Duncan Lewis’ confusion

Almost exactly a year to the day after the Lindt Café terrorist attack, ASIO boss Duncan Lewis said this:

“I don’t buy the notion that the issue of Islamic extremism is in some way fostered or sponsored or supported by the Muslim religion. I don’t buy that at all. I think it’s blasphemous to the extent that I can comment on someone else’s religion.’’

Shortly thereafter, I called for Duncan Lewis to be sacked.

Obviously, nothing happened (except for numerous terrorist attacks and plots that were fostered, sponsored and supported by the Muslim religion).

However, in recent days others are now questioning whether this man is fit to run the organisation charged with the responsibility of protecting Australians from internal threats.

Andrew Bolt wrote this earlier today:

“ASIO boss Duncan Lewis should tell us the truth about refugees and terrorism, or shut up. The danger is too great for our top spy to pretend there’s no link.”

And Miranda Devine wrote this yesterday:

“What is the ASIO boss smoking?”

Indeed. Just what the ASIO Head Honcho smoking?

These comments come after Duncan Lewis told parliament that there is no link between refugees and terrorism. I went to town on that bombshell last week.

Today, it’s time to look a little closer at Duncan Lewis’ other statements to parliament, particularly this one:

“But I’ve got to stress, senator – this is very important – ASIO does not make its inquiries or its assessments on the basis of somebody’s religion.

“We are only interested in people who are exhibiting or offering violence, and to the extent that there is violent extremism – which is very frequently inspired by a warped version of Sunni Islam – that’s when our interests are invoked.”

According to Duncan Lewis, ASIO does not make assessments on the basis of religion.

And, according to Duncan Lewis, ASIO has also made two assessments on the basis of religion:

  1. Islamic extremism has nothing to do with Islam, and
  2. terrorism is a warped view of Islam.

On top of all of this, Duncan Lewis believes that questioning Islam is blasphemous.

This is all very convoluted. Let me do my best to explain.

ASIO does not investigate religions, especially Islam, because to do so would be blasphemous. But AIO does investigate warped views of Sunni Islam, which is not blasphemous because it has nothing to do with Islam even though the ASIO Director General describes it with the adjective ‘Islamic’. And that is not blasphemous either.

As ASIO does not assess religion, especially Islam, because to do so would be blasphemous, ASIO has no idea what Islam is. But it does know that Islam is not a warped view of Sunni extremism, which it has simultaneously decided to be a warped view of Islam (a religion that it has not assessed) which means it does have everything to do with Islam even though it has nothing to with Islam at all.

Finally, as the ASIO Director General believes that it is blasphemy to comment on someone else’s religion but has commented on the religious beliefs of Islamic State terrorists, the only logical conclusion is that the ASIO Director General and Islamic State terrorists follow the same religious beliefs.

Or Duncan Lewis is making it all up as he goes along.

Either way, he should still be sacked.

I’m glad I cleared all of that up for you.

Quite seriously, how can anyone possibly believe that the man responsible for running ASIO is doing his job if he won’t make any assessments of Islam but will make entirely unfounded assessments that extremism has nothing to do with Islam?

On what basis can he possibly determine that this extremism is a ‘warping’ of Islam if he thinks it is blasphemous to assess Islamic ideology?

The answer is that he can’t.

Yet he continues to cover for Islam. And on this point, he should be sacked again.

The ASIO Act makes it very clear that the ASIO Director General has responsibilities to protect all Australians and not simply certain sections of the community. This is section 20 of that law:

Special responsibility of Director-General in relation to functions of Organisation

The Director-General shall  take all reasonable  steps to ensure that:

(a)  …

(b)  the Organisation is kept free from any influences or considerations not relevant to its functions and nothing is done that might lend colour to any suggestion that it is concerned to further or protect the interests of any particular section of the community, or with any matters other than the discharge of its functions.

On any reasonable assessment, Duncan Lewis is allowing ASIO to be subject to the perception that it is furthering or protecting the interests of the Islamic community.

This is precisely because Duncan Lewis is furthering and protecting the interests of the Islamic community by refusing to conduct any assessments about the nature of Islamic ideology or the threat this community poses Australia.

So, once again, Duncan Lewis should be sacked

(Thanks to reader Helen for the tip about ASIO’s laws).

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. the article in the The Australian on the 5th June, Yesterday, page 5 says it all.
    Jennifer Oriel’s journalism explains that THE ENEMIES OF THE CROSS who are invading
    Australia must be stopped before it is too late. Duncan Lewis refused to answer Pauline
    Hanson’s question with regard to the number of Jihadist’s we have currently in Australia.
    How many have arrived back from the Middle East.
    Our Freedom of Speech is being taken away from us.
    The Prime Minister, who had lunch with the enemy, still will not mention Islamic Terrorists, nor will Bill Shorten. and all three, Liberal, Labor and the Greens believe that ISLAM IS GOOD FOR AUSTRALIA!!!
    Why is it? They preach Treason behind closed doors believing that their divine Islamist destiny
    is to kill the Infidel and be rewarded.
    We are the Infidel, we are the Enemy. This is a Christian Country, still part of the British Empire,
    and we have faith in Jesus Christ and the Blessed Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
    Jennifer and Pauline are right. We are at War and need to strengthen our Borders.

    Post a Reply
  2. “In the overwhelming majority of cases it’s as a result of online viewing in their loungerooms, in their bedrooms at a very young age and absorbing some of this very objectionable and brutal material,” Duncan Lewis

    It is the same logic as determining a person reading of, or viewing on line or otherwise the “very objectionable and brutal material” of Nazi extermination camp inmates and process and the Nazi SS killing civilians, even fellow German civilians, after finishing or half way through reflecting on such material start throwing gas canisters into a neighbour’s house – it is absolutely absurd. It determines nothing that happened before in this person’s development and cultural indoctrination affects their motivation to utilise the ethics contained in Mein Kampf in a particular way depending on their specific cultural development history to justify their behaviour or not justify it.

    These Muslim terrorist “categorization engines” driving prejudice and enabling implicit common understanding of the ‘automatic labels’ the Islamic/Muslim culture applies to Other and the methodology for dealing with Other, which enables a Muslim to move from peaceful and law abiding ‘angel’, good or bad practicing Muslim, to terrorist has to occur, repeat has to occur prior to a Muslim person young or old having sufficient cognitive ability to access the internet, and even more importantly have the cultural motivation to access “objectionable and brutal material”. This “objectionable and brutal material” must be already pre justified and authorised within ‘moderate’ peaceful and law abiding domain either implicitly or explicitly – explicitly exists within the Quran or is able to be analogised from it and/or Mohammad’s behaviour as the core ethical-moral-values-belief method source of all Muslims, inclusive of Sharia law.

    “.. tens of thousands of refugees have come to Australia in the past decade. And a very few of them have become a subjects of interest for ASIO and have been involved in terrorist planning,” ASIO chief Duncan Lewis

    As Duncan Lewis should be aware there are as sociology and social psychology research confirms only ever a ‘few’ altruistic enforcers created and sustained by a cultures ‘moderate’ peaceful and law abiding, due to the high cost particularly in some cultures of being an altruistic enforcer i.e. a short life span blowing yourself up in a music venue.

    Duncan Lewis should also be aware backed up by research, due to the culture’s own codex justification and authorisation for the cultural methodologies utilised, and the types of methodology the culture itself develops the ‘few’ altruistic enforcers created are all that are required to make sure adherents are kept in line and the interaction with Other cultures effectively managed-from the cultures own perspective not necessarily from an Other cultures perspective i.e. Muslim terror utilised as a cultural justified and authorised method.

    Research has clearly shown the relative damage the ‘few’ can do far outweigh their actual numbers. So for Duncan Lewis to claim it is only a ‘few’ is a sickening indictment of his ignorance which determines it is no wonder Muslim terror as he stated in his parliamentary responses will continue. If you do not know why cultural terror occurs in the first place, where why how it is actually initially developed and that there is only ever the ‘few’ altruistic enforcers what hope have you in stopping it.

    Clearly some cultures such as the Muslim culture systemically inform sociopath altruistic enforcer ‘few’ from an Other cultures perspective, viewed as normative from the cultures own perspective , otherwise the ‘few’ utilising terror would not exist, utilising methods which far outweigh the benefit of having such a culture coexist in an Other cultures space.

    I do not believe the cost of one child inside our borders or outside warrants such a terrible price of not holding the Muslim ‘moderate’ peaceful and law abiding, refugee or otherwise justifiably culpable for systemically creating terror-genocide in humanities streets.

    Post a Reply
  3. Like I have said in another post, Duncan Lewis appears to have an agenda that does not have the safety of Australia at its core. What he is saying is not supported by the facts we see. His claims are not supported by any evidence in the public domain I’m aware of.

    There is a point where political correctness & incompetence create the net effect of treason. But lets take a step back & look at the bigger picture. There’s a feminism or socialism of senior executive positions in APS that’s been happening for the last few years in readiness for the next ALP government which, will be influenced by organisations like “GETUP” who are vying for influence.

    I am suggesting that a perfect storm is brewing with the next ALP government who will open the borders. ASIO will let terrorists slip past our security, Increased crime, HROC in concert with law enforcement agencies will persecute those who speak out, inner city dwellings may be confiscated to house migrants

    If you think that’s crazy……guess again because that is exactly what is happening in Western Europe NOW.

    Post a Reply
  4. Duncan Lewis is confused and incorrectly naive at best.

    He is a treacherous, practicing, ferverant mohomedan practicing taqia at worse.

    I suspect though,he is in the middle. He appears a bumbling, dangerous, totally incompetent public servant worthy of scorn and dismissal. Not worthy of his charge to protect the interest of Australians.

    Post a Reply
  5. Bernard, apart from your organisation and the like of One Nation, it seems that nobody will level any criticism at Islam and the followers thereof, Muslims.

    All the evidence is available for anybody to read and see. To see it is probably the easiest of all. I mean we just had the shocking incident in Birmingham, which we are learning has nothing to do with some “Lone Wolf” who has spent too many hours listening to hate preaching Imans in a mosque. It is to do with a much larger organised web of terrorism that is being well planned and professionally executed. For God’s sake, blind Freddy can see the obvious link to Islam and Muslims.

    If you want to read about it, get hold of the Quoran (spelling???), albeit we can only access the laundered version. But that is bad enough. But I accept that reading and understanding this book is rather difficult. So how about a book by Harry Richardson titled “The Story of Mohammed, Islam Unveiled”. It’s available as an e-book or hardcover through Amazon. Harry credits Bill Warner of the Centre for the Study of Political Islam with much assistance in writing this book. The book is not heavy in terms of reading. Harry has a nice way of writing that you can understand.

    Honestly, just reading Harry’s book would have people looking over their shoulders.

    It has been said that Islam is a peaceful religion, and refers to the Quoran for support in this claim. Certainly it would appear that the early versions may have supported this belief, but you must understand that when new laws or edicts are added to it, they become the law. Unlike the Christian Bible, which hasn’t changed since when, the Quoran is an ever evolving work of laws for the beholders of Islam.

    But I must ask Bernard, how the hell do we get mainstream political groups to view Islam and Muslims in a serious manner? All they seem to do is suck up and kowtow to them. Back to you Bernard.

    Post a Reply


  1. Duncan Lewis’ confusion – Bernard Gaynor | Cranky Old Crow - […] Source: Duncan Lewis’ confusion – Bernard Gaynor […]

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