The critique by ABC’s Emma Alberici in her interview with Hizb ut–Tahrir rep (see first interview below), and the praise of her by Abbott, are steps forward in bringing into the open the fact that advocacy of violence or at least support for it exists amongst Islamic groups in Australia as well as the actual use of it amongst such groups overseas. If this kind of questioning holds within the ABC, that will help in getting support for additional stronger counter-terrorist legislation.
However, Abbott is still way off beam in arguing that advocates of violence are un-Islamic because “no respectable Muslim should have these views” (see second interview below). The reality is that many Muslims do, most notably the imams.
Provided here is a video of an interview with a non-Muslim Belgian about the Islamic group in his country and an interview with a leading spokesman/imam of that group. The imam leaves no doubt that Muslims are aiming to take over the country and to apply sharia law – democracy is not an acceptable form of government. The non-Muslim guy says that before long Belgians – that is, the non-Muslims – will have left Brussels and other major cities because they will be unliveable. Australia is some distance way from Belgium but action needs to be taken to stop the infiltration and outlaw violence.
Note the attachment also contains part of a speech in the Dutch Parliament by Gert Wilders. No such speech could currently be made in the Australian Parliament –but should be! And Abbott and his ministers should read it.
They also need to read the article by a Sydney based psychiatrist of “Bangladeshi heritage” in yesterday’s Australian. The author (presumably a Muslim himself) asks how Muslims can still pretend that the beheadings by IS have nothing to do with Islam. He adds that “millions of Muslims believe Islam is perfect, above reproach, should rule the world, and that jihad is the path to this end”.
Also of considerable interest is an article by Jonathan Sacks, who is an emeritus chief rabbi. It is rare that a Jewish leader risks going beyond referring to anti-Semitism to expose the radicalism amongst Muslims.
Today’s AFR reports from Washington that Obama’s Sherpa for the November G20 meeting is trying to work up enthusiasm amongst members for a full discussion on climate change. But the best she can do is allege (wrongly) that there has been an increase in extreme weather.
One wonders how she and her boss will respond to a NASA report, published in the journal Nature Climate Change and discussed in yesterday’s Australian (“NASA rules out deep heat for hidden heat”,8/10/14) that “not much” of the sea level rise has been due to deep warming of the oceans. So much for the scientific (sic) “explanation” that surface temperatures haven’t risen because emissions have heated the deep oceans not the surface and that it may take up to a century before the heat comes to the surface!
In his new lone wolf capacity, Alan Moran, has also drawn attention to the NASA report and to the IPCC’s assessment that, even if its predicted warming did occur, there would be a “relatively trivial effect on real level of human welfare” (see below “IPCC calculations show warming won’t be very harmful if it resumes” The Australian 8/10/14). If a presentation along these lines were to be made at the G20 meeting, that might be useful education for Obama and his Sherpa.
Don’t Forget to Accept the Invite to the Lunch at The Australian Club on Monday 27 October to Hear the Convert from Greenpeace, Patrick Moore
Royal Commission on Union Corruption
The RC will now produce an interim report by end December 2014 and a final report by end December 2015. In seeking this extension (see “Union Graft inquiry wins extension” below), Dyson Heydon made it clear that the Commission already had evidence indicating criminal conduct, use of physical and verbal violence, cartel conduct, secondary boycotts, contempt of court, and the behaviour of some union officials implying that they have immunity from “any social or community standard shared by other Australians”. Further confirmation of this should provide a very strong basis for a complete change in the existing regulatory arrangements. The HR Nicholls Society will be lodging a submission arguing that the regulatory arrangements should not allow any exercise of monopoly power or restrictive practices.