Previous issues
Contact Us

Summer 2005 cover

National Observer Home > No. 66 - Spring 2005 > Editorial

Editorial comment

Why Future Muslim Migration to Australia Must Be Halted Urgently

National Observer
(Council for the National Interest, Melbourne),
No. 66, Spring 2005,
pages 6–8.


The policy promoted by the late Mr. Al Grassby, that immigration should be decided regardless of culture, race or religion, has had serious effects in regard to Australia’s security. The development of a non-assimilating and culturally hostile Muslim minority in Australia has provided increasing grounds for concern.

The dangers of a militant and extreme minority are illustrated by such comments as those by Mr. Wassim Doureihi, spokesman for the Islamic group Hizb ut-Tahrir, who recently asserted that suicide bombings should not be condemned because they were reactions against oppression, and that Australia would pay for joining the United States in Iraq: 1

“We have to expect that if this government continues to ally itself with those countries that are destroying entire countries, that are uprooting entire peoples, that are bombing entire villages, then you have to expect that it will come at a price.”

The dangerous tenets that are adopted by many Muslims in Australia are well represented by the Melbourne militant cleric, Abu Bakr (also known as Abdul Nacer Benbrika), who has stated: 2

“I am telling you that my religion doesn’t tolerate other religions. It doesn’t tolerate. . . The only one law which needs to spread – it can be here or anywhere else – has to be Islam. . . Osama bin Laden, he’s a great man. Osama bin Laden was a great man before September 11, which they said he did, and until now, nobody knows who did it . . .

Jihad is a part of my religion, and what you have to understand is that anyone who fights for the sake of Allah. . . when he dies, the first drop of blood that comes from him, all his sin will be forgiven.”

Mr. Piers Akerman, the distinguished writer for TheSunday Tele-graph, has commented that Bakr’s creed is clearly one of intolerance, and that he should not be allowed to stay here; and that Bakr holds dual Alger-ian-Australian citizenship, but as his Australian passport has been seized by the Commonwealth government, he should be told to leave. Mr. Akerman commented further: 3

“In the past month, Britain, long regarded as tolerant beyond reason, has received its wake-up call.

Having provided sanctuary to thousands of extremists in the Pollyanna-ish belief that such generous hospitality would not be abused, Britain’s sense of tolerance has now been violated.

The governments of France, Germany, The Netherlands, Denmark and Spain predicted such a violation.”


In an important recent article in National Observer Dr. Andrew Campbell discussed the device of taqiyya, which is to be translated as deception in the context of promoting Islam. 4 The importance of this device, which justifies untruths in order to advance Islam, is that protestations by Muslims that statements by particular Muslims do not represent “moderate” Muslim thought cannot be relied upon.

Taqiyya recalls the use of deception for political purposes, as used by the governments of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany and their agents, for whom the successes of propaganda outweighed any scruples that should have been felt in promoting falsehoods.

Taqiyya must hence be borne especially in mind when the explanations and protestations of purportedly “moderate” Muslim spokesmen are appraised. In some cases these protestations may be sincere. But in other cases they promote deception. The consequence is that for practical purposes the propaganda or comments of “moderate” Muslims must be disregarded, and their real intentions must be determined by reference to objective evidence obtained by police forces and security organisations in particular.

All of the foregoing indicates how unwise the Grassby doctrine is and how dangerous it has been in assisting large numbers of Muslims to migrate to Australia. The Grassby doctrine – that culture, religion and race are to be ignored in selecting immigrants – does not have a rational basis when many of the immigrants in question have hostile intentions in regard to Australian society.

Mr. John Howard, the Prime Minister, has agreed with his British counterpart, Mr. Tony Blair, that it is appropriate to consider removing the citizenship of Muslim extremists. 5 This proposal is sensible, as far as it goes, but it does not address the more fundamental problems that a Muslim presence in Australia now creates.

The matter has become urgent, because further large numbers of Muslims are currently being admitted to Australia as migrants, and there is hence a continuing deterioration in the position. There is hence an urgent need to recognise that cultural differences are an important and proper consideration in the selection of migrants.

It is necessary that there be a provisional halt to all Muslim immigration to Australia, and this should take effect immediately. Over the course of time it will then be possible to review the matter carefully. An appropriate outcome would be to encourage Muslims already living in Australia to return to their countries of origin, where cultural differences will not arise to the same extent as in Australia.

The rapid addressing of this grave problem should not be impeded by political correctness. Political correctness cannot negate facts; and the critical fact is that Muslim culture makes it inappropriate to admit large numbers of Muslim immigrants into Australia. What has been permitted to occur up to the present time may be regarded as a major disaster.




1. The Herald Sun, 9 August 2005. Predicatably the radical president of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, Dr. Ameer Ali, opposed the barring of the pro-terrorist group. Dr. Ali has emerged as a leading propogandist for Muslim causes.

2. The Sunday Telegraph, 7 August 2005.

3. Ibid.

4. National Observer, 2005, Issue 65, pages 11-23.

5. Mr. Howard stated, as reported in the Herald Sun of 8 August 2005, “I think what Mr. Tony Blair is talking about, quite rightly, is that if someone has come from another country and has failed to properly embrace the values of this society, his society – and I would apply the same to Australia – then the idea of taking away their citizenship is one that ought to be looked at.”