Waleed Aly says that terrorism is ‘political’, but also says that the cancellation of a terror suspect’s bail by a legitimate, elected government is ‘political’.

A bit odd.

Seeing that Aly’s article is also political; the usual reaction of the usual suspects to anything the governments does is also political, and my comment is political, as are most opinions expressed on OLO, it is pretty damn silly to describe what the government has done in the case of the foreign doctor and terror suspect as political in an obviously derogatory way intended to bad mouth the government.

How on earth can terrorism, government action against terrorism and general opinion on terrorism be anything but political?

The government does, indeed, seem to have made something of a dog’s breakfast of the Haneef case. The AG, with his umming and ahing should have retired at the same time John Howard should have retired. I don't have a great deal of faith that the Government can protect Australia.

Nevertheless, Waleed Aly remains one of these ‘moderate’ Muslims who talks issue-dodging nonsense to take the heat off the real problem - Muslim terrorism.

On the frontspiece of the US Air War College Intelligence Library webpage, like a device on a shield, shine the immortal words of Marshall McLuhan:

"Only puny secrets need protection.
Big discoveries are protected by public incredulity."

So I have been turning the debacle of Dr Haneef over and over in my mind. Yes, the politicians are revealed as malevolent fantasists. Yes, the AFP are portrayed as blundering zealots. But is it all down to their own misadventures, or are they being deliberately led astray? If so, to what purpose?

The source of all this "secret" information comes from without. It comes from another country's sly-boys. The "information" can be calibrated to achieve a certain outcome, when the recipients of it are willing dupes of chimera such as The Great War On Terror. This has been done over and over in the past, in country after country screwed by US and UK corporate interests. Remember the scourge of Communism - magnified and horrorised by the very same crew who gave us Usama?

Now we face the ordeal of APEC Sydney in September, in which the Russian and Chinese leaders will be joined by the Commander-in-Chimp. The Security Industry together with it's invisible partner, The Secrecy and Concealment Industry, will quietly reap windfalls from the public purse:

http://www.americanintelligence.us/News/article/sid=4679.html

For a small investment of a red-herring or two, one may garner a very generous financial return. Aw, come on! It's just business. Neo-liberal Australia is a land of opportunity!

This is the logical outcome of Howard's politicisation and incentivisation of the public service and the national security services. But here's the kicker: the clever little chap only THOUGHT it was his idea! Zealots can be so stupid.

So wear your conspiracy badges with pride. One day they'll be worth something.

I remember a little man who may have had too much to drink that particular night saying "We will decide who comes here, and the circumstances under which they come."

Apparently this man allowed the doctor in, Howard is big on words, short on action to keep our boarders safe. Had he spend some of his surplus training Australian doctors in Australia so we would not have to import them, he would not have this current situation.

As it is I saw Vinny's on TV yesterday saying we have an alarming increase in poverty in this country, clearly when Howard said he would govern for "all of us" he meant "some of us" the big end of town.

Terrorism is indeed a political tool and is the physical response to a perceived political problem.

It is usually the only remaining practical alternative for some groups when meaningful negotiation has failed or is not possible.

It is not the real problem however - it is the symptom of another problem that it seems nobody wants to discuss.

To portray it as some sort of idealogical or religious struggle is just another way of avoiding the real issue.

As long as this is the case, it can never be eliminated or defeated.
It's always been with us in some form and historically, sometimes it even works.

As long as the politicians cause it, only they can stop it.

"Terrorism is the War of the Poor, War is the Terror of the Rich".

wobbles,
Indeed mate it certainly is. It's a war for the wealthy to remain on top of the poor. After all if we were sitting in a shack eating rice with fish waved over it for flavor and knew others in the world were starving while other were paying thousands of dollars to have their pets groomed it would probably raise the hair on the back of our necks also.

Howard doesn't discuss the "p" word because if someone does we will find that we have many of our our cases, and people may rebel and seek a fairer outcome, which would mean a shift in wealth from the mega-rich to the mega-poor in this country, totally against Liberal Party policy, and not really on the ALP's agenda either.

Waleed Ali and indeed any Islamist (not to mention a lawyer) should be read with caution.

Notice how he never mentions the common religious thread that is linking all acts of world terrorism.

Reading ‘between the lines” I could detect almost a sense of disappointment at the bungled terror attempts.

As all good Islamist Waleed puts the blame on our anti-terror system and laws, and takes no responsibility for the Islamic terrorist acts.

As head of the Islamic Council of Victoria – Waleed should be the last one to express concern about Islamic terrorism – since the prime role of ICV is promoting literatures that bluntly, and shamelessly promotes Jihad to our Australian Islamic youths.