Home Australia Droudis Trial, Part 5: The Connection to the Sydney Siege

Droudis Trial, Part 5: The Connection to the Sydney Siege

17

article image

by Mary W Maxwell

Since a reader actually asked me to compose a Part 5 for this series, and I can hardly resist an invitation, I offer this new interpretation of the Droudis situation.

Upfront disclosure: I am prejudiced, as in pre-judice, as in having made up my mind before the Droudis trial is played out. That is because I have firmed up my belief that Monis was a patsy, and that means a patsy for somebody, right? You can’t just be a free-lance patsy.

Sorry, this will have to be a crude article, but what can you do when the facts that you want to get at are hidden by government? (and when neighbors ask you if you’ve overdosed on your meds because you are interested in gory topics….).

If my patsy theme is not something you want to hear about today, please stop reading.  Or, as we say in Boston, if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the pressure cooker.

Port Arthur, Again

Let me show an analogy to the Bryant case before we get started on Droudis. Martin Bryant was picked out at an early age, was fodderized, and was made to be the patsy for the Port Arthur massacre. That is all quite provable.

When someone wrote up the story of what Bryant was to do at the Broad Arrow Café (that is, what some other poor sod then had to do), that writer also wrote that Bryant would “murder the owners of Seascape.”

Once it was written it had to happen!

So poor Sally and David Martin died because the plot development called for it. Imagine it. What am I saying? I am ashamed of talking like that.

The Martins’ premises at Seascape was going to be needed that day. For example, there had to be a venue for a “hostage situation” (which makes make federal intervention legitimate, you know).

Happily, “hostaging” also allowed the drama to extend into the night. And it set the stage for the offender’s death by fire.

Fire? Oops, am I talking about Droudis, Bryant, or what. I guess somebody likes the fire angle. Hey, maybe it was the same writer in both cases.  Twenty years isn’t much of a gap in a “writer’s” career.

I see the killing of EXwife as having no more purpose then the killing of the Martins. Isn’t that outrageous? (And think what it will coast her young lads in emotional illness.)

Monis

Let’s look at the siege again. A decision came in, probably from overseas, that there needed to be a Muslim terrorist thingiedoo in a capital city. The offender had to look a bit Middle Eastern.

I have heard that Monis is in fact Jewish; Iran has a Jewish community. He has got the right accent for an Iranian so I am sure he grew up in Iran. He hasn’t got the square-ish Iranian chin.

Maybe he grew up Muslim.  I don’t know, but he is no religious fellow, that’s for sure. You have only to inventory his lies, his thefts, and his mistreatment of women. Persons who want to please God at least make some effort to be moral. That is axiomatic.

As for Monis’ being doctrinally galvanized, that is a joke. At a very late stage of the game, namely a few days before the December 15, 2014 siege, he switched from being Shi’ite (which is normal in Iran) to Sunni, which made it at least vaguely plausible that he was speaking for ISIS, the “Islamic state.”

EXwife

So there was a siege and then the patsy died — Monis. Yes, his own death was “written in.”  But today I am not looking at the deaths in the Lindt Café but at the killing of EXwife.

If it was like the killing of Sally and David Martin, we really don’t need to seek further explanations, do we? In 1996, there was no need to track down the story abut Bryant  having a childhood grudge toward the now-elderly owners of Seascape.

So also with EXwife. Did she have a fight last year with Amirah? Doesn’t matter. Did she fiddle with Monis’ bank account? Doesn’t matter. Was she planning to spirit the kids off to Fiji? Doesn’t matter. Nothing matters. See?

Regardless of what was going on in EXwife’s daily life, she would have ended up in that stairwell (I am assuming there really was a stairwell death. Maybe somebody could interview the firefighters to find out.).

What’s Missing at the Trial?

I have found the court sessions a bit helpful, as they do provide a chance to see how Amirah looks and what her family members say in videos, and so forth. But they don’t provide the big scene that needs to be grasped.

That scene is somewhere in a boardroom. Or maybe at a pedophile party. Or maybe it’s all done by a computer these days — “the KILL computer.”

EXwife needed to be brutally murdered (that is my speculation, anyway) and so it was done. And the local do-er of the deed, the person who wielded the knife, is still unknown.

Did Amirah wield the knife? Maybe or maybe not. Even that is more or less irrelevant. If Amirah Droudis performed that killing, she did so – I feel sure – as an agent of someone who wanted it done.

Indeed the prosecutor (Mark Tedeschi, QC) agrees with me. I mean up to a point. He says the real killer is Monis. Good. He understands that A can carry out a horrific deed for B.

I say he’s picked the wrong “B” – it was not Monis that arranged EXwife’s death.

I think he probably also has the wrong “A.” If Droudis had never killed so much as a chicken before, she could probably not have stabbed a human being that day.

But at least the Prosecutor is in the ballpark. The knife wielder at the Werrington flats was basically a disinterested party. Right.

There’s That 5th Amendment Again!

The real Amirah – after all she is a real person – may be going through the trial under an agreement with somebody. The promised outcome would be that she gets acquitted, and paid.

(Maybe she has the odd moment of worry, noting that Monis also acted in expectation of freedom and then got cheated!)

Legally I think this trial must end with an acquittal, as there’s such a lack of evidence that the judge can hardly find it to be “beyond reasonable doubt” that Amirah killed EXwife.

Of course I would like the prisoner, Mrs Droudis, to have taken the stand. But thanks to events at Runnymede she has the right to not incriminate herself.

So here is what I would do if I were in the NSW Justice Department. (Yes it is actually called that.) I would wait till Amirah goes free — and then order her to be arrested as a material witness.

Singing

That’s not a punishing type of arrest, and does not give you a criminal record.  It’s a way of incarcerating you until you sing.

Today we saw an ABC video of Amirah that shows her being trained to say “Australians will be killed.”  You can hear ol’ what’s-his-face training her in the background. She also clearly enunciated the cuckoo phrase “Thank you, Bali bombers.”

Note: ABC got the video from an old website, SheikHaron.com

I guess it would be hard to pin a crime on her for any of that, but she can legally be made to sing. I want to know what she knows about Monis’s chequered career.

Heck, she could even be subpoena’d to the Lindt Café inquest.

What a nifty idea.

Ah, but that presupposes that someone somewhere wants to find out what REALLY happened at the Lindt Café.

Twenty years on, officialdom does NOT want to hear what happened at the Broad Arrow Café, so why should we hope that the Lindt Café will be different? (Actually I have hope.)

My Thesis

I’d better state my thesis again because it’s so easy for it to scamper away.

I claim that the scriptwriter for the Sydney siege threw in a couple of extra things to pile up the bad reputation of the Muslim terrorist du jour.

I am already on record as saying that I think those letters to soldiers’ families were in the set-up for the same purpose, years ago. Soooo clever.

Conceivably, the allegation that Monis embezzled $200,000 in Iran is another cooked-up sin. (If the data came from “Interpol,” please note that Interpol is a private organization.)

The heaps-big item for Monis’ bad-reputation was the murder in the stairwell. It “totally clarifies for the public” that Monis was a bad man. A monster, really.

But as far as the death of EXwife goes, don’t forget that Monis is on record as having requested a judge at Parramatta Court to investigate “involvement of ASIO and Australian federal police in her murder.”

I hereby quote from the Security Report on Man Haron Monis by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet jointly with the NSW Office of Premier and Cabinet:

“14 April, 2014: NSW Police charge Monis with three sexual assault charges dating back to 2002. He is remanded in custody.

16 April, 2014: Monis requests that the Parramatta Local Court investigate his allegation that NSW Police Force and ASIO are involved in the murder of his former partner. The request is denied.”

Kind of an odd request to make, don’t you think?

— Mary Marple is enduring great rainstorms in Adelaide today.

 

Photo credit: sheikharon.com

 

SHARE

17 COMMENTS

  1. Mary, sooner or later, some public person must surely make a connection that all these crimes have a common theme and make some public statement about that situation.

    Not everybody in public life can be so stupid, as to not to see the facts. And surely not all of them are dishonest and go along with the acts of treason that we have seen since the bombing at the Hilton Hotel.

    • Thanks, Mal. This is just a guess: if any prestigious person “came out” tomorrow, others would rush to imitate him or her.

      Do you recall when the Torture Memo was first publihed around 2005, several US Army Generals signed a letter of protest.

      Ah, but they were all RETIRED generals.

      Their reasoining was quite correct and therefore must have been shared by many non-retired generals. But the latter were in hiding. Not one brave soul in the lot.

      Mal, how bout you submit an article to Gumshoe re Hilton ’78.
      At least you know you won’t get a “Return to Sender”reply.

  2. “namely a few days before the December 15, 2014 siege, he switched from being Shi’ite (which is normal in Iran) to Sunni, which made it at least vaguely plausible that he was speaking for ISIS”

    Remember back in the days of the big scary Ayatollah when it was Shiites that we were all fearful of. ISIS had to be nominally Sunni given that, when they rolled out of the desert they were heading AWAY from Saudi, so getting Monis to switch allegiance to save the script would have been a likely option.

    • Dee, what a scream that you would say that at this juncture. I have just found an employment ad on ASIO’s website. What kind of people do you think they are looking for?

      “ASIO is seeking talented Australians to help collect information, connect the dots and play a crucial role in providing advice to government.”

      • Well we could advise government and ASIO. I love your tips on getting Droudis to be a witness. But I think you make such an excellent point… Why on earth would Monis request that the Parramatta Court investigate ASIO as being involved in the murder of his EXwife.

      • Happy day to everyone in the Abrahamic religions (except Christians).
        October 3, 2016 is not only Muharram — Islamic New Year (the year being 1438) — it is also Jewish New Year, Rosh Hashanah.

        Christians living in South Australia, however, can celebrate Labor Day.
        And everyone can celebrate the wonderful fact that the bastards have not yet totally earthquaked the planet. (I emphasize ‘yet.’)

        Isn’t that nice?

  3. This is a tidbit from last week smh.com.au:

    “Mr Tedeschi [Prosecutor] said that Monis had intended for it to appear that his ex-wife was murdered when she interrupted a break-and-enter, but the ‘ferocious attack’ instead took place on the landing outside his rented apartment.”

    I was not in court that day, so can’t be sure the quote is accurate. But I would ask: how did the Prosecutor claim to have knowledge that there was a plan for a fake Breaking and Entering?

    Who, other than the accused, would have coughed up that info?

  4. Just to correct something. I said “Tedeschi agrees with me”.

    Hope it does not imply I had a chat with him. I mean his theory of Amirah working for Monis is my more general theory that any A can work for any B.

    It was nice to receive compliments on this article but please don’t spare me if you see something unsupportable. Instead of my glib explanation for EXwife’s death being like Sally’s, maybe there ARE reasons why she was taken out.

    But I failed to hear any persuasive story from either the P or the D as to what reasons there may be. I wholly reject the bit about Monis ordering the killing on a religious basis. (Can you imagine!)

    I also have to say again that it is a rare man who would do that to his 2 sons. One of them on a video said “I miss you, Dad.”

    One more thing. I said Droudis may get acquitted and be paid. I defo do not mean someone is paying the judge. As I said, the case is being presented in such a way that (guessing here) there is not enuf proof for a guilty verdict. He looks OK to me.

    Not that judges are clean. I believe Sherman Skolnick in his book “Ahead of the Parade.” He said a judge phoned him from a pay phonebooth crying, because there was no way he could control the case against other forces. And his colleagues would not support him.

    I think it was Gunther Russbacher (high in the finance operations of CIA) who said judges are paid casino chips, which they can cash in. Gotta have a laugh. That was back in 1993.

C'mon Leave a Reply, Debate and Add to the Discussion