Not Always an Informed Australian

It never ceases to amaze me how feral some writers for The Australian can be. What makes me even more surprised is how the editors of the paper actually defend their regular columnists for being so irregular with the facts.

To this day, I will never understand how the editors of the paper could defend Janet Albrechtsen’s xenophobic claim that Muslim migrant cultures teach young men and boys to rape white women. And when Dr Albrechtsen was exposed on Media Watch, the paper continued on its vendetta against the program and the ABC in general.

Of course, it is impossible to make generalisations about an entire newspaper based upon some of its more rabid writers. After all, the paper does provide space for left-leaning Phillip Adams.

Yet some of its editorial decisions make one wonder whether the paper really is an open forum or whether it in fact has a deliberate agenda.

And if the articles of John Stone, Mark Steyn and Greg Sheridan are anything to go by, when it comes to anything relating to Muslims, the paper’s agenda seems quite clear.

John Stone wrote a set of offensive articles in support of his claim that our immigration policies should openly discriminate on the basis of presumed religious affiliation. His articles claimed that Muslim Australians cannot adapt to Australian culture, and that Islam is incompatible with our democratic values.

In response to that piece, the author submitted a brief opinion piece which was refused for publication on the basis that the paper rarely allowed an op-ed to be published which directly contradicted the argument of another opinion writer.

Of course, this excuse does not survive scrutiny. Recently, the rabidly Islamophobic Mark Steyn wrote a piece which directly referred to and contradicted an op-ed written by respected Australian terrorism expert Clive Williams.

The most recent piece by Greg Sheridan entitled “Struggle for the soul of Islam at critical stage” makes the extraordinary claim that an undefined entity known as “conservative Islam” is actually allowing suicide bombing to become “mainstream” in Muslim countries such as Indonesia.

It is interesting that nowhere in his piece does Sheridan actually define what “conservative Islam” actually is. Is he referring to the syncretic “Santri” Islam of the Nahdatul Ulama? Or is he referring to the reformist Muhammadiyya? Or the Barelwi scholarly movement of the Indian sub-continent? Or the imams of the Diyanet Vekfi of Turkey?

And what is his evidence for the suggestion that “conservative Islam” is somehow entering into a de facto marriage with extremism? Sheridan’s only evidence is a “fatwa” passed by one scholarly board in Indonesia against “liberal Muslims”.

And what is a “liberal Muslim”? Is it someone who belongs to the Liberal Party? Is it someone who grows a beard in the same style as the current Iranian President and Greg Sheridan?

Are “liberal Muslims” akin to the now-disbanded “Progressive Muslim Union of North America” (PMUNA) which now consists of a membership of around 3? Or do they consist of followers of a disgruntled Canadian lesbian dying for a fatwa so she can generate some decent book sales?

And if you think the op-eds are offensive, you should read some of the letters that pass through the editorial sieve. Here is a beauty from 5 October 2005 …

THIS latest bombing outrage by Muslim terrorists just reaffirms my belief that the war on terrorism by Western governments is nothing short of a war between western Christian civilisation and eastern Islamic barbarism. This is a war that will last decades, perhaps even centuries. Australia and other Western Christian countries are ruing the day we allowed large-scale immigration of Muslims into our liberal, secular societies. Australian Muslim leaders plead: "Don't blame Islam." Try telling that to the families of the thousands of innocent Westerners killed in cowardly Muslim terrorist bombings the world over.

This is the sort of stuff that makes Catch The Fire Ministries pastors look like masters of theosophy. How it gets onto the pages of an allegedly respectable broadsheet is anyone’s guess.

Still, I guess one cannot make generalisations about a newspaper. Though it does seem that everytime there is an election or a terrorist attack, The Australian goes into feral overdrive.

© Irfan Yusuf 2005