I have to say that I hope Christopher proves to be correct in his assessment, although I've always opposed our involvement in the so-called coalition of the willing at least in part because I think that we have invited retribution from the amorphous "enemy" in the nonsensical "war against terror" by stupidly putting our hands up as combatants.

That said, I reckon that events in the past few years demonstrate the pressing need we have to codify our civil rights, before this government legislates them away under the guise of perceived terrorism. Ironically, I didn't think that prior to the Tampa debacle that unleashed the dogs of racist paranoia once again in our society - thus providing the impetus for the very disturbing tends today.

I don't think I've ever read such hateful commentary as I do at this On Line Opinion web site. It scares me in much the same way as talk-back radio does.

From the article on website
http://www.foriegnaffairs.org
Europe's Angry Muslims

"Contrary to what many Americans concluded during Washington's dispute with Paris in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq, France is the exception to general European complacency. Well before September 11, France had deployed the most robust counterterrorism regime of any Western country. Irish terrorism may have diverted British attention from jihad, as has Basque terrorism in Spain, but Algerian terrorism worked the opposite effect in France.

To prevent proselytizing among its mostly North African Muslim community, during the 1990s the energetic French state denied asylum to radical Islamists even while they were being welcomed by its neighbors. Fearing, as Kepel puts it, that contagion would turn "the social malaise felt by Muslims in the suburbs of major cities" into extremism and terrorism, the French government cracked down on jihadists, detaining suspects for as long as four days without charging them or allowing them access to a lawyer. Today no place of worship is off limits to the police in secular France. Hate speech is rewarded with a visit from the police, blacklisting, and the prospect of deportation. These practices are consistent with the strict Gallic assimilationist model that bars religion from the public sphere (hence the headscarf dispute).

Contrast the French approach to the United Kingdom's separatist form of multiculturalism, which offered radical Arab Islamists refuge and the opportunity to preach openly, while stepping up surveillance of them. French youth could still tune into jihadist messages on satellite television and the Internet, but in the United Kingdom open radical preaching spawned terrorist cells. Most of the rest of Europe adopted the relaxed British approach, but with less surveillance."

Dear Chris
thanx for noting my comments and responding.

I sense that various elements in our society have an interest in either 'talking up' or 'talking down' the threat situation.

Those talking it 'up' would want to milk any hint of threat for its maximum political value, and vice versa for the other mob.

Looking just at the facts though, I would think that the specific mention of "Melbourne" from a person who is reported to have 'gone native' into radical Islam and is purported to be bunkered down in Afghanistan or Waziristan or some stan.... would have more credibility than the Sydney morning herald :)

But I'm more concerned that if anything does happen, that people are 'ready' on the outside with vigilance, and the inside, if they are called on to have a one on one with their Creator.

I can read your mind :) "aargggh.. he lost me right there"..... ?
Hope not. What would life be without the odd 'godbotherer' here and there to give our unique view of things.

But again, on the article and the general social/policital situation these days, I feel that all would benefit from a reading of the history of Islam and especially the time of Mohamed and the various battles he fought to establish his religion.

The contrast could not be more stark.
-Mohamed has the 'battle of Uhud'
Christ 'sends out the seventy to heal, and preach'
-Mohamed has the battle of Badr
Christ says "We are going up to Jerusalem where the Son of man will be crucified"
-Mohamed Invades Mecca
Christ said "As the Father has sent me, so I send you"
"by this shall all men know that you are my disciples, that you have love, one for another"

Mr Michaelsen you are kidding aren't you? Porous borders, symbolic targets, support for extremists, and on the doorstep of the largest population of muslims in the world- Australia has it all.
Contrary to popular belief it wasn't Iraq that made us a target but actually our involvement in East Timor. That coupled with a continued presence in Afghanistan makes an attack inevitable-when not if.
There is too much hysteria surrounding the problem but to an extent that is understandable.
Hate to be rude but if that article was graded, a pass conceded would be complimentary...

"creepy" has to be the operative word?

Anyone who does not invest in Fear & Punish tactics - must be promoting terror.

What ever happened to understanding CAUSE?

Wake Up Australia - we have the knowledge to think and DO differently.

Thank You Taswegian who said;

"Terrorism is really a side issue compared to a range of more insidious problems. These include weather disasters, entrenched current inequality, funding of care for the future needy and decreasingly affordable energy and water. These problems will generate far more human misery yet advocates of needlessly draconian laws seem silent on the bigger picture. Perhaps they don't know how to prevent, only how to punish."

Also Thank You ABC Lateline and SBS Dateline and those other shows, who give us interviews of thinkers, who help us dissect and see through these arguements.

Last Monday nights Lateline was particularly useful.

I am flagging some of these recent interviews from http://www.miacat.com/ while we await the outcome of the 2005 World Summit Talks - if anyone is interested.

I disagree with the article. I don't think a wave of paranoia is sweeping our country but I do think many people are concerned that we may be on the list of countries that are to enjoy the civilising influence of Pax Islamica delivered by al-Qaeda.

Furthermore, we should not rely on the veraciousness of answers given by muslims who are subject to police interrogation. Upholding the traditions enunciated by revered muslim icon Al-Ghazzali*, muslims employ al-Taqiyya and kitman when it suits. Maybe we have become so sophisticated in 2005 that we don't have the tools or skills to deal with a 7th century redux. To better explain what I am saying, we had the piquant situation of a muslim who migrated to Australia to enjoy the freedoms, lifestyle etc., reject our education system for the superior model on offer in Pakistan when looking for a school for his kids. Are we to believe that it is Pakistan that is turning out pansophists. I have parked myself at the Qantas departure lounge and to date have not spotted his kids waiting to board QF43 that will take them to Pakistan.

Thanks Chris for addressing an important issue.

*Al-Ghazzali, "the famous 11th-century Muslim theologian, claimed that the lie is not wrong in itself. If the lie is the way to achieve good results, then it is permissible. It is necessary to lie when the truth might lead to unpleasant or undesired results".