Newly listed terror organisation preying on ‘teenage boys'
A global network of neo-Nazi groups is trying to recruit Australian 'teenage boys', Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke says.
Terrorgram is a collective that promotes white supremacist violence on encrypted social media platforms, such as Telegram.
The Albanese government this week formally listed it as a terrorist organisation, with anyone found guilty of being involved with it facing up to 25 years behind bars.
Mr Burke said on Sunday Terrorgram poses a 'real' threat of radicalisation to young Australians.
'This is a new form of risk,' he told Sky News.
'So effectively, now we have a disproportionate number, and if you look at where the increase is happening, is fastest – it's teenage boys.'
Mr Burke said contact is usually made through online gaming platforms.
'They'll be playing with somebody who they've never met, who they presume is someone of their own age,' he said.
'They'll feel that they're building a relationship, and then that person will start to gradually try to take them down a pathway.
Mr Burke said he was 'not talking huge numbers' but that 'you don't need huge numbers' to deal with a risk to civilians.
'This is a growing form of terrorism,' he said.
Home Affairs has linked Terrorgram to the radicalisation of Jordan Patten, who was charged with attempting to commit a terrorist act last year.
Mr Patten was allegedly plotting to kill NSW state Labor MP Tim Crakanthorp.
He was a block away from Mr Crakanthorp's office in Newcastle when police arrested him.
We have officially listed Terrorgram as a terrorist organisation under the Criminal Code Act 1995 (the Criminal Code). pic.twitter.com/Vcha07WzX8
— Tony Burke (@Tony_Burke) June 26, 2025
Australia's domestic intelligence agency last year raised the terror threat to 'probable' because of deteriorating social cohesion and a spike in radicalisation among young men.
The agency's chief, Mike Burgess, warned at the time people were becoming radicalised for increasingly complicated and varied reasons and that ideologies were blending.
It was the first hike in a decade.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
18 minutes ago
- ABC News
How jurors will decide the outcome of Erin Patterson's mushroom triple-murder trial
More than nine weeks of legal proceedings have unfolded in Erin Patterson's murder trial, with the jury now set to deliberate on its verdict. Ms Patterson is accused of murdering three relatives and attempting to murder a fourth at a lunch at her home in Leongatha, south-east of Melbourne, on July 29, 2023. She has pleaded not guilty to all charges, with her lawyers arguing the incident was a tragic accident. A panel of jurors, who have watched the proceedings take place in the town of Morwell from start to finish, will now decide whether or not the alleged crimes have been proven beyond reasonable doubt. Here's what we know about how juries deliberate in Victoria. How many jurors are there? What has the jury heard in the trial? What questions will the jury consider? What has the jury been warned about? What happens in the jury deliberation room? How long will the jury deliberate? What if the jury cannot decide? Those who travelled to Morwell to watch the trial in person may have initially seen 15 potential jurors empanelled. This is because the Supreme Court empanelled an extra three people in case a potential juror fell sick or was discharged. We saw the importance of this measure first-hand on May 15, when Justice Christopher Beale opened court proceedings on what he described as "an unhappy note". Justice Beale told the panel that one of their fellow jurors had been removed based on "credible" information given to the court. "I received information that he had been discussing the case with family and friends, contrary to my instructions," the judge said. "I was of the view that it was at least a reasonable possibility that the information I'd received was credible." He ordered the jury not to contact the discharged juror. The two reserve jurors were balloted off after the judge gave his final directions to the jury, leaving 12 people to determine whether to acquit or convict Ms Patterson of the four charges. The jury has now attended the court almost every weekday for nearly two months. More than 50 prosecution witnesses were called to give evidence, from fungi experts who logged the location of deadly death cap mushrooms in Gippsland, to the nurses and doctors who treated all five attendees of the lunch for poisoning symptoms. Photos of a dehydrator that Ms Patterson admitted to throwing away in panic and detailed phone and hospital records were among the dozens of pieces of evidence shown to the jury across several weeks. For a recap on the major evidence in the Erin Patterson trial, head to our explainer here. When it came time for Ms Patterson's legal team to call a witness, defence barrister Colin Mandy SC put Ms Patterson herself in the witness box. After several days of emotional testimony where Ms Patterson shed tears watching footage of police interviewing her children, the prosecution began its cross-examination. Crown prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC engaged in several days of at-times tense questioning, regularly putting suggestions of guilt to Ms Patterson, which she strongly denied. Following Ms Patterson's testimony, both Mr Mandy and Dr Rogers made their closing addresses to the jury, recapping their cases to the jury over the course of several days. Finally, Justice Beale presented his final instructions to the jury over several days, telling the panel it must limit its deliberations to evidence presented before the court. "You are the only ones in this court who can make a decision about these facts," he said. "No one in the media, in public, in your workplace or in your homes have sat in that jury box throughout [this trial] … you and you alone are best placed to decide whether the prosecution has proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt." When it comes to deciding whether Ms Patterson is guilty of murder or not, the jury must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the four legal elements of that charge have been met. Those are: Justice Beale told the jury on Monday that what was in dispute was whether the serving of the poisonous meal was deliberate and whether it was done with murderous intent. The judge explained that for the charge of attempted murder, the jury needed to be satisfied Ms Patterson had intended to kill Ian Wilkinson, and that an intention to cause really serious injury was not applicable. As the defence reminded the jury in both its opening and closing arguments, the onus is on the prosecution to prove Ms Patterson intentionally poisoned her relatives — in other words, the accused is innocent until proven guilty. On the opening day of the trial, Mr Mandy urged the jury to consider this as a scale. "Remember that scale: innocent down here," he said. "That's your starting point: open mind. "Guilt is all the way up there," he said as he gestured higher. Jurors have also been warned about the risk widespread media coverage poses to the high-profile case. Global media attention has shrouded the case for weeks. Justice Beale has explicitly warned jurors to reject any approaches from friends and family keen to discuss the case. He also warned them against undertaking their own investigations, such as visiting websites named in the trial or searching relevant locations online. Jurors who carry out their own research don't only risk an unfair trial; they also risk committing contempt, which can be a criminal offence. We will never know. Deliberations are kept strictly confidential. Jurors must not share what took place to anyone — even after a verdict has been reached. The secrecy of deliberations is a key part of the justice system, and what determines a jury's decision is never publicly revealed. "It's difficult to get access to jurors, but there's good reason for it," Professor Horan said. However, jurors are not completely left to their own devices. They may ask questions of the judge or request to see certain evidence again, but that doesn't always happen. On Monday the jury was told they would deliberate from Monday to Saturday. They will be sequestered, meaning they will not go home during the week and on Sundays. That's one question we can't really answer. Remember, the jury's verdicts must be unanimous, meaning all 12 panel members have to agree. Suffice it to say that deliberations will take as long as they need to. Given the requirement for a unanimous verdict, even one dissenting member can cause a "hung jury", meaning no unanimous verdict can be reached. Without trying to influence jurors' verdicts, the judge may offer assistance to prevent that outcome. But in the event that the jury remains unable to reach a consensus and a hung jury is declared, they will be discharged, and a new trial eventually held. On Monday, Justice Beale told the jury their verdict must be unanimous on each charge, but that that did not mean they must all reach their decisions the same way. "No matter how you reach your verdict, you must all agree," he said.
News.com.au
28 minutes ago
- News.com.au
‘Final piece of the puzzle': Man whose body found in Maroochy River identified as Alexander Marinis
An unknown man whose remains were found in a river on the Sunshine Coast more than a year ago has been identified as Victorian man Alexander Marinis. On November 30 2023, about 8am, members of the public were walking down the Maroochy River when they saw the body of a man floating in the water under the Talep Bridge. Police were called to the scene and deemed the death as non-suspicious. A year-and-a-half after the man's remains were located, his identity remained unknown – until now. On Monday, Queensland Police confirmed the identity of the man as Alexander Marinis, 47, from Yarram in Victoria. He did not have any identification documents or a wallet at the time of his death. The man had no identifiable markers such as tattoos, dental implants or piercings. Police divers searched the river for any clues leading to the man's identity. On the bank of the river, police discovered some of the man's belongings, including a water bottle, jacket, shoes, an ATP-branded backpack and a receipt for a purchase made at a Bunnings three days before his remains were found. CCTV footage revealed the man purchased items at the hardware shop using a brown wallet that was not recovered at the scene. Police confirmed the man's identity was confirmed after a Centrelink staff member recognised his face from an ABC article. 'Great lengths were taken to identify the man over this period: door knocking, DNA testing, some work with Interpol around some surgical artefacts in the man's knee, which resulted in worldwide inquiries,' Queensland Police Detective Senior Sergeant Robert Lowry told reporters. 'The final piece of the puzzle was the DNA from the family, which led to a positive identification of the male.' The man's death has been deemed non-suspicious, and the 47-year-old's remains were returned to his family. Detective Yowry thanked those who assisted in the search to identify Mr Marinis. 'I sincerely thank the media and the public for their assistance in this investigation,' he said. 'A person, who had previously dealt with the man in a professional capacity in Maroochydore, recognised the man after seeing an appeal on the news and contacted police to share the information. 'This information led us to being able to confirm his identify through DNA testing and contact the man's family. 'I also want to thank the detectives that worked on this investigation with such perseverance and tenacity.' His mother Maree Bergamo said she learnt of her son's death on February 13, about 14 months after his remains were found in the river. She said her son was an 'intelligent, decent and loyal person' who frequently preferred to be on his own. She explained that he cut himself off from family, prompting her to hire a private investigator to track him down. He moved to Queensland and died a few weeks later. He was laid to rest in a private funeral last month, police said. 'Alex was a loner, sadly,' Ms Bergamo said at his funeral, per the ABC. 'Alex will always be remembered as a kind, decent and law-abiding person. 'He was a non-drinker and non-smoker. Alex was always loved and adored by my family. 'It's tragic that he didn't seek help.'
News.com.au
an hour ago
- News.com.au
Ex-ASIO chief questions Australia's defence spending amid Western budget boosts
The 'real issue' with Australia's defence spending is not if the Albanese government is splashing more cash but whether it is 'enough' and flowing 'fast enough', an ex-spy chief says. Duncan Lewis headed the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) from 2014 to 2019. Since departing the country's domestic spy service, he has become chair of the European Australian Business Council and the Australian arm of weapons maker Thales. Mr Lewis said on Monday there was no doubt Labor had increased the defence budget since coming to power. 'The government has increased defence expenditure and spending over the last couple of years, and the projections going forward continue that increase,' he told the ABC. 'The real issue is whether it is enough and whether it is fast enough.' Mr Lewis noted that the defence budget was sitting about 2 per cent of GDP or $59bn. Under Labor's spending commitments, that would increase to about 2.35 per cent of GDP by 2034 – the same year the Albanese government has warned a major conflict could break out. At roughly $100bn in the space of a decade, Mr Lewis said 2.35 per cent was 'a sizeable increase'. 'But the question is, is it enough to have the kind of defence force that we might require in the future?' he said. Anthony Albanese is facing domestic and international calls to boost the defence budget, with the US warning of a potentially 'imminent' threat from China in the Indo Pacific. But the Prime Minister has resisted, making Australia an outlier in the West – a position highlighted by NATO's decision last week to dramatically hike military spending to 5 per cent of GDP. The Trump administration has asked Australia to lift spending to 3.5 per cent. Both Labor and the opposition have pushed back on that target, with the Coalition proposing 3 per cent instead. Asked point blank if 2.35 per cent of GDP was enough, Mr Lewis said he thought Australia would need to front up more. 'I'm of the view that if we are going to run a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines, together with an effective defence force that's capable of doing the kind of things that we expect might be required in the future, there will have to be an increase in due course,' he said. 'But look, I'm cognisant of the fact that there are competing challenges for the public purse, and it's up to the government to get their balance right. 'But I think there is a sense of urgency in this matter, which is not universally being exhibited, and I think that needs to be something that we should pay more attention to.' Mr Lewis also said defence companies were not getting the 'certainty' needed to do business in Australia. 'There is a concern that we are unable to get into long-term, reliable partnerships with government,' he said. 'The defence industry in Australia requires long term, regular contractual arrangements if we are to develop sovereign defence capability, and that is a stated objective of the government. 'You can't have just episodic buys and expect defence companies to continue operating in Australia.'
