This is from The Age. I will know that things are really turning when we can see the same in The New York Times. The article is by Julie Szego and is titled, Let’s not pussyfoot around definitions, Man Haron Monis was a terrorist and comes with the sub-heading, “‘Lone wolves’ may have no formal ties to terror groups, be criminals or mentally ill, but their ideology is key to understanding their actions”.

To categorise Monis’ actions as those of an ordinary criminal rather than a religious extremist we have to deprive him of the “benefit” of being an individual. Monis had proclaimed his disgust for Australia’s military intervention in Afghanistan. He sent abusive letters to families of deceased Australian soldiers who served there. He converted from Shia Islam to Sunni, pledging allegiance to Islamic State. During the siege he requested an IS flag, obviously troubled that his banner wasn’t the pure article. He demanded Tony Abbott refer to his actions as a terrorist attack. It was prudent tactics to deny his self-definition during the siege, but to do so now is to flinch from reality. . . .

Monis should be seen as a violent criminal and a terrorist. We must name his extremist ideology, accept that it is influential and pernicious and redouble our efforts to confront it as a calm, harmonious community.

Together, the “lone wolves” form a rabid pack. Monis doesn’t need a certificate of authenticity signed by Islamic State.