Australia’s intelligence boss, Mike Burgess, wants the country’s terrorist alert system upgraded.
He made the argument in June, stating that “I do not believe the system was designed for a situation like the one we now face.”
While Australia’s terrorism threat level remains at PROBABLE, he said, it doesn’t tell the full story.
“The next level on the scale is EXPECTED, which applies when we have intelligence about a specific attack.”
About which, he clarified, “we do not.”
However, Burgess stated, “we do know the environment is degrading, and acts of politically motivated violence are becoming more likely.”
Referring to “extremists across the ideological spectrum”, he cited one case involving so-called “extreme Christian beliefs,” and another “allegedly inspired by an extreme left-wing ideology.”
Although the majority of terrorism threats still involve Islamists, he said, “these cases demonstrate the diversity and complexity of the contemporary terrorism environment.”
Likening the state of the security environment to “climate change”, Burgess asserted,
“Just as climate change increases the likelihood of extreme weather but does not forecast specific storms, politically motivated violence, including acts of terrorism, is more likely, even though [ASIO] cannot predict a specific attack.”
He then added that “this is where a degrading security environment intersects with a diverse one.”
From there, Burgess gave a positive nod to the Albanese Government’s “recent investment in the ASIO and AFP counter-terrorism online centre.”
He said, ASIO and the AFP have foiled 31 major plots since 2014, then reassured Australians that they don’t want to be “all-seeing and all-knowing.”
That said, his agency will confront this “new terrorism environment” head-on.
Inferring multicultural – “modern” - Australia, he said that the country’s dynamic, diverse, and degraded security is an “unfortunate reality,” then added that “the terror alert system will never include a level of “impossible” or “unthinkable”.
Hence the importance, Burgess said, of addressing “known serious threats, and continually evolving and improving [ASIO’s] capabilities.”
This includes the “aggressive adoption of new tools and techniques”, like artificial intelligence.
Listed among his “that’s terrorism” concerns were “the tolerance of intolerance, the growth of grievance, the radicalisation of minors, the embrace of conspiracy.”
His June address ended by endorsing a return to the ethos of a “fair-go.”
Burgess stated that with a revival of “mutual respect and tolerance, the temperature of our security environment would be several degrees lower.
“By all means disagree,” he declared, “but consider how we disagree.
“By all means protest, but consider how we protest.
“By all means report the news, but consider how you report the news.
“By all means condemn a government or a political party, but consider whether you should condemn a people.”
Doubling down on his assertions, Burgess noted on 11 September this year, “much has changed since 9/11.”
“Terrorist motivations are far more diverse than they were 25 years ago.”
Although Burgess noted that “Sunni violent extremism still represents the majority of ASIO’s counter-terrorism caseload,” he reasserted the June diversity claim.
Contemporary terrorism, the ASIO boss declared, now involves “mixed ideologies.”
“Drivers of extremism,” he added, “are [also] different and more diverse.”
The internet, for example, when “violent rhetoric and violent acts are left unchecked,” “creates a permissive environment for further violence.”
While mostly benign, the ASIO chief’s comments raise some red flags.
Without scrutiny, updating the terror alert system could lead to ASIO policing dissent, political commentary and Christian sermons calling the government to account.
Such is Labor and the eSafety’s apparent lust for a dystopian ministry of truth, circa “Digital Duty of Care.”
Hand-in-hand with Burgess’ updates, this could also lead to Australia’s security agencies expanding who they designate as a terrorist and what they consider to be terrorism.
In the hands of a socialist government, which hates criticism, especially when political opponents overtake them in the polls, Burgess’ promises about any ASIO overreach are far from reassuring.
Any push to further supercharge the surveillance state is a chilling prospect for a nation founded on faith, family and freedom.
One clear takeaway from Burgess’ two addresses this year is that diversity isn’t just a threat to social cohesion.
ASIO now seems to consider it a threat to national security.
