Facebook Google Menu Linkedin lock Pinterest Search Twitter

Advertisement

Federal

Sep 12, 2014

Abbott has made Australia less safe -- so he's right to lift the threat level

Tony Abbott's announcement that the terrorism threat level has been raised is correct -- after all, he has taken a deliberate decision that will make Australians less safe, and done so for political purposes.

Share

Tony Abbott

However facile and meaningless Australia’s terror threat level system is, the Prime Minister is correct to raise the level to high — a move he has announced this afternoon. The increase in the level — based on the claim that a terrorist attack is “likely”, although there was “no specific intelligence of particular plots” — will be accompanied by a “modest information campaign”, the Prime Minister revealed, in an announcement that presumably entirely by coincidence was simultaneous with another NSW Liberal MP being exposed at the Independent Commission Against Corruption and Senator Arthur Sinodinos returning to ICAC for more questioning.

Australians are less safe now than a few weeks ago — and less safe because of decisions taken, primarily for political ends, by the Abbott government: namely, to intervene in a conflict in Iraq and Syria that has nothing to do with Australia’s national interest.

We know this will make Australians less safe because our security and intelligence officials told us how the 2003 Iraq war made Western citizens less safe. Australian Federal Police commissioner Mick Keelty said it at the time and was abused by the Howard government for his trouble. Senior intelligence officials in the United Kingdom and the United States have confirmed it since: the Iraq War radicalised hundreds of Western Muslims who saw only unprompted aggression directed toward a Muslim country (the former head of MI5 has explained this best, for the Chilcot Inquiry in the UK).

Islamist terrorism is portrayed in the media as a force of irrational evil – far more so than white male terrorists ever are. But terrorism is a response by extremist individuals to external events, not a random occurrence of a disturbed or depraved mind. Osama Bin Laden understood this, knowing that if he could provoke the United States into attacking a Muslim country, it would deliver a generation of angry young men to his cause. For Bin Laden, it took the intricately-planned, epic-scale attack of 9/11 to achieve that. Islamic State militants, however, have achieved it with far less: some slaughters of prisoners and brutal murders of two Western hostages. As if compelled by an other-worldly force, once again Western countries are dropping everything to do exactly what Islamic extremists want — intervene in a Muslim country.

In choosing to be part of this process — which includes, along the way, providing arms to a proscribed terrorist organisation, PKK, which happens to be fighting on “our” side — Tony Abbott has therefore taken a decision that will demonstrably make Australians less safe. Moreover, he has done so primarily for political purposes. Having discovered a competence in international affairs of the kind that eluded Julia Gillard until much later in her prime ministership, Abbott has been keen to use international affairs as a distraction from the domestic difficulties that see his government lagging in the polls. He has also, like John Howard, sought to keep the focus on national security, an area where he knows the Coalition always leads Labor — indeed, part of the theatrics of raising the threat level are to do just that.

Problematically, however, Abbott isn’t getting the political benefit: the polls so far show his government continues to struggle and that he isn’t trusted on international affairs. It’s one thing to place the lives of Australians at risk for political purposes, but it’s even worse to do it so badly you fail to get any political benefit. It has been noticeable (and it’s been noticed by Labor) that Abbott is ostentatiously invoking Labor’s bipartisan support on the terrorism issue and repeatedly insisting that he is not using it for political purposes — especially that the decision to lift the threat level is one for security officials. Governments in national security situations can normally rely on the electorate to stand behind them with little convincing — it’s oppositions that have to be careful not to be perceived as being out of step. But in this instance, Abbott occasionally looks as though he’s clinging onto Opposition Leader Bill Shorten for protection against the criticism of politicising terrorism.

The broader point of all this is, well, duh. As Crikey has noted repeatedly, this isn’t about gormless politicians endlessly repeating the mistakes of their predecessors. They, and security officials, know perfectly well what perpetuates the War on Terror, which is such a boon for large companies, security agencies and politicians. That’s why they keep on perpetuating it.

Advertisement

We recommend

From around the web

Powered by Taboola

43 comments

Leave a comment

43 thoughts on “Abbott has made Australia less safe — so he’s right to lift the threat level

  1. GF50

    Thanks Bernard, my comment on your “who benefits from the return to Iraq.”

  2. Paul Day

    It’s not Abbot or any Western government that has made the world unsafe. It is the evil, backward religion whose ideology is found in its most extreme form in IS (ISIL or ISIS) and al Qaeda. When are people going to understand this fundamental fact. THEY WANT TO DESTROY US AND RID THE WORLD OF ANYONE WHO IS NOT MUSLIM. You and all those like you are only making things worse by insisting that it is the West and not this insane religion which are at fault. You are damned, along with all who think like you until you open your eyes and see them for what they are.

  3. Mali Edon

    @PaulDay

    Oh dear! Some reading of history and of religious traditions would not go amiss.

    The Arabs are still pretty sore about the Crusader invasion.

  4. Paul Day

    @Mali. Oh dear! here we go again. The crusades too place so long ago they may as well have occured on a different planet. It was a different time when evil existed in every country during a very dark period of world history. bringing it up is just making excuses for an evil religion who is trying to destroy us today. They need no excuse. They have murdered, raped, tortured and terrorized on every continent in recent times. They exist today as a very real threat. The crusaders don’t. Anyone who uses such historical facts as an excuse for current world tensions is completely ignorant of what is actually taking place. It’s simple. Muslims holding extreme views (of which there are many) want to rid the world of anyone opposed to that ideology. It wouldn’t matter in the slightest how we treat them. They will still hate us. They do hate us. Any arguments about who is to blame for making them hate us is irrelevant. WAKE UP!

  5. SusieQ

    How depressing this whole situation is.

  6. Suzanne Blake

    Bernard, most of our help against ISIS is humanitarian help. Whats wrong with that?

    We have no troops on the ground.

    If we let ISIS flourish, that will cause more problems.

    Our problems here are because we have let in too many undesirable people over a few decades and not cracked down harder on their teachers and gatherings

  7. ab gunter

    You are forgetting the white male Islamist terrorists, Bernard Keane. Islamist fascism isn’t a race it is a dogma that is both evil and dangerous.

    But that’s not what this is about – the terror ‘threat level’ is going up so ASIO can get its massive power grab Bill through Parliament.

    it is up for debate on the second reading about now.

    It gives ASIO spies:
    – immunity from prosecution when they break the law
    – the right to force courts to accept illegally obtained evidence
    – the right to hack anybody’s computer and tamper with the data
    – the right to put tracking devices on people without a warrant.

    They want Parliament to vote in this bill without the politicians even reading it properly. See this story:

    http://www.vice.com/read/australias-national-security-ammendment-bill-is-heavy-reading

    It’s not about Islamist fascists – though they are a massive threat. ASIO might even let an attack through just to get their laws through parly.

    If they were serious about getting rid of Islamist fascism from Australia they would target them and enforce the limits to multiculturalism. You should not have absolute religious freedom when that religion involve a fascist totalitarianism that tells you to kill gays and impose gender apartheid. But the new laws do not target them at all.

    If they were serious, then Hizb-ut-Tahrir would be on the banned terror groups list. It isn’t. only 19 groups are and Hizb isn’t one of them. Hizb is banned through the middle east. Hizb wants the Caliphate under Sharia.

  8. Paul Day

    @Bernard

    When evil men carrying a black flag one day come knocking on your door demanding that you display their flag in front of your home or suffer the consequences, I hope you remember fondly that you helped create a world where this was allowed to happen through your ignorant support of this evil regime. Tony Abbot is only doing what he has to to help destroy an evil and barbaric cause hell bent on killing all who stand in their way. I have had enough of the PC do-gooders who support a religion which denigrates women, instills fear in its followers and forces its members to do unspeakable things.It’s time ordinary people were given a voice without the fear of being labelled racist. This has to stop. People are dying. People are being tortured and murdered and all you are doing is facilitating this by shifting the blame from where it should rest to those who did not bring this about. You are actually showing no respect to what our government is trying to do and making the situation worse by giving yet more fodder to this wicked religion and its evil men.

  9. Marilyn Shepherd

    Our spooks have had billions extra to achieve not one thing in the last 13 years except fit up the innocent Dr Haneef.

  10. Marilyn Shepherd

    Paul, you sad little dickhead. Judaism still makes orthodox women wear wigs in public, walk 10 paces behind their husbands who never work, breed until they drop dead.

  11. Kyle Webb

    @Paul Day, that’s why we must fight fire with gasoline!

  12. Orthello

    Good one Bernard, seems like our Prime minister (and do use that term very loosely),He can`t seem to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. the budget is crapp! now were off to war. good leadership should be able to do more than one thing at a time. he has shown himself to be a farce of a leader. he lied and thrashed his way to office an now is totally incompetent
    I agree with you ..unlike some fools putting themselves init as far as there political beliefs go,..isil smishil, ta has now gifted all of us with more panic stations.
    Go team Crikey!

  13. Scott

    We didn’t start the fire BK. This issue was brewing way before 2003.

    Paul Day, while a bit full on, is fundamentally correct. The strategy of these extremists groups is, ultimately, to re create the Islamic Caliphate in the Middle East (and the parts of Africa and Europe), which existed, in one form or another from the 600’s to the 1900’s (most significantly under the Sunni Ottoman Empire). This is the mission, regardless of whether the West sits on its hand or intervenes.

    Only problem is that Caliphate would include Israel, and I can’t see the West sitting back allowing Israel to be wiped off the map.

    So the only question is whether to try to nip it in the bud, while ISIS is at an early stage in its governing or leave it until later, when it might be too late. Sunni’s are the majority in Islam (85% by some estimates) so there is no shortage of soldiers if the Caliphate goes from fringe dweller to mainstream.

    For mine, we need to sort this out sooner rather than later. As a full blown war between a Caliphate led Sunni alliance (potentially including a nuclear armed Pakistan) against a potentially nuclear armed Iran Shite minority, with the nuclear power of Israel some where in between could be a horror no one wants to contemplate.

  14. Dan Hilvert

    Paul Day – you might be right regarding the intentions of some of the extremist muslims. But i think you’ve missed the point of the article …. Keane is pointing out that by going to war the West is assisting the terrorists to achieve their long term objectives (recruiting more terrorists). This has gone way beyond a case of right versus wrong.

    Having said that I wonder whether Crikey’s anti-war position is ignoring the genuine humanitarian issue in this case which i think makes it much more justifiable than the previous war. I think the West should try to intervene to protect the vulnerable if they are being slaughtered but hopefully there’s a way of doing that without blowing up the conflict …. i of course don’t know whether that possible or not.

  15. John Ryan

    @Paul Day you really have learned not a thing after IRAQ, the West has been intervening interfering and generally stuffing things in the Mid East since WW1.
    And from your rant you seem to have swallowed all the lies and BS dished out by the real criminals who are not the Muslims

  16. Liz Connor

    I’ve heard from persuasive sources that it was Mossad that did 9/11, ‘knowing that it could provoke the United States into attacking a Muslim country’ and also raise US people’s fear of Islam. Sounds like a plan . . .

  17. Paddlefoot

    Apparently this time when we re-arm and train the Iraqi army, they won’t fold in 48 hours leaving $2 billion worth of hardware lying around, swamping the region with weaponry for everyone to tool up with. The reason why things will be different this time ? The cause. We’re not overthrowing a cruel dictator with WMDs, we’re leading a Crusade against fundamentalist Muslims. Surely God will be on our side this time so ‘success’ is assured. Right ?

  18. rhonaj

    Paul Day
    ISIS ,claiming to represent Islam equals KKK claiming to be Christian. You are paranoid.

  19. tonysee

    @ Paul Day

    Are you sure you’re not a plant put in by Bernard to prove his point?

    But, your right, all we need is a western force of sufficient ‘shock and awe’ to drive those heathen into hell and, after a few weeks, it’ll be ‘Mission Accomplished!’.

  20. Duncan Gilbey

    @Dan Hilvert – “Destroy IS” doesn’t sound as if humanitarianism has any part in this folly.

    Abbot is an idiot who thinks that projecting “our” values is in our National Interest when this is clearly not so.

    “We” will lose this war and be worse off as a result, as Bernard predicts.

  21. Neutral

    What is it about the warwits and their inability to make a coherent argument about why IS(ISIL or ISIS) is a direct threat to Australia?

    Or have the words of Colin Powell come back to haunt them “if you break it, you own it” and Obama, Abbott et al feel they owe something to Blair, Bush and Howard – to own their mess in Iraq so to speak?

    Exactly how does getting involved in Iraq (again) improve our national security?

    What happens if the PKK down the track use the weapons we supplied them to attack any of our troops we may commit? What legal consequences would their be for the Abbott-Shorten Axis of Poll Driven Warwitting? Arming a proscribed terrorist organisation who end up harming our troops would be treasonus I reckon. Would Irvine personally cuff ’em?

    Why are warwits posting on forums when they should be too busy leading by example at the pointy end of their crusade?

    I don’t expect any reasonable or logical answers to these questions but if anyone from the frontline of the crusade against jihadists can enlighten me please do so.

    As noted elsewhere the biggest surge of terrorist attacks recently have occured in Northern Ireland and Greece. So by using the warwits own moronic logic, one could conclude that by not advocating for military intervention in Northern Ireland and Greece they actively support these terrorists. Which makes them terrorists themselves.

    Used to be Spy v Spy, now it’s Terrorists v Terrorists.

    Politics 101: If you’re down in the polls manufacture a national security concern. For best effect do it on the 11th of September.

  22. Scott

    @rhonaj

    “ISIS ,claiming to represent Islam equals KKK claiming to be Christian.You are paranoid”

    Yes, I saw that “West Wing” episode as well. Problem with that sentiment is the KKK was never led by anyone with the theological knowledge and intellectual heft of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (who apparently has a PhD in Islamic Studies from Baghdad university).
    Don’t underestimate these guys.

  23. Shirty

    Liz, I call Tin Foil Hat Bingo! So Mossad wanted Afghanistan attacked? Was it feeling particularly threatened by a backwards nation 2000 miles away on the other side of a couple of mountain ranges? Or did it calculate that Bush & Co would later come up with a fabricated WMD story to facilitate an invasion of Iraq? Or did Mossad plant the WMD intel? Was Ossama working for Mossad? Did the planes actually hit the WTC or was it a controlled demolition coordinated by the Jewish controlled construction industry? So many questions but luckily we have an entire internet full of “persuasive sources” to find the answers!

  24. Steve Davis

    @Orthello, sorry mate but your lack of respect for our Prime Minister no matter what persuasion is outrageous.
    We are not going to war, we are reacting to a very REAL situation within our shores. The Budget has nothing to do with this.
    People are naïve to think Australia is immune to any terrorist threat. The fact is they are here they are living in our country, we have fed them trained them and it’s just a matter of time before something HEAVEN FORBID happens. It maybe worthwhile to look at Major Bernard Gaynor’s website, this guy served in Iraq not just once but 3 times as well as Afghanistan.
    Two suspects in Logan arrested are just the thin edge of the wedge.
    What does it take for people to come to grips with what is a very fast growing cult intent on destroying our western democracy and what it stands for.
    Do we have to see a tragic loss of life in a major shopping centre or train station before we then take note.
    Or do we let these terrorists just go on their merry way.
    They have no allegiance with our country or our beliefs they have already proven that by joining ISIS.
    And all I see in these comments is about ABBOTT.
    Abbott as with Shorten receive advise from our security organisations they know a hell of a lot more of what is going on than we do and act accordingly.
    Quite frankly I am over the attitude of ‘we are over reacting’ she’ll be right!! Wake up, these people are here and they don’t care about our way of life or our beliefs,
    Political correctness is their ally, and they hide behind it and use it very well to their advantage.
    The problem with Aussies is our complacency and lack of understanding or lack of wanting to understand.
    I love my country, I love our culture and our Christian heritage.
    The ADF needs to change its policy on Islam and realise who the enemy is. Or we are wasting digger’s lives.
    Our enemy is fighting for a religion a belief (be it radical) they know what they are dying for and are prepared to do what ever is necessary for their so called faith.
    What are we fighting for?? How will we stop them??

  25. Paul Day

    @Steve. Ditto mate!

  26. David Scolyer

    Here’s a useful background explainer why OZ REALLY REALLY REALLY needs to stay off the ground in Iraq from an ex-spook (if there ever is such a thing) who actually knows what’s going on with ISIS. His first article in this series explains the history of wahadism and how it led to Saudi Arabia (see http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/isis-wahhabism-saudi-arabia_b_5717157.html). The next one talks about the current situation (see http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alastair-crooke/isis-aim-saudi-arabia_b_5748744.html) But a single quote explains the situation: the wahabists believe “He or she could be no true believer, unless additionally, he or she actively denied (and destroyed) any other subject of worship. The list of such potential subjects of idolatrous worship, which al-Wahhab condemned as idolatry, was so extensive that almost all Muslims were at risk of falling under his definition of “unbelievers.” They therefore faced a choice: Either they convert to al-Wahhab’s vision of Islam — or be killed, and their wives, their children and physical property taken as the spoils of jihad. Even to express doubts about this doctrine, al-Wahhab said, should occasion execution.” Now _that’s_ serious absolutism. Expect no mercy. Expect no dialogue. Even Saudi Arabia, which is officially wahabist, has joined the new Coalition Of The Willing But Apparently Uninformed. This is an Islamic war between Islamic factions and it’s been going on for hundreds of years in one form or another. Staying OUT but providing humanitarian aid where ever possible is the sensible thing to do because non-Muslim forces basically count as Crusaders and the Muslim world REALLY hates Crusaders. Wouldn’t it be much smarter to let the Muslim powers sort this one out? Because when (if) ISIS is defeated it will just pop up somewhere else, if it hasn’t already with Boko Haram.

  27. Paul Gatto

    The reds are coming! The reds are coming!

  28. Craig Samuel

    Thankyou Bernard, I felt like I was the only one that could see what this njonsense really is!

    Good on you, it seems every other media outlet has been salivating with putting big letters behind their news readers saying things like ” Attack Immenent!”

    Why is it that people forget so quicklky! We had Howard and Bush trying to terrorise everyone and now dipstick Abbott will willingly get us invo!ved in another Iraq war just to cover his horrible polling and disasterous Government!

  29. mikehilliard

    Some seem have forgotten how basic this whole terrorist beat up is.

    For the deluded I copy & paste the essence:

    [Australians are less safe now than a few weeks ago — and less safe because of decisions taken, primarily for political ends, by the Abbott government]

    There it is, no need for obfuscation.

    And this –

    [I love my country, I love our culture and our Christian heritage.]

    I’m not sure what to say about that.

  30. Graeski

    “He robbed those wealthy squatters, their stock he did destroy,
    A terror to Australia was the Wild Colonial Boy.”

  31. Dan B

    Australians have travelled to fight with the IS, and whom are likely to return, battle-hardened and further radicalised; therefore, Government’s decision to raise the threat level is justified, and their decision to assist the fight against the IS is in our National Security’s best interests.
    The likelihood of an imminent attack is possible although, unlikely. However, by raising the threat level, it raises public awareness and directly increases our means to scrutinise possible suspicious activities. Certainly it creates a heightened sense of public paranoia and will likely invite low-level hysteria but it also increases our “eyes and ears” on the streets. And too much information coming in is always better than no information coming in.
    The notion held by many Australians that our involvement in international conflicts degrades our safety is absurd. When it comes to radical Islam, taking the fight to them, on their turf keeps them away from our turf. Those Muslims living in Australia, whether born or migrated, and who have become radicalised are not a result of our intervention against radical Islamists in Muslim countries. They have become radicalised because the Islamic doctrine advocates jihad against those who do not follow said doctrine. Mali Edon (3), swallow your own cool aid mate. You have obviously not read enough history, please articulate how the alleged Crusades were anything but a(nother) reaction to radical Islam spiralling out of control in the developing world. You will struggle.
    Media needs to stop blaming radical Islam on things that play no part in its proliferation. It is simply a byproduct of its parent doctrine. It is this type of language that feeds radical Islam, not ethical intervention by Western Governments. Hasn’t anyone wondered why the general Islamic public never denounce the actions of radical Islamists? It is a question ignored in Brobdingnagian proportions. And screams volumes of how the general ideology of Islam is received by them all. After all, Islam does mean “submit”..

  32. beachcomber

    Tony Abbott has misspent, wasted, billions of dollars on “border security” and Australia is now officially less safe than it was when he was elected. He has trashed our international credibility, poured billions of dollars down the drain, and he’s made things worse.
    Of course his motivation was never “border” security. It was all about domestic politics, securing a second term, securing his leadership. And he’s even failed abysmally there as well.
    Time’s up for Abbott’s leadership. It’s time the Liberals moved to Plan B. Julie? Malcolm? Are you ready?

  33. Craig Samuel

    At least Abbott has got what he wanted, no media in this country is mentioning the budget or hockey, Abbott will be pleased!

  34. james clapham

    I thought this was a really interesting and compelling piece––until I arrived at the final paragraph.

    I’m hardly convinced by this idea that what ‘really’ lies behind recent developments is warmongering American politicians who want only to bolster the profits of the arms industry (yeah, that has Obama written all over it…) I clicked on the link ‘Who benefits from Iraq?’ And the evidence that this campaign is really about supporting the arms industry: arms manufactures stocks have risen since Obama’s address on Thursday. How exactly that substantiates the claim at hand is beyond me. That solitary piece of information simply represents a corollary of what’s transpiring vis. Washington’s changing Middle East tack. Indeed, any idiot could have anticipated and pointed-out that the arms industry would benefit from America re-engaging in Iraq. All the figures and the claim do is reveal the anti-Americanism/’everything can be blamed on that wretched capitalist system’ ideological bent that apparently informs the ultimate direction of this piece.

    Is the influence that the American arms industry wields through its lobbyists and elected and unelected officials a blight on American democracy and a corrupting force upon US foreign policy? There can be no doubt about that. Is America’s current campaign in Iraq in fact more about supporting arms manufacturers than it is ‘destroying’ ISIS (however unrealistic or wrongheaded that may be)? Perhaps, but to my mind that is anything but proven.

    Of course, Tony Abbott–-apparently impervious to shame––is manipulating the current situation to his utmost political advantage. And that, by all means, is not only incredibly distasteful but also incredibly dangerous and counter-productive. That all makes sense. But to effectively say that ‘oh, and what makes the whole situation all the more hideous is the fact that what’s really driving American foreign policy decisions (to which, I would agree, under this government Australia is apparently beholden) is an agenda that hopes to enrich arms manufacturers’ is, in my view, a bridge too far. The claim was at the expense of the piece’s otherwise convincingness.

    (Yes, in spite of being familiar with Michael Moore’s work, I hold these views…)

  35. Lyn Gain

    Has Crikey been overrun by trolls? A number of these comments sound more like readers of the Murdoch press. Go Bernard, you’re perfectly correct.

  36. Suzanne Blake

    I think public sentiment is 90% against terrorism, what ISIS has done, the images they have seen on TV, and nothing else matters. Thats why both sides of politics are in lock step, leaving only the Greens as apologists.

  37. Browny3000

    The illegal invasion of Iraq had bipartisan support. The coalition is more likely to persecute refugees and the unemployed for political purposes.

  38. danger_monkey

    @Paul Day
    “The crusades too place so long ago they may as well have occured on a different planet. It was a different time when evil existed in every country during a very dark period of world history.”

    Thanks for setting us straight on that one Paul. Now if you could only tell the people of the Middle East that their perspective on history is baseless.

  39. GideonPolya

    The Neocon American and Zionist Imperialists (NAZI) One Percenters who run the US (USrael) falsely engender “terror hysteria” to back genocidal wars in the Muslim world that have killed 12 million Muslims by violence or war-imposed deprivation in the post-1990 US War on Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia and elsewhere (Egypt, Syria, Libya, Mali, Palestine) , the breakdown including 4.6 million Iraqis (1990-2011), 5.6 million Afghans (2001-2014), 2.2 million Somalis (1992-2014), 0.1 million Libyan (2011-2012), and 0.1 million Palestinians (since 1990) (see “Muslim Holocaust Muslim Genocide”: https://sites.google.com/site/muslimholocaustmuslimgenocide/ ).

    About 1.3 million Americans die preventably each year out of a population of 319 million (2014). Accordingly, the “empirical annual probability of an American dying preventably in the US” is 1.3 million/319 million = 4.1 in 1000 or 1 in 245. About 30 Americans were killed in America by “terrorists” in the 10 years since 9/11. The average US population in this period was about 298 million. Accordingly the “empirical annual probability of an American dying in the US from terrorism” is 30/10 years x 298 million = 1.0 in 100 million per year. Thus it is 100 million/245 = 0.408 million or about 400,000 times more likely for an American to die preventably (from smoking, alcohol, obesity, guns etc) than to die from a terrorist attack within the US.

    Obama’s Iraq War, Obama’s Syrian War,& Obama’s War on Terror “wherever” constitute a war criminal attack on Humanity and International Law by pro-war, racist, anti-Arab anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, warmongering, war criminal Obama, the world’s number 1 terrorist, war criminal, drug pusher and killer of women and children. Obama’s Iraq War and Obama’s Syrian War will involve the US, UK, Australia and other US Alliance invaders grossly violating International Law and committing 12 kinds of war crimes (see “Obama’s Iraq and Syria War, MWC News, 14 September 2014: http://mwcnews.net/focus/analysis/46129-obamas-war.html .

    The Obama Iraq War and the Obama Syrian War will involve US and Australian war crimes in a dozen areas. The barbarism of the ISIL rebels (beheadings, execution of prisoners, kidnapping of women, and terrorizing of religious and ethnic minorities) does not warrant even larger scale war crimes by the US, Whote Australia and their allies and the horrendous avoidable mortality carnage of an “endless war” in the Middle East. Peace is the only way but silence kills and silence is complicity. Decent, pro-peace people around the world should dissociate themselves from US Alliance war crimes by (a) informing everyone they can, (b) demanding cessation and punishment of war crimes, and (c) urging and applying, where possible, Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against all those people, politicians, parties, companies, corporations and countries associated with US Alliance and other war crimes.

    Decent, pro-peace Australians will reject the warmongering, war criminal, International Law-violating Lib-Labs (Liberal-Laborals, Coalition and Labor Right), vote 1 Green and put the Coalition last.

  40. Brendan

    Being against what IS does and being in favour of the government getting us embroiled in another Iraq debacle are not the same thing. Particularly when the motivation is so transparently political.

    And wow, I’ve never read a Crikey comments thread with as much hysterical nonsense in it as this one.

  41. Steve Davis

    Wow Brendan, are you a fence sitter mate, You are against IS, and yet don’t want to be involved in eliminating them, even though “Australians” (INVERTED COMMAS) are fighting with IS. They are trained fed and financed in OZ.
    Do you think they will not hesitate in beheading an Australian, whether we are involved in the war or not.
    The Brits haven’t committed yet and they beheaded one of theirs.
    Politics has nothing to do with this, both sides are for this action. Obviously because they know a lot more behind the scenes than we do. We only know what we read in the media. We have no idea of how many IS supporters there are in OZ or what they will do.
    As for an Iraq debacle, this is a totally different scenario, no soldiers on ground, 400 of the 600 heading that way are air force.
    As for Gideon you are sick mate, what ya gonna say when a bomb (heaven forbid) goes off at your shopping centre. Suppose ya gonna blame the yanks LMAO.
    DECENT PRO AUSTRALIANS FOUGHT FOR THE RIGHT FOR YOU TO HAVE YOUR SAY GIDEON.
    AND DECENT PRO AUSTRALIANS MOST CERTAINLY DONT AGREE WITH YOUR COMMENTS I AM SURE!!

  42. Lyn Gain

    I think this comment from Steve Davis helps prove your point Brendan. You echo what I said in my first comment some days ago.

  43. Brendan

    You can grade the level of a person’s nationalist mania roughly by how feverishly their post fawns over “decent Australians”; bonus points for all caps.

Leave a comment

Advertisement

https://www.crikey.com.au/2014/09/12/abbott-has-made-australia-less-safe-so-hes-right-to-lift-the-threat-level/ == https://www.crikey.com.au/free-trial/==https://www.crikey.com.au/subscribe/

Show popup

Telling you what the others don't. FREE for 21 days.

Free Trial form on Pop Up

Free Trial form on Pop Up
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.