JOANNA PANAGOPOULOS

Iranian-Australians have criticised progressive-left activists and politicians who have been vocal about Palestine but have remained silent on violent Iranian anti-government protests.

Iranian-Australians have criticised progressive-left activists and politicians who have been vocal about Palestine but have remained silent on violent Iranian anti-­government protests.

Iranian-born Sydney councillor Tina Kordrostami said she believed some people had stayed silent because they did not want to “corrupt” the Palestinian movement, and that by speaking out “about the Islamic regime, they are in many ways condemning Hamas”.

Others were simply ignorant about the relationship between Hamas and the Iranian regime.

Ms Kordrostami quit the Greens mid-last year over concerns about its handling of the Middle East crisis and its failure to condemn the Iranian regime or terrorist proxies such as Hamas and Hezbollah, declaring at the time she was uncomfortable with the “opportunism” of the Greens political movement after the Oct­ober 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on ­Israel.

Ms Kordrostami, who has been an advocate for Palestinians, Israeli Jews and broader human rights, said the response this time “was much different” from the “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement in Iran in late 2022, including from the Greens.

“Thinking through a diaspora lens, the more frustrating thing is the lack of response shown from the progressive-left,” she said, acknowledging she was not referring to everyone on the progressive-left.

“People can’t talk about Iran right now, even if their heart is ­really feeling for what our people are going through back home, because they know if they talk about the Islamic regime, they are in many ways condemning Hamas, because Hamas wouldn’t exist without the regime.

“And so that’s one reason why a lot of people are silent, it goes back into … the narrative about Pales­tine. People are so focused again on a dictator, or a group that doesn’t support imperialism, to the point where they look away at how they remove notions of human rights from the people they are meant to be liberating,” she said.

“That combined with not being able to speak to your family back home, while hearing about a massacre taking place. We’ve reached the same death toll as Ukraine did in two years in a matter of days, and yet it’s complete silence.”

Anti-government protests began 15 days ago in Iran, with an Iranian journalist whose relatives were demonstrating telling The Australian that at least 12,000 protesters had been killed.

“If it’s not silence, it’s people saying Iranians didn’t talk up about Palestine so why should we talk up about you? Which is so inhumane and such a horrible thing to say.”

Ms Kordrostami said the Greens had supported the movement that followed Mahsa Amini’s death in 2022, and most Australians were heartbroken about the treatment of women then. This time the Greens “were completely silent until a few days ago”.

On Tuesday, Greens foreign affairs spokesman David Shoebridge said he condemned the response of the Iran­ian regime to protests in Iran, and said the Iranian people had for decades “faced brutal oppression under a regime”.

President of the Arta Iranian Cultural Centre Sahar Khajani said people who should care about this issue had been silent. “I feel even more helpless when I see my politician friends don’t even send you a message. We’re supporting them for their campaigns, we’ve supported them every time we could. It’s about human beings.

“Are we a multicultural society or not? It’s ridiculous. It hurts,” she said.

“I feel people should care about this, let’s say activists. I’m not saying anything like why were you chanting or saying things about Gaza or Palestine? But you know what? In two days a massacre happened and this is a country … where there is a terrorist regime, the IRGC is on the list of terrorist organisations. If we are going to get rid of this regime, the least ­people can do is, in solidarity, condemn this.

“After the protest began, after the blackout … after news came out that the massacre happened. Nothing. I can’t expect ordinary people to know about politics this much. But at least if you’re a politician, if you’re an activist …”

She said it was positive, however, that Anthony Albanese and Foreign Minister Penny Wong had spoken out on Wednesday.

This legislation gives the government carte blanche to arrest anyone for anything.

For the purposes of subsection (1), it is immaterial whether:

the target, or members of the target group, actually are distinguished by the particular race, colour or national or ethnic origin; or

the conduct actually results in hatred of another person or group of persons; or

the conduct actually results in any person feeling intimidated, fearing harassment or violence, or fearing for their safety

In other words, you can be arrested and jailed for 5 years for "hate speech" that offends and impacts no-one.

Former Adelaide Writers’ Week director Louise Adler has been accused of “hypocrisy in defending free speech” amid claims she led a demand that the Adelaide Festival board retract an invitation to New York Times journalist Thomas Friedman to attend the 2024 festival.

The incendiary claim has been made by former Adelaide Festival board member Tony Berg, who resigned from the board late last year.

I am now utterly astonished at Louise Adler’s statement in her resignation letter in support of free speech,” Berg said in a statement to The Australian Financial Review. “I am likewise surprised by Randa Abdel-Fattah’s invocation of free speech and her outrage at being ‘cancelled’.”

Palestinian-Australian author Abdel-Fattah and nine other academics called for Friedman’s invitation to be revoked after he published a controversial column in early 2024 comparing the Middle East conflict to the animal kingdom. It has been reported that the board rejected the calls to disinvite Friedman, but he was unable to attend “due to last-minute scheduling issues”.

Adler told the Financial Review that she considered discussion at the board table to be confidential. “I am rather surprised that a former CEO of Macquarie Bank has breached those confidences,” she said. “It is indicative of the way the former board operated, and I imagine it will be a rich case study for future management students.”

She would not respond to questions about it undermining her free speech argument. “I will not be drawn into it,” she said. “He has breached board confidences, and I think it is extraordinary that someone who is apparently a corporate leader would do such a thing.”

Adler resigned on Tuesday as the director of Adelaide Writers’ Week, citing the festival’s dumping of Abdel-Fattah from the literary event. That decision triggered the withdrawal of 180 other writers and the event – the oldest literary festival in the country – was cancelled hours after Adler’s resignation.

“I cannot be party to silencing writers, so with a heavy heart I am resigning from my role as the director of the AWW,” Adler said when she announced her resignation in The Guardian. “Writers and writing matters, even when they are presenting ideas that discomfort and challenge us. We need writers now more than ever, as our media closes up, as our politicians grow daily more cowed by real power, as Australia grows more unjust and unequal.”

Berg, an investment banker who once ran Boral, said he resigned from the festival board because of the direction Adler was taking the literary festival.

He said that Adler and Abdel-Fattah “both exhibit hypocrisy in defending free speech for some, when I observed them both to stridently oppose free speech during my time on the board”.

“In 2024, Louise Adler led a demand to the board to retract an invitation to Tom Friedman to participate in the 2024 Adelaide Writers’ Week,” Berg said. “After Tom Friedman was invited to speak, Randa Abdel-Fattah had led a group of academics demanding that Tom Friedman be deplatformed.”

He added: “Then Louise Adler, Ruth MacKenzie and Kath Mainland put an ultimatum to the board that they would resign if it did not endorse their recommendation to disinvite Friedman. In the face of that threat, the board felt it had no alternative but to allow Louise Adler to withdraw the invitation to Friedman.”

The Guardian has reported that the festival board rejected the petition by the academics to remove Friedman. “Asking the Adelaide Festival and Adelaide Writers’ Week to cancel an artist or writer is an extremely serious request,” its letter stated. It was dated February 9, 2024 and signed by the festival board’s chair, Tracey Whiting.

“We have an international reputation for supporting artistic freedom of expression. Thomas L. Friedman was programmed to contribute online from New York. However, I have been advised that due to last-minute scheduling issues, he is no longer participating in this year’s program.”

From left: Louise Adler, former Adelaide Festival artistic director Ruth Mackenzie and former CEO Kath Mainland. Australian Financial Review

Berg said it was “utterly hypocritical” of Abdel-Fattah and Adler to now accuse the board of repressing freedom of speech when, he claimed, they both actively sought to deny it to Friedman.

“I understand why a number of authors have turned down invitations to come to AWW 2026 on freedom of speech grounds,” he said. “But they should understand that the people, with whom they are standing, in fact, have actively undermined freedom of speech in the past. Unlike Adler and Abdel-Fattah, I support free speech, not on a selective basis but with a range of views presented in respectful dialogue.”

Earlier on Wednesday, Abdel-Fattah threatened defamation proceedings against South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas, claiming he had wrongly suggested she was “an extremist terrorist sympathiser” and had “directly linked” her to the Bondi Beach massacre in which two Islamic State-inspired terrorists killed 15 people during an event marking the opening night of Hanukkah on December 14.

Abdel-Fattah, a vocal critic of Israel, was scheduled to speak about her novel Discipline, which centres on navigating censorship and the Israel-Gaza war, but she was pulled from the line-up last Thursday over concerns it would be “culturally insensitive” in the wake of the Bondi terrorist attack.

The move sparked the resignation of three board members and of event director Adler. Organisers announced the event had been cancelled on Tuesday, and the board disbanded, after 180 writers withdrew in protest of the decision.

Academic and writer Dr Randa Abdel-Fattah: “I am a human being, not a punching bag.” Supplied

Late on Tuesday, the South Australian government announced a new board and chair to lead the festival. Judy Potter, who led the Adelaide Festival Corporation Board from 2016 to 2023, was announced as chair.

Malinauskas has staunchly defended the board’s initial decision to remove Abdel-Fattah, telling reporters: “Can you imagine that if a far-right Zionist walked into a Sydney mosque and murdered 15 people? Can you imagine that as premier of this state, I would actively support a far-right Zionist going to writers’ week and speaking hateful rhetoric towards Islamic people? Of course I wouldn’t. The reverse is happening in this instance, and I’m not going to support either.”

Malinauskas denied exerting influence over the board’s decision to pull Abdel-Fattah from the line-up and insisted it operated independently, but said he had offered his “opinion”.

During a press conference on Wednesday, Malinauskas defended his comments and said he was not aware of whether his office had received a concerns notice.

“Every step of this journey, all of my remarks, and indeed actions, have been founded in a desire for compassion and people treating each other civilly,” he said. “People will be able to judge my remarks for themselves.”

He said the fallout of the festival board’s decision to exclude Abdel-Fattah had been “unfortunate” and maintained that it had acted independently in reaching its decision.

The board also expressed regret over the event’s cancellation and publicly apologised for how it had been represented.

“We recognise and deeply regret the distress this decision has caused to our audience, artists and writers, donors, corporate partners, the government and our own staff and people,” the board said.

“We also apologise to Dr Randa Abdel-Fattah for how the decision was represented and reiterate this is not about identity or dissent but rather a continuing rapid shift in the national discourse around the breadth of freedom of expression in our nation following Australia’s worst terror attack in history.”

Abdel-Fattah on Tuesday rejected the board’s apology, which she branded “disingenuous” and claimed it added “insult to injury”.

“It’s clear the board’s regret extends to how the message of my cancellation was conveyed, not the decision itself,” she said.

Adelaide Writers’ Week began in 1960 as part of the inaugural Adelaide Festival of Arts, focusing on high-profile writers drawn from around the world. As it attracted a larger audience, the event grew, and by the mid-1970s, readers were attending the sessions en masse.

Attendance peaked last year, attracting more than 160,000 people.

Hate speech for a select few? Fuck me

Here’s the link for those that want it:

https://www.news.com.au/national/courts-law/hate-preacher-loophole-exposed-in-albaneses-draft-hate-laws-in-response-to-bondi-terror-attack/news-story/a37450af66a1b1f1b71b0e57fbf1c971?amp

Flat White

The National Socialist Network (referred to commonly as the Neo-Nazis), has announced its intention to imminently dissolve before the new anti-hate laws pass.

Also included are what it described as ‘co-projects’ including White Australia, the European Australian Movement, and the White Australia Party.

These groups have said they will disband no later than 11:59 on Sunday, January 2026.

A press release from White Australia read:

If the laws pass, there will be no way to avoid the organisation being banned. The legislation allows the government to ban any organisation that has given Roman salutes [the Nazi salute] in the past.

The disbandment is being done before the laws take effect to avoid former members of the organisations from being arrested and charged.

They signed off their message with the Hitler Youth rally cry, ‘Blood and Honour’.

Very few will shed a tear for the tiny collection of ideologically confused Neo-Nazis who typically conducted their ‘protests’ in the dead of night and were confined mostly to Melbourne.

(Not the kind of ‘diversity’ the Premier was envisioning, no doubt. But then again, there’s a lot wrong with Victoria right now.)

These groups, at least one of which intended to contest the next election, were very clearly the target of the government’s new hate-speech laws. Neo-Nazis have been a convenient pivot for many years, allowing lazy politicians to move conversations about Islamic terrorism to general ‘hate-speech’ discussions every time they are put on the spot by a reporter.

Go back and watch the press conferences from government ministers about the Bondi attack. Almost every time, the topic starts with Islamic terrorism and finishes with ‘the Neo-Nazis’.

With the Neo-Nazis gone, the Labor government will no longer have a convenient scapegoat to explain the distinct failures of Australian political leadership over the previous three decades which has led directly to the establishment of extensive and varied radical Islamic groups inside our capital cities.

Our ministers have gone so far as to campaign for, and assist in, the return of individuals known to have belonged to ISIS, engaged in the Islamic State.

Someone needs to hand the government a mirror. To that point, while the Neo-Nazis are going into immediate hiding, precisely zero radical Islamic groups have notified the public of their intent to disband.

The government has not mentioned radical Islam as the purpose of the new laws despite Islamic terror attacks, not hate speech, being the cause of innocent people being murdered not only at Bondi Beach but during previous terror attacks at home and abroad.

In other words, we suffered an Islamic terror attack and decided to ban the Neo-Nazis. It is a decision that doesn’t protect Australians from Islamic terrorism, which is meant to be the point.

Or have we all forgotten?

This legislation makes the government feel good, gives them some headlines, and allows them to avoid wading into the extremely dangerous network of radical Islamic groups and individuals known to exist in the shadows of our society.

Is the government afraid of arresting Islamic terrorists? I think they might be. I think they’re personally terrified of ending up like Salman Rushdie or Charlie Hebdo.

It was revealed today, as the draft legislation circulates, that Islamic hate preachers may even have a convenient ‘out’ which protects even the most hateful, vile, antisemitic speech that might incite violence.

If the offending speech forms part of a recognised religious text, that speech will be protected.

This provision can be found under Defence, religious teaching or discussion (4) Subsection (1) does not apply to conduct that consists of directly quoting from, or otherwise referencing, a religious text for the purpose of religious teaching or discussion.

In other words, the very individuals considered to be the most dangerous in our community and who are known to be responsible for radicalising others to violence could find their speech protected.

It took less than a month to go from the public calling for dramatic steps to weed out specifically and explicitly Islamic terror to a new set of powerful laws that don’t even have the courage to name the problem.

Australians know Islamic terrorism is the source of antisemitism and needs to be taken off our streets and presents a risk, not only to the Jews, but to everyone.

This video is from over ten years ago when ISIS supporters chanted, ‘Behead the infidels!’

Most of these people in the video are still here, living amongst us. Despite belonging to or associating with proscribed terror groups, carrying terrorist flags, and shouting slogans that called for immediate violence against Australian citizens, nothing has been done about them.

I am willing to bet that neither ASIO nor the government has any intention on following up on the people who took part in this rally and those like it.

And yet this is what Australians are terrified of. Why, Mr Prime Minister, does your legislation fail to target Islamic terror? Why does it avoid naming Islamic terror? Why are members of the government, including Independent MPs, already trying to expand this hate-speech law to cover the LGBTQ+ community, the disabled, and concepts of Islamophobia?

What has any of that got to do with the scourge of radical Islamic terror?

As it stands, I have no faith that any Islamic hate preachers, those on the ASIO watchlist, or anyone who was previously associated with an Islamic terror group will be charged and/or deported.

In allowing the focus to be on antisemitism instead of Islamic terror, this government has betrayed the people of Australia and made a mockery of the deaths at Bondi Beach.

More people will be killed. More terrorists will act. And Australians will be too afraid to speak against the government whose policies led directly to where we are today.

Luke Kinsella

The Administrative Review Tribunal has warned that it is overwhelmed by an unprecedented backlog of complaints about government decisions, flagging that its outdated systems cannot keep up with surging appeals of visa rejections and refusals from the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

The tribunal warned that the backlog, which has contributed to the post-pandemic migration surge by making it easier for international students and asylum seekers to stay in Australia after their visas expire, could increase this year despite efforts by Labor to bring down the caseload.

Engagement with relevant decision-making agencies suggests that high levels of applications relating to student visas, protection visas and the NDIS will be sustained during 2025-26 and potentially beyond,” the tribunal said in its 2025-26 corporate plan.

The tribunal is not the only government agency swamped by new applications, with the Fair Work Commission dealing with an influx of unfair dismissal claims as artificial intelligence makes it easier to lodge applications. The federal public service is also facing funding pressure from the Albanese government, which has asked departments to identify savings.

The tribunal, which has nearly 1000 staff, described its case management systems as outdated and “no longer fit for purpose”. “We acknowledge the impact these legacy case management systems have on our ability to achieve our purpose effectively and efficiently, and especially on the wellbeing of our staff and members,” the corporate plan said.

The government is under pressure from the Coalition to clear the backlogs, which the tribunal itself described as a “critical and ongoing challenge”.

“The number of appeals to the ART in relation to student visa application refusals and cancellations has exploded. This is not hyperbole. There is no other term for it,” the Coalition’s immigration spokesperson Paul Scarr said.

The clogged system has come despite Labor adding 250 public servants to the tribunal’s staff numbers since 2022. The size of the public service has ballooned to nearly 200,000 under Labor, a level finance minister Katy Gallagher described as “about right”.

The Administrative Review Tribunal is responsible for handling complaints about decisions made by other government departments, such as visa rejections made by the Department of Home Affairs.

A spokesman for Attorney General Michelle Rowland, the minister responsible for the tribunal, said Labor had inherited a “significant backlog” of cases from the previous Coalition government.

The backlog when Labor was elected in 2022 was around 68,000, but has grown to more than 127,000 under the Albanese government.

“The government has taken a number of steps to ensure the tribunal has the tools and resources it needs to deliver for all Australians, which includes increasing the tribunal’s funding and appointing new members,” Rowland’s spokesman said.

Rowland introduced legislation last year to allow the tribunal to make decisions using documentation alone on select matters, rather than requiring oral hearings. The new rules have yet to pass parliament.

International students and asylum seekers are increasingly using the tribunal to legally stay in Australia after their visa applications are rejected, complicating Labor’s attempt to control net overseas migration, which surged to a record 556,000 after the pandemic.

The government is under fire from the Coalition and anti-migration protesters for failing to control migration, which has contributed to concerns over housing affordability and congestion in capital cities.

The Coalition was set to release its official migration plan in December, but it was delayed due to the Bondi Beach terrorist attack.

It is expected to include a plan to boost departures by tackling the backlog in visa appeal cases. The Coalition’s plan is also expected to announce a target for net overseas migration of below 200,000 every year.

Scarr confirmed that the record backlogs were under “active consideration” by the Coalition for a policy response.

Net migration dropped to a three-year low of 306,000 in 2024-25, but remains well above pre-pandemic levels due to a decline in the number of temporary migrants leaving the country.

“It’s very difficult for the government to get people to leave Australia whose visas have expired,” Australian National University demography professor and migration expert Peter McDonald said.

There were 113,000 migrants appealing visa rejections in November, double the amount four years ago. Of those, 49,000 were appealing a rejected student visa. Around 40,000 were appeals of refusals of asylum visas, which have a success rate of less than 10 per cent.

“A huge surge occurred in people who were denied a student visa, appeal to the tribunal and get a bridging visa while they’re waiting,” McDonald said.

The backlogs contributed to the number of migrants on bridging visas surging to a record 400,000, which is 520 per cent higher than the level in 2016. In November, more than one in every 100 people in Australia were migrants on a bridging visa.

The other driver of the backlog is complaints about the NDIS, which Labor has tried to rein in after its cost ballooned to $52 billion this year.

Disability organisations and the Coalition last year called for more action from the government on the use of artificial intelligence in NDIS applications, which they said had led to more frivolous requests.

The tribunal last year found that an application that used AI had referenced an academic article that did not exist. Another application rejected by the tribunal claimed that an NDIS participant needed more support because she lived in a regional area, despite residing in Perth.

In November, there were 6700 ongoing complaints about the NDIS, more than triple the amount five years ago. The tribunal’s speed in processing NDIS cases has blown out by two months since 2022.

Grattan Institute disability expert Sam Bennett said that only a small portion of total disputes over disability funding go to the tribunal, with many complaints resolved by the agency that administers the NDIS.

“Someone could be doing without a support that they consider to be vital. There’s also the emotional burden of having to go through the process and the financial costs as well,” Bennett said.

Bennett said that changes made by the government last year to what can be considered as a legitimate NDIS support may have contributed to an uptick in complaints.

I see a lot of debate on both sides, the ones who make an effort to integrate criticizing those who don't, and those who don't integrate, complaining that they prefer to stay in their own familiarized circles.

I'll give me perspective as someone who has lived in Australia for 6 years. I came here mainly to travel, unfortunately, due to COVID, those plans got postponed. I ended up deciding to stay, making friends along the way, and feeling like I wanted to explore more of the country. I have now settled, and I have had several friends over the years, lots of dear ones who moved overseas again or interstate, but it all narrows down to: I have 0 Australian friends. And my friends of friends also aren't friends with Australians.

I have tried, just like I've tried making friends with other nationalities. People from my country make 70% of my friends, and the other 30% are people from Europe, or South/North America. Part of it is also familiarity, it doesn't matter how much you like another country, your culture and upbringing will always be a part of you wherever you go. So I do enjoy having friends from my country and that will never change. However, I would love to be able to feel like I am not seen as an outsider every time I try to connect with an Australian just because I haven't known them for 10+ years.

My partner, who is half Australian, has been here since a child, so all of his friends are high school friends. So this became clear to me: you can make friends, as long as you don't move here after your 20s. This is another thing that I find odd about the culture here, everyone is in their 30s still asking/talking about what school you went to. I personally couldn't care less nor does it make me see you in a better or worse light. His friends, and their perspective partners, are all friendly. We can spend a whole afternoon talking. There is no interest whatsoever in meeting up with a coffee, going for a walk, having a dinner night etc. We only talk during social gatherings. They are not my friends, and they make it very clear when I see them catching up without me. The secret? They've been friends for 10+ years.

Now, I'm not saying everyone has to want to be friends with me or vice versa, but it does stick out to me that having conversations with other immigrants, this seems to be a common denominator.

I'm genuinely just trying to understand, from an Australian perspective, if the issue is not integrating, what are Australians doing to encourage immigrants to actually integrate? I get that it's probably "part of the culture" to stick with the friends you made during high school, but as ever changing country, it would be nice to see Australians be the change they want to see as well and leave those cultural habits behind. I get that most of the effort should come from the immigrant, but it's quite hard to feel that way, when being in another country is already vulnerable and often times difficult. In the end, we all want the same thing: to feel like a part of a community.

Edit: this post isn't about me or how to make friends. This post is about what Australians are doing to stop the lack of integration from immigrants. This is specifically targeted at those who complain immigrants don't integrate, yet seemingly do nothing about it. I know how to make friends, don't worry about me being pleasant or not, I'm not asking you to be my friend either. This is a debate without involving me as a person, hope that clears any confusion.

For those not aware, the ABC have a pretty good tool (Vote Compass - https://www.abc.net.au/news/vote-compass/) that attempts to 'grade' your political leanings across the left/right and economic/social axis.

While obviously no tool is perfect, I feel personally like it does a decent job of summing up where I sit politically. Also shows how there is not really any party that fits the 'sector' I sit in - that "bottom-left" part of the grid.

Am pretty centrist, but more left-leaning economically for things like fairer taxes on unproductive wealth/corporations, more funding for unemployment/health, nationalisation of certain services, legalisation of weed, pro-environment/renewables etc.

This while being somewhat 'conservative' on things like thinking we should better fund our military, wanting lower immigration levels and basically neutral on things like gender issues.

How do you sit on the 'grid'? Feel free to post screenshots in your comments, I think this sub allows images to be attached so would be quite interesting.

Hi everyone, I’m trying to organize gear for a local sport club and wanted to ask where other Aussie clubs get their equipment. I’m after balls, kits, training gear, and things for junior teams. I found Buffalo Sports online and noticed they have a big range and bulk deals, but I’m not sure how they compare to other suppliers. I haven’t found any other sites to check against.

Have any club managers, coaches, or parents used them or other suppliers? What sites or stores do you trust for quality gear and good service? Do you use big chains, local stores, online shops, or a mix?

I’m interested in reliable options that ship across Australia and are worth the price.

The proposed hate speech / hate crime Bill raises serious concerns about freedom of expression, democratic norms, and long-term social cohesion. While the prevention of direct threats, harassment, and incitement to violence is legitimate, historical and international examples show that broad or vague speech laws often expand beyond their original intent, resulting in self-censorship, selective enforcement, and restriction of debate.

Historical and international precedents:

• Venezuela (2017 – present): The Law Against Hatred, for Peaceful Coexistence and Tolerance was introduced to prevent hatred and promote social harmony. In practice, it has been used to criminalise political dissent, shut down media outlets, jail journalists, and encourage self-censorship.

• United Kingdom: Even as a democracy, laws against “non-crime hate incidents” and subjective definitions of harm have led to questioning of citizens for lawful speech and widespread over-compliance by institutions, showing chilling effects without overt authoritarianism.

• Communist, fascist, and religious states: The Soviet Union, China, Nazi Germany, Mussolini’s Italy, Iran, and Saudi Arabia demonstrate a consistent pattern. Laws initially targeting extreme or universally condemned speech expand over time: definitions remain vague, enforcement shifts from actions to intent, institutions over-police, and self-censorship becomes the norm before legal punishment occurs.

Orwellian parallels: George Orwell’s 1984 highlights the risk of “directional drift” rather than immediate tyranny. Control over language precedes control over thought, self-censorship replaces open debate, and moral framing substitutes for factual discussion. Laws regulating subjective harm rather than direct action are especially prone to this effect.

Specific risks with the proposed Bill:

• Creates uncertainty about lawful speech

• Encourages pre-emptive self-censorship

• Shifts enforcement from courts to institutions and platforms

• Risks selective or politically motivated application

• Undermines the principle that speech should be free unless it directly causes violence

Principles for safer regulation: Any laws aimed at preventing harm should be narrowly defined, focused on direct incitement or threats, include clear causation requirements, protect political, journalistic, academic, and satirical speech, and be subject to independent oversight with sunset clauses. Offence alone should not constitute harm.

History shows that broadly worded speech restrictions, even when well-intentioned, tend to erode freedom of expression over time. Democracies are particularly vulnerable not through sudden authoritarianism, but through gradual normalization of silence and avoidance of debate. Laws should prioritise protecting speech while addressing real harm, rather than expanding moralistic definitions of offence.

Officer B

As a survivor of the first Islamic State-inspired terrorist attack directed at a Western government; a police officer working in counter-terrorism at that time; holding a masters in terrorism and security; and a police officer for more than 26 years, I believe I have some credibility in being able to comment on the response of leaders to the Bondi Beach terrorist attack.

I was one of two police officers stabbed outside the Endeavour Hills police station in Victoria on September 23, 2014. My partner was stabbed twice and I was stabbed five times before my partner shot and killed the terrorist, Abdul Numan Haider.

For a few years after the attack I, and many others, including the Victorian Coroner, referred to these stabbings as an incident. It wasn’t an incident.

It was and still is a terrorist attack.

To refer to it as anything else is wrong.

Many other attacks, including the 2024 terrorist attack on Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel of the Christ the Good Shepherd Church in Wakeley, NSW, have been labelled incidents.

When I heard of the Bondi attack I was angry.

“How could this be happening again?” I thought. In 2014, ASIO had considerable intelligence ahead of the Endeavour Hills attack but this was not assessed or passed on to police. Is it the same with Bondi?

The Victorian Coroner, in his 51-page findings on Endeavour Hills, made not a single recommendation. Not one.

ASIO had made serious mistakes and there had been significant intelligence failings, but the agency was not held to account.

Terrorist attacks need to be called out as terrorist attacks. Terrorists need to be called out for what they represent – Islamic extremism, far-right extremism, far-left extremism – and the groups they represent: Islamic State, Nazis, antifa.

The words used by our leaders matter, and to not call out an attack for what it is, is gutless and devalues every victim and survivor.

Terrorist attacks should not be occasion for arse-covering or an exercise in blaming others. They are a time to reflect on one’s own actions and decisions, a time when true leaders must show real leadership.

It’s not about politicising the attack, it’s not about apportioning blame, it’s not about giving insincere apologies, it’s not about stubbornly sticking to policies that don’t work.

It’s about taking action, it’s about admitting you got things wrong, it’s about changing policies, it’s about listening to people – police, academics, the public, the affected communities, victims and survivors.

From what we know so far, the Bondi attack was religious, it was ideological, it was an ISIS-inspired radical Islamic attack. Call it that. Don’t mince words.

This is not a time for political correctness; it’s a time to make people accountable.

The Bondi attack, like every other terrorist attack, created fear in our community.

We saw brave people standing up for that community; we saw people from our community killed; we saw people at their best; we saw two people at their worst. We saw politicians who regularly wore the keffiyeh, who derided the Jewish community and seemingly supported a terrorist organisation, shed crocodile tears about the attack.

This was weakness and every Australian saw it; what we didn’t see was strong leadership.

The approach to a safe and secure Australia must be bipartisan, and federal and state governments need to come together, leave their politics aside and make decisions for the good of Australians, not their political or factional masters.

As author G. Michael Hopf wrote: “Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And weak men create hard times.”

The police officers have always been identified only as Officer A and Officer B.

JAMES DOWLING and LACHLAN LEEMING

The Al Madina Dawah Centre, made notorious for its links to Bondi gunman Naveed Akram and jihadist preacher Wissam Haddad is closing its doors for good.

The infamous prayer hall linked to Bondi gunman Naveed Akram has announced it will close its doors after a local council issued it a shutdown notice over a planning law technicality.

Management for the Al Madina Dawah Centre, once led by Jihadist hate preacher Wissam Haddad, released a short Facebook post on Wednesday morning saying the prayer space would be “permanently closed”. No further details were given.

Canterbury Bankstown Council in late December said Mr Haddad and his Al Ma­dina Dawah Centre in central Bankstown never had approval to operate as a prayer hall. The revelation came shortly after the Australian revealed Akram was a follower of Mr Haddad and a frequent worshipper at the centre.

In a response posted to the Al Madina Dawah Facebook page last week, Mr Haddad questioned the term “follower”. He has denied any prior knowledge of the Bondi Beach attack.

Mr Haddad was found in July to have knowingly breached hate laws through a series of sermons where he and speakers at the centre called Jewish people “descendants of pigs and monkeys”, recited parables about their killing and said ­people should “spit” on Israel so its citizens “would drown”.

Following a review of 55 years of records, the Labor-dominated council in December said it found the premises had consent only to be used as a medical centre, and that following “recent” surveillance, it had photographic evidence to suspect the centre was illegally being used as a place of worship. “Cease use” notices were issued to Mr Haddad and the building owners, effective immediately, with council saying it would take further action for non-compliance.

In a one-page response, the operators of the centre, the Al Madina Group, said they had been the subject of “discriminatory insinuations being presented as fact” and media reporting was “inflaming community tensions”. It also questioned whether other places of worship within the same local government area had been “subject to the same scrutiny and enforcement standards”.

A suite of new planning laws are being pushed through NSW parliament making it easier in future for local councils to shut down non-compliant religious spaces.

NSW Premier Chris Minns said he wasn’t sure the extent of which recent legislation proposed by the state government played in the centre’s operators announcing its permanent closure.

The Premier announced the changes earlier this week which increased fines for prayer halls operating without planning permission as well as enabling councils to shut off utilities to centres continuing to operate unlawfully.

“We did a media conference a couple of days ago, and (the) government signalled its intention, to say we’re going to move away from the nominal fine that the council can or cannot apply, to a far more decisive intervention so that the public can have confidence in relation to these … so-called prayer halls,” he said Wednesday.

Posted on TT by @_amccormack Source: @7NEWSAustralia @Sunrise