World Economic Forum "Global Gender Gap Report 2016" - Australia

In 2016 the World Economic Forum ranked Australia in the top tier when it came to educational attainment – with  females having an equal literacy rate, comparable rates to males when it came to primary and secondary school enrolments and, a much higher rate of enrolment in tertiary education.

Yet this year Australia ranks 46^th out of 144 nations on the Global Gender Gap Index. In 2006 this country managed 15^th place out of 115.

In terms of ranking for economic participation and opportunity Australia was placed 42^nd.

However, in terms of wage equality for similar work (equal wage), high-income classified Australia now ranks 60^th and 57^th on estimated earned income - females on average earning est. 37 per cent less per annum than males.

In overall ranking the countries which do better than Australia are from 1 through to 45; Iceland, Finland, Norway, Sweden, Rwanda, Ireland, Philippines, Slovenia, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Switzerland, Burundi, Germany, Namibia, South Africa, Netherlands, France, Latvia, Denmark, United Kingdom, Mozambique, Estonia, Bolivia, Belgium, Lithuania, Moldova, Cuba, Barbados, Spain, Belarus, Portugal, Costa Rica, Argentina, Luxembourg, Canada, Cape Verde, Bahamas, Poland, Columbia, Ecuador, Bulgaria, Jamaica, Lao PDR, Trinidad and Tobago & the United States.

When it comes to the number of women with seats in parliament or holding ministerial positions, Australia ranks 50^th and 75^th respectively.

At this rate Australian women will reach full economic and political parity with men in about 200 years.

Turnbull Government fails at full marriage equality

Set out below are certain proposed clauses in the same-sex marriage amendments to the Commonwealth Marriage Act 1961, as previously amended by the Howard Coalition Government in 2004.

As can plainly be seen this bill does not seek to establish full marriage equality, in that it allows widespread discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender citizens seeking to legally marry in this country.

Should this bill eventually be submitted to the Australian Parliament, the Turnbull Coalition Government proposes the establishment of a Joint Select Committee to review and report on the Exposure Draft.

Excerpt from the Marriage Amendment (Same-Sex Marriage) Bill 201X (Exposure Draft) released by Attorney-General George Brandis on 10 October 2016:

"47 Ministers of religion may refuse to solemnise marriages

Refusing to solemnise a marriage despite this Part

(1) A minister of religion may refuse to solemnise a marriage despite  anything in this Part.

(2) In particular, nothing in this Part prevents a minister of religion from:

(a) making it a condition of solemnising a marriage that:

(i) notice of the intended marriage is given to the minister earlier than this Act requires; or

(ii) additional requirements to those provided by this Act are complied with; and

(b) refusing to solemnise the marriage if the condition is not observed.

Refusing to solemnise a marriage that is not the union of a man and a woman

(3) A minister of religion may refuse to solemnise a marriage despite any law (including this Part) if:

(a) the refusal is because the marriage is not the union of a man and a woman; and

(b) any of the following applies:

(i) the refusal conforms to the doctrines, tenets or beliefs of the religion of the minister’s religious body or religious organisation;

(ii) the refusal is necessary to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of adherents of that religion;

(iii) the minister’s conscientious or religious beliefs do not allow the minister to solemnise the marriage.

Grounds for refusal not limited by this section

(4) This section does not limit the grounds on which a minister of 16 religion may refuse to solemnise a marriage.

6 Before section 48

Insert:

47A Marriage celebrants may refuse to solemnise marriages

(1) A marriage celebrant (not being a minister of religion) may refuse to solemnise a marriage despite any law (including this Part) if:

(a) the refusal is because the marriage is not the union of a man and a woman; and

(b) the marriage celebrant’s conscientious or religious beliefs do not allow the marriage celebrant to solemnise the marriage.

Grounds for refusal not limited by this section

(2) This section does not limit the grounds on which a marriage celebrant (not being a minister of religion) may refuse to solemnise a marriage.

47B Religious bodies and organisations may refuse to make facilities available or provide goods or services

(1) A religious body or a religious organisation may, despite any law (including this Part), refuse to make a facility available, or to provide goods or services, for the purposes of the solemnisation of  a marriage, or for purposes reasonably incidental to the solemnisation of a marriage, if:

(a) the refusal is because the marriage is not the union of a man and a woman; and

(b) the refusal:

(i) conforms to the doctrines, tenets or beliefs of the religion of the religious body or religious organisation; or

(ii) is necessary to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of adherents of that religion.

(2) Subsection (1) applies to facilities made available, and goods and services provided, whether for payment or not.

(3) This section does not limit the grounds on which a religious body or a religious organisation may refuse to make a facility available, or to provide goods or services, for the purposes of the solemnisation of a marriage, or for purposes reasonably incidental to the solemnisation of a marriage."

It is noted that under this bill it appears as though discrimination may be practiced against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender citizens seeking to legally marry, as a matter of conscience alone. Therefore a minister of religion whose own peak religious governing body accepts same-sex marriage may still practice discrimination himself/herself and, a civil marriage celebrant does not have to hold religious beliefs in order to discriminate.

This appears to run counter to international human rights law which does not support discrimination based on a general exemption for conscience. As an example see Article 18 Clause 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ratified by Australia on 13 August 1980.

It should be further noted that neither the amendment bill nor the Marriage Act itself appear to contain a legal definition of the term "religious organisation".

For the purposes of any newly amended marriage act, is a religious organisation a not-for-profit institution for the advancement and promotion of religious purposes, such as churches, convents, faith-based schools or bible colleges, or is it capable of a broader definition?

Will any bigot or homophobe be able to prominently display a religious icon in their place of business and thereby gain a right to deny goods and services to same-sex couples seeking to organise a wedding?

The road to parliamentary approval of the unfair Marriage Amendment (Same-Sex Marriage) Bill became a little more difficult to traverse yesterday......

ABC News, 11 October 2016:

A meeting at Parliament House this morning saw Labor MPs and senators vote unanimously to block the bill establishing the plebiscite.

"The experts have unequivocally explained to Labor that the plebiscite would cause harm to gay and lesbian people — particularly, but not exclusively, young people," Mr Shorten said.

"Having met these families, having listened to their stories, I could not in good conscience recommend to the Labor Party that we support the plebiscite about marriage equality.

"The Labor Party, therefore, will in Parliament oppose Malcolm Turnbull's expensive, divisive plebiscite."

The Greens and a number of balance-of-power Senate crossbenchers have also pledged to block the enabling legislation, meaning it will not pass Parliament.

The compulsory Australia-wide ballot on whether to allow same-sex couples to marry was set to happen in February next year.

The Opposition criticised the plebiscite for months and its decision today was widely expected.

Labor is expected to keep pressing for a free vote in Parliament on whether to legalise same-sex marriage.

But a number of senior Government ministers have made it clear that will not happen.

Note: The results of the proposed precuser national plebiscite will be non-binding on MPs and senators and a number of government members have stated that they will not vote for same-sex marriage under any circumstances.

So why is the Turnbull Government toadying to the religious right when it comes to marriage equality?

Why is the Turnbull Government toadying to the religious right when it comes to marriage equality?

It is a bit of a puzzle when religion appears to mean so little to couples deciding to marry.

For instance, there were 121,197 marriages registered in Australia in 2014 and only 31,336 (or 25.8%) of the marriage services were conducted by a minister of religion, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

At least 79.4 per cent of all these couples co-habitated before marriage.

In 2014 a total of 299,697 births were recorded of which an est. 34.6% were born outside of a registered marriage.

If one looks at the broader picture – the 2011 Census records that that 67.3% of the population professed to having a religion.

Only 48.7% of the 2011 population over 15 years of age were married, 5.5% were widowed and 45.8% were never married, separated or divorced.

In 2011 a total of 301,617 births were recorded of which an est. 34.18% were born outside of a registered marriage.

Similarly In 2010 a total of 297,903 births were recorded of which an est. 33.63% were born outside of a registered marriage.

Given that the majority of religions practiced in Australia have some form of prohibition on the sexual conduct of unmarried males and females and encourage legally binding marriage, one has to suspect that an individual’s religious beliefs do not necessarily have any impact on how they choose to enter into partnerships for life or what type of partnerships these may be.

Nor does religious belief appear to play a large part in decisions to start a family.

As for the last stage of life, McCrindle Research (2014) states that in Australia; Cost is the biggest influencer when planning a funeral with 2 in 3 (66%) Australians stating it is extremely or significantly influential. Cost is considered more important than both religion or life philosophy (31%) and culture and family traditions (27%) and Over half (58%) of the population would prefer to have a civil celebrant conduct their funeral.

Which indicates that religious beliefs are no longer a primary concern for the majority of individuals when burying life partners and family members.

So, Liberal and National Party senators and members of parliament – why on earth are you creating such a hypocritical fuss over revisiting the federal Marriage Act again and including same-sex, transgender etc. couples in the definition of marriage and why are you considering giving people professing a religion and rabid homophobes the right to discriminate against LGBTIQ couples who may seek to marry in the future?

It was the Australian Parliament which narrowed the Marriage Act in 2004 and it is up to this 45th parliament to correct that mistake.

No Plebiscite, You Cowards in Canberra!

In August 2004 the Australian Parliament changed the federal Marriage Act 1961 to deliberately exclude LGBTIQ couples from legally marrying, so it’s up to the Australian Parliament to rectify its own mistake.

“Two thirds of the Australian people, a majority of the parliament and leaders of all major parties support every Australian being treated fairly and equally through the Marriage Act. It is time for the Parliament to deliver marriage equality. We call on our parliamentary supporters to start working together on a pathway that delivers marriage equality in this parliament without delay.” [Australian Marriage Equality (AME) Chair, Alex Greenwich in media release, 14 September 2016]

Click on image to enlarge

The unashamed public vitriol begins....

While misguided attempts to entrench discrimination in legislation continue in the federal parliament:

Senator Leyonhjelm says he has been actively lobbying Senator Brandis to consider and adopt aspects of the Liberal Democrats bill on the matter. 

“I am pleased the Liberal Party has adopted exemptions for civil celebrants, along the lines of legislation my 2014 bill,” Senator Leyonhjelm said. “I have also shown Senator Brandis my 2016 bill exempting people who supply goods and services for weddings from breaching the Sex Discrimination Act. I believe that these kinds of tweaks help to make the legislation more acceptable to politicians in the Coalition and thus more likely to succeed.”

And even though its plebiscite question simply states “Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?”, the Turnbull Government seriously contemplates creating two separate forms of legal marriage - one of which fails to allow the full protection of federal anti-discrimination law to LGBTIQ couples.

The Guardian, 14 September 2016:

The government will propose new protections for “conscientious objectors” to same-sex marriage which marriage equality advocates fear could allow civil celebrants, registrars and even bakers and florists to refuse to serve same-sex weddings.

According to briefing notes on the plebiscite prepared for the Coalition party room, seen by Guardian Australia, the legislation would allow “conscientious objectors” to reject same-sex weddings, an exemption more extensive than merely allowing religious leaders to refuse to conduct them…..

The note said the government will introduce proposed amendments to the Marriage Act and other relevant legislation to give effect to the decision of the plebiscite “well in advance” of the popular vote.

“Those amendments will also include appropriate protections for religious freedom and conscientious objections,” it said.

One more reason not to buy pizza from an American multinational fast food chain

Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Florida, media release, 23 April 2015:

BARTOW, Fla. - The Council on American-Islamic Relations Florida (CAIR Florida) has announced they will pursue a lawsuit for public accommodation discrimination and other legal claims against a Davenport Domino's Pizza for the horrendous treatment of a Muslim customer on July 27, 2012.

Hakima Benaddi, a Florida woman who was wearing a Muslim head covering at the time, was accused by Domino's Pizza management of threatening to blow up the location after she complained about the service and pizza she received. On July 27, 2012, a pregnant Benaddi went to Domino's to order a veggie pizza with her 23-month-old daughter. When Benaddi opened her pizza box she discovered that it was grossly inadequate and returned to complain and seek a refund.

"I was surprised because what I got was nothing like my order," Benaddi explained. "That pizza was barely suitable to feed to a dog."

Prior to the incident, Benaddi was a regular customer at the location. There was one small difference, however, on the day of the incident Benaddi had recently started covering her hair by wearing the hijab, the Muslim head scarf.

The Domino's Pizza did not assist Benaddi when she returned, they did not offer to make her a new pizza or offer her a refund. Instead, the cashier laughed at her and mocked her limited English proficiency.

Then, in what could only be described as a brazen discriminatory act, the Domino's Pizza management called local police claiming that Benaddi had threatened to blow up the location resulting in Benaddi's arrest.

Benaddi was in custody for over 24 hours before she was released. She was also forced to remove her headscarf before her booking image was taken.

CAIR Florida's investigator revealed that eyewitness accounts were consistent with that of Benaddi's and admitting that Benaddi never made any threats other than to file a complaint. The story the Domino's Pizza's manager provided to the police was completely, intentionally and maliciously fabricated.

Although the felony charge against Hakima was dropped before the arraignment, Domino's Pizza has yet to confirm any wrongdoing.

"Without them acknowledging what they did wrong, this is our only opportunity for her voice to be heard," said Thania Diaz Clevenger, Civil Rights Director of CAIR Florida. "We need to tell people that this is not okay, to let Domino's Pizza know this is not okay, and to let other Muslim women who are targeted to know that they can stand up for themselves."

###

CAIR Florida is the state's largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy organization. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties of all people, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

"White. WHITE. white." *WARNING: offensive language & racist comment*

[@fulani]

It’s the 2015 Australia Day long weekend and the Aussie arm of the twitterverse has been discussing everything from patriotic cake decorations and barbeques through to invasion, colonial occupation and race-based discrimination.

All is as expected. Some tweets are happy, some sad. Others are hurt, angry or defensive. Many more are insightful, balanced and supportive of other people’s views.

At some time over the last two days I began to realise that my Twitter timeline was showing signs of a savage argument developing somewhere else and, that a number of people living in Australia were having their racial and/or cultural identity questioned in some manner.

I peeked at this ongoing argument. Big mistake. I fell into a sewer.

The main focus seemed to be the fact that a well-known young Aboriginal woman was erroneously having her identity questioned because the colour of her skin, hair and eyes were judged to be too light for her to be recognised as indigenous. Shades of journalist Andrew Bolt!

However, I was surprised at both the degree of vitriol spewed across the Internet and the places it originated.

Along the way, other Australians were gratuitously insulted as well.

In no particular order here are just some of the comments made by those seeking to denigrate the Australian indigenous experience (click on any of the images to enlarge):

And the vileness spread far and wide:

This attack went on and on and on. Leaving a bad taste in the mouth and a tarnished holiday weekend in its wake.

@ebswearspink, @upjulie and @StringStory didn’t deserve the hate sent their way.

UPDATE

In which two individuals (one with a doctorate) apparently decide to mistake an adjective describing an argument for a noun allegedly indicating a person(s) in an effort to justify their tweets:

To make matters clear to those doubters, deniers and downright abusive tweeters, this is a brief snapshot of Ebs background:

Descended from Kamilaroi and Dharug peoples of New South Wales;

Bachelor of Laws (LL.B) Australian Indigenous Law;

Graduate Diploma Legal Practice;

Admitted to the bar by the Legal Profession Admission Board (LPAB) of the Supreme Court of NSW;

Represented traditional owners in NSW Native Title applications;

National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples inaugural delegate.

I am confident that Ebs achieved this because she was both embraced and accepted by the Aboriginal community and loved by her large extended family.

Greatest area of need for people with disability left unmet by Abbott Government according to the Australian Federation of Disability Organisations

Media Release 6 Jan 2015:

‘Greatest area of need for people with disability left unmet by Government’ said Matthew Wright, Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Federation of Disability Organisations (AFDO) and spokesperson for the disability peaks.

Responding to claims in The Australian newspaper by Minister for Social Services, Scott Morrison that the new peaks funding ‘supports the area of greatest need’, Matthew Wright said “The department has cut or not provided funding to the highest population groups of people with disability in Australia’.

Both the NDIS quarterly report and Disability Support Pension (DSP) statistics show consistently that intellectual disability, autism (also the fastest growing disability), mental illness and physical disability are the four most prevalent types of disability.

‘All of these groups including the National Council on Intellectual Disability, Autism Aspergers Advocacy Australia (A4), and Physical Disability Australia have not been funded as part of this process’.

Bob Buckley, Convenor of A4 said “No other disability organisation at the national level has any effective track record of representation or advocacy across the full spectrum of people living with autism.  People with some of the worst disability outcomes are again left without funded support.”

Support to over 200,000 Australians with a disability will be ceased as part of the process, and any protection from adverse action for the most vulnerable Australians will be lost’.

“Intellectual disability is consistently one of the top three primary conditions in DSP and NDIS data” said Mark Pattison, CEO of National Council on Intellectual Disability.

We are still urgently seeking a meeting with Minister Scott Morrison, said Matthew Wright. 

The disability peaks support the push for a Senate Inquiry into the process that has led to people with disability being left without essential support.

Please direct all media enquiries to Mr Matthew Wright on 0428 608 861. 

Are you satisfied with your violent handiwork, Mr. Abbott?

Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott. Illustration: Sturt Krygsman

Just a few examples of where your one-eyed, far-right, über Christian politics is taking us, Prime Minister…..

The Hoopla 19 September 2014:

There’s a hashtag doing the rounds on Twitter – #wearascarfday – urging people to don a scarf in support of Australia’s Muslims. There’s a perception – and not just amongst well-meaning lefties – that life is about to become very difficult for our Muslim community…..

 for the Muslim community, the majority of which is peaceful and happy to be a member of Tony Abbott’s “Team Australia”, the raids and the rhetoric around them are not so easy to accept.

Many Muslims see themselves as unwanted, viewed with suspicion, the enemy. They see their kids, especially the males, being singled out and watched, along with ridiculously simplistic and offensive media reports about their communities and their way of life and protests about the intended building of mosques as well as arguments mounted by ignorant politicians (well, one in particular) about the need to ban the burqa.

Fear creates intolerance and since 9/11 Muslims have lived with this.

Yet still, when genuinely frightening evidence is offered of a genuinely frightening threat to innocent people, as it was during yesterdays dramatic raids, people ask why young Australian Muslims are so angry they gravitate towards a militant cult masquerading as a religious movement and claiming to be a state. What they don’t do, is tell themselves that the number of these angry young men is very small and that the vast majority of Muslims are peacefully living in the Australian community, as productive and aspirational as the next non-Muslim family.

Nor do they accept that being Muslim, even in largely tolerant Australia, can be a gruelling life experience.  

http://theantibogan.wordpress.com/ 20 September 2014:

The Australian 20 September 2014:

Sunshine Coast Daily 20 September:

At one point police were booed as they ordered a protester to get down from a stage as he spoke of beheadings and his fears over a mosque.

Protesters questioned what happened to freedom of speech in Australia.

The crowd cheered as supporters lifted the man onto their shoulders so he could continue speaking.

Among those protesting the mosque were One Nation, Christian bikie gangs, opponents of halal meat certification as well as representatives from some local churches.

The Sydney Morning Herald 21 September 2014:

The Cairns Post 21 September 2014:

Mareeba mayor Tom Gilmore said the mosque had been part of the community since the 1950s and labelled the incident “entirely unacceptable”.

“I don’t think it’s ever been defaced before,” he said.

Cr Gilmore said a large group of “highly respected” Muslims had lived in the community since the 1920s.

The Courier Mail 21 September 2014:

DESPITE pleas for calm from the Queensland Premier and senior police, Muslims – particularly women – have been targeted in a series of hate attacks.
The Sunday Mail can reveal Muslim women are being singled out, including one victim who had coffee thrown in her face while she was stopped at traffic lights south of Brisbane.
The woman said a man in a car pulled up beside her and callously doused her in coffee before driving off along Beenleigh Rd.
“I was terrified,’’ she said. “I feel unsafe. I feel like a stranger in my own country.”
Other Muslim women have been abused and threatened, with one told to take off her headscarf – or hijab – at West End by a man who wanted to burn it.
The women did not want to be identified, and all believe they are “collateral damage” from recent police anti-terrorism raids which have fuelled fear and suspicion across the nation.
Sarah, 30, said she’d been waiting outside a shop in Logan Rd at Underwood with a 12-year-old girl when insults were hurled at her by a man riding past on a pushbike.
“He yelled f--- jihad, f--- off, go back home you c--- and continued to verbally abuse us,’’ she said.
In the next 20 minutes she was abused twice by other men. “It’s quite frightening to hear such vile language and hatred. I was fearful,’’ she said.
Stacey, 27, said she had copped offensive insults online.
“I’m a seventh generation Australian,’’ she said. “My family are as Australian as you can get and I’m scared.”

ABC News 24 September 2014:

Sunshine Coast Daily 24 September 2014:

A CATHOLIC priest has been criticised by some of his own parishioners for his attempts to douse the fires between protesters for and against a mosque in Maroochydore.

Father Joe Duffy, the Maroochydore Parish priest, wrote a letter to the Daily apologising for the "absurd and offensive demonstration" last Saturday outside the Stella Maris Church.

But his heartfelt letter didn't strike a happy chord with some members of his church.

Father Duffy said he had received a letter from one parishioner warning he was inciting further "beheadings" and "chopping nuns' breasts off".

New Matilda 24 September 2014:

As images of the raids are beamed across Australia, far right groups are hoping for a return of the violence against Muslims seen during the Cronulla riots, writes Andy Fleming.

Last week’s police raids on properties in Brisbane and Sydney, reportedly the largest “anti-terror” raids in Australian history, have given anti-Muslim activists in Australia an enormous boost. Understood as representing dramatic confirmation of the threat posed to Australia by Islam, the raids also placed Islamophobic groups in the spotlight, chief among them the Australian Defence League (ADL).
Speaking on ABC’s Q&A on Monday night, one Muslim woman reported having received death and rape threats from members of the ADL….

Sunshine Coast Daily 25 September 2014:

Brisbane Times 25 September 2014:

The Australian Tea Party 25 August 2014:

The Guardian 26 September 2014:

An Islamic school in Sydney’s south-west was targeted by a man wielding a knife.

Police were searching for the man who reportedly entered Al-Faisal college in Minto just after 2pm on Thursday, asked if it was a “Muslim school” and threatened a female teacher and student with a knife.

Primary school students hid under their desks while those from the high school were gathered in a prayer hall as the school went into lockdown, one mother said.

The mother, who did not wish to be named, said she was greeted by a swarm of police when arriving to pick up her children.

“I am still pretty much in shock,” the mother said. “I am keeping my younger two [children] home tomorrow. One doesn’t want to go back there.”

Although most schools are on holidays, classes there finish on Friday and students get an extra week’s holidays later in the year, she said.....

The Daily Telegraph 26 September 2014:

A 19-YEAR-OLD man wrongly identified by Fairfax Media as terrorism suspect Numan Haider says he fears leaving his house.

ABU Bakar Alam, 19, a Year 12 student who works part-time at a fast food restaurant, said the ordeal has turned his life upside down.

"I'm really scared," he told SBS Radio.

"I can't go anywhere. I haven't been out all day. I can't do work, I've cancelled my shift. I don't know when I'll be back at school and work.

"I've had such a good name as a student, as a worker. It's a terrible thing to happen."

Mr Alam said his grandfather moved to Australia from Afghanistan but returned to help rebuild the war-torn nation. He died in a suicide bombing in 2006.

"We came here to have a better life, better future and not be known as terrorists," he said.

Mr Alam said he was shocked, then angered, that Fairfax Media had incorrectly identified him as the man shot dead following an altercation with anti-terror police outside Endeavour Hills police station on Tuesday.

"I told my dad and my whole family was really angry, upset for accusing my family, for the bad image which we've never had."…

The Sydney Morning Herald 26 September 2014:

A member of the Australian Defence Force who told police he was attacked by two men of Middle Eastern appearance outside his north-western Sydney home has now withdrawn his complaint.

NSW Police issued a statement on Friday announcing the "allegation of assault has now been withdrawn".

"NSW Police will continue to examine the circumstances that led to the allegation being brought to their attention," the statement said.

The 41-year-old man told police he was threatened and assaulted by two men while wearing his full uniform at Bella Vista at 6.30am on Thursday.

The man, who suffered minor bruising, reported the matter to police and then attended Kings Cross police station in person later on Thursday.

He described his attackers as being of Middle Eastern appearance.

Defence force chief Air Chief Marshal Mark Binskin apologised for the incident.

"On behalf of the Australian Defence Force, I would like to apologise to the Australian community and in particular the Middle Eastern community for any angst this has caused," he told reporters in Canberra.

The Guardian  26 September 2014:

New South Wales police have been moved to reassure Australians that text messages claiming members of Islamic State (Isis) are knocking on people’s doors and marking Christian houses are a hoax, as concerns grow about the threat the extremist group poses.

The text message states: “There are members if Isis going door knocking on homes. They greet you with ‘Salam Alaykom’, and then pretend they are trying to collect money for orphans. They come with a black folder and ask you if you want to donate. I have just had one approach me at home just 2 hours ago. Please - do NOT Talk to them or open for them.”

The message, which references areas in the south-west suburbs of Sydney, exhorts people to “spread the word” and apparently convinced enough people for the police to feel compelled to tell them that there was no truth in it. In a tweet on Friday, the police included a picture of the offending text message with “FALSE” written in bold red letters across it. An accompanying message said: “Don’t be fooled by social media myths exploiting the current political climate.”

In all this Prime Minister Abbott is ably supported by Federal Government senators and MHRs, all of whom became complicit via their parliamentray vote and many by their public silence as the politically-inspired Coalition scare campaign rolls on, and as I write I'm looking straight at you Nationals MP for Page Kevin Hogan.