a jihad through the streets of Sydney have no right to be there in the first place? In Sydney, that is. Or in Australia at all.

And I must say that far from welcoming this type of lawlessness and anti-social behaviour, we should be jettisoning its perpetrators. We don’t need people like this in Australia, and they don’t deserve to be here.

One protester — identified in numerous reports as Abdullah Sary — claimed the mob had assembled in peace and “were disappointed” police used tear gas, which defies belief, given the number of riot police who were injured today by out-of-control thugs.

“This was a non-violent protest but people don’t like seeing their brothers attacked by dogs and ending up in hospital,” he said, which begs the question: did they expect to be allowed to rampage through Sydney unhindered?

Sary — who admitted that he hadn’t even seen the film that was supposed to be the reason for all of this — offered the justification that “if you attack the prophet you are attacking our way of life.”

If today’s antics represent the “way of life” of these people, then it is to be hoped the NSW Police, in the cold light of day tomorrow, make good use of the ample television and CCTV footage that was recorded today to identify the ringleaders and other serious offenders, round them up, and hand them over to Immigration for deportation.

In fact, any of these people holding the citizenship of another country should have their Australian residency or citizenship rescinded, and be packed off to their country of origin — and barred from ever returning.

This is not the Australian way of life, and irrespective of the justifications or excuses proffered for their actions, what happened today cannot and should not be tolerated.

And at the end of the day, tolerance does not extend to accepting religiously based rioting in Australia.

To their credit, Prime Minister Julia Gillard and opposition leader Tony Abbott condemned today’s events, as did Greens leader Christine Milne; I’d challenge any of them to make an example of the people responsible for today’s riot, and to send to the rest the clear message that this type of misconduct will indeed be met with the starkest of consequences.

I’m the first to welcome anyone into this country who wants a better life, providing they come through the appropriate channels, and provided that once here they obey Australian law and observe Australian customs, and treat Australia as what it is to them: a new home, yes, but a place that has allowed them to escape from whatever it was they were on the run from when they left it.

What I will never support is attempts to transform Australia into something else — it is not a Muslim society, and never will be; nor can I tolerate the type of lawless violence, perpetrated in the name of peace but based on religion, that transpired in Sydney today.

And neither should anyone else in this country — do-gooder bleeding-hearted compassion babblers included.