Peach, thanks so very much for posting PM Howard's statement. I wanted a transcript to save and didn't get a chance to do it during the week. Do you mind if I blockquote it here for emphasis? That Blair-Howard press conference was the inspiration for my doing this.
Australian Prime Minister John Howard, speaking at a press conference in London after last week's failed bombings:
Can I just say very directly, Paul, on the issue of the policies of my government and indeed the policies of the British and American governments on Iraq, that the first point of reference is that once a country allows its foreign policy to be determined by terrorism, it's given the game away, to use the vernacular. And no Australian government that I lead will ever have policies determined by terrorism or terrorist threats, and no self-respecting government of any political stripe in Australia would allow that to happen.
Can I remind you that the murder of 88 Australians in Bali took place before the operation in Iraq.
And I remind you that the 11th of September occurred before the operation in Iraq.
Can I also remind you that the very first occasion that bin Laden specifically referred to Australia was in the context of Australia's involvement in liberating the people of East Timor. Are people by implication suggesting we shouldn't have done that?
When a group claimed responsibility on the website for the attacks on the 7th of July, they talked about British policy not just in Iraq, but in Afghanistan. Are people suggesting we shouldn't be in Afghanistan?
When Sergio de Mello was murdered in Iraq -- a brave man, a distinguished international diplomat, a person immensely respected for his work in the United Nations -- when al Qaeda gloated about that, they referred specifically to the role that de Mello had carried out in East Timor because he was the United Nations administrator in East Timor.
Now I don't know the mind of the terrorists. By definition, you can't put yourself in the mind of a successful suicide bomber. I can only look at objective facts, and the objective facts are as I've cited. The objective evidence is that Australia was a terrorist target long before the operation in Iraq. And indeed, all the evidence, as distinct from the suppositions, suggests to me that this is about hatred of a way of life, this is about the perverted use of principles of the great world religion that, at its root, preaches peace and cooperation. And I think we lose sight of the challenge we have if we allow ourselves to see these attacks in the context of particular circumstances rather than the abuse through a perverted ideology of people and their murder.
Can't be repeated often enough, imo.
I've bookmarked it for later use.
There was a fascinating article I read recently about a female judge.
After 9/11, she read every book about Islam she could lay her hands on.
When she was finished, she learned key words in Arabic, visited Islamic web sites and using software to translate, started reading. Using a screen name, she set herself up as a jihadist.
She never posted during the five times a day of prayer and learned the holidays of the Islamic faith, etc., and other jihadists started corresponding with her.
She contacted the FBI several times, testified in a trial and the FBI have stated publicly that she averted a terrorist attack in this country.
She remained anonymous until the despicable MSM outted her when some reporters attended the trial and wrote her real name in their papers.
She has since received death threats and has been put under protection, along with her family, but she is back under another screen name doing the same thing.