@navyislamic: what a tangled tale you tell, Chief of Navy

The Chief of Navy’s response to Captain Shindy’s pro-Islamic and politicised Twitter account becomes more bizarre by the day.

However, considering that the Chief of Navy is great mates with the Grand Mufti, joins in the Ramadan fast and holds Islamic dinners at the Australian War Memorial, it is really not at all that surprising. Rather it is concerning.

CN with Grand Mufti

The Chief of Navy, Vice Admiral Tim Barrett, AO, CSC (third from left) poses for a photograph standing next to the Grand Mufti of Australia, Dr Ibrahim Abu Mohamed. This photo accompanied a report on the Navy’s news website titled, ‘Chief of Navy engaged in cultural diversity journey’. Captain Mona Shindy is second from the left.

In fact, one could rather drily question if the Chief of Navy, Vice Admiral Tim Barrett, AO, CSC, has already converted to Islam.

As such, it was concerning to see a reader comment online in The Australian this week claiming that Tim Barrett’s brother had done exactly that.

Australian comment

A comment posted to The Australian website this week.

While I normally do not publish such statements without verifying them (and I have found no evidence that Tim Barrett has any brother, let alone one who has converted to Islam), there still remain serious questions about the motivations of the man who has the responsibility of leading the Royal Australian Navy when we are so clearly at war with those who hold Islamic beliefs dearly and sincerely.

And the hypocrisy of the Mona Shindy scandal only deepens them.

Let’s start with the dating game that is being played by the Chief of Navy and then move on to other matters.

The dating game

In the big scheme of things, the dates of who said what in this scandal are completely irrelevant. All that matters is that an official Royal Australian Navy Twitter account was publishing pro-Islamic and political propaganda in contravention of orders.

The fact that the Chief of Navy has gone down this little rabbit hole says one thing: he is desperately trying to avoid examination of the real issue and is hiding behind trivialities.

But it won’t help him. Not one little bit.

The dating game revolves around two questions:

  1. When was the @navyislamic account shut down?
  2. When was Captain Mona Shindy counselled?

And it is all designed to try and make it look like the Chief of Navy was not responding to the Australian Liberty Alliance’s letter sent to the Chief of Defence Force on 10 December, 2015.

So when was @navyislamic shut down?

I noticed the account had vanished on 22 December, 2015.

I promptly tweeted this interesting news to the ABC and, unsurprisingly, it remains the only outlet not to have filed a report about this issue (although, to be fair, I am informed there was some discussion of it on Radio National yesterday).

A search of Twitter clearly shows that there were regular interactions with the account until at least 17 December, 2015 and the first mention that the account was gone came on 18 December, 2015.

And then there is this. Google cached the account on 16 December, 2015. That means the account was active on that date.


A screenshot showing that Google cached Captain Shindy’s Twitter account on 16 December. As such, it had to be running at that time. Defence is trying to claim that is was shut down six days earlier to give the impression that it had nothing to do with the letter sent by the Australian Liberty Alliance.

So there is definite proof that Mona Shindy’s @navyislamic Twitter account was up and running until at least 16 December and possibly for another two days after that.

But the Chief of Navy is not having a bar of the facts. Defence put out a statement yesterday and it said:

“The Twitter account was shut down on 10 December 2015.”

Defence, presumably with the go ahead from the Chief of Navy, also briefed journalists that this proves that the retreat from @navyislamic had nothing to do with the letter sent by the President of the Australian Liberty Alliance, Debbie Robinson.

As an alibi, it’s not very good.

For a start, it’s wrong. You might call it a lie. All it does is show that Defence, at best, can’t get its facts straight, or at worst, is being deliberately deceptive.

And in any case, I have been writing about Captain Mona Shindy and her political activity in her capacity as a member of the Royal Australian Navy for over six months. So the alibi still doesn’t cut it.

Then there’s the question of when the Chief of Navy ‘counselled’ Captain Shindy about her political activities.

The Guardian was informed initially that this occurred on 8 December, 2015.

“Defence said Shindy had been counselled on 8 December, two days before an official complaint was lodged by the head of the Australian Liberty Alliance, a newly formed political party critical of Islam.”

Then Defence put out its new, revised statement yesterday, giving a new, earlier date:

“On 3 December 2015, the Chief of Navy counselled CAPT Shindy”

And then Defence briefed The Australian that the Chief of Navy himself became concerned about Captain Shindy’s activities much earlier:

Defence sources yesterday said Vice-Admiral Barrett began questioning how to deal with Captain Mona Shindy’s @navyislamic Twitter account in November after she posted a series of controversial political tweets.

So what?

The Chief of Navy has decided to play politics with dates over the fact that one of his closest advisors was playing politics publicly. On an official Royal Australian Navy Twitter account.

And he’s done it to try and downplay the embarrassment of having been caught out by the Australian Liberty Alliance.

It’s a logical strategy if you are a political party trying to make yourself look stupid.

However, the Australian Defence Force has yet to lodge the paperwork to register as a political party, so it becomes an illogical strategy that simply makes the Chief of Navy look tricky. And inept.

The ‘councilling’ session

Apparently, Captain Shindy was ‘counselled’ by the Chief of Navy.

I say ‘apparently’ for a good reason.

The Chief of Navy has gone through a tortured process of trying to extricate himself from this embarrassing position by painting a picture that he took action against Captain Shindy on earlier and earlier dates.

It’s a tactic that only opens more questions. Like what exactly was Captain Shindy counselled about? After all, if the Chief of Navy’s story is true that he became concerned in November, why was the account not shut down for up to seven weeks, with about two weeks between his ‘dressing down’ of Shindy and the closure of the account?

Furthermore, doesn’t the fact that absolutely nothing happened after the counselling session only reinforce the exact story that the Chief of Navy is attempting to avoid?

According to Defence, Captain Shindy was ‘keelhauled’ on 3 December. It was so severe that immediate action was taken to do absolutely nothing with her Twitter feed.

And then just as Navy HQ was celebrating its non-Christmas specific, diversity holiday, alcohol-free lemon and mint shandies a letter arrived from the Australian Liberty Alliance. I can just see the smiling faces drooping while a committee held a ‘councilling’ session, agonising over how the Chief of Navy should respond. Eventually, it was decided that this particular game was up and that there was no way to avoid having to face the fact that the account must be shut down.

And then, after a painful six or seven days, the plug on @navyislamic was pulled.

It is not at all difficult to see why the diversity bright sparks thought this approach might have a silver-lining. Now they could claim that the account was shut down due to pressure from the mean and nasty right wing groups.

While I have no doubt that the Australian Liberty Alliance forced the Chief of Navy’s hand, this hopeful position does not help either. It just makes the Chief of Navy look weak. It only highlights that politics, and not principle, was behind the establishment of this Twitter account in the first place.

Can I be punished too?

The farcical saga does not end just yet for the Chief of Navy.

And he should expect further questions to come from the media.

For instance, Captain Shindy has been ‘punished’ by being sent off to study a masters of politics. Courtesy of the Australian taxpayer.

In fact, the Navy newspaper announced this on 3 December.

Masters of politics

On the same day that the Chief of Navy allegedly ‘counselled’ Mona Shindy for her unlawful uniformed political activity, the Navy newspaper announced that the Navy was sending her off to study a masters of politics.

No doubt, whoever was responsible for choosing the dates in the dating game above was not aware of this. Now the Chief of Navy has been lumped into the somewhat embarrassing position of having to explain why the Navy was publicly announcing Captain Shindy was off to study politics on the same day that he was allegedly disciplining her for her politics in uniform in breach of Defence’s political and social media policies.

I’m sure there will be many sailors wishing they were punished the same way.

After all, six sailors were sacked in 2014 for posting anti-Islamic comments on Facebook in 2014. Will Defence now sponsor their university studies?

Shifting blame

The public has grown increasingly sceptical about the ability of the Defence Force hierarchy to do things like kill our enemies when they are more often than not seen to be running progressive political agendas.

The former Chief of Army claimed that he was acting politically before he left office. He said this about the same time he decided that his devotion to feminist ideals would be his legacy.

His transgender speechwriter openly boasted of wedging the Liberal/National coalition.

The former Chief of Defence Force has been found to have unlawfully exercised his power by sacking people for their private political beliefs.

The current Chief of Defence Force is going back to court to try and gain legal power to do just that.

For three years now Defence has participated in a blatant protest against extant Commonwealth laws on marriage and family.

All of these outrages have damaged public confidence in the hierarchy of the Australian Defence Force.

And now the Chief of Navy is punishing Captain Shindy for her pro-Islamic political activity in uniform by sending her off to do a masters in politics.

Unless the Chief of Navy rethinks his position on this, Australians will lose all confidence in him and his colleagues. In fact, it may well already be too late.

The reaction to this story on social media has been immense and it has been crystal clear; the Chief of Navy, however, is obstinately refusing to accept that he has a duty to impose discipline and standards.

Australians will be outraged at his attempts to shift the blame for this whole incident from Captain Mona Shindy, and himself, to them.

Yes. The Chief of Navy believes that the problem with this Twitter account was not what it said, but the response it received. In other words, we’re to blame. If only we were more tolerant of a pro-Islamic and politicised military, this problem would never have occurred.

This is the statement that insults the intelligence of every Australian that Defence released yesterday:

As part of Navy’s promotion of diversity within the Australian Defence Force, a Twitter account was established to promote Defence and Navy policy on employment diversity across Defence. Initially, the account received mixed attention but in recent months, in line with increased public debate on Islam, it has attracted a growing number of contentious comments.

In administering the account, CAPT Shindy has been inundated with these comments, many of which have been very personal and highly confronting and she has had to judge the right balance between policy and personal comment.   On 3 December 2015, the Chief of Navy counselled CAPT Shindy on this dilemma. In discussion with CAPT Shindy, the Chief of Navy determined that while she may have misjudged the balance, there had been no wilful violation of policy, but that further use of the Twitter account and public comment of this nature would cease at his direction. She agreed with this position. The Twitter account was shut down on 10 December 2015. 

Subsequently, the Chief of Navy initiated a review of Navy’s social media methods to regain the necessary direction for Navy and Defence’s diversity message. In conducting the review, Navy seeks to strengthen its messaging in sync with its support to traditional media and other lines of communication, to ensure accuracy of information, and to provide reliable supplemental communications to its members and the wider Australian public. Navy’s use of social media is continuing to develop as a necessary part of a synchronised communications plan.

Navy remains committed to the promotion of diversity and to strengthening its diversity message.

CAPT Shindy has provided 26 years of dedicated service and retains the Chief of Navy’s complete support.

What should happen?

DI(G) PERS 21-1 Political activities of Defence personnel is an order from the Chief of Defence Force.

This is what is states:

4. This Instruction constitutes an order to Defence members from the CDF.


10. Defence personnel may:

d. express their personal opinions on a political party, candidate or an issue, but not as Defence personnel.

Unless the Chief of Navy wants to give the impression that orders from the Chief of Defence no longer need to be obeyed, Captain Mona Shindy should face military disciplinary action.

She should be charged.

And I offer this advice: it’s not hard to do. I was charged 12 times and it all happened very quickly. However, I was not found guilty because I was charged for my private political views, expressed as a civilian. Captain Mona Shindy will not have that defence. But the Chief of Navy is running the defence that Captain Shindy is Islamic for her.

Public confidence in the military will rest on whether it upholds its laws, or whether it hypocritically proves, once again, that these laws have been politicised as well in order to protect Islam within the Australian Defence Force.

What will happen?

The Australian newspaper is reporting today that Defence is concerned about losing the following that @navyislamic had built.

I can guarantee that is not going to happen!

Author: Bernard Gaynor

Bernard Gaynor is a married father of nine children. He has a background in military intelligence, Arabic language and culture and is an outspoken advocate of conservative and family values.

Share This Post On


  1. Our defence force leaders are COWARDS like our politicians bowing to the minorities. THE TIME IS RIGHT for a change, how can we trust our current pollies who let this sort of thing happen. It’s UN AUSTRALIAN.

    Post a Reply
  2. It is outrageous that Mona Shindy can promote Islam in her official capacity as an officer in the Navy for over six months and continue to keep her job, and indeed be rewarded by a scholarship paid for by the taxpayer! Such a case undermines public confidence in the ability of Defence to be non political. The Defence Force is charged with defending this country. They are not paid to be a political or religious organization, especially not to promote a religion that only 2 percent of the population identify with! Australians expect and deserve far better from the Defence Force.

    Post a Reply
  3. My final thought: Navy may have ‘counselled’ Shindy on 3 Dec after Andrew Bolt questioned her twitter account on 30 Nov. Bolt’s blog is widely read, by polticians too, and his post was not a good look for the Defence hierarchy or the minister. But perhaps the brass thought a ‘hey Mona, just cool it a bit’ was sufficient, until things got complicated when Gaynor won his case and/or ALA officially complained -that press release was 10 Dec, no?
    Rather than concede ALA had just cause for their complaint and admit their slack oversight (even after Bolt pointed out questionable tweets including those criticizing registered political parties), and discipline Shindy they quietly ditched the account and were preparing the consolidated communications defense to ALA:’Nothing more to see here, move along’. Until that line fell apart.

    Given the evidence publically available I’d say 1. ADF hierarchy selectively applies regs in accordance with their personal political beliefs and in order to promote a political agenda (= every faddish lefty social justice warrior cause) 2. Having been exposed and tripped themselves up in defense, they are now engaging in a major arse covering operation. Hey, the big cohuna had been worried for a while, you know, long before even Bolt!

    And we all thought the ADF was a military fighting force, there to defend the nation and resist her enemies.

    Sunlight is such a great disinfectant.

    Post a Reply
  4. Regarding the Statement from Defence, about initiating new policies “to regain the necessary direction for Navy”
    I am sure the the new policies will be, to have all ships, Constantly pointed towards Mecca…
    ( thus rendering them ineffective, and capable of going nowhere but there.)
    Wake up Australians – we are being betrayed.

    Post a Reply
  5. Hi Bernard, Overall I support you in your endeavours and believe that you were hard done by, by the Army and the Chief of the Defence Force. However, I am somewhat concerned that you are prone to a little bit of over statement with respect to VADM Tim Barrett. There was one dinner held at the War Museum. He didn’t fast just for Ramadan, he fasts for 2 days in each week and a matter of habit. He may have said that he fasted for Ramadan (Mistake to say that) but his speech was written by his Islamic Adviser, Capt. Shindy, who I understand was instructed by the previous Defence Minister to wear the Islamic head dress to demonstrate that the Defence Force does accept Muslims and that they did not experience and anti Islam bias. As you are well aware, it is our political masters who are wielding more and more sway over the Defence Force. All Defence Chiefs are appointed by the Governor General in Counsel. If you wish to rise to the highest honour you have to be ‘political acceptable’. Gone are the days when Defence chiefs acted without fear or favour.

    Post a Reply
    • So Bruce, all Australian police forces and the ADF being heavily politicized is OK by you?

      Post a Reply
  6. One question that is yet to be asked is “Who at Telstra thought that giving the ‘Business Man/Woman of the Year Award to a military person”?
    Another question could be “Why would Telstra give a ‘Business Award’ to a military person?” After all, that person didn’t actually do anything without being completely funded by taxpayer money.
    Maybe an intrepid journalist could chase down an answer to those questions.

    Post a Reply
    • This Telstra award seems to be an attempt to reach more people by choosing this person, who is getting a lot of publicity, like Glamours choice of woman of the year, the winner a man ! Publicity seems to be the goal here.

      Post a Reply
  7. Well, you have certainly got the cockroaches that they are scurrying for cover Bernie. A big well done to you for that!

    Isn’t Barrett a Gillard appointee?

    If that is the case, then he is certainly living up to her expectations.

    What a mockery Shindi makes of the Australian Naval uniform! I find it utterly offensive that she is permitted to wear a hoodie under an officers hat! Those who have condoned and promoted the out-of-uniform look throughout our military and police I find contemptible and not fit to hold the office that allowed them to undermine two of our pillars of western civilization. In fact they are beneath contempt and should be called out for the damage to morale and esprit de corps that they have willingly done!

    At some point, the damage to all our institutions by those who have aided and abetted the denigration of them must be advertised for what they have partaken of – the deliberate undermining of the culture they were born into via a political ideology that has been proven throughout the 20th Century to be an abject failure, and a failure that has caused the deaths of inestimable millions of people while robbing those who survived of their inalienable human rights, and in many, many cases, their will to live.

    Those actions can only mean on thing – Treason! And those who even now are subverting what remains of our institutions should be reminded of what Treason means and the consequences to those who willingly commit to that act fully explained.

    For at some time in future, they must be held accountable if we do not wish to re-visit what has been allowed to happen to this country over the past 70 years.

    Post a Reply
  8. Both Nanny Oz and Aunty Oz support al halal correctness and the Islamification of Australia. They are probably already paying the jizzya.

    The invasion of Europe by Islamics from many nations is being carefully sanitised by Aunty Oz on (Y)idiot box.

    Here’s a dashcam capture from the Calais front at the Chunnel.

    Migrants break through police line at Calais

    The command of the Australian military will be ‘Nsync with Nanny Oz on the tranny agenda. Currently Oz might be bringing up the rear of this tidal wave of insanity, but it is now cresting in NYC. JooYawk is now imposing fines for using incorrect pronouns when speaking to a tranny (ie someone with clout in the victim hierarchy as designated by the Gaystapo).

    NYC will fine you $250,000 for not calling a trans zhi or zhir

    Yes this wave of insanity is heading for Oz.

    Post a Reply
    • “JooYawk”, oh side-splitting hilarious. Got any more of them? Any concentration jokes? How about that old favourite ‘How do you tell a Jew is next to you? When the sun disappears because of his nose.’ Gosh, the oldies are the best!

      Them were the days when you could tell a good Jew joke and not be intimidated by the thought police, hey Lynda!

      Keep up the good work girl…idiot!

      Post a Reply
  9. One more thing. Of course if I can reconstruct this so easily so can the Navy and they could have revised their dates to suit the extant evidence (yeah that’s a bit of conspiracy theory there but hey…it happens) after their initial consolidation excuse fell apart in three seconds.

    An aside: It’s interesting seeing the different ways different media outlets report the demise of @navyislamic. For example I note how media outlets such as Canberra Times and the UK’s Independent use very old photos of Shindy without her hijab. Far more benign when you are rooting for the poor victimised Islamic advisor. Just goes to show how media does sometimes try to manipulate instead of inform, as this extreme (unrelated) example quite clearly demonstrates.

    Post a Reply
  10. If Google cache is accurate and account was still up as at 16 December, note that the last tweet was on 2 December.

    Of course that doesn’t discount subsequent tweets between 2 Dec and 16 Dec being deleted – but that would need more extensive checking (For the record: I was still mentioning @navyislamic on my twitter account on 12 Dec but without directly linking to a tweet – as it is I was blocked by her ages ago, not that that stops me from seeing or linking to her tweets – but in those instances I usually RT others RT’g the blocker so blocked tweets can still show up in full on my time line.)

    Shindy got counselled on 3 December on the same day a report appeared in the Navy news telling you all she got some award in November and is going off to do a masters.

    The previous issue of Navy news was on 19 November, the same day she got the Telstra award so I assume her award/masters could not be announced in that issue (I really don’t understand how a Navy officer doing her job is some sort of business person, unless we now have an ADF model akin to the Indonesians…but anyway)

    So she got an award on 19 Nov (which she and superiors would have known about before), tweeted til 2 Dec, got counselled on 3 Dec (when Navy news was published, probably too late to delete any ref to Masters if such a ‘reward’ was withdrawn, which I doubt) and the account was deleted without any further tweets (although this needs to be checked more thoroughly) on or around 16 Dec.

    So there may be some credibility in some of the dates Defence has given but it doesn’t really explain their pissfarting around giving different dates and different excuses for WHY it was closed down. The latter could just be general incompetence – right hand doesn’t know what left hand is doing (which doesn’t inspire confidence) or a very clumsy attempt to avoid publicising the truth: Golden girl is in a big poo now that ALA has publically questioned her account and a court case makes it hard to fob them off. One also has to account fo the fact that different media outlets ask different questions of different personnel and put different spins on their reports, sometimes not for the most noble of reasons. So some of the discrepancies can be due to media sources.

    I still have questions on this whole Shindy saga though. But perhaps my 2 minute reconstruction might help you formulate better ones.

    Post a Reply
  11. To me, it appears from that statement that the Australian Navy under the current Chief of Navy no longer respects the Australian Government, the views of the Australian people or it’s own rules or regulations. Even though it has been caught out playing political games, all is okay, no-one will be effectively disciplined in accordance with Defence Department policy and statutes and the key player in all this has been rewarded with an educational scholarship courtesy of the man whose job it is to uphold the standards of the organisation he took an oath to serve unreservedly. I for one no longer have faith in the Australian Navy to operate in a manner conducive in warranting any respect or loyalty from the Australian people whilst the current Administration is in charge and the Federal Defence Minister has performed a disappearing act when it comes to this whole issue. Malcolm Turnbull must get directly involved in this matter and excuse the expression, “heads must roll” at the highest level or this becomes bonafide election issue. We as a democratic secular nation can not have a branch of the military operating as a political party or as a tool promoting a particular ideological bent. No sir, this cannot be acceptable to the Australian people under any circumstances.

    Post a Reply
    • I am in total agreement with you Michael. And as an ex-member of the ADF, I am appalled that any member of the ADF has been allowed to publicly air their political views or persuasions without being disciplined and removed from the Defence Force ………

      Post a Reply
  12. Forget the censure of the Chief of Navy – remove him immediately. What if . . . the Iran/Saudi embroglio
    worsens and sucks in Australian Defence Forces – not
    an impossible scenario. Where would a Chief of Navy
    stand whose sympathies lie more with them than with
    us? The whole ADF needs to be completely overhauled,
    from top to bottom – and those who would weaken our
    defence response through word, thought or deed ruthlessly shown the exit. The Defence Force is no
    place for politically correct party games – these are a
    dishonourable pursuit and totally destabilising for
    the country and our people. I am NOT alone in this
    attitude – appeasers, cowards and cringers, please note!

    Post a Reply
    • Well expressed…I totally agree with your comment and so would the silent majority – if they gave any thought for Australia’s economic, cultural and social future.

      Post a Reply
  13. Perhaps the chief of navy should be relieved of his posotion for covering up the treasonous activities of mona shindy. Why are taxpayers footing the bill for her studies?This pandering to the grand pufti is a bloody disgrace. This bloke has openly supported the attacks in France and in Australia. This crap has to stop Court Marshal Shindy now. Censure the chief of navy.

    Post a Reply
    • Totally agree, the defence force in Australia has a charter to ensure the laws of the land are adhered to, therefore muslims (who have their own “sharia” law) should not be allowed into the defence force at all.

      Post a Reply
  14. Lies and manipulation of the facts. Anyone that is in the Australian defence force cannot be a muslim because the allegiance is in question. What can be more simple than that?


    Post a Reply
    • If it had been a person attacking Islam they would have sacked immediately. She must go and the Navy Chief also.

      Post a Reply
  15. It seems not only Mona Shindy get the sack, but also the Chief of Defence.
    He does not demonstrate that he has Australians interests at heart, but busy standing up for Islam. This is very worrying for the head of our Defence force. How can we have any confidence in this man or the defence force to protect Australia over Islam.
    Thank you Bernard for all you do & hopefully you can nail their hides to the wall.

    Post a Reply


  1. Chief of Defence Force to appeal Federal Court win - Bernard Gaynor - […] The good news is that the Australian Liberty Alliance has already forced the military back into its box. I…
  2. DEFGLIS, you're next - Bernard Gaynor - […] the spectacular failure of the politicised and pro-Islamic Twitter account, @navyislamic, the Defence Gay and Lesbian […]

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Pin It on Pinterest