Australian Islamist Monitor

Islam Under Scrutiny

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

October 2009 Dhimiwit

E-mail Print PDF

RatsWe have only 3 but very outstanding nominees this month.

So readers, it's up to you to vote for your favourite Dhimwit.

1. Dick Smith, for his backing of convicted terrorist David Hicks.
Last year, in an interview with Dick Smith, the famous Australian adventurer and philanthropist, concerning his support for convicted Muslim terrorist and Australian citizen David Hicks, Smith readily admitted that terrorists were evil people. But after meeting with David Hicks, he decided he was not evil and so offered to foot the $50,000.00 bill to push for a ‘fair trial’.

When asked what he thought of Hicks, Smith replied. ‘I thought he was incredibly naïve...David had not heard of Al Qaeda until he got to Guantanamo Bay.’ He asked Hicks some difficult questions like ‘Why do you write letters criticizing Jews?’ and ’What were you doing in Afghanistan?’ Satisfied with the answers, Smith formed the opinion that Hicks was ‘an incredibly open person,’ and worthy of support.


It'is on the public record that Hicks trained with Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and  met with his hero Bin Laden, not once, but eight times! He also trained in bomb-making at the main terrorist training camp, Al-Faruq. By the time he left there, fifteen weeks later, he was skilled in firearms, explosives, camouflage and counter-surveillance.

 Smith then stated that he didn’t care what others thought of him so long as he could get a fair go for those he considered to be worthy of it.

‘What concerns me is the media who on one hand will say David Hicks would have agreed to anything to get out… .yet they say he’s a convicted supporter of terrorism. I’m hoping one day that may be quashed and people will realize, similar to the Lindy Chamberlain case, that this terrible episode in modern Australia was a huge miscarriage of justice."

Hard to see any similarity between terrorism and having a child taken by a Dingo. And what about a ‘fair go’ for the innocent victims of terrorism?

Dick has previously used his money to assist those less fortunate, but here he has backed the wrong horse. Hicks knowingly  trained with Al Qaeda to fight the enemies of Islam, which included the United States and its allies.  (see: An Interview With Terrorist Supporter Dick Smith)Dick Smith

Tim Blair isn't too impressed with Dick either :

Dick Smith sticks up for Hicks:
Convicted terrorism supporter David Hicks is a decent Australian who has never supported terrorism, Dick Smith says.
He’s never supported terrorism, but “spent around three months in a muslim military training camp in the mountains. I learnt about weapons such as ballistic missiles, surface to surface and shoulder fired missiles, anti aircraft and anti-tank rockets, rapid fire heavy and light machine guns, pistols, AK47s, mines and explosives. After three months everybody leaves capable and war-ready”. Decent Dave also fired hundreds of bullets at Indian troops, and regarded Osama bin Laden as his “lovely brother”. Carry on, Dick:
"I was going to Adelaide so I rang David and said, ‘Can I come talk to you because you’re looking for a job and I’m happy to help with that but I’d want to get some answers to some questions’,” Mr Smith told ABC radio. "I asked him why he was in Afghanistan and it was quite different to what we’ve heard about ... (it was) all about trying to help independence movements.'
Yes ... but independence from whom, and for what? As Hicks himself previously wrote: “The West is full of poison. The western society is controlled by the Jews with music, TV, houses, cars, free sex takes Muslims away from the true Islam keeps Islam week and in the third world.” Dave’s “independence movement” is otherwise known as the Taliban. Hicks also believes that Osama bin Laden isn’t a terrorist.
"But I’ve changed my view completely now because he’s said he’s never supported terrorism and most journalists I talk to and all lawyers say that the particular plea bargain is just terrible because he would have agreed to anything to get out of there (Guantanamo)."
Apparently you’re not a terrorism supporter unless you say you are. An intriguing legal theory. (source)

Tim Blair suggested people should boycott Dick Smith products, which was not well received in some circles:
Dick Smith spokesmuppet Andrew Craig responds to concerns over Smith’s raging gullibility:
"He is only reporting the results of a meeting that he had with David Hicks."
No, he’s claiming Hicks is a “decent Australian” who was only “trying to help independence movements”.
Not buying Dick Smith Foods products...will not hurt Dick at all.
It was set up to help provide jobs for your fellow Australians, by using Australian owned companies to produce foods using Australian sourced and grown ingredients. This kept the taxes that these companies paid here, as well as the profits, rather than allowing the multinational companies to repatriate their profits and to import their products and utilise transfer pricing mechanisms to avoid paying taxes.

Any profits have been used to further Dick Smith’s philanthropic pursuits, such as providing wheel chairs for the disabled, donations to the Salvation Army etc.
How does Dick feel about someone leaving Australia to join a multinational terrorist organisation?
Ultimately the hundreds of people who are involved with the production and sales of Dick Smith Foods products will thank you for choosing not to buy them as they contemplate their futures. Those charities and disabled people will also be forever grateful to you as well, as their supply of funds diminishes.
Oh, nice! Here’s another way of looking at things: Dick  himself has caused problems for his employees and chosen charities by expressing views repugnant to many Australians. If he’s going to use his high profile to promote food sales, he should take care that his profile not be repellent. (source)

2. Bob Brown, for his support of Uighurs.

Australian Greens Leader Bob Brown introduced Uighur leader, Rebiya Kadeer whose documentary, The 10 Conditions of Love, featured at the recent Melbourne International Film Festival:

She used her visit to Australia to urge the Federal Government to take a stand over China's violent repression in her homeland...and to try to persuade Australia to take the remaining Uighur detainees from Guantanamo Bay.
The Uighurs say the Chinese Government is committing "cultural genocide" by banning the teaching of Uighur in schools, discriminating against Uighurs in jobs, closing mosques and demolishing ancient Uighur cities such as Kashgar, on the Silk Road.
As for the 13 Uighurs in Guantanamo Bay, who were declassified as enemy combatants in 2005, and whom the US has asked Australia to take, Kadeer says Australia has nothing to fear.
"Those people are completely innocent, just like you and me. They happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time... They won't bring any danger to Australian society." (source)

Bob BrownBob brown sees no problem in throwing his weight behind the Uighurs, even though they have been linked to terrorism - the two men who killed 16 policemen in Kashgar last year were Uighur members of the insurgency seeking to break Xinjiang away from China and establish an independent Islamic state of “East Turkistan”.

... After the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, the United States supported Beijing in having the East Turkistan Islamic Movement listed as a terror organization by the UN.
...Last month, after people were killed by series of explosions on buses in southern China, a video claiming responsibility was posted on the Internet by a group identifying itself as the Turkistan Islamic Party. (source)

 But despite all this, Bob Brown remains unwavering in his support:

The Australian government should make public Beijing's pressure campaign to stop Australia taking Guantanamo Bay inmates, who are Uighurs, found totally innocent of any charge, Bob Brown said.
...China's government is publicly demanding that the Uighurs are sent back to trial in China and, no doubt, further ill-treatment.
"On the eve of twentieth anniversary of the massacre of democrats in Tiananmen Square, the Rudd government should not be coerced to deny these men joining their compatriot Uighur community in Australia."  (source)


That's right Bob - we need more Muslim terrorists in Australia!

He  insisted that Foreign Minister Stephen Smith should meet with Kadeer during her visit to Canberra:

Senator Brown, who hosted a screening of the documentary, The 10 Conditions of Love, in Parliament House , said her fight for autonomy for her homeland of East Turkistan was one deserving of international recognition and respect.
"It is fine that Minister Smith should defend the request by the Chinese Government to ban Kadeer from speaking at the National Press Club, but it should be balanced by the Minister meeting the Uighur leader."
"The film reveals that it is 10 years since Kadeer was arrested by the Chinese Government for sending newspaper clippings to her husband who was then exiled in the United States. What followed was six years of imprisonment, including two years in solitary confinement. (source)

Bob's dogged support of Uighurs continues, despite evidence that Muslims  in the Middle East may be offering help to the Muslim Chinese Uighurs.

... there are reports that the UAE attempted to ship arms, ammunition and explosives to the Uighurs in Western China, but the shipment was detained in India.
This follows expressions of concern from other Middle East Arabs over the harsh Chinese treatment of the Uighurs during July rioting in the regional capital of Urumqi.
The UAE offer of assistance became known after one of its C-130 Hercules transport aircraft was detained and its weapons cargo seized by Indian authorities as the aircraft landed at Calcutta Airport en route to Xinjiang.
Only upon landing did the captain of the aircraft file a declaration with Indian Customs that the aircraft was carrying arms, ammunition and explosives. (source)Rats

Still, we all know one man's terrorist in another man's freedom fighter, don't we Bob? So nothing to worry about!

3. Julian Burnside, for promoting the human rights of  perpetrators over their victims.

Burnside, QC is a barrister and President of Liberty Victoria. He appeared at The Human Rights Arts and Film Festival, (whose stated aim is  "to make human rights accessible, relevant and significant to the broader Australian community"), along with Waleed Aly, Tim Costello and  others who don't like the West. (reference)

Now don't get me wrong,  I support human rights. But not when the term is used to blind us to the obvious threats we face. As Gerard Henderson points out:

The problem is that a number of well-meaning people in the civil liberties lobby will continue to believe what they want to believe, and consequently, will continue to deny that Islamist terrorists want to destroy Western societies.
In 2006 Julian Burnside, QC, took part in a debate in which he argued that citizens have more to fear from the state than from terrorists. His non sequitur was of the motor vehicle genre. Burnside said: "The average worldwide death toll from terrorism each year is 600 to 700 people - which makes it one of the least likely ways to die. Westerners are 100,000 times more likely to die in a car accident than in a terrorist attack".
If such logical howlers were made in a school debate they could be readily corrected. However, when they are made by bright, well-meaning people such as  Burnside there is a problem. Clearly he does not want acknowledge that Islamist terrorists want to attack Western and non-Western societies and to kill indiscriminately.
In Warrant for Terror (Hoover Studies, 2006), Shmuel Bar says Islamism is not a "consequence of political and socioeconomic factors alone" and points to "the centrality of the religious culture that allows it to flourish". The civil liberties lobby does not want to concede that Islamists are waging a religious war against the West.
While the overwhelming majority of Muslim leaders decline to condemn al-Qaeda's killings, it makes sense for Westerners to be vigilant about terrorism. Or even obsessed. (source)

But Burnside and others continue to spruik for those accused of terror offences, ignoring valid security concerns:

The treatment of Mohamed Haneef compromises Australia's legal system and puts at risk the way of life the Government says it is fighting to protect, writes Julian Burnside.

He spent 12 days in custody waiting to be questioned by police... as soon as Haneef was granted bail, Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews cancelled his visa, ensuring that Haneef will remain in custody pending trial, despite the granting of bail. This is a serious misuse of power for an ulterior purpose and an illegitimate interference with the process of criminal justice...The minister has publicly branded Haneef as a person of bad character. That will make a fair trial more difficult to achieve.

Where does the presumption of innocence get a look in?
Nowhere apparently. The minister has hinted strongly that if Haneef is acquitted he will be removed from Australia anyway.
This Government will use every dirty trick to crush Haneef, regardless of his guilt or innocence. (source)

Julian BurnsideBurnside is fiercely supportive of the Palestinian cause, less so about the human rights of victims of jihad. Yet he was outraged when Ted Lapkin wrote an article stating he was pro-Palestinian:

It concerned Anthony Loewenstein's book 'My Israel Question' and mentions the forthcoming event at the Melbourne Writer's Festival..

The author states: "According to the Festival program, Loewenstein will share the stage with QCs Julian Burnside and Robert Richter. Burnside’s pro-Palestinian sympathies are a matter of public record."

That is false and defamatory. Whilst I have sympathy for any group of people who suffer, I am neutral on the question of Israel and Palestine. I challenge Mr Lapkin to justify the sentence I refer to. I suspect it is just an example of his willingness to argue by abuse rather than by reason. (source)

Ted Lapkin responded:

I find it quite odd that you have taken umbrage at my characterisation of you as one whose “pro-Palestinian sympathies are a matter of public record.” In light of your track record, I would have thought that you would consider such a description to be the highest form of praise.

What other reasoned conclusion can be drawn from your decision to launch the “Palestine Lost” photo exhibit in 2004? The exhibition’s sponsors – Women for Palestine and the Australian Arabic Council – make no bones about their pro-Palestinian stance. And the application of that explicitly partisan worldview to the exhibit was made abundantly clear by Women for Palestine President Sonja Karkur, who was quoted in the Age as follows:

“it is the first time that the Palestinian story is shown from three different perspectives in one exhibition… the exhibition tells the story of the Palestinian struggle to retain identity and homeland under occupation”.

Curator Judith Pugh stressed that the exhibit included photos of Israeli victims of suicide bombings. But these token references to Palestinian violence did little to redress the overall partisan thrust of the exhibit. The leit-motif of the enterprise remained harshly critical of Israel. While “bad things have happened on both sides,” said Pugh, the exhibition’s primary focus is to “show the moral decay that happens to a society [Israel] that overwhelms another [Palestinian] society.”

This clearly reflect a pronounced partiality in favour of the Palestinian narrative....  your willingness to lend your name to this partisan enterprise makes it only reasonable to conclude that you share its weltanshauung.

And that impression is reinforced by a speech you gave at the NSW Parliament, where you quoted approvingly from a poem by Edmund Ortiz that expressed profoundly anti-Israel sentiments...and called for a moment of silence to honour “the tens of thousands of Palestinians who have died at the hands of U.S.-backed Israeli forces over decades of occupation”.

At the very time that you delivered this oration, in November 2002, the Palestinian campaign of suicide bombing against Israel was at its ghastly height. Hundreds of innocent Jews were ripped to shreds in attacks against commuter buses, shopping centres, cafes and nightclubs. Yet you saw no need to pay any deference to the Israeli victims of this conflict...You deemed only Palestinian tribulations to be worthy of public recognition.

By both commission and omission, you made your partisan proclivities on the Middle East conflict readily apparent. And I contend that your paper trail does not support your protestations of neutrality on the “question of Israel and Palestine.” (source)

On Paul Bongiorno's Meet the Press, Burnside shows his support for terrorist Hicks:Dhimmi Rat

PB:  Well, Julian Burnside, how do you see the outcome? Is it a good end to a sorry saga?
J. Burnside: "Well, it's good for David Hicks because he's been through five years of hell and now at least there's an end in sight, but it's a bad outcome because the whole deal is poisoned at the [start?].
It comes at the end of five years of what must be almost unbearable treatment and just before he was about to face a trial that by any standard was going to be an unfair trial, and  in circumstances where the Government...has decided they'd better do something to help him because it's an election year.
So, frankly, I don't think anyone should draw any inferences against Hicks just because he's done this deal.
Brian Toohey:"....Don't you think that there's a reasonable chance however that were he put before a civilian court he would have been found guilty of the narrow charge of assisting or providing material support to a terrorist organisation?"
JB: "Well, I doubt it very much. Because it seems - obviously if he'd been tried in a civil court they would not have been able to receive hearsay evidence, they would not have been able to receive evidence obtained by coercion...
Why do you think they introduced specific rules for this commission set up specifically for him that allowed hearsay and coerced evidence? (source)

 At the Equal Opportunity Commission Annual Oration 2006, Jules is full of moral outrage about how we behave.

The response of western governments to September 11 might be the defining characteristic of the 21st century.
Parliament should recognize that human rights are a basic assumption in democratic systems, and that majoritarian rule does not justify the mistreatment of unpopular minorities.
The protection of human rights depends on the executive showing restraint and decency in administering laws.. In this, the Howard Government has a miserable record,  made all the worse by their hypocritical maundering about ' family values' and a ' fair go' .
ASIO has vast powers and seeks, wherever possible, to avoid any scrutiny of its activity by Courts. Mahommad Sagar has been held on Nauru by Australia for 5 years, even though Australian officials accept that he is a refugee. He has been adversely assessed by ASIO, and they refuse to tell him why.
Mr Ruddock made himself popular during the 2001 election campaign by vilifying refugees. He created a climate in which they were seen - quite wrongly - as a threat to the community. When Howard and Ruddock lied about the so-called children overboard affair, when they used the language of 'border protection' to justify the Pacific Solution, they created a climate in which the public were able to think that asylum seekers were people whose human rights did not count if we wanted to stay safe.
By inducing a state of fear, the Howard government has been able to engage in terrible abuses of human rights which would not otherwise be tolerated, but they pass without complaint as 'border protection' or the war on terror. (source)

Good to know Jules wants to protect the human rights of those who want to destroy our freedoms.

Last Updated on Tuesday, 13 October 2009 22:45  

AIM Listed by NLA


Australian Islamist Monitor's web publications were selected for preservation by the National Library of Australia. Access to our materials stored in the NLA Archive is facilitated in two ways: via the Library’s online catalogue; and via subject and title lists maintained on the PANDORA home page.
Click HERE for direct access to the archive

Islam Kills

History - Articles

Lest We Forget the Battle of Tours

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Violent Jihad

Australians celebrate and revere Anzac Day on April 25th each year in remembrance of our brave soldiers who fought in two great world wars to secure our freedom. Every Australian identifies with the slogan “lest we forget” and in services held around the country people reflect on the battles and men who died to secure our freedom. Yet across the world in France, there is one remarkable battle which helped form the Europe we know today and allowed the development of civilization based on Judeo Christian principles. This one famous battle has become known as the battle of Tours and effectively stopped the Muslim advance into Europe. After the death of Mohammed in 632AD, Muslim armies exploded out of the Arabian peninsula to conquer much of the Middle East, expanding across north Africa. From there they crossed into Spain in 711AD and eventually controlled much of al-Andalus by 715AD. It was the victory at Tours by Charles Martel that stemmed the tide and eventually the Muslim marauders were expelled from Spain in 1492 when the last outpost at Granada fell to King Ferdinand of Spain. 

Read more

Shivaji’s Coronation Laudatory Landmark

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Infidels' Resistance

Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj was born, lived, fought and won battles against religious and social oppression in the 17th century Bharat or India. He was a shining star in the Indian firmament and is renowned as a champion of the downtrodden and depressed masses. He was and continues to be an icon for the classes and masses alike and is seen as a rallying point for peasants oppressed by foreign rulers, Pathans and Moghuls alike. Sexually exploited women found in Shivaji Raje a protector, a benefactor and flocked to his Hindavi Swaraj to find solace and feel liberated under his saffron flag. 

Read more

Ransomer of Captives from the Muslims

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Tolerance Myths

Perhaps some readers might be interested to know that January 28 is considered a feast day among Catholics – actually 2 feast days are celebrated on the same day – one is of ST Thomas Aquinas, the great medieval theologian and philosopher who adapted Aristotle to the western Judeo-Christian worldview. . It is also the feast day of a lesser known person – St Peter Nolasco, the great ransomer of captives from the Muslims.

Read more

Islamic Pirates

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Violent Jihad

Barbary Corsair
Somalian Islamic Pirates & Lessons from History
The dramatic rescue of the American cargo-ship captain Richard Phillips from the hands of Somalian Islamic pirates by the U.S. Navy—killing three pirates, holding him hostage at gun-point, through precision-targeting—warrants a review of the U.S. struggle with piracy and hostage-taking in North Africa, which ended two centuries ago.

Raiding trade-caravans and hostage-taking for extracting ransom in Islam was started by Prophet Muhammad. Having become powerful and secure after his relocation to Medina from Mecca in 622, Muhammad initiated Jihad or holy war in the form of raids of trade-caravans for earning livelihood for his community. In the first successful raid of a Meccan caravan at Nakhla in December 623, his brigands killed one of the attendants, took two of them captive, and acquired the caravan as “sacred” booty. The captives were ransomed to generate further revenue. Muhammad, later on, expanded this mode of Jihad to raiding non-Muslim communities around Arabia—for capturing their homes, properties and livestock, capturing their women and children as slaves often for ransoming and selling, and imposing extortional taxes—which sometimes involved mass-slaughter of the attacked victims.

Read more

The Battle of Broken Hill

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

Battle of Broken Hill Logo
The First Islamic Terrorist Attack on Australian Soil
On January 1, 1915 two Broken Hill men, both former camel drivers, armed themselves with rifles, an homemade flag bearing Islamic insignia and a large supply of ammunition and launched a surprise attack on the Picnic Train about 3 kilometres outside Broken Hill.

The train carried about 1200 Broken Hill residents to Silverton where a picnic to celebrate the new year was to take place.

The two Muslim men, Gool Mohamed originally a Pashtun tribesman from Afghanistan and Mullah Abdullah from what is known today as Pakistan, decided to wage jihad against Australian infidels after Australia and the Ottoman Empire officially joined the opposite sides in the WWI.

Read more

Jihad Galore

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Tolerance Myths

Jihad Galore and the Toledo Whore

Battle of Higueruela

Alhambra - GazelleHow often in conversation with a Muslim, do they quote Spain as the crowning achievement of Islam, where Muslims, Jews and Christians lived in harmony for about 800 years?

And when you mention the killings and massacres, you are told that the Spanish Inquisition was much worse.
This is a misconception, since the Inquisition in Spain was responsible for only between 4,000 and 5,000 lives. [1]

Yet in 1066AD, in a single day, muslims murdered over 4,000 Jews because Vizier Joseph ibn Naghrela had risen to a position greater than them, and of course, this upset the Muslim sensitivities. [2]

Read more

Arabs Hated The Quran

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Stolen Heritage

How the Arabs Hated The Quran
Old Quran

Wh y are you a Muslim?
Musli ms in general love to hear the above question because it has a simple and readymade answer in their minds besides it gives them the opp or t u nity to propagate their religion and talk proudly about Islam.


Read more

Lepanto Anniversary

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Imperialism

Decisive Victory for the West

At this time of year, it is timely to remember one of the greatest victories of the west against the Islamic world. On the 7th October in 1571, Don Juan and the Holy League, led by Admiral Doria, defeated the larger Ottoman fleet in the Battle of Lepanto, saving Europe from the Turks and militant Islam. The Holy League was a coalition of different armies - of the Republic of Venice, the Papacy (under Pope Pius V), Spain (including Naples, Sicily and Sardinia), the Republic of Genoa, the Duchy of Savoy, the Knights Hospitaller and some others.

Read more

Muslim Jerusalem

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Stolen Heritage

Jerusalem - Coat of ArmsWhy do Muslims insist that Jerusalem is their Holy City?
When Mohamed and his faithful followers moved from Mecca to Medina, they found themselves among three Jewish tribes/clans (BANU-L-NADIR, BANU KAINUKA and BANU KURAIZA)  which settled there some time after their expulsion from their homeland and also living there were  two Arab, pagan tribes.

Mohammed, who at this stage needed more followers, decided to win those tribes over and convert them to his newly invented religion.

Islam was yet not as fully developed as we know it today, and Mohammed was still having his sessions with Allah (the Medina period revelations).

Read more

Killing of Banu Quraiza

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Imperialism

Did Prophet Muhammad order Killing Surrendered Jews of Banu Quraiza and Khaybar?  A historical Analysis

In the post 9/11 era of this modern-world, Islamists around the globe are busy with ‘damage control utopia’ in order to correct the image of religion Islam. We all know that the nucleus of Islam are: Quran, Hadiths (Sunnah) supported by Islamic histories and biographies recorded by various famous Islamic scholars and historians.

What Mecca?

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

History - Early History

A great tragedy of the Islamic control of our universities and political correctness plus the fear of extreme violence if anyone dares question the roots and claims of Islam is ...that nobody dares question the roots and claims of Islam!!!  I want to stimulate interest and offer this summary of information on Mecca from (LINK) which discusses some problems with Muslim claims in a comparison of evidence supporting Islam/Christianity. 

Read more

Yahweh or Hubal

Attention: open in a new window. PDF | Print | E-mail

FlagThere is a very strongly entrenched view among majority of Westerners today that the three main monotheistic religions Judaism, Christianity and Islam share one common God and therefore despite the obvious differences, the core foundation of these three religions is the same. 

Read more