Leo Alhalabi
Yesterday at 9:02pm ·
Tim Anderson is one of those least likely to be anyone’s best friend given his colorful history and current demeanor. All one has to do is ask some of his associates to realize that with having friends like him, one doesn’t need enemies. But this is the last thing that Tim wants his international fan base to know.
Tim Anderson jumped onto the Syrian bandwagon for many reasons, one of which was that he’d been desperately looking for a come-back into fame, or rather infamy.
As a young adult, would-be professor Tim was a leading figure in Ananda Marga, a highly “devoted” Hindu-ish sect, but one that’s also highly controversial. Whether the many allegations about Ananda Marga are baseless or not, who knows, but this post focuses on what I know of Tim and what is gleaned about him from sources online. The intention here isn’t to open a closet of skeletons, but as Ananda Marga was accused of a number of serious acts of religious terrorism around the world and that Tim is connected with the cause of defending Syria, we need to understand whether his involvement is an asset or a liability, a credit or an embarrassment. Or is he merely another nutty professor.
It’s alleged that Ananda Marga’s target was the Indian Government, as at that time their leader was imprisoned by Indian authorities. Australia was one of many countries that suffered from terrorism in the late 1970’s, long before the IS ever existed.
The would-be professor wasn’t accused of one act, but actually two, and let’s get real; why would the Australian Government try to frame him as he pleaded? Why would the KGB frame him as he also pleaded? After all, before the incidents, he was a Mr. No Body.
He was a young man in his twenties and merely played the role of a spokesperson for the Ananda Margas, and the Australian Government had absolutely no reason to target him and use him as a sacrificial lamb.
He was put on trial, found guilty and spent six years in jail, before he was found guilty again of another crime which saw him locked up again. That was the infamous Sydney Hilton Hotel bombing of 1978 in which three people were killed and 11 injured, some very seriously. All up, he served a total of just over seven years for crimes he claims he never committed.
The evidence against him was later found to be not 100% conclusive, and hence he finally was acquitted and released from jail on the basis of insufficient evidence and the fact that he’d already served time, not once, but twice, on two separate incidences. His co-Margi stayed behind bars, unlike him, with incriminating evidence and confessions. Some ask why would his fellow Margi, a member from the lower echelons of the group’s hierarchy be guilty without Tim’s knowledge and involvement, given that this member confessed to the crime, stating he was ordered by Tim. That was a matter the Australian Government decided to rule about in Tim’s favor, but we should remember that although this ruling was made in his favor, his direct involvement in the acts of terror were not categorically proven, but neither was his innocence. It’s plausible to speculate that the Australian authorities wanted to close this embarrassing chapter (more on this below) and after seven years in jail all up, decided to let Tim go.
During his “tenure” in jail, the would-be professor was making in-roads towards another tenure. He started his tertiary education whilst in jail, and after receiving his PhD later on, he immediately landed on a senior position at the University of Technology Sydney, and shortly afterwards scored permanent tenure at Sydney University; one of the most prestigious universities in Australia.
Why would a prestigious university appoint a man of such background and give him a permanent position unless he was a good catch and a prolific publisher? But he is neither. His thus far tenure of two decades at the university has produced little in terms of number of academic publications, citations and advisory to post-graduate students. Such appointments are much less than the common practice in academia, they are never done.
The attached article clearly states that there was a huge upheaval surrounding the terror acts and rivalry between police and intelligence agencies and many attempts to silence some people. Was Anderson’s tenure at the university a part of a deal to keep him quiet? What’s even more odd, is that the man, according to his own admission, is “Australia’s only academic who is boycotted by the media”, so what exactly is he doing at that university when funds are hard to come by and competition is fierce?
During the transformation from a convicted criminal, acquitted free man, to a professor, Tim turned from living a devoted esoteric life into atheism and Marxism; which is odd given that he accused the KGB of framing him earlier. True believers in God don’t suddenly become atheists, and if they do, it only means that they never believed in God in the first place. But the new-found professor did have a god, and he will always serve this god with the utmost of devotion, and that god is none but his own ego.
His former Margi friends speak volumes about his eccentricities and egocentricity, as even though the group was restricted and under watch, former members continued to have a bond of friendship with each other, but not with big man Tim and it seems most loath him or feel so devastated that they wish to forget him.
Let us speed forward to 2011 when the Syria war began. In that war, the professor found a ripe opportunity to serve his ego god. Hence, he jumped on the opportunity long before most other Western supporters. He quickly built for himself a group of followers and established a movement he named “Hands off Syria”. He rounded up a good number of supporters who were much younger than him and much less experienced in politics and relevant matters. They looked up to him, regarding him as a demi god, wanting to eat from his hands. The demi god felt satisfaction, and he thought it was good.
To be catapulted to fame within the Syrian support movement, the professor needed a mega boost, so he piggy-backed on the Australian Wikileaks Party and headed a delegation to visit Syria and met with President Assad in 2013. By then, the Syrian Embassy in Australia was closed and the Syrian Government didn’t have the means to check him out.
Furthermore, Syria was in deep trouble back then, and Assad gave him audience because he needed as many windows to the West as possible, and what a boost that audience gave the professor. He became an instant hero and his ego elevated from that of a demi god to a full god.
Now his followers back home needed to plead for his audience, and it’s a wonder how his tall thin body was able to balance the big pumpkin of a head that grew on top.
However, when his controversial past attracted media commentary after his visit to President Assad, that media attention would likely have informed the refusal of his request to meet for a second time with Assad as he was refused.
His Facebook group, “Hands off Syria”, was like no other group, because originally he was the only admin and had a permanent “pinned” intro (courtesy god Tim) in which he dictated his terms and conditions. But when suggestions were made to him, he often disregarded them, as he’s the ultimate ruler of that group and it is after all, one of the many manifestations of his ego.
The professor then decided to write a book. The flimsy thin book that lacked substance was festooned with plates and graphics, and pages upon pages of references. The 250 page B5 book has almost 50 pages of references at its end, many pages of references and the end of each chapter, and many, many plates leaving at best 80 B5 pages of material of poor quality, not befitting that of an academic. Now the book is translated into seven languages. How was this paid for and who do the proceeds of sales go to?
But what the great professor didn’t realize was that its back cover as well as the last page in the final draft featured the “wrong” map of Syria, a map that acknowledges the Syrian Iskandaroun province as part of Turkey. Whilst it is internationally recognized as part of Turkey, any Syrian, genuine supporter of Syria or even an alleged supporter of Syria will find great offence in this map. The professor was able to correct his mistake before the book was launched.
In fairness to the “all-knowing” professor, it must be stated that he didn’t use the wrong map deliberately; he simply didn’t know. His lack of knowledge in regard to the map is however a true reflection of his lack of knowledge about Syria, period.
The pretense the unbecoming professor displays about his alleged love for Syria has the thumbprints of a passion that is highly pathological. Why would a white Australian who’s never been to Syria till 2013, who doesn’t know what the proper map of Syria should look like, have this kind of strong, morbid fetish that goes as far as challenging Syrians, patriotic Syrians, about their love and devotion to their own country?
The word “fetish” possibly holds the key, the ageing Prof who is in his mid sixties seems to have a fetish for brunettes. His similar aged partner is one, but within the Syrian community, the professor seemingly displays a penchant smutty streak that places himself surrounded by young Syrian female beauties who look up to him, considering themselves blessed.
This professor even once made an audacious Facebook collage about Syrian girls, displaying faces of young Syrian girls in their twenties, young enough to be his grand-daughters, with a try-hard fatherly caption, alluding these to be the angelic faces of Syria. It doesn’t take a deep probe to read into this statement and guess what was on his mind.
After a series of crimes rightly or wrongly associated with Ananda Marga in Australia and elsewhere, the most infamous of which was the 1978 Sydney Hilton Hotel bombing, Tim Anderson’s involvement or otherwise will remain in the minds of some as questionable in the absence of him being proven innocent. After all, the inconclusive evidence against him that eventually led to his acquittal, doesn’t conclusively prove his innocence either, especially that his alleged accomplice (Pederick) as mentioned above, who confessed to the crime stated he was ordered to do the bombing Tim himself.
In between 2011 and now, that controversial professor has shed many skins and turned his back on his “friends” within the Syria support movement, just like he turned his back in the past on his Margi friends and left them alone to face the brunt of the law.
A cynic’s view of Tim would not classify him as a nutty professor but rather as a smutty professor.
The smutty, flippy-floppy, self-conceited, holier-than-thou, former terror suspect who was never proven resoundingly innocent, dares take the upper moral ground in the pro-Syria movement and decrees from his self-proclaimed ivory tower that no one within the movement should call another a traitor. But he doesn’t apply his own “golden rule” to himself. He takes liberty to talk about betrayals of others and classifying some even as enemies; including very active patriotic Syrians. The alleged great pro-Syria activist who had to be told what the map of Syria looks like, has taken upon himself the license to decide who are the true patriotic Syrians and who aren’t. He also has the temerity to welcome dubious non-Syrians to Syria saying, “welcome to your second country”. It’s a mystery as to why he considers himself entitled or in such a position to do so.
Behind the scenes, the professor supports smear campaigns against genuine Syrian activists, knowing deep down inside that there is no proof to support those campaigns against them. Now, why would a man, an alleged freedom fighter, someone who was “framed” with a crime that he says he didn’t commit and spent over 7 years of his youth behind bars for it, why would he engage deliberately in defamatory campaigns against people he claims to support. It’s a bit like holocaust survivors who in turn did the same to the hapless population in Palestine. Reflecting on that, the congruency in the manner of thinking and actions display a worrying indictment on his character.
In one of his many lame attempts to acquire credibility, he joined hands with a dubious character according to the Australian media, an academic he’d put on his team and who the media reports as engaging in highly offensive racial remarks and alleged earlier years participation in a neo-Nazi website called StormFront. An experienced activist should have an eye and nose for such types, and even though the professor seemed to not know those details beforehand, he certainly displayed once again, his lack of wisdom and inability to make sound judgements.
Yes, indeed Tim has a long history of changing friends and causes like he changes socks. He’s no one’s friend and he doesn’t seem to have a permanent cause to serve. His alleged love for Syria looks like a ploy, and he only serves his ego, all the while savoring the accolade of young Syrian beautiful brunettes.
Tim Anderson has been playing with fire, stabbing his comrades in the back, throwing rocks at people when his own house is made of glass. He has a lot to answer to.
http://benhills.com/articles/scams-scoundrels/the-hilton-fiasco/
Tuesday, May 09, 2017
Friday, March 24, 2017
London terrorist attack: another reason why we need a Royal Commission on radicalisation
Despite being on high alert, the UK authorities were not able to stop the deadly terrorist attack in London yesterday. This event should have a great impact on how our authorities deal with local radicalisation.
In the UK (same as in Australia), the government together with authorities and opposition, acknowledged there was a problem with radicalisation but chose not to take any action against it. Some sections of the media and politicians even used this radicalisation to stir up division and more Islamophobia in our society.
In the last few years, in Australia, there has been no debate on where the source of this sudden “discovered” high radicalisation came from. We saw both the minister and shadow minister of education claim they had no prior knowledge of the high radicalisation in our public (and Islamic) schools. When in fact, myself and many of my friends, knew about this high radicalisation.
We had grave concerns when we witnessed our media, together with our politicians, support terrorism in Syria under the false banner of supporting the “Syrian revolution". It is a fact that every terror attack both in Australia and around the world, has been perpetrated by supporters of the so called Syrian revolution or by terrorists returned after participating in the Syrian revolution.
After all the terrorist attacks on home soil and the heightened alert, still to this day, our authorities have not taken any practical steps towards de-radicalisation. Extreme centres are still allowed to preach hate, mosques managed by extremists remain open, extreme Imams haven’t been deported and funding to extreme organisations is still active.
So far all we have seen from our authorities is the arrest of a few radicals just before they commit terror attacks or immediately after they have committed one. We have seen plenty of rhetoric without any meaningful action.
This lack of actions from our authorities towards radicalisation is due partly to the fact that extremist have become a very powerful lobby in this country. No government, no major party and no politician can take meaningful steps against the source of radicalisation. The radicals have infiltrated our political system, media and education system.
We believe that the only solution is to form a royal commission to reveal who allowed the radicalisation to infiltrate in our system at all levels. A royal commission, with its power to grant immunity and protection for witnesses and experts, will have a better chance to explore and reveal the reality of this sudden-discovered high radicalisation.
A royal commission can:
• Investigate how radicals infiltrated political parties and parachuted their preferred candidates on parties in safe seats.
• Investigate how terrorists were able to easily travel without passports to join the fight in Syria.
• Reveal how the authorities were actively engaging in bullying campaigns to silence anti-extremism campaigners to the point of conspiring with foreign authorities (in my case to ban me from entering Lebanon).
• Reveal how Saudi Arabia and other foreign countries were able to infiltrate our universities, schools, media and political parties.
• Explain how Australia found itself populated by thousands of hardcore radicals who are working very hard to kill our citizens and spread chaos in our beautiful country.
• Investigate how our media, especially state-funded ones, were actively spreading radicalisation by falsely reporting on what was happening in other countries, especially Syria and Libya.
• Explore how government departments are funding extremist organisations with millions of dollars and discover the extent of radicalisation achieved with such funds.
A royal commission will be able to give answers and recommendations.
A royal commission is our only hope to find out what went wrong and how to correct past mistakes. Without assertive de-radicalisation steps, we are dealing with symptoms and not with the real cause.
Without a royal commission and its findings, radicals and their foreign financiers will continue their infiltration of our political system, media and schools.
They will have enough money to build more mosques, centres and schools to continue radicalising our youth.
A royal commission is the only meaningful step to stop the blame game between the minister for education and the shadow minister on what is happening in our public schools.
We will mount a campaign demanding a royal commission to start a meaningful de-radicalisation plan. Such plan is vital not only to prevent terrorist attacks in Australia, but it is also important to start a campaign to restore faith in our authorities and the system.
We need to restore security and social harmony in our community and the only way to achieve this is through a royal commission.
In the UK (same as in Australia), the government together with authorities and opposition, acknowledged there was a problem with radicalisation but chose not to take any action against it. Some sections of the media and politicians even used this radicalisation to stir up division and more Islamophobia in our society.
In the last few years, in Australia, there has been no debate on where the source of this sudden “discovered” high radicalisation came from. We saw both the minister and shadow minister of education claim they had no prior knowledge of the high radicalisation in our public (and Islamic) schools. When in fact, myself and many of my friends, knew about this high radicalisation.
We had grave concerns when we witnessed our media, together with our politicians, support terrorism in Syria under the false banner of supporting the “Syrian revolution". It is a fact that every terror attack both in Australia and around the world, has been perpetrated by supporters of the so called Syrian revolution or by terrorists returned after participating in the Syrian revolution.
After all the terrorist attacks on home soil and the heightened alert, still to this day, our authorities have not taken any practical steps towards de-radicalisation. Extreme centres are still allowed to preach hate, mosques managed by extremists remain open, extreme Imams haven’t been deported and funding to extreme organisations is still active.
So far all we have seen from our authorities is the arrest of a few radicals just before they commit terror attacks or immediately after they have committed one. We have seen plenty of rhetoric without any meaningful action.
This lack of actions from our authorities towards radicalisation is due partly to the fact that extremist have become a very powerful lobby in this country. No government, no major party and no politician can take meaningful steps against the source of radicalisation. The radicals have infiltrated our political system, media and education system.
We believe that the only solution is to form a royal commission to reveal who allowed the radicalisation to infiltrate in our system at all levels. A royal commission, with its power to grant immunity and protection for witnesses and experts, will have a better chance to explore and reveal the reality of this sudden-discovered high radicalisation.
A royal commission can:
• Investigate how radicals infiltrated political parties and parachuted their preferred candidates on parties in safe seats.
• Investigate how terrorists were able to easily travel without passports to join the fight in Syria.
• Reveal how the authorities were actively engaging in bullying campaigns to silence anti-extremism campaigners to the point of conspiring with foreign authorities (in my case to ban me from entering Lebanon).
• Reveal how Saudi Arabia and other foreign countries were able to infiltrate our universities, schools, media and political parties.
• Explain how Australia found itself populated by thousands of hardcore radicals who are working very hard to kill our citizens and spread chaos in our beautiful country.
• Investigate how our media, especially state-funded ones, were actively spreading radicalisation by falsely reporting on what was happening in other countries, especially Syria and Libya.
• Explore how government departments are funding extremist organisations with millions of dollars and discover the extent of radicalisation achieved with such funds.
A royal commission will be able to give answers and recommendations.
A royal commission is our only hope to find out what went wrong and how to correct past mistakes. Without assertive de-radicalisation steps, we are dealing with symptoms and not with the real cause.
Without a royal commission and its findings, radicals and their foreign financiers will continue their infiltration of our political system, media and schools.
They will have enough money to build more mosques, centres and schools to continue radicalising our youth.
A royal commission is the only meaningful step to stop the blame game between the minister for education and the shadow minister on what is happening in our public schools.
We will mount a campaign demanding a royal commission to start a meaningful de-radicalisation plan. Such plan is vital not only to prevent terrorist attacks in Australia, but it is also important to start a campaign to restore faith in our authorities and the system.
We need to restore security and social harmony in our community and the only way to achieve this is through a royal commission.
Thursday, March 09, 2017
When Pauline Hanson refused to meet with us to discuss radicalisation..
Pauline Hanson's latest comments about Islam and Muslims are further evidence that she is another lying politician who cannot be trusted.
Pauline Hanson deafened our ears for the last decade talking about extremism and radicalisation. Yet when we contacted her office several times offering to combine efforts in fighting against radicalisation, she just ignored our calls.
Since her election last July, we sent her two letters inviting her for a meeting to discuss radicalisation and extremism. We contacted her on 25 July 2016 and 15 February 2017. On both occasions, we received no reply (attached are the letters we sent)
Hanson’s main campaign election platform was to fight extremism. So when she refuses to meet one of the strongest voices fighting extremism, what does this tell you? Simple, it was just a mere empty election promise only to gain votes!
Pauline Hanson wants to show herself as a politician promoting transparency, clean politics and national security. So far what we are seeing from her is just more divisive rhetoric. As yet we have not seen any of her election promises in action.
Ms Hanson's empty racist and Islamophobic rhetoric will not benefit anyone in the community. Her racist and divisive rhetoric will not prevent terrorist attacks. It will not help in de-radicalisation efforts. And definitely will not help our national security.
Her divisive rhetoric will not improve housing affordability and employment security. And of course it will not repair social division and will not improve social harmony.
We would like here to publicly challenge Ms Hanson to show her true colour: if you are against extremism, let us work together. But if you want to use extremism for cheap electoral gains, we will be the first to fight against your destructive agendas and platforms.
Pauline Hanson deafened our ears for the last decade talking about extremism and radicalisation. Yet when we contacted her office several times offering to combine efforts in fighting against radicalisation, she just ignored our calls.
Since her election last July, we sent her two letters inviting her for a meeting to discuss radicalisation and extremism. We contacted her on 25 July 2016 and 15 February 2017. On both occasions, we received no reply (attached are the letters we sent)
Hanson’s main campaign election platform was to fight extremism. So when she refuses to meet one of the strongest voices fighting extremism, what does this tell you? Simple, it was just a mere empty election promise only to gain votes!
Pauline Hanson wants to show herself as a politician promoting transparency, clean politics and national security. So far what we are seeing from her is just more divisive rhetoric. As yet we have not seen any of her election promises in action.
Ms Hanson's empty racist and Islamophobic rhetoric will not benefit anyone in the community. Her racist and divisive rhetoric will not prevent terrorist attacks. It will not help in de-radicalisation efforts. And definitely will not help our national security.
Her divisive rhetoric will not improve housing affordability and employment security. And of course it will not repair social division and will not improve social harmony.
We would like here to publicly challenge Ms Hanson to show her true colour: if you are against extremism, let us work together. But if you want to use extremism for cheap electoral gains, we will be the first to fight against your destructive agendas and platforms.
Thursday, March 02, 2017
Why I support the ban on face coverings
The debate on whether to ban the face covering has reached a point where there is talk of introducing a private members’ bill to ban it.
First and foremost I want to mention that as a Muslim, I support the bill.
Should the bill be designed only to help improve national security and to prevent terrorist attacks, then most Muslims would welcome the ban.
My concern is that members who introduced and support the ban have done so, to inflame islamophobia for electoral gains.
The reason I support the ban is as follows:
• Under the current circumstances of high extremism and high security scare of terrorist attacks on home soil, the ban could help in preventing security scare and calm fear in the community. It will help security agencies monitor extremists and might prevent attacks.
• Contrary to claims made by extremists, the burqa and the niqab are not part of the original teachings of Islam.
• There is no doubt that wearing the burqa or the niqab is an indication of extreme conservative ideology. Almost all terrorists arrested and convicted of terrorism-related charges believe so and have their female family members wearing this kind of face covering.
Having said this, I do believe the ban itself won’t bring security to this nation nor it will reduce the chance of terrorist attacks. This ban should be part of a wide-range strategy to fight extremism.
Politicians who are using the ban to stir islamophobia will in fact achieve the opposite. This ban and the growing islamophobia that accompany the debate will be used by extreme organisations to lure more youth into the rhetoric of hate. This will serve as golden opportunity for extreme organisations to recruit more terrorists.
What is more concerning is that political parties are talking tough on fighting extremism but their actions show quite the opposite.
For the last 3 years, major political parties were talking tough on fighting extremism, but were sending the opposite message by siding with terrorist organisations in Syria.
Even various local governments and major political parties are still to this day, strengthening their ties with local extreme organisations by increasing funding and inviting these organisations to all kind of consultations and events. At the same time, genuine and fierce anti-extremist organisations and individuals are still ignored and deprived of any funding.
While I and many other Muslims support the ban, we would be however reluctant to publicly support it for the above mentioned reasons. We are concerned the ban, together with other rhetoric, is designed to stir more Islamophobia in the society. With no clear de-radicalisation plan, the effect of our support to such ban will have many negative impacts.
I and many in the community welcome any engagement with any political party or group to discuss the effectiveness of such move on de-radicalising of our youth. We also are very open to cooperate with these politicians to combine efforts to fight against extremism.
The majority of Muslims in Australia have a deep feeling of belonging to this nation and share a deep fear of possible terrorist attacks. Many Muslims, including myself, were victims of attacks by extremists. We need to deal with this issue with a lot of sensitivity and not stir up more Islamophobia.
Politics of mere populism will not make Australia immune to terror attacks, quite the contrary. The same policies in France resulted in more terrorism and insecurity.
First and foremost I want to mention that as a Muslim, I support the bill.
Should the bill be designed only to help improve national security and to prevent terrorist attacks, then most Muslims would welcome the ban.
My concern is that members who introduced and support the ban have done so, to inflame islamophobia for electoral gains.
The reason I support the ban is as follows:
• Under the current circumstances of high extremism and high security scare of terrorist attacks on home soil, the ban could help in preventing security scare and calm fear in the community. It will help security agencies monitor extremists and might prevent attacks.
• Contrary to claims made by extremists, the burqa and the niqab are not part of the original teachings of Islam.
• There is no doubt that wearing the burqa or the niqab is an indication of extreme conservative ideology. Almost all terrorists arrested and convicted of terrorism-related charges believe so and have their female family members wearing this kind of face covering.
Having said this, I do believe the ban itself won’t bring security to this nation nor it will reduce the chance of terrorist attacks. This ban should be part of a wide-range strategy to fight extremism.
Politicians who are using the ban to stir islamophobia will in fact achieve the opposite. This ban and the growing islamophobia that accompany the debate will be used by extreme organisations to lure more youth into the rhetoric of hate. This will serve as golden opportunity for extreme organisations to recruit more terrorists.
What is more concerning is that political parties are talking tough on fighting extremism but their actions show quite the opposite.
For the last 3 years, major political parties were talking tough on fighting extremism, but were sending the opposite message by siding with terrorist organisations in Syria.
Even various local governments and major political parties are still to this day, strengthening their ties with local extreme organisations by increasing funding and inviting these organisations to all kind of consultations and events. At the same time, genuine and fierce anti-extremist organisations and individuals are still ignored and deprived of any funding.
While I and many other Muslims support the ban, we would be however reluctant to publicly support it for the above mentioned reasons. We are concerned the ban, together with other rhetoric, is designed to stir more Islamophobia in the society. With no clear de-radicalisation plan, the effect of our support to such ban will have many negative impacts.
I and many in the community welcome any engagement with any political party or group to discuss the effectiveness of such move on de-radicalising of our youth. We also are very open to cooperate with these politicians to combine efforts to fight against extremism.
The majority of Muslims in Australia have a deep feeling of belonging to this nation and share a deep fear of possible terrorist attacks. Many Muslims, including myself, were victims of attacks by extremists. We need to deal with this issue with a lot of sensitivity and not stir up more Islamophobia.
Politics of mere populism will not make Australia immune to terror attacks, quite the contrary. The same policies in France resulted in more terrorism and insecurity.
Saturday, December 17, 2016
Media hystirical biased reporting on Aleppo encourages sectarian violence in Sydney
The hysteria around the news from Syria created by our media and politicians, has once again inflamed sectarian tension in the streets of Sydney.
Such tensions take me back to the dark days in 2012 and 2013 when Muslim extremist had spread chaos in Australia by leading campaigns of extortion, bullying and assaulting anyone who opposed the Syrian “revolution”.
The media biased reporting on Aleppo, siding with Al-Qaeda terrorists, has once again sent the wrong message in all directions. Such irresponsible reporting has been the driving force behind the recent assaults and threats on community activists and leaders who support the Syrian and Russian anti-terrorism efforts.
I’ve started receiving threats (see one of them attached) from extremist who support terrorists in Aleppo. I’ve also been alerted to other similar threats and verbal assaults on other anti-extremism activist.
Such threats will be reported to the local police station. I have also advised other activists to report all threats and verbal assaults at their local police stations. Many anti-extremist who are fed up with the lack of support by authorities, have decided to take the law into their own hands and take an “eye for eye” approach.
We seriously believe that the lack of action by authorities in cracking down on extremists and the media support for terrorist in Syria, will lead to events that could well get out of hand.
Such tensions take me back to the dark days in 2012 and 2013 when Muslim extremist had spread chaos in Australia by leading campaigns of extortion, bullying and assaulting anyone who opposed the Syrian “revolution”.
The media biased reporting on Aleppo, siding with Al-Qaeda terrorists, has once again sent the wrong message in all directions. Such irresponsible reporting has been the driving force behind the recent assaults and threats on community activists and leaders who support the Syrian and Russian anti-terrorism efforts.
I’ve started receiving threats (see one of them attached) from extremist who support terrorists in Aleppo. I’ve also been alerted to other similar threats and verbal assaults on other anti-extremism activist.
Such threats will be reported to the local police station. I have also advised other activists to report all threats and verbal assaults at their local police stations. Many anti-extremist who are fed up with the lack of support by authorities, have decided to take the law into their own hands and take an “eye for eye” approach.
We seriously believe that the lack of action by authorities in cracking down on extremists and the media support for terrorist in Syria, will lead to events that could well get out of hand.
Sunday, November 27, 2016
Banana republic: Neil Parkash affairs
We should be panicked learning details of Neil Paraksh farce.
So few months ago, our PM announced the death of this terrorist in our parliament...
But we know now that few weeks ago, our ASIO contacted Turkey and informed them that Parkash is trying to enter Turkey...
And not announcing anything until few days ago, Australians were informed through media, and not authorities, that Parkash is still alive...
Then authorities confirmed that Parkash citizenship will not be cancelled and soon he will be back to Australia...
What conclusions we should reach...
The only conclusion I can reach is that our authorities are managing these terrorists... know where they are... what they intend to do... where they intend to travel... and will extradite them to hide them with best hospitality in our jails...
but our authorities do not want us to panic... and need to feel safe...
I feel that I live in Banana republic, despite the fact I warend about this few years ago...
We are documenting these facts in series of documentaries that will be launched soon...
So few months ago, our PM announced the death of this terrorist in our parliament...
But we know now that few weeks ago, our ASIO contacted Turkey and informed them that Parkash is trying to enter Turkey...
And not announcing anything until few days ago, Australians were informed through media, and not authorities, that Parkash is still alive...
Then authorities confirmed that Parkash citizenship will not be cancelled and soon he will be back to Australia...
What conclusions we should reach...
The only conclusion I can reach is that our authorities are managing these terrorists... know where they are... what they intend to do... where they intend to travel... and will extradite them to hide them with best hospitality in our jails...
but our authorities do not want us to panic... and need to feel safe...
I feel that I live in Banana republic, despite the fact I warend about this few years ago...
We are documenting these facts in series of documentaries that will be launched soon...
Wednesday, November 23, 2016
بعد ان بعتم كرامة الجالية: الشعب يريد اسقاط المتاجرين بالجالية الاسلامية
"يا أشباه الرجال ولا رجال ، حلوم الاطفال وعقول ربات الحجال، لوددت أني لم أركم ولم أعرفكم معرفة والله جرت ندما وأعقبت سدما، قاتلكم الله لقد ملاتم قلبي قيحا وشحنتم صدري غيظا ، وجرعتموني نغب التهمام أنفاسا"
الامام علي، كرم الله وجهه.
بعد انتهاء الحملة الانتخابية في ولاية نيو ساوث ويلز، لا بد من التوقف مليا عند تفاصيلها ونتائجها والكارثة الاخلاقية التي تمخضت عن دخول "قيادات" الجالية الاسلامية ومنهم معممون ورجال دين علی خطها بالمشاركة العملية في حملة حزب الاحرار العنصري المتطرف، وخصوصا ضد الاسلام والمسلمين.
الكارثة الاخلاقية ابتدات عندما سمح الكثير من مشايخ هذه الجاليات باستباحة جوامعهم ومصلياتهم من قبل مرشحي حزب الاحرار المتطرف والذي طالب قبل اسابيع من الانتخابات بوقف هجرة المسلمين باعتبارهم مجموعة همجية لا تستطيع الاندماج في مجتمع متحضر كالمجتمع الاسترالي.
بعد ذلك تفاقمت الفضيحة الاخلاقية لتصل الی حد نزول مشايخ، بعضهم كان في القريب العاجل هدفا مستمرا لحملات حزب الاحرار تشهيرا وتوبيخا الی حد المطالبة بسحب الجنسية منهم، الی الميدان والمشاركة في المهرجانات الانتخابية في مناطق تواجد الجالية لدعوة ابناء الجاليات الاسلامية للتصويت بشكل مكثف لهذا الحزب المتطرف.
وتوجت الفضائح الاخلاقية عندما ظهرت نتائج الانتخابات، وتبين ان هذه "القيادات" ما هي الا قيادات كرتونية او اصنام خشبية لا تضر ولا تنفع ولا تجد من يستمع لها. ففي مناطق تواجد الجاليات الاسلامية المكثف في اوبرن ولاكمبا وبانكستاون، حيث تمثل الجاليات المسلمة اكثر من ٤٠% من المقعد، فشل كل مرشحي الاحرار حتی في الاقتراب من الفوز في أي من هذه المقاعد.
الآن وبعد انتهاء العملية الانتخابية هذه ، فان الجالية تستحق بعض الاجابات ممن يدعي "قيادتها".
وبداية نحب ان نؤكد ان هذه القيادة هي قيادة غير شرعية لانها غير منتخبة من جهة. ومن جهة اخری فانها لا تمثل تطلعات ابناء الجالية ولم تقدم حلا لاي مشكلة واجهتهم.
ومع هذا، فان الجالية تستحق قليلا من الاحترام باعطائها بعض الاجوبة للاسئلة المتبادرة الی ذهن الكثيرين من ابنائها.
اول ما يتبادر الی ذهن أي مسلم في هذا البلد هو عن الفائدة التي تحققت للجالية من دعوة "قيادييها" للتصويت ضد العمال لصالح الاحرار. وانطلاقا من ان المكتوب يقرا من عنوانه، فان الفائدة الوحيدة مما قام به هذه "القيادات" في هذه الانتخابات هي انها جعلتنا اضحوكة لكل الاستراليين وجعلت منا مادة للتندر ليس في استراليا فقط، بل وحول العالم.
ففي عز الحملة الانتخابية وبينما كانت الاجتماعات السرية والعلنية تعقد بين مسؤولي حزب الاحرار العنصري و "قيادات" الجاليات الاسلامية، كان حزب الاحرار يوجه الاهانة تلو الاهانة لمسلمي استراليا ولدينهم الحنيف. ففي البداية كانت العريضه التي قدمها سناتور حزب الاحرار والمطالبة بوقف هجرة المسلمين الی استراليا لمدة ١٠ سنوات قابلة للتجديد بسبب الخطر الذي يمثلونه علی حضارة وتقدم هذا البلد. ثم جاءت الصفعة الثانية من مسؤول ملف الهجرة في الحزب والذي طالب حزبه بتصعيد حملات التخويف من الاسلام والمسلمين للفوز بالانتخابات الفيديرالية القادمة. ثم توالت الصفعات عندما صرح نائب احراري مسؤول في الحزب بان المشكلة ليست مع مسلمي استراليا، بل المشكلة الاساسية هي مع الاسلام والذي يمثل دينا عنيفا يدعو الی العنف واضطهاد المراة ورفض التعايش. ثم جاءت الصفعة التالية بترشيح الاحرار لاحد مسؤولي حزب امة واحدة سابقا. وانتهت الصفعات عندما قرر حزب الاحرار تبادل الاصوات التفضيلية مع حزب الديمقراطيين المسيحيين المعادي للمسلمين والمطالب بمنع الحجاب ووقف هجرة المسلمين نهائيا الی استراليا.
وبالرغم من كل هذه الصفعات والاهانات للجالية ولدينها الحنيف، الا ان بعض رجال دينها والمدعين "قيادتها" انتفضوا ليدافعوا عمن يسب دينهم ويسفه عقيدتهم.
يحق لابناء الجاليات الاسلامية ان تتسائل عن الفائدة من دعوة "قيادات" الجالية بمكافئة من يسبهم ويسب دينهم ويطالب بترحيلهم من البلد، بالتصويت بشكل مكثف لمرشحي حزب الاحرار العنصري.
وعندما سالناهم لماذا كل هذه التنازلات وبلع الاهانات، اخبرونا ان حزب الاحرار سيكون اكثر كرما معنا وسيعطينا بضعة آلاف من الدولارات اكثر مما كان يعطينا حزب العمال.
يحق لابناء الجاليات الاسلامية ان يتساؤلوا ماذا ينفعهم المزيد من الاموال، ان فقدوا كرامتهم وانسانيتهم وحقوقهم في المواطنة المتساوية
ان هذه القيادات من اشباه الرجال قد رسموا خارطة طريق لكل من يسعی للمجد والشهرة في هذا البلد.
فما علی أي طامح الا سب الجاليات الاسلامية وسب المسلمين واتهامهم بالهمجية واللاانسانية ولا ضير من سب دينهم الحنيف واتهامه بالتحجر ومعاداة حقوق المراة والهمجية والانتشار بحد السيف.
بل ان أي غبي او مافون فاشل في أي مجال من مجالات الحياة يجب ان يتعلم درسا مهما في كيفية ان يصبح عضوا مرموقا في المجتمع بامتطاء ظهر الجاليات المسلمة وسبهم وسب دينهم وتتفيه عقيدتهم والدعوة لقتلهم او وضعهم في معتقلات اعادة تاهيل من اجل التخلص من اللوثات العقلية التي تتنتابهم.
كما يجب ان نتوقع ان كل الحملات الانتخابية القادمة في هذا البلد ستكون مبنية علی سب المسلمين ودينهم الحنيف.
وهنا نتسائل بشكل جدي هل كنا مخطئين عندما رفضنا المشاركة في تاجيج حملات الاسلاموفوبيا خلال الانتخابات، عندما اشترك فيها اكثر من شيخ وعلامة واذاعة اسلامية، بينما كنا مصرين علی كل الصحفيين الاستراليين باننا لا يمكن ان نقبل ان نكون طرفا لاشعال اسلاموفوبيا في الولاية، حتی لو كلفنا ذلك ان لا نحصل علی أي صوت في الانتخابات.
نفس القيادات التي شاركت في تاجيج موضوع الشيخ فايز والذي عالجناه باقل الخسائر للجالية، كانت شاركت في الحملة الانتخابية لحزب الاحرار والتي كان شقها الاكبر معتمد علی استقطاب اصوات العنصريين من خلال سب المسلمين والتشهير بهم.
ما يميز مشاركة هذه "القيادات" وخصوصا المشايخ منهم في حملة حزب الاحرار هو الدعوة للتخلص من حزب العمال بسبب انه مكث طويلا في الحكم. لم يعطونا سببا واحدا او فائدة واحدة من التصويت لحزب الاحرار العنصري، سوی ضرورة تغيير الوجوه لان "المياه ان ركدت لمدة طويلة، اسنت". هذا الكلام جاء من احد القيادات المتربع علی ظهر الجالية لمدة تزيد عن ٣٠ عاما ويرفض التنحي والابتعاد عن المناصب الرسمية، حتی بعد ان شارك، مكرها او بارادته، في حملات تشويه سمعة الجالية.
لا ندافع عن حزب العمال الذي اهمل الولاية كثيرا. ولكن كان امام المسلمين العديد من الطرق لمعاقبة هذا الحزب بطريقة لا تسيئ الی الجالية ومصالحها. من هذه الطرق هو دعم المرشحين المسلمين من مستقلين او العمل علی ترشيح مرشحين عن الجمعيات الاسلامية ضد الاحزاب المعادية لمصالح الجالية.
لكن ما قام به هؤلاء يعتبر فضيحة اخلاقية بكل ما تحمل الكلمة من معاني.
وهنا نقول لابناء الجاليات الاسلامية: حضروا رقابكم لتدوسها بساطير حزب الاحرار العنصري الثقيلة. ان كانوا قد صرحوا بانكم همج وغير متحضرين في عز الحملة الانتخابية، فماذا سيفعلون بعد ان باعكم من يدعون قيادتكم وباعوا كرامتكم وكبريائكم ومصالح اجيالكم القادمة؟
ندرك تماما انه لم يتبق لنا الا ان نعمل علی خلع هذه "القيادات" من الاصنام الخشبية ونعلن انه قد حان الجهر بان: الشعب يريد اسقاط المتاجرين بالجالية الاسلامية!
ملحوظة: نشر هذا المقال في الصحافة العربية منتصف عام 2011... واعيد نشره لان التاريخ يعيد نفسه وتاكد رؤيتنا التي استقراناها قبل اعوام....
Sunday, November 20, 2016
Open letter to Mr Peter Dutton: you need to put your money where your mouth is on the subject of extremism
Dear Hon Peter Dutton, Minister for immigration
I read on your portfolio your latest comments regarding the mass migration of Lebanese Muslims during the 70s. I found your “attack” on Malcolm Fraser’s brave decision to be disgraceful!
While I agree that there is a serious problem with sections of Muslims migrated from north Lebanon, I have to disagree that the reason of this extremism is caused by being born as extremist. There is no evidence of this.
To the contrary, all reliable academic studies indicate that these extremist became like this after decades of intense brainwashing.
Academics have been warning the government about the impact of Wahhabi ideology. I can refer to the countless studies by fine academics who warned the government at the time of John Howard that extremist ideology was spreading thanks to the Saudi embassy which spent $2.7 billion in three decades to promote extremism among our youth.
Instead of taking actions to curb the Saudi spending, your party (through the Howard government) took the strategic decision in 2006, of entering into a strong alliance with Muslim extremist organisations.
These extremist organisations are lead by Lebanese background Muslims. The Howard government, in a bid to divide Muslim vote (largely backing Labor and to lesser extent the Greens), offered millions of dollars in public funding to extreme Muslim organisations. In return these organisations would ask Muslims to vote Liberals.
The effect of this alliance was almost immediate. Lebanese Moslem Association and other organisations of extremists started directing Muslims to vote for your party.
Your party’s alliance with Muslim extremist organisations got stronger and stronger. Since 2011, the alliance with Muslim extreme organisations lead by Lebanese Moslem Association, had publicly directed Muslim voters to vote exclusively to your party. In return, this alliance of Muslim extreme organisations has secured public funding of millions of dollars annually.
If you really think that the late Malcolm Fraser made the mistake of allowing Muslim Lebanese to migrate to Australia, then you need to start correcting this mistake by ending the strong alliance between your party and these extreme organisations.
You also need to reassess the way public funding is managed by stopping the funding going to extreme organisations and being used to brainwash and recruit more extremists.
Actions are louder than any talks. Political parties need to start putting the money where their mouths are.
I have no doubt that you will not take any action to correct your party’s grave mistake of contributing to the spread of extremism in this country.
Your latest comments show panic and desperation after Trump’s win. You now are faced with newly emerged right-wing small parties like One Nation, Shooters and Fishers, Christian Democrats etc.
For decades your party has exercised double standards on this issue. On one hand you allied yourself with Muslim extreme organisations in order to divide Muslim votes and on the other hand you were actively involved in spreading racism and Islamophobia. You tried to juggle too many balls at once!
The bi-election result in Orange is a clear indication that voters are sick of your Hippocratic policies. Voters are now demanding concrete actions and results, not only rhetoric.
The fact is that your party is still the strongest supporter of Muslim extreme organisations. Until you prove the opposite, conservative voters will continue to migrate to smaller right-wing parties. Again, you need urgent action not rhetoric.
My advice is to isolate extreme Lebanese Muslim forces. Stop the funding! Stop promoting them. Stop consulting them and most of all, stop the Saudi funding.
Maybe after you have taken these actions, conservative voters will regain faith in you. If you have the ambition to win in the next election and beyond, Australians need to regain their faith in you.
I read on your portfolio your latest comments regarding the mass migration of Lebanese Muslims during the 70s. I found your “attack” on Malcolm Fraser’s brave decision to be disgraceful!
While I agree that there is a serious problem with sections of Muslims migrated from north Lebanon, I have to disagree that the reason of this extremism is caused by being born as extremist. There is no evidence of this.
To the contrary, all reliable academic studies indicate that these extremist became like this after decades of intense brainwashing.
Academics have been warning the government about the impact of Wahhabi ideology. I can refer to the countless studies by fine academics who warned the government at the time of John Howard that extremist ideology was spreading thanks to the Saudi embassy which spent $2.7 billion in three decades to promote extremism among our youth.
Instead of taking actions to curb the Saudi spending, your party (through the Howard government) took the strategic decision in 2006, of entering into a strong alliance with Muslim extremist organisations.
These extremist organisations are lead by Lebanese background Muslims. The Howard government, in a bid to divide Muslim vote (largely backing Labor and to lesser extent the Greens), offered millions of dollars in public funding to extreme Muslim organisations. In return these organisations would ask Muslims to vote Liberals.
The effect of this alliance was almost immediate. Lebanese Moslem Association and other organisations of extremists started directing Muslims to vote for your party.
Your party’s alliance with Muslim extremist organisations got stronger and stronger. Since 2011, the alliance with Muslim extreme organisations lead by Lebanese Moslem Association, had publicly directed Muslim voters to vote exclusively to your party. In return, this alliance of Muslim extreme organisations has secured public funding of millions of dollars annually.
If you really think that the late Malcolm Fraser made the mistake of allowing Muslim Lebanese to migrate to Australia, then you need to start correcting this mistake by ending the strong alliance between your party and these extreme organisations.
You also need to reassess the way public funding is managed by stopping the funding going to extreme organisations and being used to brainwash and recruit more extremists.
Actions are louder than any talks. Political parties need to start putting the money where their mouths are.
I have no doubt that you will not take any action to correct your party’s grave mistake of contributing to the spread of extremism in this country.
Your latest comments show panic and desperation after Trump’s win. You now are faced with newly emerged right-wing small parties like One Nation, Shooters and Fishers, Christian Democrats etc.
For decades your party has exercised double standards on this issue. On one hand you allied yourself with Muslim extreme organisations in order to divide Muslim votes and on the other hand you were actively involved in spreading racism and Islamophobia. You tried to juggle too many balls at once!
The bi-election result in Orange is a clear indication that voters are sick of your Hippocratic policies. Voters are now demanding concrete actions and results, not only rhetoric.
The fact is that your party is still the strongest supporter of Muslim extreme organisations. Until you prove the opposite, conservative voters will continue to migrate to smaller right-wing parties. Again, you need urgent action not rhetoric.
My advice is to isolate extreme Lebanese Muslim forces. Stop the funding! Stop promoting them. Stop consulting them and most of all, stop the Saudi funding.
Maybe after you have taken these actions, conservative voters will regain faith in you. If you have the ambition to win in the next election and beyond, Australians need to regain their faith in you.
Friday, November 18, 2016
The letter that could attract us $2200 fines: more reasons why Liberals should go...
From: jamal daoud [mailto:daoudjamal@tpg.com.au]
Sent: Thursday, 17 November 2016 10:19 AM
To: 'office@ajaka.minister.nsw.gov.au'
Subject: Complaint of persistent unfair treatment our organisation receives from Multicultural NSW
To the Hon John Ajaka, Minister for Multiculturalism
Dear Mr Ajaka,
I am writing this letter to advise you of the persistent unfair treatment our organisation receives from Multicultural NSW.
First and foremost let me mention to you that our organisation has been and still is, the strongest anti-extremism voice in our community. Our organisation has been advocating for a better and stronger multiculturalism in Australia for the last decade. During this decade we helped hundreds of newly arrived NES people with their settlement. We advocated for changes to better represent NESB people with decision-making bodies and have fought very hard against all kind of extremism and radical views.
It is common knowledge how myself and others in the organisation were subjected to all different threats and assaults. These attacks were because of our work and our strong anti-extremist views.
Working hard for a better NSW and Australia, we are very disappointed by the lack of help from Multicultural NSW.
In the late 2014, we noticed that Multicultural NSW was granting money from public funds to promote Multiculturalism and harmony in our society.
With a strong track record for opposing radicalisation, lobbying for better multiculturalism and supporting people from NESB, we thought our organisation would receive, even if small, a grant from Multicultural NSW. We were wrong
During 2014, we managed a program called “Living Together”.
This program was designed to fight both radicalisation and sectarian hate among Muslim communities in Australia.
“Living Together” was about bringing together activist and community leaders who belonged to different religions and sects. Meetings were organised in rotation at the homes of the different participants.
Thanks to these meetings we managed to organise a big event during Ramadan 2015, where we invited Christians, Sunni Muslim, Shia Muslims, Alawi Muslims, secular Muslims and other groups.
The event was a success and the feedback was very positive from all who attended. The event was paid for out of our own pockets.
We knew that Multicultural NSW had specific grants to help promote such activities and programs. We decided to apply for a “Unity Grant” of $25,000 in order to continue the “Living Together” program.
We provided Multicultural NSW with a detailed plan on how the program would run, how we would measure the success and the expected positive outcomes.
Our application was rejected! We were shocked to receive a letter from Multicultural NSW rejecting our application on the grounds that we didn’t provide a financial statement.
A financial statement is required from organisations that have previously received public funding. Our organisation never received any public funding which meant we were not required to lodge a financial statement.
We wrote to Multicultural NSW outlining the reasons for not providing a financial statement, however to this day we have not received a reply.
This year in July we applied for a “Celebration Grant” of $5,000 only. We wanted to hold a multi-faith and multi-sect celebration of Eid. We are still waiting to hear back. At this stage we don’t know if Multicultural NSW is ignoring us or if it has simply disposed of our application in the rubbish bin.
I cannot begin to tell you how disheartening it was to find out that Multicultural NSW granted hundreds of thousands of dollars to a well-known extremist organisation.
While we were trying to get funding, the Lebanese Muslim Association (LMA) was enjoying millions of dollars in grants. Multicultural NSW was funding the same organisation that was promoting extremism and radicalisation by issuing Fatwas against Christmas and Easter. LMA had also broadcasted lectures from terrorist Anwar Al Awlaki at Lakemba Mosque and encouraged followers to go help the “mujahedeen” (terrorist) in Syria
LMA is not the only extreme organisation to receive extensive funding from your department.
Multicultural NSW is operating in a way that not only encourages individuals to continue with their radicalisation but it also weakens the anti-radicalisation and anti-sectarian campaigns.
My hope is that you will address our concerns and perhaps explain to us why we are not able to receive even small amounts of funding. These grants would help us continue the spread of harmony and anti-radicalisation messages.
Yours sincerely
Jamal Daoud
President, Social Justice Network
Sent: Thursday, 17 November 2016 10:19 AM
To: 'office@ajaka.minister.nsw.gov.au'
Subject: Complaint of persistent unfair treatment our organisation receives from Multicultural NSW
To the Hon John Ajaka, Minister for Multiculturalism
Dear Mr Ajaka,
I am writing this letter to advise you of the persistent unfair treatment our organisation receives from Multicultural NSW.
First and foremost let me mention to you that our organisation has been and still is, the strongest anti-extremism voice in our community. Our organisation has been advocating for a better and stronger multiculturalism in Australia for the last decade. During this decade we helped hundreds of newly arrived NES people with their settlement. We advocated for changes to better represent NESB people with decision-making bodies and have fought very hard against all kind of extremism and radical views.
It is common knowledge how myself and others in the organisation were subjected to all different threats and assaults. These attacks were because of our work and our strong anti-extremist views.
Working hard for a better NSW and Australia, we are very disappointed by the lack of help from Multicultural NSW.
In the late 2014, we noticed that Multicultural NSW was granting money from public funds to promote Multiculturalism and harmony in our society.
With a strong track record for opposing radicalisation, lobbying for better multiculturalism and supporting people from NESB, we thought our organisation would receive, even if small, a grant from Multicultural NSW. We were wrong
During 2014, we managed a program called “Living Together”.
This program was designed to fight both radicalisation and sectarian hate among Muslim communities in Australia.
“Living Together” was about bringing together activist and community leaders who belonged to different religions and sects. Meetings were organised in rotation at the homes of the different participants.
Thanks to these meetings we managed to organise a big event during Ramadan 2015, where we invited Christians, Sunni Muslim, Shia Muslims, Alawi Muslims, secular Muslims and other groups.
The event was a success and the feedback was very positive from all who attended. The event was paid for out of our own pockets.
We knew that Multicultural NSW had specific grants to help promote such activities and programs. We decided to apply for a “Unity Grant” of $25,000 in order to continue the “Living Together” program.
We provided Multicultural NSW with a detailed plan on how the program would run, how we would measure the success and the expected positive outcomes.
Our application was rejected! We were shocked to receive a letter from Multicultural NSW rejecting our application on the grounds that we didn’t provide a financial statement.
A financial statement is required from organisations that have previously received public funding. Our organisation never received any public funding which meant we were not required to lodge a financial statement.
We wrote to Multicultural NSW outlining the reasons for not providing a financial statement, however to this day we have not received a reply.
This year in July we applied for a “Celebration Grant” of $5,000 only. We wanted to hold a multi-faith and multi-sect celebration of Eid. We are still waiting to hear back. At this stage we don’t know if Multicultural NSW is ignoring us or if it has simply disposed of our application in the rubbish bin.
I cannot begin to tell you how disheartening it was to find out that Multicultural NSW granted hundreds of thousands of dollars to a well-known extremist organisation.
While we were trying to get funding, the Lebanese Muslim Association (LMA) was enjoying millions of dollars in grants. Multicultural NSW was funding the same organisation that was promoting extremism and radicalisation by issuing Fatwas against Christmas and Easter. LMA had also broadcasted lectures from terrorist Anwar Al Awlaki at Lakemba Mosque and encouraged followers to go help the “mujahedeen” (terrorist) in Syria
LMA is not the only extreme organisation to receive extensive funding from your department.
Multicultural NSW is operating in a way that not only encourages individuals to continue with their radicalisation but it also weakens the anti-radicalisation and anti-sectarian campaigns.
My hope is that you will address our concerns and perhaps explain to us why we are not able to receive even small amounts of funding. These grants would help us continue the spread of harmony and anti-radicalisation messages.
Yours sincerely
Jamal Daoud
President, Social Justice Network
Tuesday, November 15, 2016
Authorities breach their own regulations: the funding of extreme organisations is an example
Anyone who works or deals with civil society and the way it is funded will know that any NGO that interferes in elections are banned from public funding. The philosophy behind this is very simple: public funding should not be used by the government of the day to sway voters to vote for its party, candidates and agenda.
In an indirect way, the government of the day uses public money to persuade voters to vote for them.
The government of the day is allowed to spend public money to publicise their services and newly introduced legislations and their impact on voters’ lives.
Such practices were heavily criticised by all opposition parties, however the same parties once in government were more than happy to keep this practice going.
Since federation, no NGO that campaigned during election time received public funding. The only exception was made for some Muslim extreme organisations.
This process of excluding extremist organisation from such regulations was started by the Howard government but was later adopted also by Labor and subsequently by Labor-Greens governments.
It is worth mentioning some facts in detail.
The Lebanese Moslem Association (LMA), prior to 2005, never applied for public funding. The association depended on donations from community members and foreign embassies (Saudi Arabia top of the list). LMA knew too well that due to their extreme conservative agendas and their heavy involvement in local politics, no public funding would ever be granted to their association.
The LMA and the majority of Muslim organisations and active members were mainly managed by Labor members of Muslim communities.
Voting or even supporting Liberals or Greens was out of the question.
The Liberals were known to be anti-Muslim, anti-multiculturalism, anti-Palestine, pro-US wars (mainly Muslim countries) and anti-public service.
The Greens with their “liberal” views on drugs and family policies didn’t go well among conservative Muslims.
Then the Liberals infiltrated the LMA by offering millions of dollars in public funding to organise and manage community services. The strategy was simple: “we give you money in return you spread lies about Australian politics”
The role of LMA was to send out the message that Labor was becoming similar to Liberals. In simple terms the message was: since both Labor and Liberals are the same let’s vote for the party that gives us more money!
This was never about the interests of the community like getting better policies. It was all about the wealth and status of a few members only. At the end of the day the relationship with the Liberal party over two decades did not bring any benefit to the community including integration in the society and respect.
Labor on the other hand panicked and instead of challenging the legality of funding organisations that have a strong political interest, decided to match the Liberals.
When Liberals granted LMA around $2 million in 2006 over a period of 3 years, Labor tried to match this with a larger amount on state level. While it worked for LMA and its leadership, as they became both rich and influential, this practice sent a very serious and alarming precedent.
Our democracy became for sale on even cheaper and larger scale.
This precedent sent a message: a community organisation should associate with one of the big parties to secure funding. Democracy can go to hell.
We, at Social Justice Network, never applied for public funding because we knew the regulations of no public funding for politically motivated and active organisations.
We were offered funding early 2010 but only if we stopped our campaigns against the Labor government policies on refugees’ rights, Palestine and anti-war. We refused the offer as we continued our campaign in line with our philosophy and mission statement.
After the regulations were watered down and LMA together with other politically active organisations (mainly of Muslim extremist) got a lot of public funding (tens of millions of dollars annually), we applied for some funding.
After all, if associations like LMA got so much money we couldn’t see any reason why we would not be granted a smaller sum.
With this in mind we applied for a $25,000 grant to help us fight extremism in our society. Our application was refused. We applied for a second one for only $5,000. This application was simply ignored.
At present we are waiting to hear on our third application to grant us $30,000 to help new migrants and refugees find work. Since we are not aligned to any major party we expect our application to end up in a rubbish bin.
Our organisation has one of two options if we want to continue our work.
Align ourselves with one of the major parties or become an extremist organisation and support terrorism in Syria, Iraq and Australia.
Apparently these are the only two requisites needed in order to be granted millions of dollars.
To find out the credibility of our claim one has to just go and check the list of organisations funded through Multiculturalism NSW.
And our authorities still ask “where did all this radicalisation come from...!!!”
Who will challenge the two major parties on their violation of our constitution?
In an indirect way, the government of the day uses public money to persuade voters to vote for them.
The government of the day is allowed to spend public money to publicise their services and newly introduced legislations and their impact on voters’ lives.
Such practices were heavily criticised by all opposition parties, however the same parties once in government were more than happy to keep this practice going.
Since federation, no NGO that campaigned during election time received public funding. The only exception was made for some Muslim extreme organisations.
This process of excluding extremist organisation from such regulations was started by the Howard government but was later adopted also by Labor and subsequently by Labor-Greens governments.
It is worth mentioning some facts in detail.
The Lebanese Moslem Association (LMA), prior to 2005, never applied for public funding. The association depended on donations from community members and foreign embassies (Saudi Arabia top of the list). LMA knew too well that due to their extreme conservative agendas and their heavy involvement in local politics, no public funding would ever be granted to their association.
The LMA and the majority of Muslim organisations and active members were mainly managed by Labor members of Muslim communities.
Voting or even supporting Liberals or Greens was out of the question.
The Liberals were known to be anti-Muslim, anti-multiculturalism, anti-Palestine, pro-US wars (mainly Muslim countries) and anti-public service.
The Greens with their “liberal” views on drugs and family policies didn’t go well among conservative Muslims.
Then the Liberals infiltrated the LMA by offering millions of dollars in public funding to organise and manage community services. The strategy was simple: “we give you money in return you spread lies about Australian politics”
The role of LMA was to send out the message that Labor was becoming similar to Liberals. In simple terms the message was: since both Labor and Liberals are the same let’s vote for the party that gives us more money!
This was never about the interests of the community like getting better policies. It was all about the wealth and status of a few members only. At the end of the day the relationship with the Liberal party over two decades did not bring any benefit to the community including integration in the society and respect.
Labor on the other hand panicked and instead of challenging the legality of funding organisations that have a strong political interest, decided to match the Liberals.
When Liberals granted LMA around $2 million in 2006 over a period of 3 years, Labor tried to match this with a larger amount on state level. While it worked for LMA and its leadership, as they became both rich and influential, this practice sent a very serious and alarming precedent.
Our democracy became for sale on even cheaper and larger scale.
This precedent sent a message: a community organisation should associate with one of the big parties to secure funding. Democracy can go to hell.
We, at Social Justice Network, never applied for public funding because we knew the regulations of no public funding for politically motivated and active organisations.
We were offered funding early 2010 but only if we stopped our campaigns against the Labor government policies on refugees’ rights, Palestine and anti-war. We refused the offer as we continued our campaign in line with our philosophy and mission statement.
After the regulations were watered down and LMA together with other politically active organisations (mainly of Muslim extremist) got a lot of public funding (tens of millions of dollars annually), we applied for some funding.
After all, if associations like LMA got so much money we couldn’t see any reason why we would not be granted a smaller sum.
With this in mind we applied for a $25,000 grant to help us fight extremism in our society. Our application was refused. We applied for a second one for only $5,000. This application was simply ignored.
At present we are waiting to hear on our third application to grant us $30,000 to help new migrants and refugees find work. Since we are not aligned to any major party we expect our application to end up in a rubbish bin.
Our organisation has one of two options if we want to continue our work.
Align ourselves with one of the major parties or become an extremist organisation and support terrorism in Syria, Iraq and Australia.
Apparently these are the only two requisites needed in order to be granted millions of dollars.
To find out the credibility of our claim one has to just go and check the list of organisations funded through Multiculturalism NSW.
And our authorities still ask “where did all this radicalisation come from...!!!”
Who will challenge the two major parties on their violation of our constitution?
Thursday, November 10, 2016
Trump’s win: lessons on how to defy media and lobby groups
Just one day before the US presidential election, the Channel 7 journalist in USA was vending clear lies about the presidential race. The journalist declared that “all minorities had abandoned Trump” referring to the last minute rally attended by Trump. Funny thing when stating this, you could clearly see that the crowd in the background were more women than men. There were more Latinos and other coloured people than white. There were also a lot of Muslims.
I was sure that Trump would win. The media frenzy was a clear indication that faceless forces were on their way to be defeated. This is why the lying had intensified in the last few days. The last opinion poll, for example, indicated that Clinton’s chance of winning had mounted to nearly 90%.
I suddenly remembered how Tripoli (Libya) fell. It succumbed under the rubble of media lies and deceptions. Qatari based Al Jazeera broadcasted everywhere that Tripoli had fallen to “opposition” 24 hours before any NATO soldier set foot in the city. The announcement of the fall of Tripoli had a huge impact on the Libyan army which was there to defend the city. Thinking that their “regime” collapsed and not wanting to face their fate, they immediately abandoned their posts.
The same trick happened during the US invasion of Iraq, 2003.
The strategy was to me clear: supporters of Trump will feel betrayed and defeated, so they will not go to vote. And Hillary will win.
I will talk about the lessons we need to learn from Trump’s win, and apply these lessons here in Australian. We need to learn these lessons to break free from the same “faceless” forces that are keeping us in a political deadlock.
These faceless forces are maintaining the status quo by using the “divide and disgruntle” policy.
The real forces of change have always been defeated and have been left feeling helpless thanks to media blackout, constant attacks by institutions and deprivation of funds (public and private).
The consequence of such attacks would result in either abandoning such ideas and join one of the regressive forces or simply stay silent and give up.
It’s hard to believe that our two longest serving PMs Robert Menzies and John Howard, were also the dumbest. Instead, one of the shortest serving PMs was the great Gough Whitlam. This could not be achieved without the practices of faceless forces who manage all the affairs in this country and around the world.
Between 2013 and early 2015 I had the media chasing me for interviews and seeking comments on different news issues. At one stage, when I stopped answering their calls, the media showed up on my doorstep. I was always happy to be available and answer any questions.
In 2015 I ran in the NSW state election. I thought that with all my media contacts I could easily gain a considerable number of votes. I naively thought that in return for all the help I had given them in the past, they would help me get my message through to the public.
Immediately before the election the media blackout was total. My campaign could not get any message through any media outlet. Even local and ethnic media implemented a total blackout.
Even Channel 7 with whom I had worked very closely shut its channels of communication. Not even after providing them with all the information and breaking news stories, they were unable or unwilling to return the favour.
The total media blackout affected our fundraising efforts and the result was clear on polling day.
I mentioned Channel 7 as they were very active in promoting Pauline Hanson and helped her in the 2016 election.
As we know now, Channel 7 deliberately invited Pauline Hanson several times prior to 2016 Federal Election and conducted extensive media interviews with her. Not only this. Chanel 7 paid Pauline Hanson large sums of money in return for her appearance on their programs (especially on popular Sunrise). This money was used to finance her election campaign.
Pauline Hanson was the perfect candidate to be presented as a “changing force”: unintelligent and without a real agenda. Even her claim of fighting against Muslim extremist has just been talk and not action. I contacted her many times to offer my help but still to this day I have not received any communication from her.
The same faceless forces so desperate to shut our voice since 2007 threatened to sue us if we continued our campaign to boycott the NSW election.
Since 2007 we have been under constant attacks of various nature such as vandalism, physical attacks on our volunteers, death threats and even going as far as conspiring with a foreign power to limit our movement around the world. The public has a right to know and would be interested in finding out how much effort was put in to conspire against the strongest voice fighting extremism in our society. The media has kept this quiet. Any individual at this stage would just think it’s too hard and give up the fight. This is exactly what faceless forces want.
Without the help of the media especially Channel 7 Sunrise, there was no chance of Pauline Hanson returning to politics and getting elected.
One time I talked to former Labor heavy weight Laurie Ferguson, about the rising forces in Australian politics (like the Greens party). He told me word for word “we allow these forces to grow to certain size as good decoration for democracy”. This is why the faceless forces prefer to allow Pauline Hanson and Greens party to grow, but not us. We proved to them that we will not accept to be just a decoration for democracy. The Syrian crisis made them confident of this. When all political forces accepted the CIA lies about Syrian “revolution”, we were the only dissent.
Now back to Trump’s win. The faceless forces tried their best to defeat him: media blackout of his messages, media lies about him, opinion polls fabrications and no donations from big corporations.
So how could he defeat them?
Simple answer: he took matter in his own hands.
With $100 million campaign budget, he managed to get his message to the US voters through unconventional ways. Campaign workers, social media, paid ads and staged rallies and forums. He exposed the system managed by unelected faceless forces.
We believe Trump’s win will send a chilling message: change is possible.
But we need to be persistent, stubborn, well-organised and able to get enough funding. What we are witnessing here is a glimpse of hope. The seed has been planted. We just need to persist with getting the message out through social media exposing the lies and conspiracies of faceless forces working against us.
Orison Swett Marden once wrote: “the more one sows, the greater the harvest “.
Would Australians believe that the authorities and other organisations of faceless forces conspired against the most vocal anti-terrorism campaigner to try and break the growing movement? Details soon...
I was sure that Trump would win. The media frenzy was a clear indication that faceless forces were on their way to be defeated. This is why the lying had intensified in the last few days. The last opinion poll, for example, indicated that Clinton’s chance of winning had mounted to nearly 90%.
I suddenly remembered how Tripoli (Libya) fell. It succumbed under the rubble of media lies and deceptions. Qatari based Al Jazeera broadcasted everywhere that Tripoli had fallen to “opposition” 24 hours before any NATO soldier set foot in the city. The announcement of the fall of Tripoli had a huge impact on the Libyan army which was there to defend the city. Thinking that their “regime” collapsed and not wanting to face their fate, they immediately abandoned their posts.
The same trick happened during the US invasion of Iraq, 2003.
The strategy was to me clear: supporters of Trump will feel betrayed and defeated, so they will not go to vote. And Hillary will win.
I will talk about the lessons we need to learn from Trump’s win, and apply these lessons here in Australian. We need to learn these lessons to break free from the same “faceless” forces that are keeping us in a political deadlock.
These faceless forces are maintaining the status quo by using the “divide and disgruntle” policy.
The real forces of change have always been defeated and have been left feeling helpless thanks to media blackout, constant attacks by institutions and deprivation of funds (public and private).
The consequence of such attacks would result in either abandoning such ideas and join one of the regressive forces or simply stay silent and give up.
It’s hard to believe that our two longest serving PMs Robert Menzies and John Howard, were also the dumbest. Instead, one of the shortest serving PMs was the great Gough Whitlam. This could not be achieved without the practices of faceless forces who manage all the affairs in this country and around the world.
Between 2013 and early 2015 I had the media chasing me for interviews and seeking comments on different news issues. At one stage, when I stopped answering their calls, the media showed up on my doorstep. I was always happy to be available and answer any questions.
In 2015 I ran in the NSW state election. I thought that with all my media contacts I could easily gain a considerable number of votes. I naively thought that in return for all the help I had given them in the past, they would help me get my message through to the public.
Immediately before the election the media blackout was total. My campaign could not get any message through any media outlet. Even local and ethnic media implemented a total blackout.
Even Channel 7 with whom I had worked very closely shut its channels of communication. Not even after providing them with all the information and breaking news stories, they were unable or unwilling to return the favour.
The total media blackout affected our fundraising efforts and the result was clear on polling day.
I mentioned Channel 7 as they were very active in promoting Pauline Hanson and helped her in the 2016 election.
As we know now, Channel 7 deliberately invited Pauline Hanson several times prior to 2016 Federal Election and conducted extensive media interviews with her. Not only this. Chanel 7 paid Pauline Hanson large sums of money in return for her appearance on their programs (especially on popular Sunrise). This money was used to finance her election campaign.
Pauline Hanson was the perfect candidate to be presented as a “changing force”: unintelligent and without a real agenda. Even her claim of fighting against Muslim extremist has just been talk and not action. I contacted her many times to offer my help but still to this day I have not received any communication from her.
The same faceless forces so desperate to shut our voice since 2007 threatened to sue us if we continued our campaign to boycott the NSW election.
Since 2007 we have been under constant attacks of various nature such as vandalism, physical attacks on our volunteers, death threats and even going as far as conspiring with a foreign power to limit our movement around the world. The public has a right to know and would be interested in finding out how much effort was put in to conspire against the strongest voice fighting extremism in our society. The media has kept this quiet. Any individual at this stage would just think it’s too hard and give up the fight. This is exactly what faceless forces want.
Without the help of the media especially Channel 7 Sunrise, there was no chance of Pauline Hanson returning to politics and getting elected.
One time I talked to former Labor heavy weight Laurie Ferguson, about the rising forces in Australian politics (like the Greens party). He told me word for word “we allow these forces to grow to certain size as good decoration for democracy”. This is why the faceless forces prefer to allow Pauline Hanson and Greens party to grow, but not us. We proved to them that we will not accept to be just a decoration for democracy. The Syrian crisis made them confident of this. When all political forces accepted the CIA lies about Syrian “revolution”, we were the only dissent.
Now back to Trump’s win. The faceless forces tried their best to defeat him: media blackout of his messages, media lies about him, opinion polls fabrications and no donations from big corporations.
So how could he defeat them?
Simple answer: he took matter in his own hands.
With $100 million campaign budget, he managed to get his message to the US voters through unconventional ways. Campaign workers, social media, paid ads and staged rallies and forums. He exposed the system managed by unelected faceless forces.
We believe Trump’s win will send a chilling message: change is possible.
But we need to be persistent, stubborn, well-organised and able to get enough funding. What we are witnessing here is a glimpse of hope. The seed has been planted. We just need to persist with getting the message out through social media exposing the lies and conspiracies of faceless forces working against us.
Orison Swett Marden once wrote: “the more one sows, the greater the harvest “.
Would Australians believe that the authorities and other organisations of faceless forces conspired against the most vocal anti-terrorism campaigner to try and break the growing movement? Details soon...
Wednesday, November 09, 2016
Trump's win: exactly as I predicted a month ago...
Despite the media’s overwhelming propaganda in favour of Clinton, I am proud to say that I was almost the only commentator to predict Trump would do better than Clinton. It seems according to early results, Trump is the favourite to win the presidential race.
Unlike all the fabrications and media lies that were fed to the public on how Clinton was going to win comfortably, I insisted this was not the case.
The Americans are fed up with Clinton and her clans’ bloody adventures in waging wars and supporting terrorist organisations and their backers in Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
We seriously believe that Trump as president will work very hard to extinguish the fires lit up by Obama-Clinton around the world: from the Middle East to Ukraine and Eastern Europe. The cold war with Russia could be eased under Trump.
Unlike media lies, Trump’s win is very good news for millions of Arabs and Muslims around the world, including USA. The Trump rhetoric will see more needed crack down on Wahhabi extremists inside US and around the world.
Unlike all the fabrications and media lies that were fed to the public on how Clinton was going to win comfortably, I insisted this was not the case.
The Americans are fed up with Clinton and her clans’ bloody adventures in waging wars and supporting terrorist organisations and their backers in Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
We seriously believe that Trump as president will work very hard to extinguish the fires lit up by Obama-Clinton around the world: from the Middle East to Ukraine and Eastern Europe. The cold war with Russia could be eased under Trump.
Unlike media lies, Trump’s win is very good news for millions of Arabs and Muslims around the world, including USA. The Trump rhetoric will see more needed crack down on Wahhabi extremists inside US and around the world.
Thursday, October 13, 2016
The real perpetrators of yesterday’s terrorist plot: authorities and media..!
Australia is in shock after the arrest of 2 terrorist in Bankstown yesterday. Media and authorities are wasting time discussing details of little importance. Names, ages and motives of the perpetrators are of really little concern. The fundamental question that should be asked, especially if we want to prevent more plots and attacks, is: who radicalized them and who recruited them?
We now know that one of the teenagers was known to the authorities for his violent actions and extreme views. Why is no one asking the right questions? Where was he radicalised and by who? Who recruited him? Was he undergoing a de-radicalisation program and which one?
Once we know the answer to all these questions we can take the steps needed to stop the recruiting and brainwashing of others.
Two years of government funded de-radicalisation programs, costing tax payers millions of dollars, has achieved little or nothing. An evaluation on such programs is urgently needed.
I was the first to raise concerns over how the authorities’ were handling extremism. With such concerns in mind I helped draft a letter and collected many signatures from different anti-extremism experts and campaigners. We wanted to alert authorities they were on the wrong path in dealing with radicalisation and terrorist issues.
The letter explained how the authorities were consulting with the wrong people. We expressed our concerns about the de-radicalisation funding and how it would be spent on the wrong organisations.
The course taken by our authorities soon after, was both dangerous and disappointing.
Suddenly authorities and media started to promote extremist and terrorist sympathisers as the champions of de-radicalisation. They gave a voice to extremists like Shady Al Sulieman, Jamal Rifi, Keysar Trad and the so-called Australian Mufti.
These are the same people who actively participated in spreading extremism and radicalisation in Australia, through their active role in supporting terrorists in Syria.
We also tried to explain to the authorities and media that supporting terrorism in Syria would actually cause radicalisation and terrorism back home.
All real experts on the matter know too well that all radicalisation and terrorism in Australia is directly and indirectly inspired by the terrorism in Syria.
Not only our letter and various warnings were ignored, suddenly I became number one enemy. For this reason authorities refused to consult us and support our anti radical efforts. This is why Multicultural NSW refused to grant us even the small sum of $5,000 but continued to grant millions of dollars to the extremist organisations.
The media who consider persons such as Jamal Rifi and Keysar Trad to be champions of peace, should explain to us how they reached such conclusion.
The government also needs to explain their strange policy in engaging extremist and inviting them to Iftars and private consultations.
Multicultural NSW and the Attorney-General’s office, should issue a detailed media release outlining where the hundreds of millions of dollars of de-radicalisation programs were spent and what did they achieve.
Multicultural NSW needs to send us (Social Justice Network) a letter explaining the reason why our $5000 request for a grant was rejected.
Instead, Multicultural NSW granted $750,000 to an extreme organisation which often broadcasted lectures by number 1 Al-Qaeda terrorist Anwar Al Awlaki who was later killed by a US drone.
If our authorities and media don’t change their approach soon, I am afraid we will face difficult times. Next time we could have someone’s head roll in the street of Bankstown or Lakemba beheaded by another brainwashed teenager.
We now know that one of the teenagers was known to the authorities for his violent actions and extreme views. Why is no one asking the right questions? Where was he radicalised and by who? Who recruited him? Was he undergoing a de-radicalisation program and which one?
Once we know the answer to all these questions we can take the steps needed to stop the recruiting and brainwashing of others.
Two years of government funded de-radicalisation programs, costing tax payers millions of dollars, has achieved little or nothing. An evaluation on such programs is urgently needed.
I was the first to raise concerns over how the authorities’ were handling extremism. With such concerns in mind I helped draft a letter and collected many signatures from different anti-extremism experts and campaigners. We wanted to alert authorities they were on the wrong path in dealing with radicalisation and terrorist issues.
The letter explained how the authorities were consulting with the wrong people. We expressed our concerns about the de-radicalisation funding and how it would be spent on the wrong organisations.
The course taken by our authorities soon after, was both dangerous and disappointing.
Suddenly authorities and media started to promote extremist and terrorist sympathisers as the champions of de-radicalisation. They gave a voice to extremists like Shady Al Sulieman, Jamal Rifi, Keysar Trad and the so-called Australian Mufti.
These are the same people who actively participated in spreading extremism and radicalisation in Australia, through their active role in supporting terrorists in Syria.
We also tried to explain to the authorities and media that supporting terrorism in Syria would actually cause radicalisation and terrorism back home.
All real experts on the matter know too well that all radicalisation and terrorism in Australia is directly and indirectly inspired by the terrorism in Syria.
Not only our letter and various warnings were ignored, suddenly I became number one enemy. For this reason authorities refused to consult us and support our anti radical efforts. This is why Multicultural NSW refused to grant us even the small sum of $5,000 but continued to grant millions of dollars to the extremist organisations.
The media who consider persons such as Jamal Rifi and Keysar Trad to be champions of peace, should explain to us how they reached such conclusion.
The government also needs to explain their strange policy in engaging extremist and inviting them to Iftars and private consultations.
Multicultural NSW and the Attorney-General’s office, should issue a detailed media release outlining where the hundreds of millions of dollars of de-radicalisation programs were spent and what did they achieve.
Multicultural NSW needs to send us (Social Justice Network) a letter explaining the reason why our $5000 request for a grant was rejected.
Instead, Multicultural NSW granted $750,000 to an extreme organisation which often broadcasted lectures by number 1 Al-Qaeda terrorist Anwar Al Awlaki who was later killed by a US drone.
If our authorities and media don’t change their approach soon, I am afraid we will face difficult times. Next time we could have someone’s head roll in the street of Bankstown or Lakemba beheaded by another brainwashed teenager.
Multicultural NSW: when authorities encourage radicalisation!
After the first terrorist attack on Australian soil in December 2014, our authorities admitted we could be facing a problem of radicalisation and possible terrorism.
Journalists who in the past ignored such problems started contacting me and telling me that I was right in saying all along about our growing extremism in our suburbs. For the past 3 years I had voiced my concerns about the growing number of radicalised Muslims.
For the first time in many years, local politicians had started praising my work and my ideas. Even liberal politician Greg Laundy had asked me to visit him at his office to discuss such issues.
At the time, Social Justice Network was carrying out a de-radicalisation program called “Together We Live”. We were bringing together people from different backgrounds and religious beliefs to discuss the sectarian tensions arising in our suburbs. The meetings were held at people’s homes where we would discuss various issues over coffee.
Encouraged by the positive message from our authorities and media, we decided to take our project “Together We Live” to the next level.
State and federal government announced an increase in funding for de-radicalisation programs. The government allocated 8 million dollars.
Social Justice Network decided to apply for a sum of $25,000. This would allow us to increase our meetings taking minutes to document and publish recommendations. We were sure we would be granted the money since we are a well recognised organisation fighting against extremism and have experts on radicalisation.
Our application was rejected! We were shocked to receive a letter from Multicultural NSW rejecting our application on the grounds that we didn’t provide a financial statement.
A financial statement is required from organisations that have previously received public funding. Our organisation never received any public funding which meant we were not required to lodge a financial statement.
It appears that our rejection was merely a political one.
We were taken aback when we found out that Multicultural NSW granted 8 million dollars to organisations that some of them played a vital role in spreading radical Islam and to organisations who knew nothing about extremism.
A grant of $750,000 was given to the Lebanese Muslim Association. This organisation is known for holding radical Islamic ideology. This organisation was at the centre of many extreme “fatwas” including forbidding Muslims to wish Christians Merry Christmas and happy Easter.
(http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/no-merriness-here-mosque-puts-fatwa-on-christmas-20121222-2bsk2.html)
The organisation allowed known extreme preachers to deliver extreme ceremonies in its mosque (http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/alqaeda-at-city-mosque-20100414-se8g.html) .
We applied again, this time only for $5000. Surely after finding out the list of all the extremist organisations that got hundreds of thousands in grants, our small amount would be approved.
This time Multicultural NSW didn’t reject our application. It just chose to ignore it in violation of procedures of official dealings.
On one hand we have our authorities publicly question the increased levels of radicalisation in Australia. On the other hand we have Multicultural NSW granting millions to the organisations guilty of spreading extremism.
Multicultural NSW participated in spreading extremism by granting millions of dollars to extreme organisations. One of the individuals arrested over a terror plot was going through a de-radicalisation program (http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/boy-16-arrested-over-anzac-day-terror-plot-was-in-deradicalisation-program-20160426-goexwm.html ), most likely administered by Multicultural NSW.
Do we stand a chance of defeating terrorism? I doubt it.
When an organisation like ours that has been fighting extremism for years is refused a $5,000 grant but at the same time extreme organisations are granted 8 million dollars, one needs to ask whose side the authorities are on.
More on authorities support for extremists on our Youtube channel (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YEKMmEajEo&feature=youtu.be) or my blog: www.jamaldaoud.blogspot.com
Journalists who in the past ignored such problems started contacting me and telling me that I was right in saying all along about our growing extremism in our suburbs. For the past 3 years I had voiced my concerns about the growing number of radicalised Muslims.
For the first time in many years, local politicians had started praising my work and my ideas. Even liberal politician Greg Laundy had asked me to visit him at his office to discuss such issues.
At the time, Social Justice Network was carrying out a de-radicalisation program called “Together We Live”. We were bringing together people from different backgrounds and religious beliefs to discuss the sectarian tensions arising in our suburbs. The meetings were held at people’s homes where we would discuss various issues over coffee.
Encouraged by the positive message from our authorities and media, we decided to take our project “Together We Live” to the next level.
State and federal government announced an increase in funding for de-radicalisation programs. The government allocated 8 million dollars.
Social Justice Network decided to apply for a sum of $25,000. This would allow us to increase our meetings taking minutes to document and publish recommendations. We were sure we would be granted the money since we are a well recognised organisation fighting against extremism and have experts on radicalisation.
Our application was rejected! We were shocked to receive a letter from Multicultural NSW rejecting our application on the grounds that we didn’t provide a financial statement.
A financial statement is required from organisations that have previously received public funding. Our organisation never received any public funding which meant we were not required to lodge a financial statement.
It appears that our rejection was merely a political one.
We were taken aback when we found out that Multicultural NSW granted 8 million dollars to organisations that some of them played a vital role in spreading radical Islam and to organisations who knew nothing about extremism.
A grant of $750,000 was given to the Lebanese Muslim Association. This organisation is known for holding radical Islamic ideology. This organisation was at the centre of many extreme “fatwas” including forbidding Muslims to wish Christians Merry Christmas and happy Easter.
(http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/no-merriness-here-mosque-puts-fatwa-on-christmas-20121222-2bsk2.html)
The organisation allowed known extreme preachers to deliver extreme ceremonies in its mosque (http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/alqaeda-at-city-mosque-20100414-se8g.html) .
We applied again, this time only for $5000. Surely after finding out the list of all the extremist organisations that got hundreds of thousands in grants, our small amount would be approved.
This time Multicultural NSW didn’t reject our application. It just chose to ignore it in violation of procedures of official dealings.
On one hand we have our authorities publicly question the increased levels of radicalisation in Australia. On the other hand we have Multicultural NSW granting millions to the organisations guilty of spreading extremism.
Multicultural NSW participated in spreading extremism by granting millions of dollars to extreme organisations. One of the individuals arrested over a terror plot was going through a de-radicalisation program (http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/boy-16-arrested-over-anzac-day-terror-plot-was-in-deradicalisation-program-20160426-goexwm.html ), most likely administered by Multicultural NSW.
Do we stand a chance of defeating terrorism? I doubt it.
When an organisation like ours that has been fighting extremism for years is refused a $5,000 grant but at the same time extreme organisations are granted 8 million dollars, one needs to ask whose side the authorities are on.
More on authorities support for extremists on our Youtube channel (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YEKMmEajEo&feature=youtu.be) or my blog: www.jamaldaoud.blogspot.com
Monday, October 10, 2016
Meeting Dr Ali Haidar: Gulf States offered me money to defect...!!!
On Wednesday 21 September 2016 I had arranged a meeting with the minister in Damascus. The meeting was part of our 3rd International Peace Tour to Syria.
Our group arrived at the ministry’s offices around 1pm. We were welcomed by Dr Ali’s aid and taken into the meeting room. The minister arrived and shook hands with each participant giving everyone a very warm welcome. He apologised for being late explaining that in the current circumstances it was very difficult to plan the day.
We completely understood the situation as we witnessed in first person. Check points are everywhere around the city. This week alone, terrorist tried to attack Damascus from Jober. They only managed to advance a few meters but this was enough for a sniper to kill innocent residents who were in the vicinity of Abbasyeen square. One of the victims was a poor taxi driver who was shot dead and was still in his taxi. The snipers made it difficult for the authorities to retrieve his body and the damaged taxi.
After the warm welcome, the minister explained to us he didn’t want to deliver a possible boring speech and was happier to answer instead, any questions we had for him.
The first question went straight to the point: how can the opposition be part of the government.
Dr Ali:
“At the beginning of the crisis, we shared the views of the opposition and their demands towards the government. One of the main one was the fight against corruption, changes to ensure more democracy and transparency in the government. But then we noticed the crisis took a totally different path
In July 2011, the Syrian government declared it was open to any suggestions. A consultation summit was called to discuss the needed reforms. Our party advocated for other opposition groups to attend the summit and give the government the opportunity to show leadership and willingness to listen.
The majority of the opposition parties instead, called for a boycott of the summit. Our party was also contacted and asked not to participate.
The summit was convened and lead by the president’s former deputy, Faourq Al Sharaa. The government was eager to prove their willingness to listen and cooperate.”
It is at this point of the meeting that Dr Ali dropped a bomb-shell.
“Just before the summit, we were offered large sums of money by Qatar to boycott the summit and the reconciliation process. When I refused the offer of money, the threats came and my son was murdered.
The assassination of my son gave us an indication of the reality of the crisis.
It is at this stage that we decided the best solution to deal with the crisis was to form a government of National Unity. Only united we could deal with the crisis.
We were offered different portfolios in the new cabinet. I came up with the idea of creating a ministry for national reconciliation. The president agreed and invited me to become the minister”
Mark, one of our participants from Canada, asked the minister if the 2011 drought in Syria was behind one of the reasons for this crisis and the “uprising”.
Again, Dr Ali smiled and replied:
“There were a lot of premeditated reasons, but the drought wasn’t one of them.
I want to be clear. The current crisis would have happened even if we had a perfect government. The reason behind the current crisis is related to ensuring the security of Israel.
After Israel’s defeat in the Lebanon war in 2006 and Gaza in 2009 by both Lebanese and Palestinian resistance, Israel supporters thought the best chance to secure the state of Israel, would be to suffocate the resistance and their supporters. This is the reason of the crisis in Syria.”
Q.How are reconciliation efforts going?
Dr Ali:
“At the beginning we faced criticism from all sides. Opposition were accusing us of undermining their requests and government supporters were accusing us of betraying the state. But now both sides have accepted us.
There have been over 20,000 rebels who agreed to lay down their arms and end the rebellion. There even is a special battalion of ex-rebels who are currently fighting with the Syrian army against terrorists. Many of them were killed fighting against terrorists.
There are more than 50 areas under reconciliation agreements, including Darya recently.”
Q. What about the sanctions?
Dr Ali:
“Sanctions are a very painful issue. It is devastating the lives of ordinary Syrians.
As a minister, I am not directly affected by sanctions and I continue to work as normal. It is the ordinary Syrians who are directly hit by these inhumane and illegal sanctions.
Such sanctions have negatively affected our health and education system. We are short in many foods and medicines.
The sanctions were put in place to push the Syrian people into poverty and miserable conditions to encourage an uprise. This has failed and today more than ever the Syrian people are determined to stay united.”
The meeting ended.
In conclusion, to understand the current crisis and how it reached this level, we need to ask a vital question. What was Qatar’s role in the Syrian crisis?
Why did Qatar offer millions of dollars to opposition parties to make them refuse to talk with the government?
Many of the opposition, who refused such offer, ended up dead.
I am sure that the Australian media will not pick up this story as it does not fit their narrative on the Syrian crisis.
The Australian media is clearly participating in supporting terrorists in a bid to destabilise the legitimate Syrian government.
Saturday, October 01, 2016
Why the media blackout on our regular visits to Syria
The media circus covering the visit of ex Liberal MP Wyatt Roy to the Iraq frontline, constitutes a big hypocrisy in how the media operates in this country.
The visit, which achieved no goal, revealed no facts and had no clear agenda in helping Iraqis, generated wide media coverage for no obvious reason. The failed politician did not tell us any useful information during his controversial visit to the Kurdish fighters’ posts in Iraq. Until now, we are unaware of the reason behind the visit. It seems to have been more a stunt carried out by a politician wanting to come back in the political arena. No more no less.
So here we have a total media circus frenzy covering a non event, whilst ignoring and forcing a total blackout on our highly informative visit to Syria.
The media is not interested to hear from participants on the situation in the war-torn country and is not interested to hear the voices of ordinary Syrians victims of violence.
The media did not show any interest to hear from participants from more than 8 countries and their observations of what is really happening in Syria and the Middle East. But it was highly interested to cover the story of a dumb politician going to Iraq with absolutely no aim or interest.
The deliberate media blackout on our highly informative visit to Syria had only one agenda, keeping the truth from the Australian people and other people in Western countries.
Returning from Syria recently, I was shocked to watch our media coverage of what is happening in Syria. The media is reporting on something totally different. The truth is so far off that it’s like watching a Hollywood movie in a made up world.
A clear example of one of the big deceits perpetrated by our media, is the “safe passage” for civilians wishing to leave Eastern Aleppo suburbs. They chose to ignore the fact that the Syrian government and Russia have declared 5 safe passages more than 2 weeks ago for all civilians who wish to leave. It was the snipers of the terrorist group Jabhat Al Nusra who killed civilians trying to escape.
The media was quick in accusing the Syrian and Russian army for the killing of the civilians totally ignoring the fact that Eastern suburbs of Aleppo are under the control of terrorists from the Jabhat Al Nusra and most of the civilians there are terrorists and their families. The media did not mention the name of Jabhat Al Nusra once!
Our fact finding Syrian peace tours included peace activists and freelance journalists from many countries. Not one of our 3 tours we organised in the last 12 months was ever mentioned in the media.
We filmed testimonies of many ordinary Syrians expressing their support for their government and their president. Ordinary Syrians we interviewed, accused Western countries of financing, training and arming ISIS and Jabhat AL Nusra. Our media is clearly not interested in the truth.
By enforcing a total blackout on our visits to Syria our media continues to deceive the Australian people by hiding the truth of what is really happening in Syria and the Middle East. Such a deception campaign not only has aided terrorists but it has increased the levels of extremism in our society.
And they still ask: where did all this radicalisation come from..?!!!
The visit, which achieved no goal, revealed no facts and had no clear agenda in helping Iraqis, generated wide media coverage for no obvious reason. The failed politician did not tell us any useful information during his controversial visit to the Kurdish fighters’ posts in Iraq. Until now, we are unaware of the reason behind the visit. It seems to have been more a stunt carried out by a politician wanting to come back in the political arena. No more no less.
So here we have a total media circus frenzy covering a non event, whilst ignoring and forcing a total blackout on our highly informative visit to Syria.
The media is not interested to hear from participants on the situation in the war-torn country and is not interested to hear the voices of ordinary Syrians victims of violence.
The media did not show any interest to hear from participants from more than 8 countries and their observations of what is really happening in Syria and the Middle East. But it was highly interested to cover the story of a dumb politician going to Iraq with absolutely no aim or interest.
The deliberate media blackout on our highly informative visit to Syria had only one agenda, keeping the truth from the Australian people and other people in Western countries.
Returning from Syria recently, I was shocked to watch our media coverage of what is happening in Syria. The media is reporting on something totally different. The truth is so far off that it’s like watching a Hollywood movie in a made up world.
A clear example of one of the big deceits perpetrated by our media, is the “safe passage” for civilians wishing to leave Eastern Aleppo suburbs. They chose to ignore the fact that the Syrian government and Russia have declared 5 safe passages more than 2 weeks ago for all civilians who wish to leave. It was the snipers of the terrorist group Jabhat Al Nusra who killed civilians trying to escape.
The media was quick in accusing the Syrian and Russian army for the killing of the civilians totally ignoring the fact that Eastern suburbs of Aleppo are under the control of terrorists from the Jabhat Al Nusra and most of the civilians there are terrorists and their families. The media did not mention the name of Jabhat Al Nusra once!
Our fact finding Syrian peace tours included peace activists and freelance journalists from many countries. Not one of our 3 tours we organised in the last 12 months was ever mentioned in the media.
We filmed testimonies of many ordinary Syrians expressing their support for their government and their president. Ordinary Syrians we interviewed, accused Western countries of financing, training and arming ISIS and Jabhat AL Nusra. Our media is clearly not interested in the truth.
By enforcing a total blackout on our visits to Syria our media continues to deceive the Australian people by hiding the truth of what is really happening in Syria and the Middle East. Such a deception campaign not only has aided terrorists but it has increased the levels of extremism in our society.
And they still ask: where did all this radicalisation come from..?!!!
Thursday, August 18, 2016
Rising Islamophobia: who to blame...!!!
For the last 6 years and since the beginning of terrorist activities in Syria under the banner of “revolution”, I (and many community leaders and activists) were warning of the dire consequences for the current rhetoric on the issue. The major concern for us was that such rhetoric would lead to a deep division in the society and inevitable skyrocketing Islamophobia. We also warned that official support for radical elements in the society will increase the actual possibility of imminent terrorist activities in the country. This would help the radicals establish networks this way spreading their extreme philosophies.
Our warnings fell on deaf ears!
Now and after the revelation of Centrelink’s payments to ISIS terrorists, authorities need to take major steps.
Scandals such as this one and previous terrorist activities have greatly helped the increase of Islamophobia never experienced before in this country’s history.
We saw the results of this high level of Islamophobia in last month’s Federal election results, where anti-Muslim micro-parties gained big political representation in our parliament.
Thanks to the increase of a divided society, now we are experiencing attacks from both sides and not only in the virtual world.
For the first time in years our authorities arrested neo Nazi activist for planning terrorist attacks against Muslims or pro-Muslim targets.
As a well-known anti-extremism campaigner, I find myself (and I believe many of anti-extremism Muslim activists) in a unique position.
Since the beginning of terrorism in Syria, I was subjected to vicious campaigns of attacks and threats by Wahhabi “Muslim” extremists. These days, the threats and fear is coming from anti-Muslim extremists, for being Muslim.
Not only this. To date and because of my opposition to US-NATO intervention in Syria, authorities are against me. Last year, Australian authorities directed AFP and ABF to target me by subjecting me to a humiliating investigation at the airport. Then AFP lead a major covert operation involving the collection of false testimonies from at least two “community leaders” (actually ASIO informants) and cooperated with some segment of corrupt Lebanese authorities to ban me from entering Lebanon. Such move was hailed as a victory by extremists, which they expressed in messages and comments on my Facebook page.
In answering the dumb question of “who to blame” for this situation of high radicalisation (to the point of imminent terrorist attack) and skyrocketing Islamophobia, the official answer is “Google sheikhs” and “Youtube Imams”.
I am not sure if the authorities classify Centrelink as Google Sheikh? What about classifying Bob Carr as “Youtube Imam”?
Our lives are rapidly degrading because of US ambition to destroy an unfriendly state (Syria). Our lives are under imminent danger of terrorist attacks because of this US dream/plan. And our rights were taken away under the mirage of authorities fight against terrorism, when in fact they were supporting radical elements in the society for the last 6 years.
I see no hope of change in the immediate future.
Our authorities are still conspiring against me because of my opposition to US-NATO destructive plan.
Our PM still invites extremists/godfathers of terrorists for Iftar and has regular consultations on how to fight radicalisation.
Our media is still glorifying the various godfathers of extremism portraying them as “anti-extremism champions”.
Our “human rights organisations” still recognise the work of extremists as exemplary to fight against radicalisation.
Our government departments still fund extremist organisations, but refuse to fund the anti-extremism ones.
And the anti-Muslim extremists still attack all Muslims indiscriminately, for being just Muslims without taking the time to understand the difference.
Soon, we will start a campaign to bring the real perpetrators of this mess into the spotlight.
Watch this space!
Our warnings fell on deaf ears!
Now and after the revelation of Centrelink’s payments to ISIS terrorists, authorities need to take major steps.
Scandals such as this one and previous terrorist activities have greatly helped the increase of Islamophobia never experienced before in this country’s history.
We saw the results of this high level of Islamophobia in last month’s Federal election results, where anti-Muslim micro-parties gained big political representation in our parliament.
Thanks to the increase of a divided society, now we are experiencing attacks from both sides and not only in the virtual world.
For the first time in years our authorities arrested neo Nazi activist for planning terrorist attacks against Muslims or pro-Muslim targets.
As a well-known anti-extremism campaigner, I find myself (and I believe many of anti-extremism Muslim activists) in a unique position.
Since the beginning of terrorism in Syria, I was subjected to vicious campaigns of attacks and threats by Wahhabi “Muslim” extremists. These days, the threats and fear is coming from anti-Muslim extremists, for being Muslim.
Not only this. To date and because of my opposition to US-NATO intervention in Syria, authorities are against me. Last year, Australian authorities directed AFP and ABF to target me by subjecting me to a humiliating investigation at the airport. Then AFP lead a major covert operation involving the collection of false testimonies from at least two “community leaders” (actually ASIO informants) and cooperated with some segment of corrupt Lebanese authorities to ban me from entering Lebanon. Such move was hailed as a victory by extremists, which they expressed in messages and comments on my Facebook page.
In answering the dumb question of “who to blame” for this situation of high radicalisation (to the point of imminent terrorist attack) and skyrocketing Islamophobia, the official answer is “Google sheikhs” and “Youtube Imams”.
I am not sure if the authorities classify Centrelink as Google Sheikh? What about classifying Bob Carr as “Youtube Imam”?
Our lives are rapidly degrading because of US ambition to destroy an unfriendly state (Syria). Our lives are under imminent danger of terrorist attacks because of this US dream/plan. And our rights were taken away under the mirage of authorities fight against terrorism, when in fact they were supporting radical elements in the society for the last 6 years.
I see no hope of change in the immediate future.
Our authorities are still conspiring against me because of my opposition to US-NATO destructive plan.
Our PM still invites extremists/godfathers of terrorists for Iftar and has regular consultations on how to fight radicalisation.
Our media is still glorifying the various godfathers of extremism portraying them as “anti-extremism champions”.
Our “human rights organisations” still recognise the work of extremists as exemplary to fight against radicalisation.
Our government departments still fund extremist organisations, but refuse to fund the anti-extremism ones.
And the anti-Muslim extremists still attack all Muslims indiscriminately, for being just Muslims without taking the time to understand the difference.
Soon, we will start a campaign to bring the real perpetrators of this mess into the spotlight.
Watch this space!
Tuesday, August 09, 2016
نتائج معركة حلب كما توقعتها قبل خمس اعوام: ستهزمون...!!!ِ
في شهر اكتوبر/تشرين اول 2011 التقيت وبالصدفة مع احد قياديي اخوان مسلمي سوريا في العاصمة الاردنية عمان. كنت قادما من طهران بعد المشاركة في مؤتمر للصحفيين المستقلين. القيادي الاخونجي كان زميلا قديما في مهنة الطب البيطري, حيث استقر في عمان بعد فشل مخطط الاخوان الارهابي في سبعينيات وثماننينات القرن الماضي. وبالصدفة كان زميلا لي في عيادة مجاورة لعيادتي في منطقة زيزيا خارج العاصمة عمان.
بعد اعادة التعارف (بعد اكثر من عقد ونصف من مغادرتي للاردن), احببت استطلاع رايه عما يحدث في بلده الام سوريا. كان واثقا في كلامه الواضح "هذه المرة سيسقط النظام وسنصل للسلطة, وخلال اشهر. لدينا كل المعطيات والتطمينات".
عاجلته بسؤال "يعني الامريكي اعطاكم الضمانات والوعود ام الاسرائيلي".
عاجلني بجواب صاعق لم اتوقعه "ليس مهما من اعطانا الوعود المهم تحقيق الهدف".
"حتى لو تحالفتم مع اسرائيل, كما صرح قيادييكم وعلى راسهم البيانوني"
اشتدت دهشتي لصراحته المطلقة "سنتحالف مع الشيطان لاسقاط النظام".
اعدت السؤال من شدة دهشتي "حتى مع اسرائيل".
"قلت لك حتى مع الشيطان"
لم يترك لي مجال للدبلوماسية فبادرته بحدة "هذا سيحصل فقط في احلامكم. كما حدث في الماضي القريب, ستسحقون مرة اخرى. هذه المرة للابد".
كنت قادما من طهران حيث التقيت بعض الاصدقاء من المقربين لصناع القرار هناك. كانوا جميعهم قلقين. كنت اطمع ان احصل على اجابات عن الاسئلة الكثيرة التي حملتها معي لطهران عن الازمة السورية. بدلا من ان اتلقى اي اجابات, ووجهت بعاصفة من الاسئلة على راسها "هل سيصمد النظام ام يتفكك, كما حدث في ليبيا".
الكل في طهران كان يدرك حجم المؤامرة على سوريا. الخوف الوحيد كان ان تنجح الفتنة الطائفية (كما حدث في الحرب الاهلية اللبنانية) فيتشظى البلد.
في كل لقاءاتي كنت متفائلا. هذا التفاؤل الذي لم يشاطرني فيه احد.
بادرني احد الاعلاميين الايرانيين بالقول "لو خرجت تظاهرات مليونية... لو انشق الجيش على اساس طائفي وديني... لو خاف الوزراء والمسؤولون من مصير كمصير القذافي وكل من وقف في وجه "الربيع العربي" فانشق او هرب او اعتزل... لو حصل اي من هذا فلن تستطيع ايران مساعدة حليفها السوري. بل الخوف الحقيقي هو: لو تخلى الروسي عن حليفه (كما حدث في ليبيا قبل اشهر) وسمح للناتو بالهجوم على سوريا, هل سيملك النظام شجاعه الدخول في حرب ضد الناتو واسرائيل؟"
في مقالة لي في بداية الازمة (فشل مخططات الاطاحة بالنظام السوري وانعكاساته على مستقبل المنطقة, النهار الاسترالية, 12/5/2011), قلت تحليلا ان الروسي لن يتخلى عن سوريا. كما توقعت, وعلى خلاف معظم المحللين, بان سوريا لن تنهار. فسوريا ليست ليبيا القذافي. كما ان الظروف الدولية ليست كتلك ايام الغزو الامريكي للعراق. في مقالتي تلك قلت ان سوريا ستصمد. بل ذهبت الى ابعد من ذلك حيث توقعت ان يسفر انهيار المؤامرة الغربية على سوريا الى تغيرات جذرية في النظام العالمي تعيد بعض التوازن اليه. هذه التغيرات التي بدأت تطل براسها منذ نهاية العام الماضي بالتدخل الروسي العسكري خارج روسيا لاول مرة منذ انهيار الاتحاد السوفياتي. هذا التدخل الذي ارسل رسالة واضحة بان روسيا قد عادت دولة مهمه على الساحه الدولية.
معارك حلب الدائرة الان تعتبر الخاتمة لما جاء في توقعاتي في المقالة التي نشرتها في شهر ايار/مايو 2011. الامريكي الان يزج بكل ما يملك من ارهابيين في المعركة الاخيرة قبل اعلانه الفشل النهائي في المغامرة السورية. فحشد حوالي 30 الف ارهابي وتوحيد اكثر من 20 فصيل عسكري مهم وكبير, الهدف منه محاولة صنع انتصار مهم قد يقلب الوضع الميداني لصالح ادوات المؤامرة الامبريالية.
هذا الهدف مفهوم لدى القيادة السورية وحليفها الروسي. هذا الفهم الذي سيجعل القيادتين السورية والروسية (وبالتعاون مع ايران) مصرتين تماما على احباطه, حتى لو تاتى هذا الاحباط بسياسة الارض المحروقة تماما لمناطق وجود الارهابيين. هذه السياسة التي بدأت منذ الامس بغارات عنيفة واستخدام كل انواع الاسلحة الثقيلة ليس فقط ضد المواقع التي تراجع عنها الجيش السوري وحلفاؤه في الكليات الحربية, بل وفي عقر دار الارهابيين في ادلب وريفها.
قد يقول قائل ان زج امريكا لهذا الكم الهائل من ارهابييها في معركة حلب ما هو الا مرحلة من مراحل الازمة وانها قادرة, حتى لو فشل الهجوم, ان تحشد المزيد من الارهابيين واطلاق عملية اخرى في حلب او في منطقة اخرى.
هذا السيناريو قد يكون منطقيا قبل عام او اثنين. فبعد ان زحف الارهاب الى باريس وبروكسل ولندن وسيدني واورلندو. وبعد انهيار معنويات الارهابيين بعد خساراتهم الهائلة في حمص وريف اللاذقية والغوطة والقلمون والانبار وصلاح الدين وسرت. بعد كل ذلك, فان هزيمة على مستوى صد هجوم ل30 الف ارهابي, سيكون بمثابة القشة التي قصمت ظهر البعير. مع ان البعير هو بعير غبي مغيب العقل والانسانية والاخلاق والشعور. الا ان هزائم متلاحقة على هذا المستوى الاقليمي سيعيد بعض العقل لمن غيبتهم انتصارات الرقة والموصل وسرت الى حد الغيبوبة عن الواقع تماما. كما ان الاوروبي تحت ضغط هائل لمنع مزيد من العمليات الارهابية في قلب عواصمه, لاعطاء مزيد من الوقت لمغامرات جديدة للثنائي المرعب اوباما-كيري.
في رأيي فان معركة حلب محسومة ومنذ ساعاتها الاولى. الجيش السوري وحلفاؤه لا يستطيعون فقدان اي نقطة عسكرية حول حلب. بل ان الازمة وصلت الى نقطة ان تحرير حلب الان هو هدف يتقدم على اي هدف اخر, حتى هدف تحرير غوطة دمشق المهمه. المعركة ليست خسارة نقطة عسكرية هنا او اخرى هناك. القضية الان هو المحافظه على هيبة ما تحقق بعد الاشتراك الروسي في المعارك وبالتالي المحافظة على هيبة الحليف الروسي الطامع للعودة الى مصاف الدول العظمى. كما ان الهدف الاخر هو توجيه رسالة قاطعه للثنائي الارهابي اوباما-كيري الذين مارسا سياسة الخداع والكذب منذ بداية الازمة حتى الان. هذه الرسالة مفادها ان الروسي لن يسمح لهم بتحقيق اي انتصار سيشجعهم على التمادي في سياسة الخداع الاجرامي.
معركة حلب واحباط مخطط واشنطن هناك سيجعل الروسي يوجه رسالة صادمة ومباشرة للامريكي: لن نسمح لكم بالاستمرار في خداعنا.
عندما توقعت منذ البداية ان سوريا ستسحق الارهاب ومخططه, ابتسم زميلي البيطري الاخونجي. كما تعجب بعض المسؤولين في طهران. كما ضحك علي المتطرفون في استراليا. وها هي حلب تثبت مقولتي. وانا واثق من نصر الجيش السوري وحلفاؤه في حلب.
في الحقيقة فان الامريكي اراد معركة حلب ان تكون معركة فاصلة لاهانة الحليف الروسي وبالتالي تاجيل استحقاقات كبرى اهمها ضرورة ارساء دعائم نظام عالمي جديد متعدد الاقطاب. والروسي يريد من معركة حلب القضاء على هذا الهدف الامريكي الشرير وبالتالي تسريع الوصول الى هذه التفاهمات الدولية الوازنة.
وحلب منتصرة قريبا على الارهاب الدولي ومشغليه.
Monday, August 01, 2016
The Greens public infighting: my own observations
After watching the 7:30 Report, Lee Rhiannon has only herself to blame for the public attack by former leader Bob Brown on her including demanding her resignation.
I joined the Greens party 2000 and resigned 2006. Lee was the major reason why I resigned, as I became sure that the party has no vision and no agenda of socio-economic change as they claim by its charter and constitution. The party was talking about one issue: how to win more power. No discussion of how this power will be used to enforce 2 major parties to retreat and accept reforms that will achieve better equality in the society.
After joining the Greens party 2000, I quickly became friend of Lee.
Attending Greens events and meetings, there was one constant face I was seeing. And this person was always vocal on issues of social justice and equality. No matter the subject was, you cannot disagree with her. This was Lee Rhiannon, the MLC in NSW then.
She was very good organiser: she is everywhere, at all events, record details of everything and follows up on previous conversations. This is why she was successful in her empire-building inside the Greens and could sideline many of her rivals.
Contrary to what both Bob Brown and Lee Rhiannon claimed on 7:30 Report, it was very easy to notice the factionalism inside the party since Lee joined the party 1990. One of Lee’s strong supporters told me after 2001 Federal election that she voted and joined the Greens after Lee’s prominence in the party which “broadened the platform of the Greens from simply environmental party to inclusive party on wide-range of social-justice issues”. She in fact created factions inside the Greens to serve its agenda, as she has no credential or understanding of environmental movement and issues.
While I do not agree with Bob Brown’s conservative and pragmatic politics aimed at winning more votes only, but I do not agree that Lee is still Red Melon politician. She is using this rhetoric just to stay in politics. She had dream of becoming the leader of the Greens party, and this is why she stayed in parliament even after the resignation of party’s historical figures of Bob Brown, Christine Milne and Ian Cohen.
Bob Brown agreed with me that Lee is liability on the Greens in general, and in NSW in particular. Her style of breaking all rivals and enforce them to resign, had inherited her lot of enemies. Many of her enemies refused to help with her campaign in 2010 and this year. This is one reason of the low vote for Lee and her ticket.
But in addition to this reason, we believe that our repeated campaigns against her (and the Greens in general) had worked. Since 2007, the Greens popularity did not grow significantly in NSW. Despite the fact that the Greens grew significantly in ALL states, NSW is the only state that the Greens popularity had stalled.
I started to criticise Lee’s empire building and her vicious campaigns against all rivals since 2003. In 2003 state election, I resigned amid the NSW election as party spokesperson for Refugees and Immigration after she interfered with my portfolio. Since then, I became harsh critical of her style of destroying political rivals inside the Greens. In addition to her lack of commitment and vision on social justice issues.
Her undemocratic disgraceful attacks on her colleagues were documented by many of her rivals and activists on many issues.
The first colleague to suffer from her disloyalty was Ian Cohen, when she led vicious campaign to oust him by campaigning to enforce limited tenure principle. The same principle that she never respected.
She branded him with all bad names and descriptions: Zionist, regressive, dead-man walking and unGreen MLC.
In the process, she also opened fire on Inner-West Greens because the convenor of that group, Mersina Tonys-Soulos, did not accept to agree with her on many issues.
After conspiring against Inner-West Greens, Lee involved in bashing Blacktown newly formed group. Lee could not control that group as the convenor David Cunningham refused to back her attempts against Ian Cohen.
Then she conspired against me and group of progressive left members. This included many failed attempts to get rid of me and other progressive people. Most of us decided to leave as we lost the faith in the party and its lack of vision.
(I attach a letter of resignation of one of very respected activist because of her empire-building undemocratic practices to totally control the party)
Lee had shown no compromise in her bid to keep full control of the NSW Greens. Despite the fact that her rivals of other factions’ leaders agreement to play within the rules. She is the only one that crossed all red-lines in her cheap and personal attacks on rivals and her insistence to stay in politics as long as it takes until she could control Australian Greens.
I deeply believe that Lee has no chance to achieve her agenda. She thought that her support of young faces (who were never been Greenies too) will land her to the top job in the Greens. The other unGreen politicians (Adam Bandt, Di Natalie, Sarah Hanson-Young...) turned to be also careerists-opportunists that had their eyes on the leadership of the party.
I also disagree with Bob that Greens had made any significant gains in this election. The election was double dissolution election, where the Greens achieved no full quota in any state if it was normal election. No Greens party in any state got the 14.5% quota required in normal election.
I think that the in-fighting will intensify until Lee will be convinced that she has no chance to win leadership post. But this will have great impact on the Greens. The Greens is deeply lucky party that there is no strong minor left party that could attract significant voters who are currently voting for the Greens as protest against Labor and Liberals. But the big changes resulted in this election is promising that another left alternative is possible within the next 3 years until the next election (if we go to full term).
I joined the Greens party 2000 and resigned 2006. Lee was the major reason why I resigned, as I became sure that the party has no vision and no agenda of socio-economic change as they claim by its charter and constitution. The party was talking about one issue: how to win more power. No discussion of how this power will be used to enforce 2 major parties to retreat and accept reforms that will achieve better equality in the society.
After joining the Greens party 2000, I quickly became friend of Lee.
Attending Greens events and meetings, there was one constant face I was seeing. And this person was always vocal on issues of social justice and equality. No matter the subject was, you cannot disagree with her. This was Lee Rhiannon, the MLC in NSW then.
She was very good organiser: she is everywhere, at all events, record details of everything and follows up on previous conversations. This is why she was successful in her empire-building inside the Greens and could sideline many of her rivals.
Contrary to what both Bob Brown and Lee Rhiannon claimed on 7:30 Report, it was very easy to notice the factionalism inside the party since Lee joined the party 1990. One of Lee’s strong supporters told me after 2001 Federal election that she voted and joined the Greens after Lee’s prominence in the party which “broadened the platform of the Greens from simply environmental party to inclusive party on wide-range of social-justice issues”. She in fact created factions inside the Greens to serve its agenda, as she has no credential or understanding of environmental movement and issues.
While I do not agree with Bob Brown’s conservative and pragmatic politics aimed at winning more votes only, but I do not agree that Lee is still Red Melon politician. She is using this rhetoric just to stay in politics. She had dream of becoming the leader of the Greens party, and this is why she stayed in parliament even after the resignation of party’s historical figures of Bob Brown, Christine Milne and Ian Cohen.
Bob Brown agreed with me that Lee is liability on the Greens in general, and in NSW in particular. Her style of breaking all rivals and enforce them to resign, had inherited her lot of enemies. Many of her enemies refused to help with her campaign in 2010 and this year. This is one reason of the low vote for Lee and her ticket.
But in addition to this reason, we believe that our repeated campaigns against her (and the Greens in general) had worked. Since 2007, the Greens popularity did not grow significantly in NSW. Despite the fact that the Greens grew significantly in ALL states, NSW is the only state that the Greens popularity had stalled.
I started to criticise Lee’s empire building and her vicious campaigns against all rivals since 2003. In 2003 state election, I resigned amid the NSW election as party spokesperson for Refugees and Immigration after she interfered with my portfolio. Since then, I became harsh critical of her style of destroying political rivals inside the Greens. In addition to her lack of commitment and vision on social justice issues.
Her undemocratic disgraceful attacks on her colleagues were documented by many of her rivals and activists on many issues.
The first colleague to suffer from her disloyalty was Ian Cohen, when she led vicious campaign to oust him by campaigning to enforce limited tenure principle. The same principle that she never respected.
She branded him with all bad names and descriptions: Zionist, regressive, dead-man walking and unGreen MLC.
In the process, she also opened fire on Inner-West Greens because the convenor of that group, Mersina Tonys-Soulos, did not accept to agree with her on many issues.
After conspiring against Inner-West Greens, Lee involved in bashing Blacktown newly formed group. Lee could not control that group as the convenor David Cunningham refused to back her attempts against Ian Cohen.
Then she conspired against me and group of progressive left members. This included many failed attempts to get rid of me and other progressive people. Most of us decided to leave as we lost the faith in the party and its lack of vision.
(I attach a letter of resignation of one of very respected activist because of her empire-building undemocratic practices to totally control the party)
Lee had shown no compromise in her bid to keep full control of the NSW Greens. Despite the fact that her rivals of other factions’ leaders agreement to play within the rules. She is the only one that crossed all red-lines in her cheap and personal attacks on rivals and her insistence to stay in politics as long as it takes until she could control Australian Greens.
I deeply believe that Lee has no chance to achieve her agenda. She thought that her support of young faces (who were never been Greenies too) will land her to the top job in the Greens. The other unGreen politicians (Adam Bandt, Di Natalie, Sarah Hanson-Young...) turned to be also careerists-opportunists that had their eyes on the leadership of the party.
I also disagree with Bob that Greens had made any significant gains in this election. The election was double dissolution election, where the Greens achieved no full quota in any state if it was normal election. No Greens party in any state got the 14.5% quota required in normal election.
I think that the in-fighting will intensify until Lee will be convinced that she has no chance to win leadership post. But this will have great impact on the Greens. The Greens is deeply lucky party that there is no strong minor left party that could attract significant voters who are currently voting for the Greens as protest against Labor and Liberals. But the big changes resulted in this election is promising that another left alternative is possible within the next 3 years until the next election (if we go to full term).
Thursday, July 21, 2016
Repeated terrorist attacks in Australia: I was right on terrorism...!!!
We, as citizens, have all rights to ask our authorities: why?
Why do we have this high radicalisation level? And why you cannot control it and cannot start successful de-radicalisation steps?
Before Khaled Sharrouf managed to leave Australia and reach Syria with no valid passport.
Before AFP admitted that they cooked the conspiracy with “community leaders” and foreign powers to ban me from entering Lebanon.
Before my local MP Jason Clare refused to meet me and other community members/victims of radicals’ attacks.
Before PM invited extremists to annual Iftar, while excluding anti-extremist campaigners from invitation.
Before authorities granted millions of dollars to extreme organisations to manage anti-extremism programs.
Before all this, I was trying to give our authorities the “benefit of doubt” for lacking any sense on these actions.
But the reality of things is very concerning. For me the real causes of radicalisation is very clear now.
When I was warning about growing extremism in the suburbs, the leader of NSW Liberal party was sending condolence letters to families of Australian terrorists killed in Syria.
When I was living in fear in my home, fearing attacks form radicals because of my anti-extremism campaigns; Labor leader was busy calling Syrian ambassador asking him to leave the country because Syrian army was fighting against terrorists including our own ones. Labor leader was busy supporting terrorists by calling on Al Qaeda affiliates to assassinate Syrian president as the only solution of growing terrorism in Syria.
When I was reporting to media about Wahhabi extremists’ crimes against Ali Ibrahim, Campsie police station officers were busy threatening me of legal consequences if I continued with these actions.
When I travelled to Syria in fact-finding mission and to promote peaceful solution for the conflicts, SBS and ABC were busy condemning me even before hearing what I will say about the situation in Syria.
When I was organising peace tours for journalists and peace activist to Syria, our security agencies were busy cooking conspiracies with foreign powers to cripple my ability to travel to Syria, through banning me from entering Lebanon.
When I was documenting Wahhabi crimes against local shop owners and peace activists, the Greens party politicians were busy calling for NATO to bomb Syria as the best available support for rebels-terrorists in Syria.
For all this, I feel very proud that I was right for the last 5 years.
I was right to consider Syrian “revolution” as Western conspiracy to get rid of unfriendly regime using terrorism.
I feel proud that I opposed this “revolution” and considered it to be the mother of all terrorist activities around the world.
And I am proud that I warned Australians that current authorities’ approach will not solve any problem. On the contrary.
Banning me from entering Lebanon, gave extremist “morale” boost that they still enjoy authorities support.
Refusing to grant our organisation a single dollar to manage anti-radicalisation program, is the wrong message to all directions.
Authorities insistence to invite extremists to activities and events on behalf of Australian Muslims, gives the extremists strong sense of power and influence.
In short, our authorities are on the wrong path and they need to change course. Before it is too late.....
Why do we have this high radicalisation level? And why you cannot control it and cannot start successful de-radicalisation steps?
Before Khaled Sharrouf managed to leave Australia and reach Syria with no valid passport.
Before AFP admitted that they cooked the conspiracy with “community leaders” and foreign powers to ban me from entering Lebanon.
Before my local MP Jason Clare refused to meet me and other community members/victims of radicals’ attacks.
Before PM invited extremists to annual Iftar, while excluding anti-extremist campaigners from invitation.
Before authorities granted millions of dollars to extreme organisations to manage anti-extremism programs.
Before all this, I was trying to give our authorities the “benefit of doubt” for lacking any sense on these actions.
But the reality of things is very concerning. For me the real causes of radicalisation is very clear now.
When I was warning about growing extremism in the suburbs, the leader of NSW Liberal party was sending condolence letters to families of Australian terrorists killed in Syria.
When I was living in fear in my home, fearing attacks form radicals because of my anti-extremism campaigns; Labor leader was busy calling Syrian ambassador asking him to leave the country because Syrian army was fighting against terrorists including our own ones. Labor leader was busy supporting terrorists by calling on Al Qaeda affiliates to assassinate Syrian president as the only solution of growing terrorism in Syria.
When I was reporting to media about Wahhabi extremists’ crimes against Ali Ibrahim, Campsie police station officers were busy threatening me of legal consequences if I continued with these actions.
When I travelled to Syria in fact-finding mission and to promote peaceful solution for the conflicts, SBS and ABC were busy condemning me even before hearing what I will say about the situation in Syria.
When I was organising peace tours for journalists and peace activist to Syria, our security agencies were busy cooking conspiracies with foreign powers to cripple my ability to travel to Syria, through banning me from entering Lebanon.
When I was documenting Wahhabi crimes against local shop owners and peace activists, the Greens party politicians were busy calling for NATO to bomb Syria as the best available support for rebels-terrorists in Syria.
For all this, I feel very proud that I was right for the last 5 years.
I was right to consider Syrian “revolution” as Western conspiracy to get rid of unfriendly regime using terrorism.
I feel proud that I opposed this “revolution” and considered it to be the mother of all terrorist activities around the world.
And I am proud that I warned Australians that current authorities’ approach will not solve any problem. On the contrary.
Banning me from entering Lebanon, gave extremist “morale” boost that they still enjoy authorities support.
Refusing to grant our organisation a single dollar to manage anti-radicalisation program, is the wrong message to all directions.
Authorities insistence to invite extremists to activities and events on behalf of Australian Muslims, gives the extremists strong sense of power and influence.
In short, our authorities are on the wrong path and they need to change course. Before it is too late.....
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...
-
I should mention here that when the crisis erupted in Syria more than a year ago, I was not supporting President Assad. At that time, I decl...
-
Bravo, bravo, bravo and million bravos. It is confirmed by the Tasmanian Greens leader and the Australian Greens leader: the Greens is seeki...
-
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...