The mass murder of Muslims in Christchurch perfectly fulfils the project of Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and their jihadist offspring around the globe, including Islamic State: exploit the political, social and media structures of the West to provoke reactions that can be portrayed as revealing the homicidal Islamophobia of the heart of the West. This would allegedly — in their thinking — force even moderate and westernised Muslims to fight back.
The Dubya Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, in which the Howard government gleefully joined, fitted this narrative perfectly. Security agencies across the West repeatedly warned us of this outcome — and were repeatedly ignored. But the mass murder of Muslims at prayer by white terrorists also serves perfectly. The hijacker, the suicide bomber, the IS minion beheading a westerner for YouTube, the hate-filled white male slaughtering people in a mosque, are all brothers in arms in common cause — to outrage, provoke, terrorise and will into existence the delusion that people with slightly varying versions of the same religious story, or of different racial origins, can’t live peaceably and prosperously together.
There’s also been a union of interests between politicians and the media and terrorists to hype the danger of terrorism to the point where it would routinely and absurdly be described as “existential”. Politicians have used it to justify wars, channel vast sums of money to corporate donors, give themselves massively greater powers over citizens. The media, ever more desperate to attract diminishing audiences, have enthusiastically joined in the hype and exploitation.
White supremacist terrorists, however, have had the advantage of not being taken seriously by the media and politicians — indeed, of being enabled by them. The 2016 election gave a platform to the racism and Islamophobic bile of Pauline Hanson and her cronies (her culpability was nailed on the weekend by journalist Rashida Yosufzai in a single, searing tweet).
The enabling extends to the Coalition, indeed to the Prime Minister himself, who eight years ago urged his shadow cabinet colleagues to exploit “Muslim immigration” and the alleged “inability” of Muslim immigrants to integrate with Australian society for political gain. It extends to the Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton, who has claimed asylum seekers who might be brought to Australia for medical treatment would displace Australians.
It extends to Attorney-General Christian Porter who warned of rapists and murderers arriving in Australia under the medivac legislation, and Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack claiming the same — while Tony Abbott as Prime Minister criticised the claim that Islam is a religion of peace.
They all used the imagery and language of white supremacists, who portray Muslims as fundamentally hostile to western societies and invaders who aim to displace Australians.
Much of the media, especially News Corp, has also played an enabling role. Both Sky News — a festering sore of far-right extremism after dark — and Seven Network actually provided a platform for fascist convicted criminal Blair Cottrell. Seven has provided a long-running breakfast TV platform for Pauline Hanson that not merely served to normalise her hate speech but gave her crucial free airtime in the lead-up to the election that restored her to parliament. A slew of News Corp commentators have demonised Muslims using the tropes and language of white supremacists for nearly two decades, and celebrated far-right provocateurs as brave truth-tellers rather than the vacuous, self-promoting bigots they are.
This was accompanied by a remarkable double standard. While all Muslims were called upon to denounce any act of violence by a Muslim anywhere in the world, when white supremacists engaged in violence or confrontational behaviour, this was downplayed or ignored.
Again, intelligence and security agencies warned us of the threat of violence. US security agencies and police forces repeatedly singled out white supremacists and other far-right extremists as the most dangerous sources of terrorism in that country, rather than Islamist terrorism. But, again, politicians and the media ignored them (here, ASIO was even criticised for warning politicians about the impact of the language they used to describe Muslims).
It may have been that politicians and the media — perhaps security agencies themselves — assumed white supremacists were only interested in, or capable of, brownshirt-style thuggery. History, particularly the 1995 Oklahoma bombing, showed how wrong this was. This is a key point made by Anthony Byrne, Labor’s deputy chair on parliament’s intelligence and security committee and an MP whose own electorate has been defiled by both Islamist terrorism and white supremacist aggression.
“There is a perception that our agencies have overlooked right-wing extremism and the terrorist threat they posed,” he told Crikey. “This is not true. [ASIO director] Duncan Lewis has warned the public of the threat of right wing extremism for years, but those warnings seemed to have been ignored by the media and politicians. I think, however, the scale of this mass casualty attack would have caught the agencies by surprise. They need to be enabled by politicians to do whatever is necessary to protect the public in the same way they are empowered to deal with the threat posed by Islamic extremism.”
For too long, white supremacists have operated with the advantage of a winking indulgence, even encouragement, from politicians and the media. Changing that means not merely empowering security and intelligence agencies but changing politics and media culture.
Even after the shock of Christchurch, don’t count on politicians and media executives doing that.
The Abbott quote you refer to is a curious one now. Prime Minister Abbott said in 2015, “I’ve often heard Western leaders describe Islam as a ‘religion of peace’. I wish more Muslim leaders would say that more often, and mean it”.
You have to wonder if he, or Dutton, Morrison or any News scribbler, mean their condemnations of hate.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, we need to stop calling these people “terrorists”.
They are criminals, no more, no less.
Just because they kill or blow things up in the name of religion, race or nationality, that does not make them any different from a common or garden variety mass-murderer or arsonist who acts for his or her own gratuitous and warped pleasure.
Calling them “terrorists” publicly links their actions to their cause, making them martyrs to the cause and attracting attention and new recruits to the cause.
It doesn’t matter which side of the fence they are on – they are simply criminals, and should be treated as such.
It is a country’s leadership that enables existence of opportunities . . . “criminals” (with you K) once alerted; then walk through.
The frequent description of killers as lone “wolves” is an unfortunately sexy (to such nutters) term.
Far better to call them “mad dogs” or “rabid rats”.
One of the few things Lady Asbestos did/said of which I approved was to use daesh as an appropriate term for IS, both a direct translation meaning “shit/mess” and a pun on the acronym in Arabic.
But terrorists are criminals.! Criminals who commit terrorist acts. We need to identify them for what they are. Ordinary criminals don’t intentionally terrorize society!
Howard legitimise fear and hatred of others with Tampa and Children Overboard for the cynical reason of appropriating Gun Nation’s emerging constituency. Since then it has become a Liberal Party tradition to dip into the vat of irrational fear and hatred. There is blood on their hands and the cleansing process is probably now impossible in the near term.
“Security agencies warned us about right-wing terrorism. We ignored them.”
Who’s “we”?
Ohhhhh. Right wing politicians and mainstream journalists. Right.
They also compromised any such message by their complicity in creating the swag of secret interrogation and detention without trial laws enacted since Rabbotts ascension.
As K says above creating a whole new fear category called terrorists suits political agendas of others in power as much as the criminals. Also proper pollies like to monopolise political violence and don’t take kindly to outsiders muscling in. 50 dead civilians from a distant air attack are just as inexcusably dead.
Arky, yes. I read “we ignored them” with a question in my mind too. Because I had never once seen anything in any of the media about warnings from security agencies, let alone heard any mention of such warnings from politicians of any party. As an Aussie Muslim I’m aware at first hand that the security agencies keep an eye on what’s happening in Muslim communities. Ms Hanson’s demand for cameras in the the mosques is unnecessary. There is almost certainly someone in every mosque who is in contact with the authorities and such organisations as ASIO and the AFP know better than anyone else what is being said in the sermons. They know how Aussie Muslims go about living their lives and getting along with their neighbours. They even know who we talk to on the phone and probably who we email. One hopes that they exercise at least the same level of surveillance on white nationalist groups.
Yes Rais the organisations do keep us Aussies safe – after the second world war the fanatics from Europe were kept under control and under surveillance. We have a long history of prevention. Even during World War ll we had an undercover military unit that made the actual saboteurs of our war activity that actually jeopardised the troops disappear [didn’t worry about the mere chatterboxes, pamphleteers etc]. That is why the idiot fanatic had to go to New Zealand to carry out his plans.
I’d like to think so but anti-terrorism expert Anne Aly MP interviewed on RN drive this evening seemed to think otherwise if I understood her correctly. If they have not been giving the lunar right and white nationalists close attention perhaps Friday’s horror will get them moving. I don’t blame Australian security organisations for the Christchurch attack though, since it seems that the alleged perpetratrator had spent most of the last three years outside Australia in NZ and elsewhere. Unfortunately though, the lunar right is represented in Parliament.
I’m curious, besides the single reference to the ABC article (which I would characterise as an oblique warning to the public) when did the AFP, ASIO or ASIS come out and start warning the public about right wing extremists? Did I miss something?