Sniffle XXXII
Aussie reader Brett McS sent this to me this morning, making sure I didn’t miss it.
The Times - How Australia confronts militant Islam, by Gerard Henderson
A nation’s blunt refusal to back down to terror
It so happens that the approach advocated for Britain by Martin Bright in his important Policy Exchange pamphlet When Progressives Treat With Reactionaries is consistent with what has occurred Down Under over the past five years. Put briefly, the Australian system takes Islamist ideology seriously. It does not deal with radical Islamists. It confronts extremists’ views, rather than seeking to co-opt “pragmatic” radicals who happen not to be in favour of the use of violence in the here and now for purely tactical reasons. After the bombings of 7/7 in London, Tony Blair declared correctly that “the rules of the game had changed”. In Australia the rules changed dramatically some time earlier. A few recent examples illustrate the point.
After the shock of 7/7 Mr Howard established a Muslim Community Reference Group and said that no radicals would be invited to join. When Sheikh Taj Aldin al-Hilali (the Mufti of Australia) ventured into Holocaust denial, Andrew Robb (the Parliamentary Secretary for Multiculturalism) let it be known that he would not be reappointed to the group. Last February Peter Costello (Mr Howard’s deputy) publicly declared that, if the radical Muslim cleric Abdul Nasser Ben Brika really wanted to live under Sharia law, he might choose voluntary deportation to Iran. The next month the Prime Minister told Reuters TV that Australia could not ignore “that there is a small section of the Islamic population which identifies with some of the more extremist views associated with support of terrorism”. In New South Wales the former Labor Premier, Bob Carr, and his successor, Morris Iemma, have made similar candid statements where necessary.
There remains a significant terror threat in Australia — with some convictions for terrorist-related offences and a number of Muslim men in Sydney and Melbourne awaiting trial on serious charges. However, the tough line on security seems to have worked well and there have been no terrorist attacks.
The Howard Government has let it be known that radical Islamism is also a threat to the overwhelming majority of the Muslim community and reminded its leaders of their responsibilities to resolve potential problems in their own self-interest. This approach has strengthened the position of moderate Muslims.
Meanwhile, the conservatives, with the support of social democrats, have advanced the cause of citizenship tests as a means of emphasising that all who choose to live in Australia are expected to sign-on to our democratic values. Moreover, imams have been advised to preach in English. There is little backing in Australia for the extremist right-wing view that Muslim immigration should be banned. But there is bipartisan support for tackling the real threat posed by radical Islamism in a direct, even blunt, manner.
Sigh.
Sniffle
January 15th, 2007 at 11:46 pm
I wonder if we will be able to get a report on the UK Channel 4 program Dispatches: Undercover Mosque? LGF are showing some clips.
January 16th, 2007 at 1:26 am
Yup I saw it. The preachers tended to be of non-Arab, non-Pakistani origin, West Indian perhaps or American. Clearly very stupid, one can see the appeal to people who are at the bottom of the pile. The message was one of violence, and they regard women as “defective” which is not a word I’d use in front of ninme. The programme made the point that some of the preachers had some links at least to organisations that are well-regarded by the government, and that there’s a lot of Saudi money coming in. Pretty depressing programme, actually.
January 16th, 2007 at 3:29 am
Thanks for the summary, Red.
What scares the Islamic hierachy most is the analytic, probing nature of Western thought processes. It is something that doesn’t exist at all in Islamic society. They don’t understand it, but they know, or suspect, that the only chance they have of retaining their flock while in the west is to maintain separation.
I read comments a Muslim woman made bemoaning the “slander” of “my beautiful Islam”. Even to put “beauty” and “Islam” in the same sentence shows that the typical followers know next to nothing about their own religion. And that is the way the hierachy like it. There is no equivalent of bible study. They learn to recite parts of the Koran phonetically, in a language they don’t know. Then they talk about how “beautiful” it is.
Have a listen to the Heritage Foundation’s podcast of Brigitte Gabriel’s talk there - what an eye opener. Some (nominally) Muslim friend went to a Christian service out of curiosity and noted to her that “they sung songs about love and peace and forgiveness. All our songs are about killing Jews.”
January 16th, 2007 at 4:15 am
The delivery of all the preachers bar none was a shout, and the language intemperate and the sanctions for unbelievers extreme. Fascist, essentially. There was certainly no sense of their preaching being the rsult of years of prayer and study, rather the reactions of angry old men in a saloon bar. It’s not an easy religion to defend now that Westerners are learning what it’s about.
January 16th, 2007 at 4:33 am
As long as the religion of multi-culturalism gets the same treatment.
I see that England have broken the drought.
January 16th, 2007 at 6:32 am
It’s about time! Do the NZ-ers count? And Vaughan’s injured again (hamstring). Not the easiest of tours. A bloke I knew at university’s just become editor of Wisden - just the job for him, he knew more about the game than was good for him, without being much of a player at all.