As part of its efforts to whip up an atmosphere of "imminent terrorist attack" in Australia, and thereby ensure public acceptance of its new, anti-democratic "anti-terrorism" laws, the federal government staged a drastic attack on civil rights with its November 7-8 raids on the Muslim community, in which 17 men in Sydney and Melbourne were arrested. Green Left Weekly spoke to people from a range of communities in Brisbane about the raids and new terror laws.
Michael Meadows, Associate Professor of Journalism at Griffith University, told GLW: "There are some real issues of concern about this. The first is that the media was used very effectively by the police to promulgate the idea that there is some kind of justification for the arrests", Meadows said. "This comes on the heels of the very harsh nature of the new legislation ... [which] shifts from the prosecution having to prove someone is guilty, to the people who are arrested having to prove they are innocent.
"This is a significant winding back of the rights that people have fought for over many hundreds of years. It represents a really retrograde steps in terms of the basic human rights that should operate in a democratic society."
Meadows believes "the media complicity in this is of great concern, because people clearly were tipped off about the raids, so that the cameras were rolling when the raids occurred. If this is a matter of great national security why were media involved, if not to bolster the position of politicians?
"If you look at the newspapers, radio and television, all the media coverage is talking about some kind of holy war against Australia. The evidence that came out in court supported nothing like this. All the evidence has been allegations, no proof.
"The real concern is that under the anti-terrorism laws the onus of proof has shifted from the prosecution to the defence. Looking at the media coverage [of the raids] it seems the onus of proof has already shifted <197 even though legislation has not yet been enacted.
"It is a pity indeed that the media feel the need to sensationalise these kind of issues, because all they do is to play into the hands of politicians and others who are really dining out on the fear created in the Australian community, when the hard evidence for that fear simply does not exist.
Dr Mohamad Abdalla, director of the Griffith University Islamic Research Unit and vice-Imam of the Kuraby mosque, told GLW: "They are targeting Muslims, in particular the youth, with their anti-terrorism law. Islam prohibits terrorism and terrorist operations; it is a religion of peace.
"The government carried out the arrests in a brutal and savage way, in which the media were employed negatively. They broke into people's houses at night, terrorising families. This is against basic civil and human rights. If they wanted to arrest them, they could have done it in a civilised and legal way."
Abdalla continued: "In the view of many legal and other scholars, the [new] 'anti-terrorism' legislation represents an admission in many ways that terrorism has won. What we must do is to win back basic human rights in Australia that have been taken for granted — hard-won rights that in many countries in the world people simply do not have.
"These laws are not going to stop any acts of terrorism. All they will do will be to impinge on the everyday activities of people going about their business — and they tend to target a specific community in Australia."
Terry Patrick, a Catholic priest at St Mary's church in south Brisbane, told GLW: "'Be afraid!' — they know it works. Fear is the way the federal government is able to manipulate the majority of Australians. They create racism — that sense of being suspicious of one another — by their campaign against the Muslim community and Aborigines, which escalates fear and division.
"Where there is division they can maintain power, and the anti-terrorism law is the main part of that, on the one hand. On the other hand, the recent arrests and 'anti-terrorism' legislation are in favour of those who have power and wealth, those who also support the new industrial relations laws."
Ray Bergmann, secretary of the Jewish-Palestinian Committee, told GLW: "The government has lied so much and kept so much secret that it is only understandable that we have suspicions about whether they are telling us the truth or whether they are creating an environment of fear and intimidation purposely.
"The government says that the majority of Muslims are law-abiding citizens and they point to some Muslim leaders as 'moderate', but they also imply that other Muslim leaders are 'extremist'. Such fear keeps the populace from protesting the government's actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, and also keeps them from protesting about the anti-terrorism laws and the industrial relations changes."
Sam Watson, an Indigenous community leader and national executive member of the Socialist Alliance, believes the anti-terrorism laws are designed to terrorise and intimidate Aboriginal and Islander people, migrants, refugees and any person who is "different".
"What the Howard government is trying to do is to turn the clock back and produce a nation with one religion and one language. It sounds a terrible warning bell to everyone. Howard and Liberal leaders of the far right are saying that if you are different you have no value, if you are different you are a threat to the Australian way of life. It's a form of racist, totalitarian politics.
"The key terrorist is John Howard, who sent Australian troops into Iraq in breach of the sovereign rights of the nation of Iraq. And he used military hardware to forfeit the rights of individual Iraqis and to carry on a campaign of mass murder and mass terrorism against the people of Iraq."
Abdalla commented: "Their terrorism policy possibly means Australia may face the same situation of disorder that happened in France. We ask the government to treat people legally, and do not destabilise, on purpose, the entire situation in Australia."
Meadows concluded: "It's difficult to predict the consequence of this anti-terror legislation [but] there are a couple of things that are very clear. It has been introduced to bolster the popularity of governments in the US, UK and Australia.
"Australia is blindly following the example of the US. What kind of terrorist threat is there in Australia? Why, in fact, are these laws needed? My understanding is that the existing legislation is ample to enable police to undertake the work of surveillance. Politicians in this country do not adequately answer this question."
From Green Left Weekly, December 7, 2005.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.