There are many unanswered questions about Monis. That is only the latest of at least three names under which he was known. He "fled" Iran in 1996 and was granted asylum by the Australian government. He conveniently appeared in a 2001 ABC interview at a time of anti-Iran hysteria. He was introduced by the ABC as an anti-Iranian cleric who had taken up residence in Macquarie St outside of the State Parliament.

He claimed that Australia was "a real religious society" that compared to Iran and other Middle Eastern countries was "heaven".

Over the years since he has shape shifted, coinciding with shifts in pro-war anti-Islam rhetoric. His garb changed along with his name and his alleged opinions. His latest incarnation was as a claimed convert to Sunni Islam, affiliated with al Nusra, which just happens to be an al Qaeda front armed and financed by the Americans among others in the quest for regime change in Syria.

The Australian government was warned about him by Iran several years ago, and in 2008 the Australian Muslim community urged that he be investigated. He was given bail despite facing a serious charge of being an accomplice in his wife's murder, and despite his criminal background. Despite all this he was able to obtain a weapon and freely walk the streets.

It is known that he was known to the Australian security services. One might think that he served a number of useful purposes for them and the government. It would not be the first such example.

Don't expect a serious analysis of the many questions by the corporate media. Their agenda clearly coincides with that of the national security state.

Interesting comments. I too wondered, if the media could get a good head shot of Monis, why couldn't police? It was pointed out that it was uncertain how many hostage takers there were, and that authorities would prefer Monis alive for interrogation. However, the choice of venue for his action did not allow any escape route which did not bode well for the outcome. The real question is that given the history of Monis - cruel letters to families of dead soldiers, his fake sheik persona, sexual assault charges, and the belief he was involved in the murder of his ex-wife, why was this man free and unmonitered in the first place?

Jay Of Melbourne,

There are tables for .308 and glass. It would be assumed that the glass is the toughened and thicker sort for shop windows.

While the Muslim apologists' spin has it that the offender 'must' have been mad and not a 'true' Muslim, he certainly seems to the layperson at least to have known what he was about. Having the hostages up against the glass or near to it would make a shot even more risky. He wore a backpack too and loose clothes, giving the impression he had explosives beneath.

He appeared trained/briefed in other ways too, such as the sly demands (not agreed to) that could have helped to make it into an international incident.

I wonder too if he really operated alone. Maybe he was one of a unit that was spooked and he went for the choc shop. Also, what was the real mission and what tools? It is a stretch to believe that he expected 72 virgins for a coffee shop.

The first task and most useful role of a marksman is observation and intelligence.

The preferred strategy is talk, delay and mount up the knowledge, understand. The win is to get all hostages out alive.

otb,

"I wonder too if he really operated alone. Maybe he was one of a unit that was spooked and he went for the choc shop..."

I think you realise that scenario is highly unlikely...knowing what we know now.

This puts it quite well:

"The Iranian-born Australian who overran a Sydney chocolate shop on Monday was hardly a fearsome terrorist operative.

He was more of a self-aggrandizing creep.

Ostracized by Australia’s Islamic community, Man Haron Monis, dubiously called himself “sheikh.” He mailed crude insults to families of soldiers killed in Afghanistan. The 50-year-old was fond of preying on women and racked up dozens of sexual assault charges.

He also appeared to be a fanboy of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and declared support for the “caliphate” online. It’s a scintillating detail but rather meaningless. No evidence suggests the brutal proto-state in Iraq and Syria knew Monis existed before he held 17 hostage and was then shot dead by police.

On his website, Monis spouted the rhetoric of global jihad. He called for Muslims to fight the “terrorism of America and its allies including Australia.” But the attention seeker was likely exploiting outsized panic over ISIS for attention.

If so, it’s working. His militancy has helped some media outlets transform a narcissistic criminal into a harbinger of global terror...."

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/asia-pacific/141216/australian-hostage-taker-was-delusional-phony

Poirot,

None of what you say changes the fact that he seems to have known what he was about.

Why would he choose a chocolate shop to win the 72 virgins?

You seem to be a follower of Faceache and the twits of Twitter. How many followers does he have? Where else has be been? Does he have handlers?

'We' know nothing at all apart from what we are being told. Except that it is a jolly good idea to cast him as a bumbling mental case so as not to encourage copycats, or provide the media circus that might be capitalised upon by terrorists already embedded or from abroad.

I will wait for the coroner's report, while knowing that the police and others will be busy looking behind the image being marketed to the public. I very much hope there are no others.

otb,

"... Except that it is a jolly good idea to cast him as a bumbling mental case so as not to encourage copycats..."

All indications are that he was what he appears to be - a somewhat unstable, opportunistic, self-promoting fake with a dubious history.

Not difficult to analyse.