David Gillespie (Lyne, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

Terrorism by any name is hard to understand. Terror, in itself, is irrational except to the perpetrator of the terror. Anyone who has a clear perspective on what is right and wrong cannot justify acts of terror. Whether it be a jet that is shot down as it is leaving a holiday resort in Egypt, a Mounty on duty at a monument in Canada, people attacking a parliament, people arriving on a boat and turning up at an exclusive hotel with machine guns, or whether it be what we have just recently seen in Paris or what we saw at Parramatta, it does not make sense to the rational mind. What is it that, at the moment, drives people to this terrorism?

Historically, we have seen terror applied, with the bombing of pubs and bars in the UK during the Troubles. That was terrorism. We saw the Red Brigades. That was terrorism too. We saw people attacking the Olympic village. All that is terror in its barest essence. But what we are seeing now is terrorism justified by a religious belief, and that is what I think the world needs to admit to. Depending on which suras of the Koran you read, you can get a different interpretation. But, in essence, whether it was in the Lindt cafe, Parramatta, Paris, Belgium—you name it—there were frequent cries of religious allegiance, there was a banner. You only have to see what is happening in Syria and Iraq. The whole region is a site of terrorism. The whole of the Middle East is fracturing before our very eyes.

It brings up how valuable society, the rule of law and our institutions are in this country. We value freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of religion and the principle of tolerance, and we have to defend those rights. We have to call out terrorism for what it is when it happens. Using euphemisms and soft terminology will not fix the problem. To combat terrorism we have to call it what it is and call out what generates it.

There have been misdeeds across history done in the name of various religions since history began. But, generally, in the Western world and in the areas where we are seeing terrorism raise its ugly head we are the beneficiaries of movements and adjustments that have happened over centuries that have not yet occurred in parts of the Islamic world. I am referring to the Enlightenment, the Reformation, the Counter-Reformation and the universal reassessment of what is involved in Christian principles. Theoretically you can find in the Bible justification to stone a woman to death. You could find justification in the thinking of the kings and queens of England for burning so-called witches and nonbelievers or Protestants at the stake. But Christianity got over that. We worked through it. We reinterpreted things in light of modern-day sentiment. There needs to be that process in Islam.

I know hundreds of Muslims in this country who are very fine, upstanding Australian citizens. They are model citizens—99.9 per cent of them are wonderful assets to the nation. But there are a percentage inside our borders who justify this sort of weird thinking by quoting the Koran. But that does not justify it, just as me stoning someone to death for adultery does not make sense in this day and age. Christianity realised that that is the Old Testament, and sacred texts in the Old Testament have been reinterpreted in view of the New Testament.

I do not think we are going to see the end of this scourge of terrorism soon. How do we defeat it? We defeat it not just by confronting violence with violence. Sometimes you need to point to your argument at the end of the barrel of a gun, but that will not solve the problem. As the President of Egypt himself said, Egypt needs to have its own Reformation. The changes have to come from within the various Islamic mosques around the world. The imams themselves and the prominent teachers and thinkers in chorus around the world need to point out that violence cannot be justified by selecting bits of the Koran. I do not know how soon this is going to happen, but there are signs around the world. There are publications and prominent Islamic thinkers and speakers who are saying that. I am encouraged by that. I am encouraged by the recent pronouncements by Islamic leaders in our country condemning the violence and also saying more than just passing on condolences.

All of our thoughts are with the victims of terror. We revile in shock and horror at terrorism, but we must continue to call it what it is. We must defend the principles on which our liberal democracy has been founded. That includes all the institutions and laws that we have inherited from 800 to 900 years of British history. That includes tolerance and respect for difference, but you can only respect and tolerate other religions and actions up to a certain red line. No matter what the religion—whether it is Taoism, Buddhism, Islam, Christianity or whatever—some actions are not justifiable.

It is a sad day that we have to be standing in this House passing on condolences for events that have recently become a scar on the world. It is going to be a long and tortuous period in human history in front of us, because there are many people who still think it is justifiable to do what we have seen recently. Syria and Iraq are at the epicentre of this battle, but it is being waged on a smaller scale across Africa. Even in Asia there are outposts of this weird and extreme Islamic ideology. I call on those who know that it is unjust and not justifiable to publicly repudiate it because, until there are masses of people within Islam who are publicly repudiating it, things will not be resolved.

We in the West seem to be the focus of their anger. But, from a true global perspective, the people who have the greatest fears and concerns about this Islamic extreme terrorism are other Islamic nations, which we see being turned into ungovernable, post-apocalyptic wastelands of shattered buildings and societies with masses of refugees. We are getting a snapshot of it, but it is going to be a much greater risk to Islamic society than Western society. Nevertheless, we have principles that we are all the beneficiaries of: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the ability to disagree with religion, the separation of state and religion, and a secular, liberal democracy.

My condolences go to all those victims—the hundreds, thousands and millions of people from the Middle East who are suffering from it, as well as those in Paris, Australia and across the world. I encourage all members to remain resolute in defending the freedoms that make our society what it is.

See this speech in context