 |
 |
Consultative Structure
Community Relations
Media Analysis
|
Case Study Three |
Terrorism raids November 2005
1. Preceding week (reporting period November 1-8, 2005)
Approximately three-quarters of the articles concerned either the new counter-terrorism legislation then being debated by Parliament or the amendments made to current legislation at the Prime Minister’s instigation. The remaining articles explored the possibility of a terrorist attack in Australia, discussed the Australian “Islamic community”, explicated Muslim extremism both in Australia and internationally, and speculated about the possible identification and arrest of Australian terrorists. These articles are discussed in detail below. Australia’s “Islamic community” Although a number of articles discussed the possibility of Australian-born Muslim extremists, only three touched on the “Islamic community” generally. Two articles published by The Age on November 4 and 6 concerned the potential alienation and marginalisation of Australian Muslims through targeted application of the new counter-terrorism laws. The first article presented the views of non-Muslim civil rights advocates, worried that the Islamic community was being demonised and homogenised despite the wide array of cultural and ethnic backgrounds among its members, and the moderate beliefs of most Muslims. The second article presented the views of Keysar Trad, founder of the Islamic Friendship Association of Australia, who is regularly interviewed as an “Islamic community spokesman” by the Australian media. Mr Trad expressed fears that the counter-terrorism legislation would inevitably target Muslim Australians but that this would not be recognised by the general public due to legal restrictions on reporting detentions. He urged the families of detained people to publicise their “disappearance” and criticised the Federal Government for intimidating the Australian population. The third article was a short piece by federal minister Tony Abbott, taken from the Liberal Party journal and republished by The Australian on November 2. The headline given to this piece by the newspaper was “No worries, mate – Muslims will naturally integrate”. Mr Abbott revealed his conversion from a sceptic to supporter of multiculturalism, based on his experiences of working alongside “Chinese, Greek, Islander [and] Aboriginal” Australians for Constitutional Monarchy. He contended that demanding Muslim women abandon their headscarves would make them more vulnerable and different, not more Australian. He assured readers that Muslim Australians would adapt in their own way and at their own pace, as no one is “… resistant to the gravitational pull of the Australian way of life …” Islamic extremism The majority of articles concerning Muslim Australians published during this period were opinion and analysis pieces that focused on extremism and the threat posed by extremists. On November 1, The Age published an opinion piece by Ted Lapkin, director of policy analysis at the Australia/Israel Jewish Affairs Council. This piece, entitled “When at war, words can kill”, quoted substantially from “jihadist propaganda” sold by an Islamic bookstore associated with “radical” cleric Sheikh Mohammed Omran. Mr Lapkin asserted that the terrorist attacks committed in New York, Bali, Madrid and London demonstrated that “we are at war”, and so counter-terrorism measures must target “enemy propaganda” which potentially incites violence. On November 8, The Age published a response to this piece, written by Amjid Muhammed, advisory committee member of an Islamic education and welfare society (ASWJ) led by Sheikh Omran. Dr Muhammed contended that the media depiction of Omran’s views had distorted his message about terrorism’s incompatibility with Islam, deliberately creating a climate of fear and distrust that was used to advance political agendas. He noted that the books of “jihadist propaganda” referred to in the earlier article were available from university libraries, and that these books garnered no attention from visitors to the society’s bookstore until media coverage brought them to public notice. The five remaining articles were published in The Australian between November 3 and 7. Four articles formed a series reporting on extremist preaching by Muslim clerics in Sydney and Melbourne. The first article, “Clerics still preaching hatred of West”, revealed that the author had spent four weeks attending “controversial” mosques to research the story. The story identified Sheikhs Omran and Zoud as the leaders of radical clerics preaching “against the West”. It quoted extensively from sermons praising the mujaheddin fighting in Iraq, Palestine and Afghanistan and denigrating the actions of the Australian and US governments in the “war on terror”. The apparent hypocrisy of their preaching was revealed by contrasting the clerics’ speeches in Arabic with the public comments denouncing terrorism that they had previously made to national media outlets. It also cited their “contempt” and “open defiance” of Prime Minister Howard’s call for Islamic community leaders to denounce terrorism. The report stated that one cleric “screamed … inflammatory rhetoric” while another “gloated over the fears held by Westerners”. A second article was published the following day, expanding on the author’s “undercover” experiences and providing an insider’s view of the “controversial” mosques. The same provocative quotes were included, and the views of Sheikhs Omran and Zoud were expanded on. The report provided descriptions of the diverse range of men attending the sermons, including Western converts, and the reactions garnered by the sermons. The men listened in a “trance-like, meditative state” and “nod approvingly” when Zoud praised mujaheddin fighters in Iraq. The report stated that both clerics teach Wahhabism, a “fundamentalist branch of Islam” that inspired Afghanistan’s Taliban regime and is followed by Osama bin Laden. The article then shifted tempo, stating that the views of “such home-based extremists by no means define the majority of Islamic messages being preached by Muslim clerics across the country”. A brief description of a sermon focusing on questions of faith rather than political issues followed before the article reverted to outlining accusations of terrorist links made against Sheikh Zoud. More provocative comments from Sheikh Omran were quoted, alongside those of Harun Abu Talha, one of his followers. Tahla’s quip about the dangers of discussing mujaheddin in the present climate “elicits sniggers and laughter” from his congregation. The article concluded with a quote from a man attending a Sydney mosque “known for its moderate preaching”: “You got all kinds of Muslim here [in Sydney]. But it’s always the few extreme ones who ruin it for the majority, brother.” A short article, published on November 4, reported that the new counter-terrorism legislation could see mosques being proscribed as terrorist organisations, if preaching by clerics contravened laws about supporting or praising terrorism. The Attorney-General’s Department gave a statement which did not deny or confirm this possibility: “We can’t offer a legal opinion. We ultimately take advice from our agencies on these matters.” An Inquirer feature article entitled “Beneath the minaret” was published on November 5 in the Weekend Australian. This piece focused on radical Islam in Australia, its growing number of followers, and ongoing ASIO investigations. It began by describing “the changing face of radical Islam” as young Australian-born Muslims and Caucasian converts are drawn to the teachings of a few fundamentalist clerics. The article again identified Sheikhs Omran and Zoud as central figures, citing their support for mujaheddin fighters overseas and their separatist views of Muslim life in Australia. Isolationist attitudes were assigned to those gathering in radical mosques and prayer halls, where “conspiracy theories abound” and the “perception of ‘us and them’ is a striking feature of conversation”. It reported that a number of young men raided by ASIO in June 2005 feared arrest following the legislative amendments enacted by Parliament after Prime Minister Howard’s announcement of a “potential terrorist threat”. These men were identified as followers of Muslim cleric Nacer Benbrika (aka Abu Bakr), who formed his own prayer group after declaring Sheikh Omran “too moderate”. A substantial proportion of the article described ASIO’s ongoing investigations and speculated about the likelihood of arrests following Parliament’s legislative amendments. The final article was an opinion piece by James Morrow, editor of Investigate magazine, arguing “the conservative case against the anti-terrorism laws”. He asserted that Australia had not been subjected to a terrorist attack or Muslim uprising because it “has managed to strike a balance between integrating the vast majority of moderate Muslims … and exposing the evil that is radical Islam …” Morrow expressed fears that the new legislation would drive fundamentalist views underground, allowing terrorist groups to thrive out of public view. He stated that Australians would believe radical Islam posed no threat until a terrorist attack occurred, as we “would have fallen for the Islamic doctrine of al-Taqiya: … ‘lying to one’s enemy in order to defeat him’”. ASIO investigations Seven articles, published by The Age, the Herald Sun and The Australian, reported on ASIO’s investigations of Australian terror suspects and the possibility of a “home-grown” attack revealed in the ASIO annual report. The first article, on November 7, revealed details from the ASIO report regarding terrorist training undertaken by Australian Muslims, and the likelihood of control orders being implemented after the passage of the new counter-terrorism legislation. Quotes from the ASIO reports included the perception of Australian extremists that they were engaged in a conflict between “Muslims and infidels” and that their interpretation of Islam engendered “a sense of hostility and isolation towards the broader Australian society”. A second article also quoted the ASIO report: “Some in Australia view the Coalition action in Iraq as an attack on all Muslims.” Four reports, published from November 4 to 6, revealed that ASIO and the Australian Federal Police were continuing surveillance, identifying the followers of Benbrika and Sheikh Omran as the targets. The articles reported that some of the men under surveillance had attended terrorist training camps overseas and in Australia. Some of the men revealed that they expected to be placed under control orders once the new legislation was passed. The final report, on November 7 in The Australian, revealed that surveillance operations had been substantially increased, and speculated that raids were imminent. Attorney-General Philip Ruddock refused to comment on reports that ASIO was monitoring a terror cell formed by the “Australian-born offspring of Muslim immigrants”, responding only that “typecasting is never helpful. To suggest it is a particular group and to characterise it in a particular way isn’t helpful either”. Descriptive language Sheikh Omran was repeatedly identified as a “radical firebrand”. Clerics were described as “preaching hatred”, “attacking” government policy and “ridiculing the US”. Sermons were “screamed” and “shrieked”. The terms “extremist”, “extremism”, “fundamentalist” and “radical” were used to describe the views and beliefs of the people and groups identified. They were contrasted with the “moderate” and “mainstream” views of most Australian Muslims. The language used varied little and was extremely repetitive. |
        |
|