Suddenly and without any warnings or consultations, sections of the Muslim community have officially announced they will establish a political party to represent Muslims in this country.
This group made up of both conservative and extreme elements have set out to silence any moderate progressive voice within the community by hijacking the name “Muslim”.
In the last decade, these extremist elements have been deceiving the Australian public, the politicians and the media thanks to continuous flowing of funds from Saudi Arabia.
What all this funding has achieved is a growing number of radicalised Muslims never seen before in this country.
Saudi money has enabled them to build major religious centres, radio station, newspapers and YouTube base TV stations. All these information sources have served and continue to serve as major vehicles to brainwash and radicalise.
This group has gained a lot of influence in the media and in politics. Surprisingly since the beginning of the Syrian crisis, all the major political parties and the Greens sided with them and supported terrorism in Syria.
The support from the two major political parties didn’t come as a surprise since we know too well that both the Labor and Liberal parties take directives from the US. What we didn’t expect was the support given both by Greens and sections of the socialists.
Sadly this would not have been possible without the impact made by Saudi funding.
Unfortunately the voices of other sections in the Muslim community (secular Muslims, moderate Sunni, Shia, Alawis, Sufis...) have been so far ignored and their voices remain silent.
Now, conservative and extreme sections of the Muslim community aim to totally hijack the Muslim representation in this country by declaring that the newly established political party will represent Muslims. By doing so, these extreme sections aim to maximise their influence in politics and media.
We will not allow this!
Our goal will be to expose the real agenda of this party. We will expose the conservative nature of their “leadership” and we will campaign to de-legitimise any claim that it represents Muslims of this country.
These so called “devout” Muslims who want to establish this party forgot to inform us about the important issues.
What we need to know is the following:
• Which Islam do they follow and seek to promote. Wahhabi, Secular, Ashaari, Sufi, Shia, Alawi....?
• Which organisations, individuals and groups did they consult before making this big announcement?
• How will they deal with religious divisions and tensions between different groups and sects?
• What is their stance on issues important to Muslim communities: on Syria, Yemen, Egypt..?
• Depending on which Islam they follow: what is their official stance on issues like Jihad, Caliphate, Sharia Law and relations with non-Muslims.
• Why the secrecy on consultations and intention to establish party?
• How do they finance themselves?
For a political party to claim representation of a certain group (Muslims), the officials must be honest and transparent in order to gain support from all the parties interested. So far we know nothing about this party.
So far, the officials are very secretive with their plans. They are trying to keep their agendas totally hidden. They have lacked consultation with important organisations and individuals. Yet they seek to convince you and me that they will be representing all Muslims.
Their disdain towards other Muslim minorities was made very clear in June 2013 when they invited Mr George Galloway to Australia to hold a speech.
This group had a formal contract which they broke off as soon as they found out that Mr Galloway was invited to speak at another venue organised by Shia Muslims.
Thankfully the second group was able to take over the organising of the tour and was able to turn it into a great success.
In conclusion, this group of conservative and extremist elements want to register a political party to silence all moderate and non-Sunnis Muslims in this country.
For this reason they will fail and we will make them fail!
Monday, November 23, 2015
Tuesday, November 17, 2015
Paris mass-shootings: Did Australian authorities get the message..?!!!
The mass shootings in Paris, including several suicide bombings, are the last wake-up call for our politicians, authorities and media. If they wish to avoid similar mass shootings on Australian soil, they should start changing their policies, attitude and planning.
So far, our authorities have no plan on how to prevent similar attacks. We believe that it is just a matter of luck and geographical isolation that saved Australia from similar devastating and carnage. The authorities so far have demonstrated a lack of sensitivity and understanding and have not yet come up with a workable plan to de-radicalise our youth.
After returning from the Middle East recently, I felt the difference between Australia and the countries I visited.
Australian authorities, politicians and media are still in the mind frame that de-radicalisation will happen just by using rhetoric. The government thinks that talks about radicalisation and the need for harmony in the society is enough to prevent radicals from committing horrendous crimes. They think that de-radicalisation could be achieved by convincing “extremist leaders” to abandon their radical plans and brainwashing.
Well after the Paris mass shooting they should come to terms that this was just a mere dream and that a different approach is needed.
The government should learn from Paris mass shootings: consulting extremist “leaders” will lead us nowhere. Our politicians and media should come to terms with the facts that giving extremist “leaders” awards such as “Father of the Year”, “Sister of the year” or “Stupid of the year” will not help convince the thousands of already brainwashed youths to abandon their extremist ideology. This ideology has already been imprinted in their minds.
It is time for the government to start listening and cooperating with the organisations, leaders and groups who have been warning of the dangers in supporting the Syrian “revolution”. It was exactly the support of this fake revolution that has brought about the current situation of radicalisation and global terrorism.
The government went about it the wrong way from the beginning, starting in early 2012 when the Syrian embassy in Canberra was attacked. Still getting it wrong and sending the wrong message by deporting Warren Marriner a peace activist who has been all along a strong voice against extremism.
Such actions have been the catalyst all along for the high radicalisation in our society.
The government’s complete silence during the sectarian tensions and at the same time their fully support to extremist “leaders” has basically let these “hate preachers” roam free to radicalise , recruit and brainwash thousands into going overseas to fight for terrorist groups. It is thanks to these policies (or lack of) we have over 400 people who have fought or are still fighting in Syria, Iraq and maybe even in Libya and Yemen.
French authorities also tackled the problem in the same way, taking rather the “soft” approach of consulting and open dialogue with the extremist “leaders”, thinking that this would be enough. They thought that their policies were enough to positively de-radicalise these hardened terrorist coming back home after fighting with some of the most vicious terror groups in the world
Both French and Australian authorities were somewhat naive to believe that these radicals would, once back home, give up their dream of establishing a Caliphate.
The Paris mass shooting should now convince the Australian government that their plan is not working and is bound to fail just like in France.
We need to convince our government that our approach should be as follows
• Shutting down their financial network by cutting off funds coming from Saudi Arabia. These millions of dollars are poured into Mosques and Islamic schools and serve to radicalise Australian Muslims.
• Government should be consulting only with community leaders who have helped and who are still helping integration. A true leadership is to advance the mutual interests of a peaceful, secular and democratic society.
• The government needs to make tough decisions shutting down centres of hate even if this creates discontent among a small group of people. The majority of our society will appreciate these decisions and even if politically this would cost some votes, the rewards and the outcome would outweigh these small losses.
• Preachers who spread hate should be either silenced or deported. It is unacceptable that known extremist organisations are still able to operate in our suburbs. It is even more unacceptable that these organisations are still allowed to organise conferences and invite from overseas (mostly Saudi Arabia) preachers who are famous for radicalising and spreading hatred.
In conclusion, our government needs to stop targeting peace activists like Warren Marriner and should start targeting the people who are the cause of extremism. The individuals who are spreading hatred and extremism in Australian are well known to authorities, despite the fact that our media still likes to portray them as “messiahs of anti-extremism”
It’s all rather simple. What we need to do in order to prevent a Paris-like carnage is for our government to accept that their support for the Syrian “revolution” was the biggest mistake and has been the cause of all radicalisation.
So far, our authorities have no plan on how to prevent similar attacks. We believe that it is just a matter of luck and geographical isolation that saved Australia from similar devastating and carnage. The authorities so far have demonstrated a lack of sensitivity and understanding and have not yet come up with a workable plan to de-radicalise our youth.
After returning from the Middle East recently, I felt the difference between Australia and the countries I visited.
Australian authorities, politicians and media are still in the mind frame that de-radicalisation will happen just by using rhetoric. The government thinks that talks about radicalisation and the need for harmony in the society is enough to prevent radicals from committing horrendous crimes. They think that de-radicalisation could be achieved by convincing “extremist leaders” to abandon their radical plans and brainwashing.
Well after the Paris mass shooting they should come to terms that this was just a mere dream and that a different approach is needed.
The government should learn from Paris mass shootings: consulting extremist “leaders” will lead us nowhere. Our politicians and media should come to terms with the facts that giving extremist “leaders” awards such as “Father of the Year”, “Sister of the year” or “Stupid of the year” will not help convince the thousands of already brainwashed youths to abandon their extremist ideology. This ideology has already been imprinted in their minds.
It is time for the government to start listening and cooperating with the organisations, leaders and groups who have been warning of the dangers in supporting the Syrian “revolution”. It was exactly the support of this fake revolution that has brought about the current situation of radicalisation and global terrorism.
The government went about it the wrong way from the beginning, starting in early 2012 when the Syrian embassy in Canberra was attacked. Still getting it wrong and sending the wrong message by deporting Warren Marriner a peace activist who has been all along a strong voice against extremism.
Such actions have been the catalyst all along for the high radicalisation in our society.
The government’s complete silence during the sectarian tensions and at the same time their fully support to extremist “leaders” has basically let these “hate preachers” roam free to radicalise , recruit and brainwash thousands into going overseas to fight for terrorist groups. It is thanks to these policies (or lack of) we have over 400 people who have fought or are still fighting in Syria, Iraq and maybe even in Libya and Yemen.
French authorities also tackled the problem in the same way, taking rather the “soft” approach of consulting and open dialogue with the extremist “leaders”, thinking that this would be enough. They thought that their policies were enough to positively de-radicalise these hardened terrorist coming back home after fighting with some of the most vicious terror groups in the world
Both French and Australian authorities were somewhat naive to believe that these radicals would, once back home, give up their dream of establishing a Caliphate.
The Paris mass shooting should now convince the Australian government that their plan is not working and is bound to fail just like in France.
We need to convince our government that our approach should be as follows
• Shutting down their financial network by cutting off funds coming from Saudi Arabia. These millions of dollars are poured into Mosques and Islamic schools and serve to radicalise Australian Muslims.
• Government should be consulting only with community leaders who have helped and who are still helping integration. A true leadership is to advance the mutual interests of a peaceful, secular and democratic society.
• The government needs to make tough decisions shutting down centres of hate even if this creates discontent among a small group of people. The majority of our society will appreciate these decisions and even if politically this would cost some votes, the rewards and the outcome would outweigh these small losses.
• Preachers who spread hate should be either silenced or deported. It is unacceptable that known extremist organisations are still able to operate in our suburbs. It is even more unacceptable that these organisations are still allowed to organise conferences and invite from overseas (mostly Saudi Arabia) preachers who are famous for radicalising and spreading hatred.
In conclusion, our government needs to stop targeting peace activists like Warren Marriner and should start targeting the people who are the cause of extremism. The individuals who are spreading hatred and extremism in Australian are well known to authorities, despite the fact that our media still likes to portray them as “messiahs of anti-extremism”
It’s all rather simple. What we need to do in order to prevent a Paris-like carnage is for our government to accept that their support for the Syrian “revolution” was the biggest mistake and has been the cause of all radicalisation.
Tuesday, November 10, 2015
Australian authorities target opponents for political reasons
As the president and founder of Social Justice Network, the official organizer of the International Tours of Peace to Syria, I would like to express my deep disappointment in the way the authorities mistreated participants of the tour.
All of us at Social Justice Network cannot find any logical explanation for the interception and intense investigation I was subjected on my way to Syria and back.
I am a well known anti-extremism activist and community leader. I have received countless (and still do) death threats. I have been physically attacked and verbally abused by extremists. Despite this I was held by Australian Border Force for hours at Melbourne and Sydney airports.
Until now I don’t know why I was investigated. I am a well known anti-extremist activist. I have already visited Syria twice before. I had declared months in advance about my intention to visit Syria in October. I even went to the extent to communicate to the antiterrorism agencies about my movements. The ABF investigation was baseless and had no aim but to send the wrong message in all directions.
The ABF provided no legal basis for the interception and investigation. There is nothing in the anti-terrorism legislation that gives security agencies the authority to intercept and try to humiliate citizens for no reason. I was given no reason as to way I was held so many hours at the airport.
Australia Border Force claim they did not recognize me and had no knowledge about the tour which sounds more like a bid to cover up their farce. So I ask, if the ABF had no knowledge of our tour, what is the reason they intercepted again all the participants on the way back again. And why and for what reason the ABF investigated the participants in the first place?
It is also strange that the ABF illegal and unnecessary actions towards SJN, did not attract any attention from the Australian media despite getting huge NZ media coverage after the harsh treatment of Mr Warren Marriner.
It is obvious these actions were politically motivated.
When we combine the intense investigation of the participants with the arrest and deportation of NZ peace activist Warren Marriner, we can comfortably reach the conclusion that our authorities were actually targeting our anti-extremists initiative.
Australian authorities should be condemned by all means for targeting peace-activists. Such move only sends the wrong message that in fact Australia supports extremists in Australia and in Syria.
In a delicate time when Australia faces the most serious challenge from terrorists, such message could have a devastated effect.
I want to reassure the public that the illegal regressive actions carried out by the authorities will not deter us. SJN will continue its commitment to speak out and fight against extremism and terrorism.
All of us at Social Justice Network cannot find any logical explanation for the interception and intense investigation I was subjected on my way to Syria and back.
I am a well known anti-extremism activist and community leader. I have received countless (and still do) death threats. I have been physically attacked and verbally abused by extremists. Despite this I was held by Australian Border Force for hours at Melbourne and Sydney airports.
Until now I don’t know why I was investigated. I am a well known anti-extremist activist. I have already visited Syria twice before. I had declared months in advance about my intention to visit Syria in October. I even went to the extent to communicate to the antiterrorism agencies about my movements. The ABF investigation was baseless and had no aim but to send the wrong message in all directions.
The ABF provided no legal basis for the interception and investigation. There is nothing in the anti-terrorism legislation that gives security agencies the authority to intercept and try to humiliate citizens for no reason. I was given no reason as to way I was held so many hours at the airport.
Australia Border Force claim they did not recognize me and had no knowledge about the tour which sounds more like a bid to cover up their farce. So I ask, if the ABF had no knowledge of our tour, what is the reason they intercepted again all the participants on the way back again. And why and for what reason the ABF investigated the participants in the first place?
It is also strange that the ABF illegal and unnecessary actions towards SJN, did not attract any attention from the Australian media despite getting huge NZ media coverage after the harsh treatment of Mr Warren Marriner.
It is obvious these actions were politically motivated.
When we combine the intense investigation of the participants with the arrest and deportation of NZ peace activist Warren Marriner, we can comfortably reach the conclusion that our authorities were actually targeting our anti-extremists initiative.
Australian authorities should be condemned by all means for targeting peace-activists. Such move only sends the wrong message that in fact Australia supports extremists in Australia and in Syria.
In a delicate time when Australia faces the most serious challenge from terrorists, such message could have a devastated effect.
I want to reassure the public that the illegal regressive actions carried out by the authorities will not deter us. SJN will continue its commitment to speak out and fight against extremism and terrorism.
Sunday, November 08, 2015
Only in Australia: when authorities suspected I am ISIS member
For more than one year, we were announcing that we intend to start sending “Tours of peace” to Syria. We did not hide any fact. We were very open about our plans. And we published all available and needed information, except the dates of the first tour, for security reasons.
And despite the fact that I am well-known anti-extremist activist, who appeared on many media outlets for the last 4 years criticizing the so-called Syrian revolution and its supporters.
All this did not save me from being intercepted by Australian Border Force at Melbourne airport on 26 October.
An agent of ABF looked at me, asked me (among hundreds of travelers) for my passport. And checked the departure declaration. I fit the criteria for “ISIS supporter”: Middle Eastern appearance, Arabic name and travelling to Beirut.
The agent was very serious and bit angry. Then asked me to follow him to interrogation room.
“Where are you travelling to?”
“Lebanon”
“and then?
“To Syria”.
That was enough to shock him. How dare I was to declare that I am going to Syria.
He asked me to get everything from my pocket. He also asked me how much money I have. He did not believe that I have only about $2000.
He had no clue about our “tours”. He did not have any clue about my background. He did not have any clue about my political commitments.
I started to be annoyed.
“It seems that you do not watch TV. It seems that you have no clue what is happening in the communities. It is very clear that you have no coordination with ASIO, Anti-terrorism squad and AFP”.
He was angry that I did not declare in the departure declaration that I am bounding to Syria. Despite the fact that the question on the declaration is “country where you will get off this flight”, which is Lebanon in my case.
At that time I thought that the reason behind this farce could be one of two possibilities.
It is either that our authorities are trying to stop terrorism by “prejudice”: if you look like off Middle Eastern appearance, your name is not Western and you are bound to one of the Middle Eastern countries” you are suspect. No intelligence gathering and no data needed or available.
So if I changed my name to John Howard, bought a ticket to Malaysia or even Germany and changed the colour of my hair to blonde, I would escape the radar.
The other possibility is that our authorities are siding with extremists and trying to sabotage our initiative. After the arrest of the tour’s hero and peace activist Warren Marrienr, I am now convinced that the second possibility is the logical reason.
Our authorities who facilitated travel of Australian terrorists to fight in Syria for years (including convicted terrorist Khaled Sharrouf who left the country despite the fact that his passport was cancelled for years), are very angry that we organised tour of peace to Syria. Instead of thanking us for organising initiative that promotes peace and reconciliation, our participants were targeted, detained and deported (in the case of Warren Marriner).
I am on my way home to Australia. I am alert that authorities will act silly and maybe irresponsible. Hence I am taking all precautions.
I am declaring how much money I have. I am also declaring the products of animals. And I am expecting intense interrogation. But the vital question still remains in my mind: Why authorities are targeting the wrong people.
Even if we support president Assad and his government, we never heard that Syrian government or Syrian army constitute any threat on our national security. We have no information that we are breaking any Australian law. And we are not promoting any violence. On the contrary. I want to see violence in Syria and around the world ends yesterday.
It is very clear that our authorities had lost any logic or common sense. It is very clear that our authorities have no plan on how to protect our national security from the real threats. And it seems that our authorities are determined to crack down on freedom of speech and turn our country into police state.
We will resist this by all peaceful means available. This includes fighting against the regressive troika (Labor, Liberals and Greens) in the next election.
One fact stands: we are coming back Syria: to help and to promote peace and reconciliation.
And despite the fact that I am well-known anti-extremist activist, who appeared on many media outlets for the last 4 years criticizing the so-called Syrian revolution and its supporters.
All this did not save me from being intercepted by Australian Border Force at Melbourne airport on 26 October.
An agent of ABF looked at me, asked me (among hundreds of travelers) for my passport. And checked the departure declaration. I fit the criteria for “ISIS supporter”: Middle Eastern appearance, Arabic name and travelling to Beirut.
The agent was very serious and bit angry. Then asked me to follow him to interrogation room.
“Where are you travelling to?”
“Lebanon”
“and then?
“To Syria”.
That was enough to shock him. How dare I was to declare that I am going to Syria.
He asked me to get everything from my pocket. He also asked me how much money I have. He did not believe that I have only about $2000.
He had no clue about our “tours”. He did not have any clue about my background. He did not have any clue about my political commitments.
I started to be annoyed.
“It seems that you do not watch TV. It seems that you have no clue what is happening in the communities. It is very clear that you have no coordination with ASIO, Anti-terrorism squad and AFP”.
He was angry that I did not declare in the departure declaration that I am bounding to Syria. Despite the fact that the question on the declaration is “country where you will get off this flight”, which is Lebanon in my case.
At that time I thought that the reason behind this farce could be one of two possibilities.
It is either that our authorities are trying to stop terrorism by “prejudice”: if you look like off Middle Eastern appearance, your name is not Western and you are bound to one of the Middle Eastern countries” you are suspect. No intelligence gathering and no data needed or available.
So if I changed my name to John Howard, bought a ticket to Malaysia or even Germany and changed the colour of my hair to blonde, I would escape the radar.
The other possibility is that our authorities are siding with extremists and trying to sabotage our initiative. After the arrest of the tour’s hero and peace activist Warren Marrienr, I am now convinced that the second possibility is the logical reason.
Our authorities who facilitated travel of Australian terrorists to fight in Syria for years (including convicted terrorist Khaled Sharrouf who left the country despite the fact that his passport was cancelled for years), are very angry that we organised tour of peace to Syria. Instead of thanking us for organising initiative that promotes peace and reconciliation, our participants were targeted, detained and deported (in the case of Warren Marriner).
I am on my way home to Australia. I am alert that authorities will act silly and maybe irresponsible. Hence I am taking all precautions.
I am declaring how much money I have. I am also declaring the products of animals. And I am expecting intense interrogation. But the vital question still remains in my mind: Why authorities are targeting the wrong people.
Even if we support president Assad and his government, we never heard that Syrian government or Syrian army constitute any threat on our national security. We have no information that we are breaking any Australian law. And we are not promoting any violence. On the contrary. I want to see violence in Syria and around the world ends yesterday.
It is very clear that our authorities had lost any logic or common sense. It is very clear that our authorities have no plan on how to protect our national security from the real threats. And it seems that our authorities are determined to crack down on freedom of speech and turn our country into police state.
We will resist this by all peaceful means available. This includes fighting against the regressive troika (Labor, Liberals and Greens) in the next election.
One fact stands: we are coming back Syria: to help and to promote peace and reconciliation.
Wednesday, October 14, 2015
How celebrating extremists’ “achievements” could help de-radicalisation?!!
While the security agencies are struggling to contain the wave of radicals’ attacks and foiling potential terrorist actions, the performance of our politicians and journalists are not helping in any of these efforts. On the contrary. Our politicians, who are busy calculating measures to win in the next election, are sending the wrong message in all directions. The media also has different agendas altogether.
Following the latest terrorist attack on Parramatta police headquarter, which left one innocent man dead, the media reporting has been appalling.
All our media was busy reporting the incident as if it was a normal crime in the suburbs. No consideration was given to investigate deeply the seriously concerning aspects of this horrendous crimes.
Our media did not investigate seriously:
- How many Farhad Jabar do we have in our schools?
- The extent of extremism in our school and the negative effect on other students (especially the students who are the natural target of Wahhabi extremist student networks).
- What steps should be taken to neutralise students like Farhad Jabar.
The response to the terrorist attack was very deeply disappointing and served no noble target.
Our authorities were trying to soften their rhetoric on extremists and their supporters. Our PM even went to conduct many consultations with the “leaders” who were openly behind radicalisation of our youth for the last decade.
The media did a terrible job. Not one media outlet met with real experts on the issue. No media met with any community active member who campaigned in the last few years against extremism and documented all the efforts which lead to terrorist attacks. No media met with community leaders who were victim of extremist attacks to talk about the real radicalisation in our schools. The media opened its doors for the extremists to claim that there is no radicalisation and Muslim extremists are victims of media and political campaigns of Islamophobia.
Let me talk about the ABC, as a very clear example. On the Q&A program last Monday dedicated to extremism in our society. The program was so misleading that by the end it would actually have you believing that there is no extremism and no radicalisation anywhere.
According to Wesam Sharkawi and Greens Adam Bandt, the terrorists fighting in Syria are warriors and radicalisation is all down to marginalised youth in housing commission.
If I didn’t know better I also would have believed this.
But because I have witnessed first-hand the many vicious attacks perpetrated by extremists on Muslims who speak against them, I don’t fall for this act.
Too many are the accounts that have been bought to my attention from friends in the community. A few examples:
A friend’s son who attends Birrong High was bullied badly because he was a Shia Muslim. Another friend has a daughter who also is Shia was told by the religious teacher that Shia are not Muslims.
A terrorist who has recently returned from Syria has caused great fear for everyone living in that street. And these are just some example.
The major question we asked ABC was, why and on behalf of who they chose Wesam Sharkawi and Adam Bandt to talk about this important issue? What are their qualifications to speak on behalf of 600,000 Muslims?
Adam Bandt is a politician of a party that considers ISIS as freedom fighters. One of its senators asked media and authorities to stop calling ISIS members as “terrorists”. Adam Bandt is a member of political party that is struggling to keep its popularity on all issues, so they resorted to ally with extremists.
Wesam Sharkawi is a well-known person in Western Sydney who supports extremists. His work as a “teacher” does not give him any qualification to speak on this sensitive issue. His fellow religion teacher Mustapha Al Majzoub, was killed in Syria mid 2012 after he joined the terrorist group Jabhat Al Nusra. At that time the media, especially the ABC, was describing Mustapha Al Majzoub as a champion humanitarian hero. At the same time I was providing the media and the authorities with documents and testimonials to prove that he was a terrorist, the media chose to ignore the facts.
After 3 years, it seems that our authorities and media have learnt nothing. But this time, things are more serious and dangerous.
After 4 years of extensive radicalisation efforts at all levels, our society is saturated with extremists who easily can become suicide bombs in the heart of our suburbs. And the media and authorities response could make these ticking bombs imminent and very close to happen.
The ABC disregards the majority of Australians, especially Muslims. The ABC has no respect and does not live up to their obligations to tax-payers who pay the wages of their journalists and workers.
We need to take action now!
We will help any campaign to discredit this network. And we will help any campaign to ease the government efforts to privatise it. And we will help any campaign to expose the truth about this pro-extremists network.
We are currently discussing if we should refuse to participate in any program produced by this network.
In conclusion, as a Muslim, Wesam Sharkawi and his so called “Mufti” do not represent me. As a Muslim I do not blame the marginalisation of youth for extremism, radicalisation and terrorism in our society. This is nonsense!
I admit that we, as Muslims, have serious problems that we need to address as we have a large numbers of extremists who are ready to kill themselves and others.
We urgently need help from the Australian authorities to neutralise these highly dangerous elements.
Not in our name...
Following the latest terrorist attack on Parramatta police headquarter, which left one innocent man dead, the media reporting has been appalling.
All our media was busy reporting the incident as if it was a normal crime in the suburbs. No consideration was given to investigate deeply the seriously concerning aspects of this horrendous crimes.
Our media did not investigate seriously:
- How many Farhad Jabar do we have in our schools?
- The extent of extremism in our school and the negative effect on other students (especially the students who are the natural target of Wahhabi extremist student networks).
- What steps should be taken to neutralise students like Farhad Jabar.
The response to the terrorist attack was very deeply disappointing and served no noble target.
Our authorities were trying to soften their rhetoric on extremists and their supporters. Our PM even went to conduct many consultations with the “leaders” who were openly behind radicalisation of our youth for the last decade.
The media did a terrible job. Not one media outlet met with real experts on the issue. No media met with any community active member who campaigned in the last few years against extremism and documented all the efforts which lead to terrorist attacks. No media met with community leaders who were victim of extremist attacks to talk about the real radicalisation in our schools. The media opened its doors for the extremists to claim that there is no radicalisation and Muslim extremists are victims of media and political campaigns of Islamophobia.
Let me talk about the ABC, as a very clear example. On the Q&A program last Monday dedicated to extremism in our society. The program was so misleading that by the end it would actually have you believing that there is no extremism and no radicalisation anywhere.
According to Wesam Sharkawi and Greens Adam Bandt, the terrorists fighting in Syria are warriors and radicalisation is all down to marginalised youth in housing commission.
If I didn’t know better I also would have believed this.
But because I have witnessed first-hand the many vicious attacks perpetrated by extremists on Muslims who speak against them, I don’t fall for this act.
Too many are the accounts that have been bought to my attention from friends in the community. A few examples:
A friend’s son who attends Birrong High was bullied badly because he was a Shia Muslim. Another friend has a daughter who also is Shia was told by the religious teacher that Shia are not Muslims.
A terrorist who has recently returned from Syria has caused great fear for everyone living in that street. And these are just some example.
The major question we asked ABC was, why and on behalf of who they chose Wesam Sharkawi and Adam Bandt to talk about this important issue? What are their qualifications to speak on behalf of 600,000 Muslims?
Adam Bandt is a politician of a party that considers ISIS as freedom fighters. One of its senators asked media and authorities to stop calling ISIS members as “terrorists”. Adam Bandt is a member of political party that is struggling to keep its popularity on all issues, so they resorted to ally with extremists.
Wesam Sharkawi is a well-known person in Western Sydney who supports extremists. His work as a “teacher” does not give him any qualification to speak on this sensitive issue. His fellow religion teacher Mustapha Al Majzoub, was killed in Syria mid 2012 after he joined the terrorist group Jabhat Al Nusra. At that time the media, especially the ABC, was describing Mustapha Al Majzoub as a champion humanitarian hero. At the same time I was providing the media and the authorities with documents and testimonials to prove that he was a terrorist, the media chose to ignore the facts.
After 3 years, it seems that our authorities and media have learnt nothing. But this time, things are more serious and dangerous.
After 4 years of extensive radicalisation efforts at all levels, our society is saturated with extremists who easily can become suicide bombs in the heart of our suburbs. And the media and authorities response could make these ticking bombs imminent and very close to happen.
The ABC disregards the majority of Australians, especially Muslims. The ABC has no respect and does not live up to their obligations to tax-payers who pay the wages of their journalists and workers.
We need to take action now!
We will help any campaign to discredit this network. And we will help any campaign to ease the government efforts to privatise it. And we will help any campaign to expose the truth about this pro-extremists network.
We are currently discussing if we should refuse to participate in any program produced by this network.
In conclusion, as a Muslim, Wesam Sharkawi and his so called “Mufti” do not represent me. As a Muslim I do not blame the marginalisation of youth for extremism, radicalisation and terrorism in our society. This is nonsense!
I admit that we, as Muslims, have serious problems that we need to address as we have a large numbers of extremists who are ready to kill themselves and others.
We urgently need help from the Australian authorities to neutralise these highly dangerous elements.
Not in our name...
Letter to ABC: inviting extremists on your program will not help de-radicalisation efforts
Last time, you invited convicted terrorist to confront whole Australia with his deep radical views and allowed him to attack government's actions on extremism/potential terrorism. Your program has apologized to Australians on this gross mistake.
But tomorrow you will repeat the same mistake, or worse. On extremism, you have invited an extremist sheikh. For the last 4 years, you never presented Australians with real anti-extremist Muslim active member or leader. Though we have deep reservation on classification of "leadership", but according to current ad hoc classification, you failed miserably.
For 4 years since radicalization started to be very evident dangerous part of Australians lives since the shooting of Ali Ibrahim and the subsequent violent attacks, we note that you never invited secular sunnis who stood against Syrian 'revolution'. You also never invited Shia community leaders to represent Muslim communities on their views on the issues. You never came near inviting Alawi leaders too. It seems that your program had adopted Wahhabi extreme ideology on considering all these not to be Muslims.
The irony here is that few days ago I met 2 of your ABC colleagues who sought our help on relevant issue. One of the journalists told me how she is investigating the extreme actions of ......( one of the sheikhs you regularly invite on your programs). We were planning how to collect more documents to expose him. and now you are presenting him to Australians as representative of Muslims and part of the solution of extremism among Muslims.
I am sorry to tell you that your program and your network had became matter of national disgrace and embarrassment. I would like to communicate to you that subsequent to this, we will boycott dealing with your network at all levels......
But tomorrow you will repeat the same mistake, or worse. On extremism, you have invited an extremist sheikh. For the last 4 years, you never presented Australians with real anti-extremist Muslim active member or leader. Though we have deep reservation on classification of "leadership", but according to current ad hoc classification, you failed miserably.
For 4 years since radicalization started to be very evident dangerous part of Australians lives since the shooting of Ali Ibrahim and the subsequent violent attacks, we note that you never invited secular sunnis who stood against Syrian 'revolution'. You also never invited Shia community leaders to represent Muslim communities on their views on the issues. You never came near inviting Alawi leaders too. It seems that your program had adopted Wahhabi extreme ideology on considering all these not to be Muslims.
The irony here is that few days ago I met 2 of your ABC colleagues who sought our help on relevant issue. One of the journalists told me how she is investigating the extreme actions of ......( one of the sheikhs you regularly invite on your programs). We were planning how to collect more documents to expose him. and now you are presenting him to Australians as representative of Muslims and part of the solution of extremism among Muslims.
I am sorry to tell you that your program and your network had became matter of national disgrace and embarrassment. I would like to communicate to you that subsequent to this, we will boycott dealing with your network at all levels......
Tuesday, October 06, 2015
Request for urgent meeting with our PM on radicalisation and extremism
Dear Hon Malcolm Turnbull, PM of Australia
On behalf of a growing number of concerned Australian Muslims, I have decided to write and reach you so you can hear a different voice from the Muslim community. The Australian Muslims (including myself) have had enough.
For the last few years, your predecessors were listening only to certain sections of the Muslim community. In the last 5 years the only loud and dominant voices were from the extreme and conservative section of the community. Further, it seemed that the only debates and discussions about radicalisation were made with the very people who were actually involved in supporting extremism.
Following the terrorist attack last week on Parramatta Police headquarter, we were deeply disappointed that you had sought advice from the same extreme and conservative Muslim voices. We are not aware that you have included in the phone hook-up any real anti-extremism leader. In this, you continue to send the wrong message in all directions.
Sadly, the authorities consulted and sought advice on how to fight radicalisation from individuals who were in actual fact part of the problem. The very people the government is consulting are self-appointed community leaders and are only supported by a very small minority. Unfortunately most times this small minority is the root of the problem.
The only way these self-appointed community leaders could have a positive impact, would be for them to admit their past errors in judgement.
Unfortunately this is not the case.
Many of the individuals involved in your phone hook-up last weekend have never left the path of supporting extremism. Yes, they are speaking against ISIS, but only after heavy media coverage on the subject. The names leaked are still very much involved in supporting radical version of Islam and are linked to groups that call for Jihad.
We ask you not to just hear the voice of these “self-proclaimed” community leaders but to hear from the voice of other Muslim representations. I understand that it is easy to take the word from ones who are well resources and are very vocal with their demands. If authorities continue to choose these members you will only have the voice of extremists and radicals.
This is why we are seeking a meeting so that we can present you with some ideas and let you know what is really happening in our communities. We would also like to bring to your attention our deep concerns from a particular section of our community which was subjected to vicious campaigns of bullying and physical attacks in the last 5 years. The voices of these members of the community have never been heard and have never been taken seriously.
To this regard, as you would be already aware, since the beginning of the notorious Syrian “revolution”, a large section of anti-extremists (mainly secular Sunnis, Shias, Alawis..) were subjected to vicious campaigns of violence and attacks. These included shootings, burning homes and businesses, physical and verbal attacks, calls to boycott business and attacks and bullying of students at schools. The stories of the victims of these abuses were never heard.
As proud Australian Muslims and concerned citizens, we are seeking to meet with you. We have been involved in anti-sectarian campaigns and inter-faith activities for a long time. We believe that we can help find a solution to the high radicalisation which threatens our society.
We are well aware that the issue of high radicalisation and extremism are causing deep concerns in our community and the fight against this will be high on the agenda of the next election. We, as anti-extremism activist intend to make this an important issue on the agenda of all political parties. We are very interested to hear your government commitments on this particular issue.
Thanks........
Jamal Daoud
On behalf of a growing number of concerned Australian Muslims, I have decided to write and reach you so you can hear a different voice from the Muslim community. The Australian Muslims (including myself) have had enough.
For the last few years, your predecessors were listening only to certain sections of the Muslim community. In the last 5 years the only loud and dominant voices were from the extreme and conservative section of the community. Further, it seemed that the only debates and discussions about radicalisation were made with the very people who were actually involved in supporting extremism.
Following the terrorist attack last week on Parramatta Police headquarter, we were deeply disappointed that you had sought advice from the same extreme and conservative Muslim voices. We are not aware that you have included in the phone hook-up any real anti-extremism leader. In this, you continue to send the wrong message in all directions.
Sadly, the authorities consulted and sought advice on how to fight radicalisation from individuals who were in actual fact part of the problem. The very people the government is consulting are self-appointed community leaders and are only supported by a very small minority. Unfortunately most times this small minority is the root of the problem.
The only way these self-appointed community leaders could have a positive impact, would be for them to admit their past errors in judgement.
Unfortunately this is not the case.
Many of the individuals involved in your phone hook-up last weekend have never left the path of supporting extremism. Yes, they are speaking against ISIS, but only after heavy media coverage on the subject. The names leaked are still very much involved in supporting radical version of Islam and are linked to groups that call for Jihad.
We ask you not to just hear the voice of these “self-proclaimed” community leaders but to hear from the voice of other Muslim representations. I understand that it is easy to take the word from ones who are well resources and are very vocal with their demands. If authorities continue to choose these members you will only have the voice of extremists and radicals.
This is why we are seeking a meeting so that we can present you with some ideas and let you know what is really happening in our communities. We would also like to bring to your attention our deep concerns from a particular section of our community which was subjected to vicious campaigns of bullying and physical attacks in the last 5 years. The voices of these members of the community have never been heard and have never been taken seriously.
To this regard, as you would be already aware, since the beginning of the notorious Syrian “revolution”, a large section of anti-extremists (mainly secular Sunnis, Shias, Alawis..) were subjected to vicious campaigns of violence and attacks. These included shootings, burning homes and businesses, physical and verbal attacks, calls to boycott business and attacks and bullying of students at schools. The stories of the victims of these abuses were never heard.
As proud Australian Muslims and concerned citizens, we are seeking to meet with you. We have been involved in anti-sectarian campaigns and inter-faith activities for a long time. We believe that we can help find a solution to the high radicalisation which threatens our society.
We are well aware that the issue of high radicalisation and extremism are causing deep concerns in our community and the fight against this will be high on the agenda of the next election. We, as anti-extremism activist intend to make this an important issue on the agenda of all political parties. We are very interested to hear your government commitments on this particular issue.
Thanks........
Jamal Daoud
Sunday, October 04, 2015
Will Parramatta terrorist attack be the last wake-up call for our authorities?
After the last December’s terrorist attack, I warned that authorities’ lack of detailed and comprehensive plan to tackle radicalisation will lead to other terrorist activities. Last night’s terrorist attack is just the tip of the iceberg and if the authorities don’t wake up this time we could be heading to bigger attacks in the near future.
In the last year, we heard a lot of noise, but saw no action. Authorities made a few arrests; many of the arrested walked free thanks to the leniency of magistrates who perhaps feared of being accused of Islamophobia. Or perhaps were under the misconception that the authorities made up stories about imaginary radicalisation. Whatever the reason for this leniency, the results are quiet clear with this last attack.
The tragic terrorist attack occurred last night, should finally induce our authorities into seriously implementing an aggressive and comprehensive de-radicalisation plan..
After the terrorist attack last night, we need to ask authorities: what did you achieve in the last 12 months of consultations and tough talks on radicals?
The plain answer would be: not much.
The government recently announced that the Australian participation in terrorist groups activities in Syria and Iraq was doubled in the last 12 months. The numbers of radicals in Australia are increasing on a daily basis. Not one extremist centre has been closed down or targeted by security agencies. No “big-fish” was caught and convicted. No ease of funding from extremists in Saudi Arabia and other gulf states.
So far our authorities have been tip toeing around extremist leaders for fear of being seen as targeting a minority. We have witnessed leaders of extreme Islamic centres attacking our authorities crying out that their freedoms were unjustly targeted.
We even witnessed government funding for some extremist groups in the name of fighting radicalisation. We witnessed extremists awarded medals and other awards. But we never witnessed a hard crack down on real extremists.
The results are speaking for themselves. When Russian army started a serious campaign to liquidate terrorists in Syria and Iraq, we witnessed our authorities siding with terrorists in the name of “we should not save Syrian regime from collapse”. Such move has sent the wrong message in all directions.
Now, and before it is too late, authorities need to start a serious crack down.
Our authorities need to investigate all extremists, even if they are “high-profile” ones who have some followers. Some organisations need to be raided and investigated. Old files on extremists should be opened to be used to close mosques and religious centres of hate. All these mosques and centres had advocated their followers to fight in Syria and to hate Shia and Alawi at some stage in the last decade.
I want to warn that failure of the authorities to use the sad tragic terrorist attack yesterday as starting point to seriously crack down on real perpetrators, would be fatal mistake or an opportunity lost.
The lone wolf who killed an innocent person yesterday before being killed is not the real perpetrator. We believe that the propaganda machine behind his brainwashing and radicalisation is the real perpetrators who need to be brought to justice. Targeting a few simple brainwashed youths by sending them to jail or killing them will not solve the problem. Authorities need to break the network of brainwashing, recruitment and funding.
Authorities need to put a stop to all funding from Saudi Arabia and other gulf countries. The majority of the brainwashing occurs in mosques, religious centres and Islamic schools which are built and funded by Saudi money.
This needs to be regulated and stopped if we really want to stop radicalisation in this country.
Locking up or even killing vulnerable young people, who are victims themselves by brainwashing, will not resolve nor will stop future attacks.
In the last year, we heard a lot of noise, but saw no action. Authorities made a few arrests; many of the arrested walked free thanks to the leniency of magistrates who perhaps feared of being accused of Islamophobia. Or perhaps were under the misconception that the authorities made up stories about imaginary radicalisation. Whatever the reason for this leniency, the results are quiet clear with this last attack.
The tragic terrorist attack occurred last night, should finally induce our authorities into seriously implementing an aggressive and comprehensive de-radicalisation plan..
After the terrorist attack last night, we need to ask authorities: what did you achieve in the last 12 months of consultations and tough talks on radicals?
The plain answer would be: not much.
The government recently announced that the Australian participation in terrorist groups activities in Syria and Iraq was doubled in the last 12 months. The numbers of radicals in Australia are increasing on a daily basis. Not one extremist centre has been closed down or targeted by security agencies. No “big-fish” was caught and convicted. No ease of funding from extremists in Saudi Arabia and other gulf states.
So far our authorities have been tip toeing around extremist leaders for fear of being seen as targeting a minority. We have witnessed leaders of extreme Islamic centres attacking our authorities crying out that their freedoms were unjustly targeted.
We even witnessed government funding for some extremist groups in the name of fighting radicalisation. We witnessed extremists awarded medals and other awards. But we never witnessed a hard crack down on real extremists.
The results are speaking for themselves. When Russian army started a serious campaign to liquidate terrorists in Syria and Iraq, we witnessed our authorities siding with terrorists in the name of “we should not save Syrian regime from collapse”. Such move has sent the wrong message in all directions.
Now, and before it is too late, authorities need to start a serious crack down.
Our authorities need to investigate all extremists, even if they are “high-profile” ones who have some followers. Some organisations need to be raided and investigated. Old files on extremists should be opened to be used to close mosques and religious centres of hate. All these mosques and centres had advocated their followers to fight in Syria and to hate Shia and Alawi at some stage in the last decade.
I want to warn that failure of the authorities to use the sad tragic terrorist attack yesterday as starting point to seriously crack down on real perpetrators, would be fatal mistake or an opportunity lost.
The lone wolf who killed an innocent person yesterday before being killed is not the real perpetrator. We believe that the propaganda machine behind his brainwashing and radicalisation is the real perpetrators who need to be brought to justice. Targeting a few simple brainwashed youths by sending them to jail or killing them will not solve the problem. Authorities need to break the network of brainwashing, recruitment and funding.
Authorities need to put a stop to all funding from Saudi Arabia and other gulf countries. The majority of the brainwashing occurs in mosques, religious centres and Islamic schools which are built and funded by Saudi money.
This needs to be regulated and stopped if we really want to stop radicalisation in this country.
Locking up or even killing vulnerable young people, who are victims themselves by brainwashing, will not resolve nor will stop future attacks.
Wednesday, September 30, 2015
جمهور المقاومة والممانعة: ما هكذا تورد الابل...!!!
لم تجف دموع الامهات الثكالى, امهات شهداء المقاومة الاسلامية اللبنانية وشهداء الجيش العربي السوري بعد.
لم تلتئم جراحات وعذابات الجرحى والمقعدين واهالي المخطوفين والمغيبين في سجون الاحتلال او معتقلات الجماعات التكفيرية والارهابية بعد.
ولم تنس الجاليات الوطنية المعارضة لمؤامرة الربيع العربي الكم الهائل من الشتائم, والكثير منها طائفي محض, والاعتداءات على ابنائها بعد.
لنفاجئ بفضيحة مدوية لا ندري ان كانت ناتجه عن حسن نية او جهل بالحقائق او استهتار بالشعور العام لكل جمهور الشرعية في سوريا وداعميها الاقليميين والدوليين.
صورة على مواقع التواصل الاجتماعي ادخلت الغصة الى قلبي وقلب كل شريف حمل او ما زال يحمل روحه على كفه مصارعا مؤامرة كونية حشد لها الغالي والنفيس.
الصورة برغم سوداويتها الا انها كانت واضحه:
جمهور جله من داعمي المقاومة وداعمي الشرعية في سوريا يستقبلون بالتصفيق احد اهم الشخصيات المعادية للمقاومة والمعادية للشرعية في سوريا ورئيسها المقاوم.
جمهور دعى من شتم الرئيس السوري بشار الاسد ووالده وعائلته باقذع الشتائم خلال السنوات الاربع الماضية, ليحاضر فيهم عن التطرف والمواطنة الحسنه.
جمهور استمع باصغاء الطالب النجيب لمن طعن في المقاومة وسلاحها وداعميها.
كيف جرؤ كائنا من كان ان يدعو المدعو جمال الريفي ليحاضر بجمهور جله من مؤيدي حلف المقاومة والممانعه عن التطرف وحسن المواطنه؟ وما هي الدوافع القوية لاهمال مواقف هذا الريفي الشاتمة والمعادية لكل محور المقاومة والممانعه عند توجيه الدعوة المشؤومة؟
شاهدت وجوها وطنية, سورية واخرى مؤيدة لسوريا وحكومتها ورئيسها بين الموجودين, ولم اصدق.
شاهدت وجوه اهالي من قدم الغالي والرخيص من اجل هذه المقاومة الشريفة, ولم اصدق.
شاهدت وجوها عانت الامرين بسبب الشحن الطائفي والتطرف الذي افرزته المؤامرة الكونية المؤيدة من هذا الريفي, ولم اصدق.
كيف يمكن لمن قاد وسار في مسيرات ومظاهرات مؤيدة للشرعية في سوريا والمقاومة في لبنان ان يقبل الاستماع الى من صدح في اكثر من مناسبة منذ انطلاق المؤامرة على سوريا "يلعن روحك يا بشار"؟
كيف يمكن لاي شريف معارض للطائفية والتطرف ان يقبل بحضور ندوة يحاضر فيها من شحذ النفوس وجمع الاموال وحشد التاييد لمؤامرة اودت بحياة مئات الاف السوريين وحلفائهم في الحلف المقدس؟
نعرف ان هناك ايدي خفية تلعب داخل جمهور المقاومة لتحقيق اهداف سياسية داخلية. ولكن ليس هكذا تورد الابل.
كان على مؤيدي هذا الحزب الاسترالي او ذاك ان يقنع حزبه اولا ان حزب الله مقاومة وطنية لا يجب ادراجها على لائحة الارهابو كما فعل حزبه لسنين, قبل ان يطلب من جمهور المقاومة العودة للتصويت لحزبه.
كما كان الاولى بمن ينتمي (او يدعي الانتماء) لهذا الجمهور العظيم المضحي ان يقنع حزبه ان يحترم ارادة السوريين في اختيار حكومتهم ورئيسهم, بدلا من اطلاق التصريحات الهوجاء عن الشرعية وفقدانها بخلاف الاصول الدولية, قبل ان يرتب هذه المهزلة المسخرة املا في استعادة تاييد انتخابي مفقود.
ندرك تماما ان هناك الكثير من الاقنعه قد سقطت بعد ليلة الامس. كما ندرك ان الكثير من هذه الاقنعه هي اصلا ساقطة منذ مدة. ولكننا ندرك ان ما حصل بالامس سيكون له تداعيات كبيرة.
ولولا الصوت المجلجل لابنة سوريا المناضلة هنادي الاسود لمرت الفضيحة مرور الكرام وخرج المافون بصورة البطل الذي اقتحم عرين المقاومة وسب رموزها دون اعتراض.
ما حصل بالامس له معنى واحد: هناك من مرغ كرامة جمهور شريف مقاوم بالوحل...
Friday, September 11, 2015
Comments on the Australian government announcement of policy on Syrian crisis
Following the Australian government announcement of policy on Syrian crisis, we would like to mention:
- Australia has committed itself to a very dangerous mission. The Australian participation in bombing of targets inside Syria could be very dangerous manoeuvre for Australia and the region. The region is already a jungle of foreign armies ready to attack each other. We are aware that thousands of Chinese, Russian and Iranian military enforcement has arrived in Syria and in the Mediterranean off the Syrian coast. Any mistake on Australians’ side of bombing of Syrian military or their allies could inflame the whole region. Australian jets could be met with hostile retaliation from both sides. We all remember the Jordanian pilot who was burned alive when his jet was shot down by terrorists.
- The only guarantee that this could be avoided is by acknowledging the only legitimate force on the ground, the Syrian army, the only force fighting terrorists. Without coordination with the Syrian army, Australian participation in the war is far too dangerous. In addition, the bombings of targets by US and its allies for the last year were ineffective and achieved almost nothing.
- In regard to proposed refugees’ intake of 12000 Syrians, we also would like to voice our deep concerns. We are aware with documents that hundreds (if not thousands) of terrorists had fled Syria and could successfully infiltrate refugees masses to Europe. We are very concerned that some of refugees that will be taken by Australia are terrorists who are following orders to infiltrate Western countries as sleeping cells (few of terrorists caught on camera can be seen on https://www.facebook.com/Omar.George.Ali/videos/874499582634422/ .
- During our visits to Jordan and Lebanon in the last 2 years, we heard horrific stories about what is happening in Syrian refugee’s camps (in Zaatary-Jordan, and refugee’s camps in Irsal-Lebanon). The camps are fertile ground for all kind of extremism/terrorism. The camps are full of sleeping cells of terrorist organisations. Last year, terrorists of Jabhat AL Nusra and ISIS attacked Lebanese army from these camps in Irsal area. The situation in Jordan and Turkey is similar.
- The authorities should be careful in choosing any Syrian refugees. We suggest:
1- Preferences given to refugees who have families in Australia. The families in Australia should be known to be not extremists and do not support extremism and have no criminal record or any trouble with authorities
2- Preferences to be given to well-educated refugees with tertiary education and their criminal background checked.
3- Some kind of intelligence exchange should be established with the Syrian authorities to gather information. It is not necessary for our authorities to take the Syrian government advice. Guidance only.
4- Australian authorities should consult Syrian, Arabic and Muslim organisations in Australia known to be anti-extremists. So far, the authorities and media had consulted known extremist individuals and organisations. There advice would be pro-extremists.
5- Imagine that the terrorist pictured in this Youtube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXhEiZUBBrQ) was brought to Australia by mistake. The evidence we have is that many similar terrorists have already been accepted as refugees in Sweden and Germany.
- Australia has committed itself to a very dangerous mission. The Australian participation in bombing of targets inside Syria could be very dangerous manoeuvre for Australia and the region. The region is already a jungle of foreign armies ready to attack each other. We are aware that thousands of Chinese, Russian and Iranian military enforcement has arrived in Syria and in the Mediterranean off the Syrian coast. Any mistake on Australians’ side of bombing of Syrian military or their allies could inflame the whole region. Australian jets could be met with hostile retaliation from both sides. We all remember the Jordanian pilot who was burned alive when his jet was shot down by terrorists.
- The only guarantee that this could be avoided is by acknowledging the only legitimate force on the ground, the Syrian army, the only force fighting terrorists. Without coordination with the Syrian army, Australian participation in the war is far too dangerous. In addition, the bombings of targets by US and its allies for the last year were ineffective and achieved almost nothing.
- In regard to proposed refugees’ intake of 12000 Syrians, we also would like to voice our deep concerns. We are aware with documents that hundreds (if not thousands) of terrorists had fled Syria and could successfully infiltrate refugees masses to Europe. We are very concerned that some of refugees that will be taken by Australia are terrorists who are following orders to infiltrate Western countries as sleeping cells (few of terrorists caught on camera can be seen on https://www.facebook.com/Omar.George.Ali/videos/874499582634422/ .
- During our visits to Jordan and Lebanon in the last 2 years, we heard horrific stories about what is happening in Syrian refugee’s camps (in Zaatary-Jordan, and refugee’s camps in Irsal-Lebanon). The camps are fertile ground for all kind of extremism/terrorism. The camps are full of sleeping cells of terrorist organisations. Last year, terrorists of Jabhat AL Nusra and ISIS attacked Lebanese army from these camps in Irsal area. The situation in Jordan and Turkey is similar.
- The authorities should be careful in choosing any Syrian refugees. We suggest:
1- Preferences given to refugees who have families in Australia. The families in Australia should be known to be not extremists and do not support extremism and have no criminal record or any trouble with authorities
2- Preferences to be given to well-educated refugees with tertiary education and their criminal background checked.
3- Some kind of intelligence exchange should be established with the Syrian authorities to gather information. It is not necessary for our authorities to take the Syrian government advice. Guidance only.
4- Australian authorities should consult Syrian, Arabic and Muslim organisations in Australia known to be anti-extremists. So far, the authorities and media had consulted known extremist individuals and organisations. There advice would be pro-extremists.
5- Imagine that the terrorist pictured in this Youtube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXhEiZUBBrQ) was brought to Australia by mistake. The evidence we have is that many similar terrorists have already been accepted as refugees in Sweden and Germany.
Monday, September 07, 2015
Media bias on Syria: Jamal Rifi’s case as a clear example
I was one of the people who thought that the recent change in rhetoric by authorities and media on the Syrian crisis, would bring a whole new breakthrough with the dealing of this crisis.
From the beginning of 2011 until late 2014, the authorities and media insisted that what was happening in Syria was a revolution. They also insisted the revolution was a peaceful one. The high death toll, which reached more than 200,000 was due to the Syrian army killing the peaceful protestors.
In mid 2014, we started to hear a bit about “terrorism” in Syria. We also started to hear about Australian terrorists taking part in the conflict. We also suddenly discovered that the Australians who died there were in fact terrorists, and not aid workers. But the coverage of such episodes are still today shallow and naive.
The media until now did not go deep to investigate the reality of what happened in Syria. Though admitting that we have the highest radicalisation in modern Australian history, they still did not bother to investigate how this high radicalisation happened. The media acknowledged the extensive brainwashing and recruiting drive among our youths, however has never pointed the fingers on who was or still is responsible.
Not only the media has never investigated the origins of radicalisation in Australia, they went even further. They have and continue to portray the very same individuals who recruited and radicalised young Australians, as pillars of the community who are contributing to peace and harmony.
In this series of articles I will shed light on some cases where individuals or organisations who were active in brainwashing and recruiting, suddenly became the champions of de-radicalisation.
Let us take Jamal Rifi as first example.
From the beginning of the Syrian crisis, Jamal Rifi was very active in supporting the “revolutionists”. He participated in organising forums, rallies, fundraising dinners and visits to politicians and security agencies’ officials encouraging them to support the revolution. He gave fiery speeches about the need to support the armed rebellion against the Syrian government and its president. We can provide countless links to Jamal Rifi’s speeches and activities. He has never kept this a secret until now, that he supported armed rebellion.
I know that Jamal Rifi will reply to my comments here that he supported “moderate rebels” of the Free Syrian Army. The very same rebels that cut heads, ate hearts, threw civilians from the top of high-rise buildings, executed people in cold blood, burned people alive and used kids to behead captured Syrian soldiers. He is only right when he declares that the Free Syrian army is not proscribed terrorist organisation.
His arrogance went even further when he approached security agencies to protest how they were dealing with terrorism in May 2014 during the crack-down on Australian terrorists joining the fight in Syria. He was so naive to the point that he issued a media release demanding Anti-terrorism agencies to stop implementing Foreign Incursion Act namely in stopping Australian terrorists-to-be in our airport and confiscating their passports. In his media release (written in Arabic and published by Arabic newspapers) he openly considered that authorities crack-down on Australian joining terrorist organisations in Syria will mean one thing “ending the Syrian revolution”. He repeated these claims in an ABC article published 14 May 2014 (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-14/muslim-leaders-hold-closed-meetings-with-police/5451094) and demanded that ASIO and Anti-terrorism agencies to “back away from enforcing "draconian" laws that make it a crime to support the civil war in Syria”.
In the above ABC article, Jamal Rifi admitted that he was questioned by ASIO and AFP on several occasions for his suspicious activities in support of extreme groups in Syria.
The story of Jamal Rifi had a serious twist when our authorities and other Western authorities including US government changed their rhetoric on the Syrian crisis. The coin suddenly flipped over immediately after the media started reporting extensively on ISIS horrendous crimes and after the federal government started talking tough on the need for new strong anti-terrorism laws. When the government started conducting extensive consultations with Muslim “leaders” and organisations, Jamal Rifi suddenly and with no prior warning made the biggest u-turn.
After earlier meeting Anti-terrorism officials to urge them to stop preventing Australian Muslims from joining terrorist organisations, Jamal Rifi voiced his opposition to one of these terrorist organisations, ISIS.
Then something extraordinary happened, something which happens only in Bollywood movies. A close family friend of Jamal Rifi sent him a tweet. The tweet was asking for Jamal Rifi’s address. An address which would be known to a very large number of Australians since his name and address have always been listed in the white pages. The Bollywood segment did not stop there. The subtly threatening tweet from this close family friend was deleted after 30 minutes. But surprisingly, these 30 minutes were enough for Jamal Rifi to intercept and read the tweet. The 30 minutes were enough for Jamal Rifi to take a snapshot. The 30 minutes were enough to pass the tweet to the media. 30 minutes were enough for many journalists to take the snapshot. And 30 minutes were enough for Jamal Rifi to hold a press conference.
Our media, which was described by many Australian philosophers and experts as the most naive and superficial media on earth, did not ask vital questions before they started to air this Bollywood segment as truth:
- Why would a terrorist, in this case Mohamed Elomer, delete his own tweet after 30 minutes of posting it? It’s not that terrorist Mohamed Elomar was going to ever return to Australia.
- Why would this high-profile terrorist target Jamal Rifi specifically, and not other Muslims who are more active on criticising ISIS and other terrorist organisations?
- Why would this high profile terrorist tweet a shy threats asking for the address of a high-profile GP (an address that is listed on Yellow pages and Google)? Why not threaten to kill him or kidnap his family (similar to threats I received from the begging of 2011 until now)?
- Why were there no subsequent threats sent to Mr Rifi following to the deleted tweet?
The media has fooled all of us and suddenly, Jamal Rifi has become a paladin of de-radicalisation efforts.
Not one media outlet has shed any light on Jamal Rifi’s contribution to radicalisation of our youth since the beginning of the Syrian crisis. Suddenly, Jamal Rifi got rid of his radical skin and has became the messiah that will bring stability and harmony to this nation.
Not only this. The Murdoch press granted him many awards for his efforts on de-radicalisation. In conclusion, it is thanks to the media that this individual who supported radicals, is now presented to us as the only hope Australians have to stop radicalisation and terrorism.
I talked once with an ABC journalist about Jamal Rifi and his Bollywood segment which transformed him into a paladin of de-radicalisation efforts. He is one of the very active ABC journalists who reported extensively on terrorism and radicalisation. I consider him to be clever and knowledgeable on this issue. When I questioned him with the points mentioned above, regarding Jamal Rifi’s Bollywood segment, the only answer he could give me was “but he (Rifi) condemns ISIS”. My reply was: “He did, but at the end of 2014. While ISIS is fully functioning in Syria from mid 2012”. I also reminded the ABC journalist about Rifi’s meeting with Nick Kaldas mid May 2014 when he was demanding authorities to stop the crack down on Australian extremists from joining ISIS and other terrorist organisation.
To date, I did not receive any answer from any journalist about why Jamal Rifi suddenly became the paladin hero of de-radicalisation efforts after been an icon for the extremist radicals.
The reason for this is complex. It is more about the nature of our naive superficial media. It also has a lot to do with our media serving the US imperialist agenda. And of course, it has a lot to do with political parties’ agenda in keeping communities under control by enforcing Jamal Rifi and similar figures as their leaders. Leaders that have very little respect from the community they live in.
It is our task to break all these agendas.
From the beginning of 2011 until late 2014, the authorities and media insisted that what was happening in Syria was a revolution. They also insisted the revolution was a peaceful one. The high death toll, which reached more than 200,000 was due to the Syrian army killing the peaceful protestors.
In mid 2014, we started to hear a bit about “terrorism” in Syria. We also started to hear about Australian terrorists taking part in the conflict. We also suddenly discovered that the Australians who died there were in fact terrorists, and not aid workers. But the coverage of such episodes are still today shallow and naive.
The media until now did not go deep to investigate the reality of what happened in Syria. Though admitting that we have the highest radicalisation in modern Australian history, they still did not bother to investigate how this high radicalisation happened. The media acknowledged the extensive brainwashing and recruiting drive among our youths, however has never pointed the fingers on who was or still is responsible.
Not only the media has never investigated the origins of radicalisation in Australia, they went even further. They have and continue to portray the very same individuals who recruited and radicalised young Australians, as pillars of the community who are contributing to peace and harmony.
In this series of articles I will shed light on some cases where individuals or organisations who were active in brainwashing and recruiting, suddenly became the champions of de-radicalisation.
Let us take Jamal Rifi as first example.
From the beginning of the Syrian crisis, Jamal Rifi was very active in supporting the “revolutionists”. He participated in organising forums, rallies, fundraising dinners and visits to politicians and security agencies’ officials encouraging them to support the revolution. He gave fiery speeches about the need to support the armed rebellion against the Syrian government and its president. We can provide countless links to Jamal Rifi’s speeches and activities. He has never kept this a secret until now, that he supported armed rebellion.
I know that Jamal Rifi will reply to my comments here that he supported “moderate rebels” of the Free Syrian Army. The very same rebels that cut heads, ate hearts, threw civilians from the top of high-rise buildings, executed people in cold blood, burned people alive and used kids to behead captured Syrian soldiers. He is only right when he declares that the Free Syrian army is not proscribed terrorist organisation.
His arrogance went even further when he approached security agencies to protest how they were dealing with terrorism in May 2014 during the crack-down on Australian terrorists joining the fight in Syria. He was so naive to the point that he issued a media release demanding Anti-terrorism agencies to stop implementing Foreign Incursion Act namely in stopping Australian terrorists-to-be in our airport and confiscating their passports. In his media release (written in Arabic and published by Arabic newspapers) he openly considered that authorities crack-down on Australian joining terrorist organisations in Syria will mean one thing “ending the Syrian revolution”. He repeated these claims in an ABC article published 14 May 2014 (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-14/muslim-leaders-hold-closed-meetings-with-police/5451094) and demanded that ASIO and Anti-terrorism agencies to “back away from enforcing "draconian" laws that make it a crime to support the civil war in Syria”.
In the above ABC article, Jamal Rifi admitted that he was questioned by ASIO and AFP on several occasions for his suspicious activities in support of extreme groups in Syria.
The story of Jamal Rifi had a serious twist when our authorities and other Western authorities including US government changed their rhetoric on the Syrian crisis. The coin suddenly flipped over immediately after the media started reporting extensively on ISIS horrendous crimes and after the federal government started talking tough on the need for new strong anti-terrorism laws. When the government started conducting extensive consultations with Muslim “leaders” and organisations, Jamal Rifi suddenly and with no prior warning made the biggest u-turn.
After earlier meeting Anti-terrorism officials to urge them to stop preventing Australian Muslims from joining terrorist organisations, Jamal Rifi voiced his opposition to one of these terrorist organisations, ISIS.
Then something extraordinary happened, something which happens only in Bollywood movies. A close family friend of Jamal Rifi sent him a tweet. The tweet was asking for Jamal Rifi’s address. An address which would be known to a very large number of Australians since his name and address have always been listed in the white pages. The Bollywood segment did not stop there. The subtly threatening tweet from this close family friend was deleted after 30 minutes. But surprisingly, these 30 minutes were enough for Jamal Rifi to intercept and read the tweet. The 30 minutes were enough for Jamal Rifi to take a snapshot. The 30 minutes were enough to pass the tweet to the media. 30 minutes were enough for many journalists to take the snapshot. And 30 minutes were enough for Jamal Rifi to hold a press conference.
Our media, which was described by many Australian philosophers and experts as the most naive and superficial media on earth, did not ask vital questions before they started to air this Bollywood segment as truth:
- Why would a terrorist, in this case Mohamed Elomer, delete his own tweet after 30 minutes of posting it? It’s not that terrorist Mohamed Elomar was going to ever return to Australia.
- Why would this high-profile terrorist target Jamal Rifi specifically, and not other Muslims who are more active on criticising ISIS and other terrorist organisations?
- Why would this high profile terrorist tweet a shy threats asking for the address of a high-profile GP (an address that is listed on Yellow pages and Google)? Why not threaten to kill him or kidnap his family (similar to threats I received from the begging of 2011 until now)?
- Why were there no subsequent threats sent to Mr Rifi following to the deleted tweet?
The media has fooled all of us and suddenly, Jamal Rifi has become a paladin of de-radicalisation efforts.
Not one media outlet has shed any light on Jamal Rifi’s contribution to radicalisation of our youth since the beginning of the Syrian crisis. Suddenly, Jamal Rifi got rid of his radical skin and has became the messiah that will bring stability and harmony to this nation.
Not only this. The Murdoch press granted him many awards for his efforts on de-radicalisation. In conclusion, it is thanks to the media that this individual who supported radicals, is now presented to us as the only hope Australians have to stop radicalisation and terrorism.
I talked once with an ABC journalist about Jamal Rifi and his Bollywood segment which transformed him into a paladin of de-radicalisation efforts. He is one of the very active ABC journalists who reported extensively on terrorism and radicalisation. I consider him to be clever and knowledgeable on this issue. When I questioned him with the points mentioned above, regarding Jamal Rifi’s Bollywood segment, the only answer he could give me was “but he (Rifi) condemns ISIS”. My reply was: “He did, but at the end of 2014. While ISIS is fully functioning in Syria from mid 2012”. I also reminded the ABC journalist about Rifi’s meeting with Nick Kaldas mid May 2014 when he was demanding authorities to stop the crack down on Australian extremists from joining ISIS and other terrorist organisation.
To date, I did not receive any answer from any journalist about why Jamal Rifi suddenly became the paladin hero of de-radicalisation efforts after been an icon for the extremist radicals.
The reason for this is complex. It is more about the nature of our naive superficial media. It also has a lot to do with our media serving the US imperialist agenda. And of course, it has a lot to do with political parties’ agenda in keeping communities under control by enforcing Jamal Rifi and similar figures as their leaders. Leaders that have very little respect from the community they live in.
It is our task to break all these agendas.
Saturday, September 05, 2015
The reality behind sudden Syrian refugees crisis to Europe
After more than 4.5 years of Syrian crisis, sudden sharp surge of Syrian asylum seekers to Europe should raise many questions that need urgent answers.
During the years of the crisis, which at many point witnessed very intense fighting, threats to Damascus which was totally surrounded by terrorists, critical shortage of basic vital materials and repeated attacks on gas supplies that plunged major cities in total darkness for weeks, the asylum seeking to Europe was minimal. Millions of refugees sought temporary asylum in neighbouring countries (mainly Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan). But never went further into Europe.
So why did the numbers of those who are seeking asylum in Europe witness skyrocketing increase in the last few days?
The other question that needs urgent answer is: what is the reason behind the sudden change of heart by conservative (and racist) leaders like Merkel, who vow to accept millions of Syrian refugees in the next few months?
We all remember the chaotic scenes of hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese people in the lead to the fall of Saigon. The S. Vietnamese collaborators with US occupiers knew very well that they will be prosecuted for treason if they stay.
The same happened to South Lebanese residents who collaborated with Israeli occupiers against their own people. They rushed just before the Israel defeat in 2000 to seek asylum in Israel, and then to other Western countries in fear of retribution, revenge or prosecution for treason.
This is the normal scenes you would see after every failed conspiracy of US against any unfriendly regime/nation.
After years of Syrian bloody crisis, the sticking point for reconciliation is the fate of hardcore terrorists who killed, raped, kidnapped and stole in their areas of control. These terrorists needed to be given a way-out from the corner they will be squeezed to in the next few months.
In the next few months, we expect (according to all indications) that US and its allies (including Australia) will mobilise big military might to start serious campaign against terrorists in Syria (and Iraq) as a first step to wind down the Arab Spring conspiracy/project.
The intensifying of Syrian refugee crisis is needed to achieve many goals:
- It will enable many terrorists to escape Syria, hence reduce the needed efforts to end terrorism there.
- It will give Western powers (US and its allies) the needed face-saving pretext to withdraw their unlimited support for terrorists and big promises to help them to destroy the Syrian government/regime.
- Then it will help to open new chapter with Syrian government, and hence requests to be involved in the massive and lucrative re-building projects.
So what will happen next?
1- The change of rhetoric in ALL Western nations and the beginning of Western countries talk about terrorism in Syria. And the restriction on terrorists’ entry to Syria from Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey. All this sent a strong message to terrorists: game is over. Or nearly. So many of them chose to lay down their arms and run away to Turkey (before this also be closed).
2- The agreement with Russia to normalise situation and return to pre 2011 situation will see US and its allies participate in massive bombings of terrorists in Syria (and Iraq) and some targeted assassination operations. This will lead to collapse of terrorist organisations (including ISIS and Jabhat Al Nusra) similar to what happened in Afghanistan in 2001. The major difference from Afghanistan 2001 is that there will be no foreign boots on the ground. The Syrian army will be quick to fill any vacuum.
3- Using issues of refugees and fight against terrorism, US and Western allies will re-establish diplomatic and political relations with Syria.
4- The Syrian extremists/terrorists/rebels will be hosted temporarily (this temporary nature could extend to few decades, as it happened in early 1980s) in different countries. The rest of Syrians who had no blood on their hands will be quick to return to participate in rebuilding their homeland.
5- I expect that the only reason the intensive bombing of terrorists in Syria (and Iraq) did not start yet is the instability of Turkish government. Turkish government is vital for this plan. Turkish government played major role in supporting, arming, training and allowing terrorists to enter Syria. And the Turkish government (even a future Erdogan’s government) will participate enthusiastically in the campaign.
6- Some of the Australian known terrorists fighting currently in Syria will travel to Turkey, get Syrian forged passport and seek asylum in Germany. We should expect that even some of the terrorists who were declared to be dead (like El Omer and Sharrouf) will be living in one of EU countries under Syrian name. But do we really care?
7- We should wait for the plan to be ready to start by mid November.
8- Our hardcore pro-extremists media and politicians should be ready to accept the changes. Bob Carr, Labor party, Greens party and SBS should start exploring way of u-turn on the issue of attacking Syrian government and president. These need to forget about terminologies like “dictator”, “Assad should go”, “barrel bombs”, “Assad forces” ...etc.
My two cents on this debate.
During the years of the crisis, which at many point witnessed very intense fighting, threats to Damascus which was totally surrounded by terrorists, critical shortage of basic vital materials and repeated attacks on gas supplies that plunged major cities in total darkness for weeks, the asylum seeking to Europe was minimal. Millions of refugees sought temporary asylum in neighbouring countries (mainly Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan). But never went further into Europe.
So why did the numbers of those who are seeking asylum in Europe witness skyrocketing increase in the last few days?
The other question that needs urgent answer is: what is the reason behind the sudden change of heart by conservative (and racist) leaders like Merkel, who vow to accept millions of Syrian refugees in the next few months?
We all remember the chaotic scenes of hundreds of thousands of South Vietnamese people in the lead to the fall of Saigon. The S. Vietnamese collaborators with US occupiers knew very well that they will be prosecuted for treason if they stay.
The same happened to South Lebanese residents who collaborated with Israeli occupiers against their own people. They rushed just before the Israel defeat in 2000 to seek asylum in Israel, and then to other Western countries in fear of retribution, revenge or prosecution for treason.
This is the normal scenes you would see after every failed conspiracy of US against any unfriendly regime/nation.
After years of Syrian bloody crisis, the sticking point for reconciliation is the fate of hardcore terrorists who killed, raped, kidnapped and stole in their areas of control. These terrorists needed to be given a way-out from the corner they will be squeezed to in the next few months.
In the next few months, we expect (according to all indications) that US and its allies (including Australia) will mobilise big military might to start serious campaign against terrorists in Syria (and Iraq) as a first step to wind down the Arab Spring conspiracy/project.
The intensifying of Syrian refugee crisis is needed to achieve many goals:
- It will enable many terrorists to escape Syria, hence reduce the needed efforts to end terrorism there.
- It will give Western powers (US and its allies) the needed face-saving pretext to withdraw their unlimited support for terrorists and big promises to help them to destroy the Syrian government/regime.
- Then it will help to open new chapter with Syrian government, and hence requests to be involved in the massive and lucrative re-building projects.
So what will happen next?
1- The change of rhetoric in ALL Western nations and the beginning of Western countries talk about terrorism in Syria. And the restriction on terrorists’ entry to Syria from Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey. All this sent a strong message to terrorists: game is over. Or nearly. So many of them chose to lay down their arms and run away to Turkey (before this also be closed).
2- The agreement with Russia to normalise situation and return to pre 2011 situation will see US and its allies participate in massive bombings of terrorists in Syria (and Iraq) and some targeted assassination operations. This will lead to collapse of terrorist organisations (including ISIS and Jabhat Al Nusra) similar to what happened in Afghanistan in 2001. The major difference from Afghanistan 2001 is that there will be no foreign boots on the ground. The Syrian army will be quick to fill any vacuum.
3- Using issues of refugees and fight against terrorism, US and Western allies will re-establish diplomatic and political relations with Syria.
4- The Syrian extremists/terrorists/rebels will be hosted temporarily (this temporary nature could extend to few decades, as it happened in early 1980s) in different countries. The rest of Syrians who had no blood on their hands will be quick to return to participate in rebuilding their homeland.
5- I expect that the only reason the intensive bombing of terrorists in Syria (and Iraq) did not start yet is the instability of Turkish government. Turkish government is vital for this plan. Turkish government played major role in supporting, arming, training and allowing terrorists to enter Syria. And the Turkish government (even a future Erdogan’s government) will participate enthusiastically in the campaign.
6- Some of the Australian known terrorists fighting currently in Syria will travel to Turkey, get Syrian forged passport and seek asylum in Germany. We should expect that even some of the terrorists who were declared to be dead (like El Omer and Sharrouf) will be living in one of EU countries under Syrian name. But do we really care?
7- We should wait for the plan to be ready to start by mid November.
8- Our hardcore pro-extremists media and politicians should be ready to accept the changes. Bob Carr, Labor party, Greens party and SBS should start exploring way of u-turn on the issue of attacking Syrian government and president. These need to forget about terminologies like “dictator”, “Assad should go”, “barrel bombs”, “Assad forces” ...etc.
My two cents on this debate.
Monday, August 10, 2015
Pick-and-choose in fighting violence: the hidden agenda?
We should be very proud of our security agencies: they successfully traced twitter account holder who threatened community activist and charged the accuser (http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/03/11/ipswich-woman-faces-court-over-online-hate-attacks-0). But this quick and effective action may face some questioning: why our authorities were slow and ineffective in tracing thousands of extremists’ threats and subsequently ineffective in arresting any perpetrator for the last 5 years.
I, as an example, was receiving since mid 2012 steady flow of hate messages, including abuses, threat to kill me and hurt my kids. To date, no one message was successfully traced and no one was subsequently arrested. Even when I was physically attacked at least 3 times, I provided pictures, videos, car plate-numbers and phone numbers of perpetrators, no one was arrested. Of course except the high-profile attack I coped in front of Chanel 7 cameras May 2013. But even though the whole incident was filmed and broadcasted widely on many media outlets here and abroad, the perpetrator was found to be “community builder” and escaped any charge.
This should lead us to ask thousands of questions: why security agencies are very quick and effective in solving some crimes, but slow and terribly ineffective in solving others? Does this depend on the profile of the victim in the society? Or maybe it is related more to the perpetrator’s profile?
Let us discuss some of the threats I received for the last 5 years and try to answer some of these questions.
The first public attacks I received were during the NSW election campaign 2011. During January 2011, ALL my posters were ripped off, my campaign workers were threatened and I was personally threatened in front of tens of people outside Al Bukhari bookstore. The perpetrators were volunteers inside the bookstore. I even passed names to Auburn police station. The police officer told me that he cannot do anything, even though I was threatened inside the Auburn police station in front of that police officer.
While my complaint was ignored by police, it received extensive media interest. I was contacted by journalists from ALL major media outlets in Australia. I was even contacted by The Times magazine. At that time, I did not know why the media gave me all this attention, but I refused to broadcast my complaint. Now I understand why single complaint received all media attention in Australia and around the world, but all my subsequent complaint in 2012 received little media (and authorities) attention.
In January 2011, the Syrian crisis did not start yet. The complaint was against notorious Wahhabi extremist “sheikh” and his followers. It was a good media opportunity to stir some Islamophobia and get coverage, readers and business. While all serious threats I, and many in the community, received after the beginning of Syrian revolution were ignored only for one reason: because we were on the wrong side of the crisis.
From mid 2012, Wahhabi extremists intensified their violence against any opponent (or possible opponent) to Syrian “revolution”. As the Syrian “revolution” enjoyed the support of ALL our Parliamentary politicians, ALL media outlets and support of our security agencies, this violence campaigns by Wahhabi extremists were largely ignored. Not only this. The politicians were denying them. Surprisingly, security agencies were not only in denial. They were suggesting that it is not about extremism but rather about drug-dealing. I was personally asked (under threat of prosecution) to stop talking about these violence campaigns.
The media that was eager in the past to pick any story about “Muslim” wrongdoings, this time was largely silent. They did not take advantage of this golden opportunity to try and spread more Islamophobia….!!!
The reasons were very clear: they all sacrificed all these opportunities to continue the support for the “Syrian revolution”. All this despite the fact that this support and turning blind eyes on these violent campaigns meant allowing extremists to brainwash, recruit, fundraise and send terrorists to fight in Syria. And all this was the reasons why we have the highest radicalization level in Australian contemporary history now.
So the quick and soft actions to arrest of violence perpetrators depend on the profile of the victims: if the victims are friendly with current media and political agendas, the action will be swift and perpetrators will be arrested immediately and convicted.
This is why Wahhabi extremists who shot Ali Ibrahim, burned Al Hariri shop, attacked many community members (before mid 2014) where never brought to justice. At that time, the agenda was to help Syrian “revolution” at any expense.
We should be happy that the agendas are changed. But this leaves the victims of Wahhabi extremists deeply disappointed. We were let down and left alone to fight extremists for years. All this with no recognition of our sacrifice and courage. On the contrary. We were described with all stupid description. All this because we were swimming against the tide, despite being ahead of the whole nation in predicting the ugly outcome.
What is more disappointing in the fact that agendas were changed means that the same people who were behind extremism for the last years, became now the face of fighting against the same extremism they promoted between 2011 – 2014.
I will write about this in details… later on…
I, as an example, was receiving since mid 2012 steady flow of hate messages, including abuses, threat to kill me and hurt my kids. To date, no one message was successfully traced and no one was subsequently arrested. Even when I was physically attacked at least 3 times, I provided pictures, videos, car plate-numbers and phone numbers of perpetrators, no one was arrested. Of course except the high-profile attack I coped in front of Chanel 7 cameras May 2013. But even though the whole incident was filmed and broadcasted widely on many media outlets here and abroad, the perpetrator was found to be “community builder” and escaped any charge.
This should lead us to ask thousands of questions: why security agencies are very quick and effective in solving some crimes, but slow and terribly ineffective in solving others? Does this depend on the profile of the victim in the society? Or maybe it is related more to the perpetrator’s profile?
Let us discuss some of the threats I received for the last 5 years and try to answer some of these questions.
The first public attacks I received were during the NSW election campaign 2011. During January 2011, ALL my posters were ripped off, my campaign workers were threatened and I was personally threatened in front of tens of people outside Al Bukhari bookstore. The perpetrators were volunteers inside the bookstore. I even passed names to Auburn police station. The police officer told me that he cannot do anything, even though I was threatened inside the Auburn police station in front of that police officer.
While my complaint was ignored by police, it received extensive media interest. I was contacted by journalists from ALL major media outlets in Australia. I was even contacted by The Times magazine. At that time, I did not know why the media gave me all this attention, but I refused to broadcast my complaint. Now I understand why single complaint received all media attention in Australia and around the world, but all my subsequent complaint in 2012 received little media (and authorities) attention.
In January 2011, the Syrian crisis did not start yet. The complaint was against notorious Wahhabi extremist “sheikh” and his followers. It was a good media opportunity to stir some Islamophobia and get coverage, readers and business. While all serious threats I, and many in the community, received after the beginning of Syrian revolution were ignored only for one reason: because we were on the wrong side of the crisis.
From mid 2012, Wahhabi extremists intensified their violence against any opponent (or possible opponent) to Syrian “revolution”. As the Syrian “revolution” enjoyed the support of ALL our Parliamentary politicians, ALL media outlets and support of our security agencies, this violence campaigns by Wahhabi extremists were largely ignored. Not only this. The politicians were denying them. Surprisingly, security agencies were not only in denial. They were suggesting that it is not about extremism but rather about drug-dealing. I was personally asked (under threat of prosecution) to stop talking about these violence campaigns.
The media that was eager in the past to pick any story about “Muslim” wrongdoings, this time was largely silent. They did not take advantage of this golden opportunity to try and spread more Islamophobia….!!!
The reasons were very clear: they all sacrificed all these opportunities to continue the support for the “Syrian revolution”. All this despite the fact that this support and turning blind eyes on these violent campaigns meant allowing extremists to brainwash, recruit, fundraise and send terrorists to fight in Syria. And all this was the reasons why we have the highest radicalization level in Australian contemporary history now.
So the quick and soft actions to arrest of violence perpetrators depend on the profile of the victims: if the victims are friendly with current media and political agendas, the action will be swift and perpetrators will be arrested immediately and convicted.
This is why Wahhabi extremists who shot Ali Ibrahim, burned Al Hariri shop, attacked many community members (before mid 2014) where never brought to justice. At that time, the agenda was to help Syrian “revolution” at any expense.
We should be happy that the agendas are changed. But this leaves the victims of Wahhabi extremists deeply disappointed. We were let down and left alone to fight extremists for years. All this with no recognition of our sacrifice and courage. On the contrary. We were described with all stupid description. All this because we were swimming against the tide, despite being ahead of the whole nation in predicting the ugly outcome.
What is more disappointing in the fact that agendas were changed means that the same people who were behind extremism for the last years, became now the face of fighting against the same extremism they promoted between 2011 – 2014.
I will write about this in details… later on…
Wednesday, July 15, 2015
the significance of the deal between Iran and 5+1...
Some people (especially those supporting Axis of Resistance) wrongly understand the significance of the deal between Iran and 5+1...
The deal does not make Iran nuclear power.... Iran has nuclear power for peaceful use for the last few decades. So the deal will not make any change...
The significance of the deal:
- It lifts sanctions on Iran, hence strengthening the Iranian economy and its influence on international economy.
- US admits of its foreign policy failure and hence its hegemony as only super power comes to and end.
- The deal was not able without the efforts and sacrifices of Iranians and their allies in Syria and Russia. The allies efforts that aborted the New Middle East plan, should expect that US and its allies will help seriously and genuinely to restore global stability by ending the terrorism launched by US policy.
The significance of the deal as described by both Putin of Russian and Assad of Syria is that US has agreed that new world order has emerged. an order that has many super powers, and not only one...
The first and immediate result of this deal should be global genuine efforts to end terrorism in Syria and Iraq. Then Libya and other countries destroyed by US destructive policy.
I would not be surprised if US army will participate in destroying terrorist forces in Syria and Iraq soon....
AFP Eid Iftar embarrassment: why authorities insist to deal with extremists..!!!
We have no other choice but to continue laughing at authorities insisting to embarrass themselves when it comes to dealing with Muslim communities. The authorities are insisting to extend the hands of cooperation with the wrong people in Muslim communities, for the last decade. These wrong decisions that resulted in the current high level of radicalisation, resulted in reaching high level of terror alert.
Authorities insisted for the last decade in dealing with Muslim communities to consult and cooperate with loud extremists claiming to represent our diverse communities. The latest round of consultation about anti-terrorism measures last year which saw major boycott by self-appointed leaders (mainly extreme elements) was not enough for our authorities to understand the real situation in the communities.
Today’s announcement of AFP cancelling its Eid Iftar because some invited “leaders” vowed to boycott the Iftar is latest funny embarrassment for our authorities.
When authorities started to consult, invite for events and invite for funding rounds for programs to fight against radicalisation, I discovered that authorities had miserably failed to choose the right people. In these rounds of invitations, the authorities failed to invite: representatives from Shia community, no representative form Alawis and secular Muslims considered by authorities to be infidels and not Muslims. Surprisingly, anti-terrorism campaigners in Muslim communities were largely ignored.
It seems to many of us (myself and many active members in the community) that to be qualified by authorities to be “Muslim leader”, we should be:
- Extremists with large beards, short pants and no moustache.
- Extremists that advocated participating in terrorist activities in Syria.
- Extremists advocating to fight against authorities moves to stop radicalisation in the society..
The authorities’ insistence to adopt extremists’ definition of the “good Muslim” is detrimental at all levels. By doing this, authorities are causing deep disappointment among many anti-extremism Muslims. The voice of these moderate and anti-extremism activists and leaders will be weakened further each time authorities embarrass themselves with extremists.
In recent meeting with Liberal MP, he admitted that the decision of PM to invite extremists for consultation (and the subsequent refusal of them to attend these consultations) was wrong decision based on wrong advice. But it seems that authorities are not ready to learn from mistakes until major terrorist activity happens.
We, as active anti-extremists Muslims, are not waiting for authorities to cooperate with us to continue our work. In fact, in the last 5 years we conducted our anti-extremism campaigns without any help from authorities. At many stages, our campaigns were weakened by authorities’ lack of cooperation and at some stage request for us to be silent and let extremists do whatever they want.
For 5 years, authorities were on the wrong side of the campaign. They dealt with the wrong side of Muslim communities. And it seems they enjoying being on the wrong side.
If our warnings were taken seriously for the last 5 years, we would not have this high level of radicalisation in our society. We start to question whether authorities have some gains to make in keeping blind-eyes on radical elements in the community!!!
Otherwise, why authorities are refusing to cooperate with elements that are keen to act on anti-extremism steps???
Questions need urgent answers....
I will circulate soon more detailed assessments with concrete facts.
Authorities insisted for the last decade in dealing with Muslim communities to consult and cooperate with loud extremists claiming to represent our diverse communities. The latest round of consultation about anti-terrorism measures last year which saw major boycott by self-appointed leaders (mainly extreme elements) was not enough for our authorities to understand the real situation in the communities.
Today’s announcement of AFP cancelling its Eid Iftar because some invited “leaders” vowed to boycott the Iftar is latest funny embarrassment for our authorities.
When authorities started to consult, invite for events and invite for funding rounds for programs to fight against radicalisation, I discovered that authorities had miserably failed to choose the right people. In these rounds of invitations, the authorities failed to invite: representatives from Shia community, no representative form Alawis and secular Muslims considered by authorities to be infidels and not Muslims. Surprisingly, anti-terrorism campaigners in Muslim communities were largely ignored.
It seems to many of us (myself and many active members in the community) that to be qualified by authorities to be “Muslim leader”, we should be:
- Extremists with large beards, short pants and no moustache.
- Extremists that advocated participating in terrorist activities in Syria.
- Extremists advocating to fight against authorities moves to stop radicalisation in the society..
The authorities’ insistence to adopt extremists’ definition of the “good Muslim” is detrimental at all levels. By doing this, authorities are causing deep disappointment among many anti-extremism Muslims. The voice of these moderate and anti-extremism activists and leaders will be weakened further each time authorities embarrass themselves with extremists.
In recent meeting with Liberal MP, he admitted that the decision of PM to invite extremists for consultation (and the subsequent refusal of them to attend these consultations) was wrong decision based on wrong advice. But it seems that authorities are not ready to learn from mistakes until major terrorist activity happens.
We, as active anti-extremists Muslims, are not waiting for authorities to cooperate with us to continue our work. In fact, in the last 5 years we conducted our anti-extremism campaigns without any help from authorities. At many stages, our campaigns were weakened by authorities’ lack of cooperation and at some stage request for us to be silent and let extremists do whatever they want.
For 5 years, authorities were on the wrong side of the campaign. They dealt with the wrong side of Muslim communities. And it seems they enjoying being on the wrong side.
If our warnings were taken seriously for the last 5 years, we would not have this high level of radicalisation in our society. We start to question whether authorities have some gains to make in keeping blind-eyes on radical elements in the community!!!
Otherwise, why authorities are refusing to cooperate with elements that are keen to act on anti-extremism steps???
Questions need urgent answers....
I will circulate soon more detailed assessments with concrete facts.
Monday, July 06, 2015
Open letter to Luke Foley: Do not be fooled by Muslim extremists...!!!
Dear Hon Luke Foley, leader of NSW Labor party and member for Auburn
I decided to write you this letter because I thought that enough is enough of your party influenced by organisations that falsely claim to have monopoly on Muslim votes in this area and in the state in general. This lie that had lead both your party and other parties to give this organisations undeserved weight and consideration. But what is important for us is the deadly impact of such consideration for organisations that have no significant base and no fans among Muslims of this state.
I will be very detailed in my arguments, and will match all this with facts and numbers.
The Lebanese Moslem Association (LMA) and its allies of mainly extremist organisations played very dirty game in 2011 election to convince you and your opponents that it is very influential organisation and it controls the votes of more than 200,000 voters in the state.
In 2011 election it was very clear that voters of NSW had enough from Labor party and that the party will suffer devastating defeat. For the whole 2010, all opinion polls suggested that Labor will lose any seat with margin of less than 20%. Consequently, all opinion polls were suggesting that Labor party will be reduced in parliament by half.
The LMA played very deceptive and dirty game. They decided to go public and declare that they will support Liberal party to win 2011 election. The Liberal party was going to win the election regardless of LMA position or declaration.
As expected, the Liberal party won every seat where Labor was governing with less than 20% margin. In some seats, Labor lost very safe seats with margin of more than 25%. None of these seats have any significant numbers of Muslim voters.
LMA exercised what should be recorded in Australian politics as “big mouth campaign”. Its president was the biggest mouth of all community and ethnic campaigners and activists. He made the biggest lies and deceptive claims ever.
He, for example, declared without any evidence that his organisation and its allies had cost the Labor party the seat of Granville.
Labor won Granville in 2007 election with less than 8% margin. It was very clear to all political analysts that Labor needs divine intervention to keep Granville. The Muslim voters constitute less than 12% of the seat. There is no shred of evidence that the Shia Afghani and Iraqi voters were influenced by deeply sectarian and tribal Lebanese Moslem Association in that seat. So it should be highly naive from your party or the opposition Liberals to believe that LMA had influenced the change of hands of Granville seat in 2011 election.
If LMA and its allies of extremists were truly influential, they should have enforced change of hands in Lakemba, Auburn, Bankstown, Canterbury or Liverpool. These seats have the highest numbers of Muslims in the state (between 25 – 35% of voters).
Despite the “big-mouth” campaign by LMA and its allies in these seats against your party, your party’s candidates kept all above mentioned seats, some with minimal loss and lower than state trend of swing against your party.
After the 2011 election and the big lies by LMA and its allies, your party has fallen hostage to these lies and deceptions. Your party thought that to win back power will definitely come through winning back the heart of LMA and its allies. When in fact the results of the 2011 election should have given your party clear indication that LMA and its allies are no more than “big-mouth liars” who have no support and no base.
This assumption by your party is the biggest mistake you could have committed in the last few decades. I will talk in details about this later.
This assumption that promoted your predecessor, John Robertson, to parachute candidate nominated and enforced upon your party by LMA in Lakemba. And without divine intervention which enforced John Robertson’s resignation, such mistake could have been repeated in Auburn and Bankstown.
Well, Mr Foley, after the end of 2015 election, I would have thought that your party had conducted thorough evaluation of the whole campaign and its results.
In Lakemba, where your party was succumbed to LMA extortion and ran candidate nominated by this organisation against the decision of rank-and-file who preselected Mr Kal Asfour, did this deal help Labor to regain much of its lost popularity?
The Labor has regained more than 8.5% of its popularity across the state. In Lakemba, where Muslim votes constitutes more than 30% of the population, the new Muslim candidate supported and enforced on Labor by LMA (and its allies of mainly extreme organisations), had won the seat with swing of +11%, ie similar to state trend. Compare this result with the result of your candidate in Bankstown who was subjected to constant attack by LMA and allies. Despite these attacks and the fact that she is not Muslim, she won the seat with swing of more than +10%. So your alliance with LMA in Lakemba did not result in any dramatic increase of vote to your candidate for Lakemba!!!
In fact, the Labor alliance with LMA did not help Labor in winning any seat. On the contrary. The alliance with LMA and its unethical practices resulted in Labor losing many of its traditional voters and members.
I would assume that Labor internal evaluation of deeply disappointed election results should have pointed fingers of the negative impact of Labor alliance with extreme organisations on its disappointing results.
The LMA who get away with their dirty tactics of “big-mouth” campaigns based on lies and deceptions and successfully imposed their candidate on Labor, did not honour its commitment and insisted to unethically betray your party by campaigning against Labor candidates in many seats, including your own seat and neighbouring Bankstown seat. But again. These unethical practices in fact exposed the lies of LMA and its allies. Their campaign against Labor in Auburn and Bankstown saw big backlash against LMA and its allies. The Labor increased its popularity in Bankstown. In Auburn, the slight loss of popularity was insignificant and was due to unrelated reasons. In Auburn, a popular independent candidate got a lot of Labor votes. The re-distribution of the seat boundaries played some role.
Would all the above mentioned factors enough for your party to stop believing the lies and deceptions of LMA? Would all these facts be enough to ignore this extreme organisation that has no support among Muslim voters at all?
We hope that your party will wake up before it is too late. The worrying trend of LMA infiltrating your party had already deep negative impact on your party.
We witnessed the worrying shift of your party’s membership and votes. We can assure you that your party’s alliance with this extreme, sectarian and tribal organisation has costed your party a lot of voters and members. We are well aware that many Shia, Alawi and secular Muslims had deserted your party and voted consistently for your opponents. Our deep worries about the infiltration of highly opportunistic and extreme elements convinced us for the first time in decades to declare that there is no difference between voting for you or for your opponents and deeply conservative Liberal party.
Your party’s superficial evaluation overlooked that the major problem of your party is the loss of direction, loss of brand and loss of commitment to issues and principles. This is why your party strategists think that the solution is by bribing this organisation or winning the heart of this lobby group. While in fact your party could win back much of its lost popularity by shaping up its policies and return to its origin of presenting progressive alternative to deeply regressive conservative opponents.
In regard to your party’s continued alliance with LMA, can you ask yourself the crucial question: what did you achieve by entering alliance with LMA and its allies?
I guarantee you that your party would have won Lakemba seat regardless of the name, background or the colour of skin of the candidate. They tried their best to unseat your candidate in 2011, and they failed. And they failed even though your party was at its lowest popularity ever.
I, and many inside your party, think that your party’s alliance with LMA (and its allies of mainly extremist organisations) will have devastating negative effect on the party. It already caused a lot of division, tension and disloyalty. We think that this organisation’s influence inside your party through the elected MP will increase the division and disharmony.
It seems to many of us that your party is allowing another Eddie Obied’s opportunist faction. I am afraid that this time the damage will be worse. At least Eddie Obied and his Terrigal faction was only about power and money. In the case of LMA faction, it will be mixture of move to accumulate power by spreading extremism, sectarian hate and tribalism. Did you notice that LMA (who claims to represent all Muslims in the state) lobbied for your party to run only Muslims from North Lebanese (Sunni) background?
You need to read some of latest Wikileaks documents to discover that your party is influenced by extremist policy of Saudi Arabia, through LMA members and supporters influence inside your party.
We hope that your party will wake up, before another disappointing defeat. This time on Federal level.
I decided to write you this letter because I thought that enough is enough of your party influenced by organisations that falsely claim to have monopoly on Muslim votes in this area and in the state in general. This lie that had lead both your party and other parties to give this organisations undeserved weight and consideration. But what is important for us is the deadly impact of such consideration for organisations that have no significant base and no fans among Muslims of this state.
I will be very detailed in my arguments, and will match all this with facts and numbers.
The Lebanese Moslem Association (LMA) and its allies of mainly extremist organisations played very dirty game in 2011 election to convince you and your opponents that it is very influential organisation and it controls the votes of more than 200,000 voters in the state.
In 2011 election it was very clear that voters of NSW had enough from Labor party and that the party will suffer devastating defeat. For the whole 2010, all opinion polls suggested that Labor will lose any seat with margin of less than 20%. Consequently, all opinion polls were suggesting that Labor party will be reduced in parliament by half.
The LMA played very deceptive and dirty game. They decided to go public and declare that they will support Liberal party to win 2011 election. The Liberal party was going to win the election regardless of LMA position or declaration.
As expected, the Liberal party won every seat where Labor was governing with less than 20% margin. In some seats, Labor lost very safe seats with margin of more than 25%. None of these seats have any significant numbers of Muslim voters.
LMA exercised what should be recorded in Australian politics as “big mouth campaign”. Its president was the biggest mouth of all community and ethnic campaigners and activists. He made the biggest lies and deceptive claims ever.
He, for example, declared without any evidence that his organisation and its allies had cost the Labor party the seat of Granville.
Labor won Granville in 2007 election with less than 8% margin. It was very clear to all political analysts that Labor needs divine intervention to keep Granville. The Muslim voters constitute less than 12% of the seat. There is no shred of evidence that the Shia Afghani and Iraqi voters were influenced by deeply sectarian and tribal Lebanese Moslem Association in that seat. So it should be highly naive from your party or the opposition Liberals to believe that LMA had influenced the change of hands of Granville seat in 2011 election.
If LMA and its allies of extremists were truly influential, they should have enforced change of hands in Lakemba, Auburn, Bankstown, Canterbury or Liverpool. These seats have the highest numbers of Muslims in the state (between 25 – 35% of voters).
Despite the “big-mouth” campaign by LMA and its allies in these seats against your party, your party’s candidates kept all above mentioned seats, some with minimal loss and lower than state trend of swing against your party.
After the 2011 election and the big lies by LMA and its allies, your party has fallen hostage to these lies and deceptions. Your party thought that to win back power will definitely come through winning back the heart of LMA and its allies. When in fact the results of the 2011 election should have given your party clear indication that LMA and its allies are no more than “big-mouth liars” who have no support and no base.
This assumption by your party is the biggest mistake you could have committed in the last few decades. I will talk in details about this later.
This assumption that promoted your predecessor, John Robertson, to parachute candidate nominated and enforced upon your party by LMA in Lakemba. And without divine intervention which enforced John Robertson’s resignation, such mistake could have been repeated in Auburn and Bankstown.
Well, Mr Foley, after the end of 2015 election, I would have thought that your party had conducted thorough evaluation of the whole campaign and its results.
In Lakemba, where your party was succumbed to LMA extortion and ran candidate nominated by this organisation against the decision of rank-and-file who preselected Mr Kal Asfour, did this deal help Labor to regain much of its lost popularity?
The Labor has regained more than 8.5% of its popularity across the state. In Lakemba, where Muslim votes constitutes more than 30% of the population, the new Muslim candidate supported and enforced on Labor by LMA (and its allies of mainly extreme organisations), had won the seat with swing of +11%, ie similar to state trend. Compare this result with the result of your candidate in Bankstown who was subjected to constant attack by LMA and allies. Despite these attacks and the fact that she is not Muslim, she won the seat with swing of more than +10%. So your alliance with LMA in Lakemba did not result in any dramatic increase of vote to your candidate for Lakemba!!!
In fact, the Labor alliance with LMA did not help Labor in winning any seat. On the contrary. The alliance with LMA and its unethical practices resulted in Labor losing many of its traditional voters and members.
I would assume that Labor internal evaluation of deeply disappointed election results should have pointed fingers of the negative impact of Labor alliance with extreme organisations on its disappointing results.
The LMA who get away with their dirty tactics of “big-mouth” campaigns based on lies and deceptions and successfully imposed their candidate on Labor, did not honour its commitment and insisted to unethically betray your party by campaigning against Labor candidates in many seats, including your own seat and neighbouring Bankstown seat. But again. These unethical practices in fact exposed the lies of LMA and its allies. Their campaign against Labor in Auburn and Bankstown saw big backlash against LMA and its allies. The Labor increased its popularity in Bankstown. In Auburn, the slight loss of popularity was insignificant and was due to unrelated reasons. In Auburn, a popular independent candidate got a lot of Labor votes. The re-distribution of the seat boundaries played some role.
Would all the above mentioned factors enough for your party to stop believing the lies and deceptions of LMA? Would all these facts be enough to ignore this extreme organisation that has no support among Muslim voters at all?
We hope that your party will wake up before it is too late. The worrying trend of LMA infiltrating your party had already deep negative impact on your party.
We witnessed the worrying shift of your party’s membership and votes. We can assure you that your party’s alliance with this extreme, sectarian and tribal organisation has costed your party a lot of voters and members. We are well aware that many Shia, Alawi and secular Muslims had deserted your party and voted consistently for your opponents. Our deep worries about the infiltration of highly opportunistic and extreme elements convinced us for the first time in decades to declare that there is no difference between voting for you or for your opponents and deeply conservative Liberal party.
Your party’s superficial evaluation overlooked that the major problem of your party is the loss of direction, loss of brand and loss of commitment to issues and principles. This is why your party strategists think that the solution is by bribing this organisation or winning the heart of this lobby group. While in fact your party could win back much of its lost popularity by shaping up its policies and return to its origin of presenting progressive alternative to deeply regressive conservative opponents.
In regard to your party’s continued alliance with LMA, can you ask yourself the crucial question: what did you achieve by entering alliance with LMA and its allies?
I guarantee you that your party would have won Lakemba seat regardless of the name, background or the colour of skin of the candidate. They tried their best to unseat your candidate in 2011, and they failed. And they failed even though your party was at its lowest popularity ever.
I, and many inside your party, think that your party’s alliance with LMA (and its allies of mainly extremist organisations) will have devastating negative effect on the party. It already caused a lot of division, tension and disloyalty. We think that this organisation’s influence inside your party through the elected MP will increase the division and disharmony.
It seems to many of us that your party is allowing another Eddie Obied’s opportunist faction. I am afraid that this time the damage will be worse. At least Eddie Obied and his Terrigal faction was only about power and money. In the case of LMA faction, it will be mixture of move to accumulate power by spreading extremism, sectarian hate and tribalism. Did you notice that LMA (who claims to represent all Muslims in the state) lobbied for your party to run only Muslims from North Lebanese (Sunni) background?
You need to read some of latest Wikileaks documents to discover that your party is influenced by extremist policy of Saudi Arabia, through LMA members and supporters influence inside your party.
We hope that your party will wake up, before another disappointing defeat. This time on Federal level.
Tuesday, May 26, 2015
ISIS in our suburbs: This is why I am so concerned...!!!
Despite the fact that the police choppers are hovering over our heads in Western Sydney suburbs on daily basis for the last few months. And despite the “big mouth” politics exercised by our government and authorities about the “new approach and new actions” to curb radicalisation in the society. And despite the billions of dollars spent on or allocated to measures to fight against extremism and potential terrorist activities.
Despite all these, I had information during the last week about three community members in our neighbourhood disappeared from community, most likely travelled to fight in Syria (or Iraq). And I have information about more people disappeared from other suburbs, most likely we will hear about them killed in Syria, soon.
Not only this.
I have information that extremists had successfully infiltrated some of our security agencies, including police force.
And in previous article I explained how extremists had infiltrated our political system, which developed closed relations with our major (and minor) political parties.
So, it is clear that things are not moving in the right direction.
There are many reasons for this. Till now, no action was taken to limit extremists’ influence. Some of the millions of dollars allocated to be spent to counter radicalisation program were allocated to extreme groups who are the source of radicalisation. And terrorists are still called “freedom fighters” when they cut heads of Syrian soldiers or policemen.
It is very clear that our authorities have no plan. But we are deeply concerned because our lives are on line here.
When someone is disappeared from my neighbourhood. I contacted anti-terrorism agencies and passed the information. I expressed to them that I and my family are very concerned, taking into account that I was physically attacked several times, attacked verbally several times and received thousands of death threats, authorities should have understood my concerns. But no action was taken.
We were not contacted by any official. We were not given any assurance that the families of these disappeared extremists are not security threat to our neighbourhood. And when we asked about confirmation of the fate of these disappeared persons. No answer was received.
The continued flow of extremists to fight in Syria has one interpretation: ISIS has established itself in our suburbs. We know that extremists existed in our suburbs for the last few decades. But the new issue here is that the militant savage medieval terrorists have sleeping cells in our suburbs. Maybe your neighbour or maybe mine. Maybe your teacher at local TAFE. I suspect the owner of local convenience store. Who knows?
The authorities who suppose to know, either do not know or do not give a damn. They are busy talking tough to win votes. While local groups of extremists managed to build tens of mosques, musallas and “bookstores” to brainwash, recruit and collect funds. Millions of $s were either locally collected or brought from countries sponsoring terrorism (on the top of them is Saudi Arabia). All this happened under the eyes and noses of our authorities.
But our authorities are still confused: where did all this radicalisation come from?
To be fair, I saw our PM got angry, at some stage, because of this high radicalisation. He asked tough questions. He promised to take action. And he took important actions.
He invited all extremist leaders and held consultations of “how to deal with high radicalisation”. And after few rounds of intense consultations, the invited “leaders” reached an important conclusion: we do not have radicalisation in this country. All is government conspiracy to win election next year. And the vowed to boycott any future consultations. Government retaliated by bribing them with couple of millions of dollars to help fighting against the same radicalisation they helped to create.
So if radicalisation does not exist, who shot Ali Ibrahim? Who physically attacked me? Who sent threatening messages to all Shia local businesses? Who burned down Naji and Hariri chicken shops? Who stormed Lindt Cafe? Who is Jake Bilardi, Khaled Sharrouf, Mohamed Elomer? And why police choppers hovering over our heads day and night in the suburbs?
I was never highly concerned about radicalisation as I am now. When local doctor gone missing, most likely to fight with ISIS. When your next-door neighbour went missing for weeks, most likely to fight in Syria. And when your son is not safe at local school. When the only constant news item on all our channels is the news about Australians who escaped security measures to join medieval terrorist organisation. You should be highly concerned.
Most importantly, when your authorities are not taking the matter seriously. When these authorities ignore your safety, ignore your feeling; ignore to tell you what is really happening in your neighbourhood. When you feel that you are on your own fighting against local extremists/potential terrorists. All of us should be highly concerned.
After recent developments, we all should be both alert and alarmed.
Authorities need to take actions. The actions should not be limited to appointing terrorism minister or counter-terrorism coordinator. It should not be limited to distributing millions of dollars to extremist organisations to convince them to depart their radical preaching.
Actions should include iron-fist approach: close down centres and mosques that preach hate. Arrest local “imams of hate”. Close down websites and Facebook pages promoting hate. Clean up our “Islamic” schools from extremists. Shut down radio stations, TV channels and newspapers. And suffocate funding of extreme organisations. In addition to education campaign to restore harmony and peace.
Simply: stop talking and put your money where your mouth is and let us reclaim our suburbs from ISIS and other terrorists.
Despite all these, I had information during the last week about three community members in our neighbourhood disappeared from community, most likely travelled to fight in Syria (or Iraq). And I have information about more people disappeared from other suburbs, most likely we will hear about them killed in Syria, soon.
Not only this.
I have information that extremists had successfully infiltrated some of our security agencies, including police force.
And in previous article I explained how extremists had infiltrated our political system, which developed closed relations with our major (and minor) political parties.
So, it is clear that things are not moving in the right direction.
There are many reasons for this. Till now, no action was taken to limit extremists’ influence. Some of the millions of dollars allocated to be spent to counter radicalisation program were allocated to extreme groups who are the source of radicalisation. And terrorists are still called “freedom fighters” when they cut heads of Syrian soldiers or policemen.
It is very clear that our authorities have no plan. But we are deeply concerned because our lives are on line here.
When someone is disappeared from my neighbourhood. I contacted anti-terrorism agencies and passed the information. I expressed to them that I and my family are very concerned, taking into account that I was physically attacked several times, attacked verbally several times and received thousands of death threats, authorities should have understood my concerns. But no action was taken.
We were not contacted by any official. We were not given any assurance that the families of these disappeared extremists are not security threat to our neighbourhood. And when we asked about confirmation of the fate of these disappeared persons. No answer was received.
The continued flow of extremists to fight in Syria has one interpretation: ISIS has established itself in our suburbs. We know that extremists existed in our suburbs for the last few decades. But the new issue here is that the militant savage medieval terrorists have sleeping cells in our suburbs. Maybe your neighbour or maybe mine. Maybe your teacher at local TAFE. I suspect the owner of local convenience store. Who knows?
The authorities who suppose to know, either do not know or do not give a damn. They are busy talking tough to win votes. While local groups of extremists managed to build tens of mosques, musallas and “bookstores” to brainwash, recruit and collect funds. Millions of $s were either locally collected or brought from countries sponsoring terrorism (on the top of them is Saudi Arabia). All this happened under the eyes and noses of our authorities.
But our authorities are still confused: where did all this radicalisation come from?
To be fair, I saw our PM got angry, at some stage, because of this high radicalisation. He asked tough questions. He promised to take action. And he took important actions.
He invited all extremist leaders and held consultations of “how to deal with high radicalisation”. And after few rounds of intense consultations, the invited “leaders” reached an important conclusion: we do not have radicalisation in this country. All is government conspiracy to win election next year. And the vowed to boycott any future consultations. Government retaliated by bribing them with couple of millions of dollars to help fighting against the same radicalisation they helped to create.
So if radicalisation does not exist, who shot Ali Ibrahim? Who physically attacked me? Who sent threatening messages to all Shia local businesses? Who burned down Naji and Hariri chicken shops? Who stormed Lindt Cafe? Who is Jake Bilardi, Khaled Sharrouf, Mohamed Elomer? And why police choppers hovering over our heads day and night in the suburbs?
I was never highly concerned about radicalisation as I am now. When local doctor gone missing, most likely to fight with ISIS. When your next-door neighbour went missing for weeks, most likely to fight in Syria. And when your son is not safe at local school. When the only constant news item on all our channels is the news about Australians who escaped security measures to join medieval terrorist organisation. You should be highly concerned.
Most importantly, when your authorities are not taking the matter seriously. When these authorities ignore your safety, ignore your feeling; ignore to tell you what is really happening in your neighbourhood. When you feel that you are on your own fighting against local extremists/potential terrorists. All of us should be highly concerned.
After recent developments, we all should be both alert and alarmed.
Authorities need to take actions. The actions should not be limited to appointing terrorism minister or counter-terrorism coordinator. It should not be limited to distributing millions of dollars to extremist organisations to convince them to depart their radical preaching.
Actions should include iron-fist approach: close down centres and mosques that preach hate. Arrest local “imams of hate”. Close down websites and Facebook pages promoting hate. Clean up our “Islamic” schools from extremists. Shut down radio stations, TV channels and newspapers. And suffocate funding of extreme organisations. In addition to education campaign to restore harmony and peace.
Simply: stop talking and put your money where your mouth is and let us reclaim our suburbs from ISIS and other terrorists.
Thursday, May 14, 2015
The risks of “Big mouths” democracy
Politicians and political analysts in Australia like to call Australian democracy (and Western democracy in general) as “participatory democracy”. The term wants to say that “if you participate in the processes, your voice will be heard. If you do not participate, you will be ignored”.
I will not try to discuss how deceptive this term is, as the democracy in real term should mean to listen and represent every citizen not only the ones who have certain capabilities and expertise. The term “participatory democracy” would indeed refute any claim of politicians to represent constituents, if they listen only to “active members” of the society.
So in reality, our democracy is democracy for “big mouths”. So if you keep whinging and making big lies loudly and publicly, they will listen to you. Even if you represent no one. And to silence you and win you to their side, they will give you some bribes in form of “grants and community funding”.
All this comes with big risks. Mostly opportunists will exercise this kind of democracy. This will mean that media and authorities will listen to the wrong people, reward wrong people and try to consult wrong people. This will result in resources being wasted and stories will be reported wrongly.
Let me give some examples.
Among Muslim communities, few extremists and few opportunists came forward for the last few decades and started to shout foul about Islamophobia and about “ignoring of Muslims’ interests and needs”. Consequently, government, opposition parties, security agencies, media and other authorities actively tried to appease these “big mouths” by engaging them and give them prominence they do not deserve and do not have in the communities.
For the last decades, the Lebanese Moslem Association was claiming day and night that they represent ALL Muslims. They were on the frontline demanding engaging its officials, as sign of engaging Muslims. And they were given a lot of prominence they do not deserve and have no right to claim.
From its name, Lebanese Moslem Association should not claim to represent Non-Lebanese Moslems (who are the overwhelming majority of Muslims). It also cannot represent Non-Sunni Lebanese (many indications point to the fact that LMA does not recognise non-Sunnis to be Muslims at all). So, if we exclude Non-Lebanese Sunnis, and Non-Sunni Lebanese, who does the LMA really represent?
So what are the risks with this “big-mouth” democracy?
Lebanese Moslem Association was representing extreme version of Islam in the last 2 or 3 decades. By claiming to represent ALL Muslims, it is very easy for the racists and Islamophobes to step up their Anti-Muslim campaigns by saying “Listen to the Muslims’ representatives what they say about this and that”.
Also, by authorities accepting that LMA represents Muslims in this country, they will consult only them and engage with them and so claim later that “everything is ok, we listened to Muslims and we have acted”.
This is what was happening in this country for the last few decades. Few fake organisations who are mainly follow and adopt extreme version of Islam were on the frontline trying to represent the Muslims. And this was one of the main reasons we have currently high radicalisation and high Islamophobia.
Some can argue that “we understand the argument about LMA and “big mouth democracy” causing high Islamophobia, but how they caused high radicalisation?”
The answer is very simple. Imagine that ordinary Muslim is hearing day after day from media and authorities that LMA and other extreme organisation represent Islam and Muslims. And at the same time, he/she is listening during Friday ceremonies and media speeches by LMA (and other extreme groups) representatives vending all kinds of extreme preaching and messages? Of course they will start to believe that this is the real Islam. So the brainwashing and recruitment will be easier.
When an ordinary Muslim hears from our authorities and media that LMA represents ALL Muslims. And LMA confirmed this lies. Then listens to the LMA religious spokesperson’s fatwa against saying “Merry Christmas” to Christians. Would not he start to believe that this is the real Islam?
And what did the government do to discipline these extremist groups?
After all extreme activities by LMA, government granted the organisation more than $2,750,000.00 to spread “harmony in the society” and to “empower marginalised religious and ethnic groups”.
Some of the tax-payers money was spent on broadcasting lectures of extremists and terrorists which lead to brainwash more Muslims and urge them to join terrorist groups like Al Qaeda.
Then our authorities did not stop on this. As LMA could have successfully deceived ALL political parties and authorities that they represent ALL Muslims in this country, governments started to compete who will grant LMA with more money (public bribes in the name of public funding for community projects) to win the Muslims votes that LMA supposedly controls.
Since mid 2011 until mid 2014, LMA was active in brainwashing Muslim youths under the banner of “supporting Syrian revolution”. Every Friday prayer ceremony will be focussed on Syrian “revolution” and the needs for community members to do all they can to support the “mujahedeen” (we discovered later that these mujahedeen are in fact AL Qaeda and ISIS terrorists). LMA was very active in supporting activities and fundraising to Syrian “revolution”. LMA was active in organising “tributes for fallen mujahideen (including killed terrorist Mustapha AL Majzoub)”.
With this track history of participating in brainwashing our youth, recently we learnt that the government has granted LMA money to “Share Humanity” as part of government’s “de-radicalisation plan”. What kind of humanity they can share by issuing fatwa against Christmas, paying respect and tribute to killed terrorists and in broadcasting lectures of extremists and terrorists?
I am shocked. And I am sure many of you are shocked too. But others are not only shocked. They used this to prove that ALL Muslims support terrorism.
What makes things worse is that our authorities actually support some part of “big mouth” democracy, but they do not support other parts.
When many of community members exercised their right to participate in “big mouth” democracy, the authorities were quick to ask them to keep silent. When early in 2012 some Muslims tried to say “not in our name” in their opposition to the so-called Syrian revolution, authorities and media either ignored the attacks on them or directly asked them to be silent for their “safety”.
So, it seems that the best description of our democracy is “friendly big mouths democracy”.
By the way, I need to mention here that after the death of prophet Mohamed, Muslims were never united but by sword with rivers of blood. How could anyone believe that Samier Danden and his LMA have more convincing power to unite ALL Muslims, than all Muslim leaders had in the last 15 centuries?
Not in my name. Not as Muslim. And not as Australian.
It is our job to recover our hijacked democracy.
I will not try to discuss how deceptive this term is, as the democracy in real term should mean to listen and represent every citizen not only the ones who have certain capabilities and expertise. The term “participatory democracy” would indeed refute any claim of politicians to represent constituents, if they listen only to “active members” of the society.
So in reality, our democracy is democracy for “big mouths”. So if you keep whinging and making big lies loudly and publicly, they will listen to you. Even if you represent no one. And to silence you and win you to their side, they will give you some bribes in form of “grants and community funding”.
All this comes with big risks. Mostly opportunists will exercise this kind of democracy. This will mean that media and authorities will listen to the wrong people, reward wrong people and try to consult wrong people. This will result in resources being wasted and stories will be reported wrongly.
Let me give some examples.
Among Muslim communities, few extremists and few opportunists came forward for the last few decades and started to shout foul about Islamophobia and about “ignoring of Muslims’ interests and needs”. Consequently, government, opposition parties, security agencies, media and other authorities actively tried to appease these “big mouths” by engaging them and give them prominence they do not deserve and do not have in the communities.
For the last decades, the Lebanese Moslem Association was claiming day and night that they represent ALL Muslims. They were on the frontline demanding engaging its officials, as sign of engaging Muslims. And they were given a lot of prominence they do not deserve and have no right to claim.
From its name, Lebanese Moslem Association should not claim to represent Non-Lebanese Moslems (who are the overwhelming majority of Muslims). It also cannot represent Non-Sunni Lebanese (many indications point to the fact that LMA does not recognise non-Sunnis to be Muslims at all). So, if we exclude Non-Lebanese Sunnis, and Non-Sunni Lebanese, who does the LMA really represent?
So what are the risks with this “big-mouth” democracy?
Lebanese Moslem Association was representing extreme version of Islam in the last 2 or 3 decades. By claiming to represent ALL Muslims, it is very easy for the racists and Islamophobes to step up their Anti-Muslim campaigns by saying “Listen to the Muslims’ representatives what they say about this and that”.
Also, by authorities accepting that LMA represents Muslims in this country, they will consult only them and engage with them and so claim later that “everything is ok, we listened to Muslims and we have acted”.
This is what was happening in this country for the last few decades. Few fake organisations who are mainly follow and adopt extreme version of Islam were on the frontline trying to represent the Muslims. And this was one of the main reasons we have currently high radicalisation and high Islamophobia.
Some can argue that “we understand the argument about LMA and “big mouth democracy” causing high Islamophobia, but how they caused high radicalisation?”
The answer is very simple. Imagine that ordinary Muslim is hearing day after day from media and authorities that LMA and other extreme organisation represent Islam and Muslims. And at the same time, he/she is listening during Friday ceremonies and media speeches by LMA (and other extreme groups) representatives vending all kinds of extreme preaching and messages? Of course they will start to believe that this is the real Islam. So the brainwashing and recruitment will be easier.
When an ordinary Muslim hears from our authorities and media that LMA represents ALL Muslims. And LMA confirmed this lies. Then listens to the LMA religious spokesperson’s fatwa against saying “Merry Christmas” to Christians. Would not he start to believe that this is the real Islam?
And what did the government do to discipline these extremist groups?
After all extreme activities by LMA, government granted the organisation more than $2,750,000.00 to spread “harmony in the society” and to “empower marginalised religious and ethnic groups”.
Some of the tax-payers money was spent on broadcasting lectures of extremists and terrorists which lead to brainwash more Muslims and urge them to join terrorist groups like Al Qaeda.
Then our authorities did not stop on this. As LMA could have successfully deceived ALL political parties and authorities that they represent ALL Muslims in this country, governments started to compete who will grant LMA with more money (public bribes in the name of public funding for community projects) to win the Muslims votes that LMA supposedly controls.
Since mid 2011 until mid 2014, LMA was active in brainwashing Muslim youths under the banner of “supporting Syrian revolution”. Every Friday prayer ceremony will be focussed on Syrian “revolution” and the needs for community members to do all they can to support the “mujahedeen” (we discovered later that these mujahedeen are in fact AL Qaeda and ISIS terrorists). LMA was very active in supporting activities and fundraising to Syrian “revolution”. LMA was active in organising “tributes for fallen mujahideen (including killed terrorist Mustapha AL Majzoub)”.
With this track history of participating in brainwashing our youth, recently we learnt that the government has granted LMA money to “Share Humanity” as part of government’s “de-radicalisation plan”. What kind of humanity they can share by issuing fatwa against Christmas, paying respect and tribute to killed terrorists and in broadcasting lectures of extremists and terrorists?
I am shocked. And I am sure many of you are shocked too. But others are not only shocked. They used this to prove that ALL Muslims support terrorism.
What makes things worse is that our authorities actually support some part of “big mouth” democracy, but they do not support other parts.
When many of community members exercised their right to participate in “big mouth” democracy, the authorities were quick to ask them to keep silent. When early in 2012 some Muslims tried to say “not in our name” in their opposition to the so-called Syrian revolution, authorities and media either ignored the attacks on them or directly asked them to be silent for their “safety”.
So, it seems that the best description of our democracy is “friendly big mouths democracy”.
By the way, I need to mention here that after the death of prophet Mohamed, Muslims were never united but by sword with rivers of blood. How could anyone believe that Samier Danden and his LMA have more convincing power to unite ALL Muslims, than all Muslim leaders had in the last 15 centuries?
Not in my name. Not as Muslim. And not as Australian.
It is our job to recover our hijacked democracy.
Tuesday, May 12, 2015
The deadly consequenes of leniency with child accused of terrorism
We are deeply worried about the signs of leniency shown by our legal system in dealing with dangerous terrorist only because he is less than 18 years old. This leniency could have dangerous consequences:
1- It will undermine the efforts of our security agencies in foiling dangerous attempts to conduct terrorist activities.
2- It could soften public opinion about the seriousness of his crimes.
3- It will overlook the needed action on investigation and taking actions against the responsible organizations for brainwashing and recruiting children to carry on such horrendous crimes.
4- It overlooks the responsibility of the child family on his radicalisation to the point of allegedly planning to conduct terrorist activity using bombs.
5- The most important deadly consequence is the fact that any leniency in dealing with this alleged terrorist because of his age could lead to wave of imminent terrorist activities carried on by children, even younger than 17.
It is well documented that the international pressure on Syrian and Iraqi governments and accusing them of targeting civilians and kids had resulted in Syrian and Iraqi authorities lenient dealing with children. This had resulted in the terrorist organizations recruiting and sending children to conduct most dangerous terrorist activities because they knew that they will escape security surveillance.
In Syria and Iraq, almost all snipers and spies for terrorist organizations are "children"... mainly under 15.... And the terrorist organizations could exploit a lot of public opinion to condemn the Syrian and Iraqi army for targeting and killing “children”, when in fact they were terrorists.
It is also deeply concerning that until now no debate about who brainwashed, trained and recruited these kids. This lack of debate and authorities’ proper actions had allowed the extremist organizations (including Islamic schools, centres and mosques) to escape any accountability and actions to stop them.
One eyewitness to the well reported event of auctioning the ISIS flag by Markaz Imam Ahmad told us that the majority of audience was children under 16. The eyewitness and his brothers who were present on the event were 16, 14 and 10. Until now, no actions were taken against this centre of extremism. Many of the “graduates” of this centre were killed recently in Syria fighting with terrorists. One of them was Mahmoud Abdul Salam.
Any leniency in dealing with children-terrorists will have deadly consequences. We strongly encourage Australian authorities to consult on this issue with Syrian and Iraqi authorities.
1- It will undermine the efforts of our security agencies in foiling dangerous attempts to conduct terrorist activities.
2- It could soften public opinion about the seriousness of his crimes.
3- It will overlook the needed action on investigation and taking actions against the responsible organizations for brainwashing and recruiting children to carry on such horrendous crimes.
4- It overlooks the responsibility of the child family on his radicalisation to the point of allegedly planning to conduct terrorist activity using bombs.
5- The most important deadly consequence is the fact that any leniency in dealing with this alleged terrorist because of his age could lead to wave of imminent terrorist activities carried on by children, even younger than 17.
It is well documented that the international pressure on Syrian and Iraqi governments and accusing them of targeting civilians and kids had resulted in Syrian and Iraqi authorities lenient dealing with children. This had resulted in the terrorist organizations recruiting and sending children to conduct most dangerous terrorist activities because they knew that they will escape security surveillance.
In Syria and Iraq, almost all snipers and spies for terrorist organizations are "children"... mainly under 15.... And the terrorist organizations could exploit a lot of public opinion to condemn the Syrian and Iraqi army for targeting and killing “children”, when in fact they were terrorists.
It is also deeply concerning that until now no debate about who brainwashed, trained and recruited these kids. This lack of debate and authorities’ proper actions had allowed the extremist organizations (including Islamic schools, centres and mosques) to escape any accountability and actions to stop them.
One eyewitness to the well reported event of auctioning the ISIS flag by Markaz Imam Ahmad told us that the majority of audience was children under 16. The eyewitness and his brothers who were present on the event were 16, 14 and 10. Until now, no actions were taken against this centre of extremism. Many of the “graduates” of this centre were killed recently in Syria fighting with terrorists. One of them was Mahmoud Abdul Salam.
Any leniency in dealing with children-terrorists will have deadly consequences. We strongly encourage Australian authorities to consult on this issue with Syrian and Iraqi authorities.
Thursday, May 07, 2015
On local extremism: I was right form the beggining
The news about Australian doctor joining terrorist organisations in Syria is another evidence of our authorities’ failure to stop radicalisation in our society. While we do not know the time this doctor left Australia, the fact that he was brainwashed from womaniser and alcohol drinker to hardline terrorist should raise many questions.
Where were our authorities from the intense brainwashing and recruitment efforts of organisations and individuals? Why authorities had ignored many warnings from different community leaders and organisations, including myself, for long time about the intense campaigns to radicalise and recruit our youths?
The major question here is: what is the holistic plan that our authorities had adopted to stop further radicalisation of our youth?
We are sorry to come to realisation that authorities are busy dealing with symptoms, rather than dealing with the source of these symptoms. The authorities proved to be either lucky or successful in stopping and foiling many terrorist activities. But they are far behind in starting real comprehensive de-radicalisation plan.
As experts on this issue, the authorities’ refusal to discuss with us our de-radicalisation plan, refusal to fund some of our proposed projects to deal with this radicalisation and refusal to consult us of the plan they suggest is deeply worrying.
The news about authorities’ continuous interception of extremists in our airports bound to Syria, news about more Australians participation in the fight in Syria and the news of relations between terrorists fighting in Syria and centres based in Australia are clear evidence of the failure of our authorities approach to the issue.
All these news, in addition to news of closing down of centres of extremism (the latest was AL Furqan) is a moral boost for our anti-extremism campaign. The campaign that started February 2012. The campaign that is getting momentum every day.
While we still receive many threatening messages form extremists, we are receiving a lot of supporting and encouraging messages. Both kind of messages are clear evidence of the effectiveness of our campaign.
We were right from the beginning.
Where were our authorities from the intense brainwashing and recruitment efforts of organisations and individuals? Why authorities had ignored many warnings from different community leaders and organisations, including myself, for long time about the intense campaigns to radicalise and recruit our youths?
The major question here is: what is the holistic plan that our authorities had adopted to stop further radicalisation of our youth?
We are sorry to come to realisation that authorities are busy dealing with symptoms, rather than dealing with the source of these symptoms. The authorities proved to be either lucky or successful in stopping and foiling many terrorist activities. But they are far behind in starting real comprehensive de-radicalisation plan.
As experts on this issue, the authorities’ refusal to discuss with us our de-radicalisation plan, refusal to fund some of our proposed projects to deal with this radicalisation and refusal to consult us of the plan they suggest is deeply worrying.
The news about authorities’ continuous interception of extremists in our airports bound to Syria, news about more Australians participation in the fight in Syria and the news of relations between terrorists fighting in Syria and centres based in Australia are clear evidence of the failure of our authorities approach to the issue.
All these news, in addition to news of closing down of centres of extremism (the latest was AL Furqan) is a moral boost for our anti-extremism campaign. The campaign that started February 2012. The campaign that is getting momentum every day.
While we still receive many threatening messages form extremists, we are receiving a lot of supporting and encouraging messages. Both kind of messages are clear evidence of the effectiveness of our campaign.
We were right from the beginning.
Wednesday, May 06, 2015
The faction war that cost Christine Milne her job
Without any warning, Bob Brown announced at the begging of April 2012 his resignation as Greens leader. In very similar way and without any warning, Christine Milne tendered her resignation as Greens leader. In addition to the total secrecy and lack of any warning, both leaders resigned months before Federal election.
Then the Greens officials want you to think that this is normal procedure within normal mainstream political party.
What the Greens officials are keen to hide from everyone, including the party ordinary members, is the factional war that was brewing for the last 2 decades inside the party.
Before exploring the reality of what happened today, I need to dissect the reality of power balance inside the Greens party.
The Greens party was established more than 40 years ago by socially conservative environmentalists who cared principally about the attack on our ecological system. The first generation of Greens activists and later on politicians were pure environmentalists who did not care for one second about any of the social-justice issues.
These environmentalists could not achieve much in term of convincing voters to vote for them. Until 2000, the support for the Greens party was less than 2.5% nationally. Without the high support in Tasmania and WA, this popularity indeed was less than 1.5%.
The Greens membership changed slightly after 2 major national and international events:
1- The collapse of the Soviet Union, which saw large numbers of Australian communists lost their platform and direction. They thought that the Greens party is the best for them to prolong their political activities and ambitions for political careers. This is where Lee Rhiannon, Sylvia Hale and others came from.
2- The start of collapse of the Australian Democrats after their hold of “balance of power” during Howard conservative government. Again, the Greens party was the only established party during this period, so it attracted the majority of members and supporters of the Democrats.
3- In addition to the above, the Labor continued in very aggressive way to creep towards the right which convinced many progressive people to join and vote for the Greens, after they lost any hope from Labor.
So the Greens membership comprised mesh-mash of all kind of people feeling hopelessness: hopelessness after the collapse of Soviet Union, hopelessness of the Democrats, hopelessness from Labor and new migrants who arrived to this country and faced by hopeless political system.
It is very safe to claim that the Greens party flourished on hopelessness. Apart from environmentalists, no Greens party member joined or voted for the Greens because they genuinely believe in the Greens platform or genuinity.
Such atmosphere of total hopelessness of political system resulted in the Greens party to rise on the hands of pure opportunists and political careerists, who has no ideology of principles.
This is why you can see all the contradictions and extreme inside the Greens party: Islamophobes and anti-religions atheists defending ISIS and Muslims, white racists defending multiculturalism, Masonic rich defending and representing the poor, Zionists claim to support Palestinian rights and racists who never met Non-English speaking migrant call for refugees rights.
This cocktail of paradoxes resulted in extreme factions fighting each other silently behind closed doors. And this is why resignation of leaders came with no warnings. Election of new leaders happens suddenly. Criticism is not allowed. No public understanding of what is happening inside the party. The party in fact is living behind “iron curtain” of total secrecy.
This is why the few comments by Chris Harris recently was found to be even shocking, by public and by ordinary members of the Greens. And this is why Chris Harris used my earlier description of what is happening inside the Greens to be similar to Animal Farm.
The Greens factions are:
1- Environmental faction: losing grip of power inside the Greens and this is why we saw Bob and Christine enforced to resign.
2- Ex-Stalinist opportunists: and these are fading too. Sylvia Hale gone, and soon Lee Rhiannon will follow.
3- Pure opportunist political careerists: and this is the majority inside the Greens now. They have no principles and no ethics. Most important for them is to win votes and continue their career. These are the majority of Greens politicians and officials.
The fight between factions started by Lee Rhiannon ex-Stalinists faction. They conducted vicious attacks on environmentalists to destabilise their historical grip on power inside the party. For Lee Rhiannon faction this was the only way to pave the road for change of leadership to their benefit. In doing this, they recruited and counted on pure opportunist careerists. These in turn, used the fight between the two factions to climb to top jobs, as a compromise between the two powerful established factions.
This is why Chris Harris and other “old guards” who joined the Greens for some kind of principles or agenda wrote very pessimistic posts about the result of the factions’ war.
Chris Harris admits (and agreed with my writings on the issue for the last ten years) that the Greens party is in fact a “Party about Nothing”.
The sacking of Christine Milne is the last straw of environmentalists reign on power inside the Greens....
Welcome to total opportunist Greens party.... No principles and no ethics... No agendas and no defined platforms.
Final note here: the Greens party is extremely lucky (for the hundred time in the last two decades). Despite the total chaos inside the Greens party and the exposure of its opportunism and lack of principles, there is no alternative party to inherit the votes of disgruntled progressive people of Australia. This is why it seems that the Greens will continue to get around %8 of the votes, until new progressive alternative political party formed.
Then the Greens officials want you to think that this is normal procedure within normal mainstream political party.
What the Greens officials are keen to hide from everyone, including the party ordinary members, is the factional war that was brewing for the last 2 decades inside the party.
Before exploring the reality of what happened today, I need to dissect the reality of power balance inside the Greens party.
The Greens party was established more than 40 years ago by socially conservative environmentalists who cared principally about the attack on our ecological system. The first generation of Greens activists and later on politicians were pure environmentalists who did not care for one second about any of the social-justice issues.
These environmentalists could not achieve much in term of convincing voters to vote for them. Until 2000, the support for the Greens party was less than 2.5% nationally. Without the high support in Tasmania and WA, this popularity indeed was less than 1.5%.
The Greens membership changed slightly after 2 major national and international events:
1- The collapse of the Soviet Union, which saw large numbers of Australian communists lost their platform and direction. They thought that the Greens party is the best for them to prolong their political activities and ambitions for political careers. This is where Lee Rhiannon, Sylvia Hale and others came from.
2- The start of collapse of the Australian Democrats after their hold of “balance of power” during Howard conservative government. Again, the Greens party was the only established party during this period, so it attracted the majority of members and supporters of the Democrats.
3- In addition to the above, the Labor continued in very aggressive way to creep towards the right which convinced many progressive people to join and vote for the Greens, after they lost any hope from Labor.
So the Greens membership comprised mesh-mash of all kind of people feeling hopelessness: hopelessness after the collapse of Soviet Union, hopelessness of the Democrats, hopelessness from Labor and new migrants who arrived to this country and faced by hopeless political system.
It is very safe to claim that the Greens party flourished on hopelessness. Apart from environmentalists, no Greens party member joined or voted for the Greens because they genuinely believe in the Greens platform or genuinity.
Such atmosphere of total hopelessness of political system resulted in the Greens party to rise on the hands of pure opportunists and political careerists, who has no ideology of principles.
This is why you can see all the contradictions and extreme inside the Greens party: Islamophobes and anti-religions atheists defending ISIS and Muslims, white racists defending multiculturalism, Masonic rich defending and representing the poor, Zionists claim to support Palestinian rights and racists who never met Non-English speaking migrant call for refugees rights.
This cocktail of paradoxes resulted in extreme factions fighting each other silently behind closed doors. And this is why resignation of leaders came with no warnings. Election of new leaders happens suddenly. Criticism is not allowed. No public understanding of what is happening inside the party. The party in fact is living behind “iron curtain” of total secrecy.
This is why the few comments by Chris Harris recently was found to be even shocking, by public and by ordinary members of the Greens. And this is why Chris Harris used my earlier description of what is happening inside the Greens to be similar to Animal Farm.
The Greens factions are:
1- Environmental faction: losing grip of power inside the Greens and this is why we saw Bob and Christine enforced to resign.
2- Ex-Stalinist opportunists: and these are fading too. Sylvia Hale gone, and soon Lee Rhiannon will follow.
3- Pure opportunist political careerists: and this is the majority inside the Greens now. They have no principles and no ethics. Most important for them is to win votes and continue their career. These are the majority of Greens politicians and officials.
The fight between factions started by Lee Rhiannon ex-Stalinists faction. They conducted vicious attacks on environmentalists to destabilise their historical grip on power inside the party. For Lee Rhiannon faction this was the only way to pave the road for change of leadership to their benefit. In doing this, they recruited and counted on pure opportunist careerists. These in turn, used the fight between the two factions to climb to top jobs, as a compromise between the two powerful established factions.
This is why Chris Harris and other “old guards” who joined the Greens for some kind of principles or agenda wrote very pessimistic posts about the result of the factions’ war.
Chris Harris admits (and agreed with my writings on the issue for the last ten years) that the Greens party is in fact a “Party about Nothing”.
The sacking of Christine Milne is the last straw of environmentalists reign on power inside the Greens....
Welcome to total opportunist Greens party.... No principles and no ethics... No agendas and no defined platforms.
Final note here: the Greens party is extremely lucky (for the hundred time in the last two decades). Despite the total chaos inside the Greens party and the exposure of its opportunism and lack of principles, there is no alternative party to inherit the votes of disgruntled progressive people of Australia. This is why it seems that the Greens will continue to get around %8 of the votes, until new progressive alternative political party formed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
My experience inside the United Australia party: why UAP’s humiliating defeat & When will Ralph defect from UAP?
After running as a federal candidate for the United Australia party in the seat of Reid, these are my observation about the reasons why UA...
