A little list of Liberal waste

With Abbott claiming that the ALP has been wasteful, it is pertinent to target the wasteful spending of the Liberal Party as well as some of their deceitful claims, such as misrepresenting the carbon price and the NBN.

-------

National Broadband Network - Abbot's 'fibre to the node' plan will supposedly cost 80% less than Labor's, but under it houses will NOT be connected to optic-fibre.  Instead people will have to pay up to $5,000 out of their own pockets to run optic-fibre from the node, meaning few will get the benefit of optic-fibre while most will continue using a 60 year old copper network. The $20 billion spent by Liberal is a complete waste. Labor's 'fibre to the premises' (FttP) genuinely connects premises to the optic-fibre network, benefiting all of Australia.

-------

It's a carbon PRICE not a carbon tax - read the legislation:

• The Clean Energy Act 2011, Section 100, Subsection 10: If a carbon unit is issued to a person in accordance with this section, the person is liable to pay a charge for the issue of the unit. 
• Subsection 11 says 'Subsection (10) has effect only so far as it is not a law imposing taxation within the meaning of section 55 of the Constitution'.  http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2011A00131/Download 

The only lie around this has been Abbott's continued lying about it being a tax.

-------

Speaking of ... Abbott has committed to the same reductions in the carbon production that Labor has, yet he will rescind the carbon price and replace with a system that will cost more while rewarding big business at the expense of tax-payers. His idea of storing carbon in the ground has been described as nonsensical.

Below is a chart showing the reductions since the introduction of the carbon price:

------

Abbott claims he will manage the economy as though it were his own household. He earns $242,000 per annum and has recently taken out a $700,000 mortgage, meaning his debt to income level is almost 300%. The Australian debt to GDP ratio is under 20%. To compare that to Mr Abbott's debt, it would be like him only holding $48,400 in debt, rather than $700,000. Let's hope he doesn't manage the economy like he manages his household. Don't buy into the scare campaign about Australia's debt: http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/politics/time-to-end-tony-abbotts-deceitful-debt-campaign/

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/politics/facts-speak-for-themselves-australia-still-lucky-country/

-------

The International Monetary Fund rates Howard as the most wasteful of all Australian Prime Ministers. 

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/hey-big-spender-howard-the-king-of-the-loose-purse-strings-20130110-2cj32.html

-------

In 1997, the treasurer Peter Costello, sold Australia's gold reserves for $2.4 billion. The sale drove down global prices to an 11 year low. Today the gold would be worth $7.4 billion.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/reserve-banks-gold-sale-cost-us-5bn/story-e6frg6nf-1225985231872

-------

Costello sold off $70 billion of Australian assets. It was from this that the Liberal Party was able to claim a surplus, not from 'good financial management'. These assets had been earning money for the Australian government, the sales gave a short-term injection of funds, but has robbed the government of continued earnings from them.
http://www.finance.gov.au/property/asset-sales/past-sales.html

-------

Howard spent $2 billion on advertising while in office, which included $118 million on GST and $120 million on WorkChoices. Compare this to Abbott's whistleblowing over Labor spending $69.5 million on carbon price advertising.

-------


The Pacific Solution cost $1 billion over 5 years:

• http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/04/17/asylum-seekers-the-facts-in-figures/ 

• http://resources.oxfam.org.au/filestore/originals/OAus-PriceTooHighAsylumSeekers-0807.pdf

During this time, Howard held 1,637 asylum seekers in detention at an average cost of $500,000 each. It was an inhumane and expensive program designed for one thing: political point scoring. Howard equated asylum seekers with terrorists to cultivate racism and xenophobia in the psyche of the Australian population. Howard nurtured a culture of fear in which he could ride in like a knight in shining armour, wielding his 'border protection' policy to save Australia from the waves of potential terrorists flooding in. Well, the 1,637 of them anyway.

------

Asylum Seekers - the Howard government covered up, or deliberately lied about a number of tragedies which cost lives of asylum seekers, including:

• MV Tampa - The Howard Government sent in the SAS to force 438 distressed and traumatised asylum seekers to board an Australian Navy vessel and be relocated to New Zealand or Nauru. Their boat had sunk and they'd been rescued by the Captain of the MV Tampa. Defence Minister Peter Reith claimed that this group of asylum seekers could be harboring terrorists. All members of this group were found to be legitimate refugees and resettled in either Australia or New Zealand. During the Tampa crisis, Howard excised 4,600 Australian islands from being considered part of Australia's migration zone for the purposes of seeking asylum. In essence, escalating the crisis and denying legal rights to asylum seekers who had the temerity to land on an Australian island. This policy required asylum seekers to reach the mainland before applying for refugee status. The policy was eventually overturned by a decision of the Australian High Court in 2009, which ruled it illegal.
• The 'Children Overboard Affair', in which Howard claimed that asylum seekers had thrown their children from a sinking boat in order to force the Royal Australian Navy to rescue them. A subsequent Senate inquiry concluded that not only were NO children thrown overboard but that the Prime Minister himself knew that no children had been thrown overboard. The Senate Inquiry found that Howard deliberately misled the public in order to "exploit voters' fears of a wave of illegal immigrants by demonising asylum seekers" for political gain through appearing strong on "border security" (as detailed in the Senate Inquiries findings). 
• Siev-X - On 19 October 2001 during the Australian federal election campaign, a boat over loaded with asylum seekers began sinking as they made their way to Australia. 353 asylum seekers drowned. The Howard government claimed the sinking occured within Indonesian waters and was therefore Indonesia's responsibility. However, SBS reporter Geoff Parish proved that the sinking occured in international waters and that Howard knew this when he made that statement. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/22/1053585647492.html

-------

WorkChoices - reduced real wages and conditions for most workers, particularly those in two of the biggest employment sectors: retail and hospitality.

-------

Iraq - there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction and despite numerous prominent warnings, including from Andrew Wilkie and UN Weapons Inspectors, Howard still went to war. It was an illegal war which has so far cost Australia in excess of $3 billion.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/3b-and-rising-rapidly-cost-of-iraq-war/2007/03/20/1174153066804.html

-------

Afghanistan - the Howard incursion into Afghanistan has cost Australia around $7 billion. http://www.theage.com.au/national/terror-fight-costs-30-billion-20110910-1k3ez.html#

-------

Lies - Howard claimed there would be 'no new taxes, tax increases or indirect taxes' during his first term of government, yet he introduced:

• Termination Payments Tax, Franchise Fees Windfall Tax, Family Trust Distribution Tax, Radiocommunications (Spectrum Licence Tax), Radiocommunications (Receiver Licence Tax), Radiocommunications (Transmitter Licence Tax) and others during his first term of government from 1996 to 1998. For a full list of Acts implemented during those years refer to the following site: http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Browse/ByYearNumber/Acts/Asmade/0/0/

More on Howard's deceit and legacy can be read here: http://thepandarant.blogspot.com.au/2012/03/howards-legacy-haughty-hypocrisy.html

-------

The Liberal Party attacks jobs, victims of persecution and sells off assets while trying to claim the high moral ground. While the Labor Party has certainly moved away from its grass roots, being as right-wing as the Liberal Party was 20 years ago, the Liberal Party has now moved even further to the right, embracing hate and negativity while ignoring, mocking, misrepresenting and demonising the real needs of the people.

Terror Bites

The cyclical nature of terrorism and war is that the more war we wage, the more we radicalise those opposed to us. 

There have been some horrendous terrorist attacks over the last few decades, including:

• New York City and Washington, 11 September 2001: 2,996 dead
• Bali bombings, 12 October 2002: 202 dead
• London, 7 July 2005: 56 dead

So what is a terrorist? 

A terrorist is a person or group who uses or advocates terrorism. Ok ... so what is terrorism? According to dictionary.com, terrorism is 'the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes'. Often terrorism is used against civilians in order to spread terror or  influence Governments for political purposes.

Why the hell would someone want to kill hundreds or thousands of innocent people? Surely no purpose, political or otherwise, justifies killing innocent people?

Apparently, it does. Otherwise we wouldn't see attacks such as those listed above. 

Even the former Secretary of State, Madeline Albright, understands that killing 500,000 children for political purposes is worth it. That's what she said in an interview with 60 Minutes aired on 12 May 1996:

Lesley Stahl (regarding US sanctions in Iraq): 'We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?'
Madeleine Albright: 'I think this is a very hard choice, but the price ... we think the price is worth it'. 

You can view this scintillating justification for terrorism here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM0uvgHKZe8

I think it is time to add a view more terrorist events to the list:

• America's war in Iraq (since 2003): more than 1.4 million deaths⁽¹⁾
• America's war in Iraq (1992 - 2003): more than 1 million deaths ⁽²⁾
• Afghanistan (2001 - now): thousands, exact number is unknown ⁽³⁾
• Afghanistan (1979 - 1989): thousands - produced Al Qaeda & Taliban

Ok, these are 'wars' ... but war is terrorism and terrorism is often in response to war. Each of these wars has directly contributed to the anti-Western terrorism that we now see.

In 1979, the United States funded anti-Soviet incursions by the rebel Mujahideen in Afghanistan. These were terrorist strikes which attacked Afghan and Soviet troops and infrastructure. It was as a result of these activities that the Soviets invaded Afghanistan on 24 December 1979 ⁽⁴⁾. 

Over the next ten years the United States provided the Mujahideen with billions of dollars in weapons and terrorist training. One of the leaders trained by the USA was Osama bin Laden. Through the use of an Islamic recruiting agency known as Jemaat al-Tabligh (Tablighi Jemaat), the CIA was able to surreptitiously recruit Muslims from around the world to join the holy war, the Jihad, in Afghanistan against the infidel Soviet Union ⁽⁵⁾.

In the mid-80s, the Mujahideen commander, Ahmad Shah Massoud, warned the United States that their years of funding extremists in the name of Jihad was creating a major problem. He advised that once the Soviets were expelled from Afghanistan the extremists would go looking for their next big target: the infidel United States ⁽⁶⁾. As it turns out, Massoud was correct; by 1989 the Soviets left Afghanistan and Al Qaeda was formed by bin Laden ⁽⁷⁾ to 'defend' Islamic interests throughout the world and introduce an global Islamic Caliphate. Interestingly, Massoud was assassinated two days before 9/11 in 2001, allegedly on the orders of Osama bin Laden ⁽⁸⁾ for warning of an upcoming major terrorist attack against America.

The Jihadis used in Afghanistan had been recruited from around the world, and returned to fight in places such as Kashmir, Palestine, Phillipines, Algeria and other parts of North Africa ⁽⁹⁾. During their occupation of Afghanistan, the Soviet Union used Muslim fighters from around the world, particularly from the Balkans and Central Asia ⁽¹⁰⁾. These Jihadis also returned to their homelands with skills and anger honed in Afghanistan. The 1990s saw the brutal conflicts in the Balkans and Chechnya.

In the early 1990s, the Taliban formed from the remnants of the Afghan extremists with the support of Pakistan's Inter Service Intelligence agency (ISI) and established a brutal regime which supported Al Qaeda.

To this day, the world is suffering from the violence and terrorism employed by the USSR, USA and their allies in Afghanistan in the 1980s.

Another outcome of the the US's involvement in Afghanistan was an increase in the global drug trade. Afghanistan is part of the 'Golden Crescent', one of the largest poppy and cannabis growing areas in the world which spans Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan. The US used the supply of Afghan produced drugs to assist in funding the fight against the Soviets. In the 1990s, the Taliban were in control of the drug supply and by the late 1990s, South Asian produced marijuana, opium and heroin was hitting the streets of the West in quantities never before seen. ⁽¹¹⁾ 

During this time, China was funding the Muslim Uighurs to also fight against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. The armed and trained Uighurs returned from the Afghan Jihad, armed and trained, and turned on the Chinese government ⁽¹²⁾.

The 1980s were a critical period for the rise of global terrorism. Fuelling the situation, was the US, British and Soviet funding of regimes in Libya, Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Pakistan and so on. There was the US and Soviet sponsored war between Iran and Iraq. Other nations, such as France and Germany, also provided funding and arms to despotic regimes and wars. 

Furthering the cause of Islamic terrorists is the occupation of Palestine by Israel, which has left hundreds of thousands of Palestinians dead and over a million displaced since 1948. The occupation is supported and funded by many western nations, with the greatest benefactor being the USA who provides Israel with billions of dollars a year despite Israel's violation of dozens of UN resolutions.

It is far too simplistic to blame Islam for terrorist attacks against the West. These attacks have nothing to do with Muslims hating democracy or hating our freedoms. The superpowers (USA, USSR and China) and their allies have contributed to decades of war against Islamic nations, and others throughout Asia, Africa and the Americas, as well as funded terrorism and despots to their own political advantage. The human face of these atrocities are the millions asylum seekers and refugees who make their way into Western nations or who spend years in refugee camps throughout the world.

The cost to innocent lives through decades of Western political posturing is horrendous: millions dead, millions displaced. And yet Islam is labelled a terrorist religion?

Modern terrorism is blow-back from decades of Western funded atrocities across the globe.

Terror bites ... and it bites back!

References

1. 'Just Foreign Policy' - http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq based on a study published in the prestigious medical journal, The Lancet. Note, that other estimates range from 100,000 to 250,000. For instance, Iraq Body Count records 114,000, http://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/numbers/2011/ (note, that some sources have recorded up to 250,000 deaths). Both accessed 8 June 2013.

2. Global Issues, 'Iraq - Post 1991 Persian Gulf War/Sanctions', http://www.globalissues.org/article/707/iraq-post-1991-persian-gulf-warsanctions, accessed 8 June 2013.

3. 'Afghan Civilian Casualties', The Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/aug/10/afghanistan-civilian-casualties-statistics, accessed 10 June 2013.

4. John K. Cooley (2001), 'Unholy Wars - Afghanistan, America and International Terrorism', Pluto Press, Chap 1 'Carter and Brezhnev in the Valley of Decision'.

5. John K. Cooley (2001), 'Unholy Wars - Afghanistan, America and International Terrorism', Pluto Press, pp. 83-85.

6. John K. Cooley (2001), 'Unholy Wars - Afghanistan, America and International Terrorism', Pluto Press, p. 100.

7. John K. Cooley (2001), 'Unholy Wars - Afghanistan, America and International Terrorism', Pluto Press, p. 226.

8. Erin Cunningham, 'Ahmad Shah Massoud, assassinated by Al Qaeda but no friend of the US', The National http://www.thenational.ae/news/world/south-asia/ahmad-shah-massoud-assassinated-by-al-qaeda-but-no-friend-of-the-us, accessed 10 June 2013.

9. John K. Cooley (2001), 'Unholy Wars - Afghanistan, America and International Terrorism', Pluto Press, Chap. 5 'Recruiters, Trainers, Trainees and Assorted Spooks'.

10. John K. Cooley (2001), 'Unholy Wars - Afghanistan, America and International Terrorism', Pluto Press, Chap. 8 'Russia: Bitter Aftertaste and Reluctant Return'.

11. John K. Cooley (2001), 'Unholy Wars - Afghanistan, America and International Terrorism', Pluto Press, Chap. 7 'Poppy Fields, Killing Fields and Druglords'.

12. John K. Cooley (2001), 'Unholy Wars - Afghanistan, America and International Terrorism', Pluto Press, Chap. 4 'Deng Xiaoping'.

Capitalism - opiate of the masses

During the Global Financial Crisis we saw just how much influence large Corporations have as the Government handed out welfare to prop up Big Businesses that were deemed 'too big fail'.  Meanwhile individuals went bankrupt, losing everything that they had gained in the name of Capitalism, in pursuit of the 'American Dream'.

And dream it was. Capitalism is merely a tool of the rich to subdue the masses, to have them believe they can also be filthy rich if they work hard enough ... if they work hard enough enslaved to the rich, to the corporations run by the rich. Capitalism makes a very few uber-rich, while the rest are sold an unattainable dream and fed just enough scraps to keep from rebelling.

Aristotle wrote that 'poverty is the parent of revolution and crime'. It is in the best interests of the rich to ensure the 'common people' don't revolt. What better way to suppress revolution than by providing a dream, an illusion of potential wealth that not only subdues the public, but has them willingly enslaved in pursuit of the dream.

Capitalism is the opiate of the masses.

The insidious nature of Capitalism has seen it follow it's natural course by usurping Government that once represented the people, with Government that represents the rich and their corporations. Such Governments are no longer democracies, they have became plutocracies which have yielded to corporatocracies through privatisation - Government by the corporation, for the corporation.

The fuel on which the Corporatocracy feeds, is consumerism. Of course, this is sold to us from a young age through advertising that challenges us to have the latest 'thing', to keep up with, or be better than, the Jones's.

In order to keep up with consumerism, we must have wealth, and to have wealth we must work. There is nothing wrong with working, in fact, it is necessary for society to function. But when workers are exploited in order to transfer wealth to the rich and the Corporations, then there is something seriously wrong.

Capitalism is transfer of wealth from the worker to the rich.

Workers were once proud members of Unions and would often vote for parties that supported workers rights, such as Labor or the Democrats. These days, workers are disparaging of Unions through negative campaigns run by corporations and parties hijacked by the Corporatocracy, and are more willing to vote for parties opposed to union membership. Why do they do this? Because the opiate of Capitalism has convinced them that they are not an exploited proletariat, but are temporarily embarrassed millionaires (as John Steinbeck once observed). These workers do not understand that they are the commodity with which the rich get richer. It is overworked and underpaid labour that builds mega-profits. And these profits do not trickle down in the way that the Corporatocracy leads the gullible to believe.

Alvin Toffler stated, 'Profits, like sausages… are esteemed most by those who know least about what goes into them'.  An insightful comment that describes the dichotomy between worker viewpoint and worker reality.

Small businesses once operated independently and were often family-owned. These days there has been an incredible growth in franchises, which has effectively turned business people into workers while they think they are operating their own business. Many small businesses are reliant on contracts from multi-nationals, effectively turning their owners into glorified workers for the corporation while under the illusion that they 'work for themselves'.

Corporatocracy is a form of feudalism. Banks hold over-valued mortgages on houses and land, forcing the vassals to work. The exploited vassals return profits and homage to the corporation. Yes, the vassal may make some money from their ventures, enough to keep them from total poverty and subsequent revolution, but it is a pittance compared to the obscene profits being made at the expense of their freedom.

Voltaire said, 'The comfort of the rich depends on the abundance of the poor'. It is no accident that we now have a growing class of people known as the 'working poor'. They are the ones at the end of the corporate production line; the ones who work extremely hard for little return. They are exploited by corporations both through under-paid jobs and the wealth-transfer of consumerism.

And then there is the candy-coated Capitalism of pyramid schemes, or multi-level marketing, which market themselves as legitimate ways to get-rich quick. Again, the only ones who get rich are those at the top of the tree, while the rest are exploited proletariat.

If ever there was a time for a workers' revolution it is now.

Revolution, however, does not necessarily have to come in the form of the flag-waving proletariat burning Parliament. Vladimir Nabokov said 'revelation can be more dangerous than revolution'.

The revelation that Capitalism is an opiate, that it feeds on greed and fear - the fear that 'someone' may steal our wealth. It is this greed that keeps people giving up their wealth as they strive to accumulate more Capital. It is this fear that keeps people willing to sacrifice freedoms for the illusion of protection provided by Government which supports a 'strong' Capitalist economy through propping up those corporations deemed 'too big to fail'.

Greed and fear can be overcome through generosity, caring for each other and understanding that individual accumulation of wealth is more dangerous to society than sharing wealth for the benefit of all. This revelation will undermine the power that Corporations and the Corporatocracy have over the masses, ultimately leading to a revolution that returns power to the people and ensures that wealth is spread evenly in order to overcome poverty and provide equal opportunity for all, rather than exploitation of all.

Radicalisation: a problem, not a solution

As radicalised Muslims unleash terrorist acts in the West, we now see the radicalisation of right-wing groups in the West. 

Following the horrendous and grotesque murder of Lee Rigby in Woolwich, far-right wing groups responded violently, torching mosques and attacking Muslims who were not responsible for, and did not condone, the murder of Lee Rigby.

Radicalised Muslims blame the brutality of the West for their actions. Yet, many Westerners don't believe that the West is as brutal as claimed. In fact, many believe that the West is 'good', while Islam is 'bad'. Many Westerners fear the Islamisation of Western nations, yet don't understand or appreciate that the West's colonisation and brutal occupation of other nations has led to the situations that we have today.

Many Westerners refuse to accept that it is the actions of the West that have led to the radicalisation of some Muslims, while justifying the radicalisation of the West in response to radical Islam. If people are saying that it is ok for the West to respond with violence to the violent actions of a minority of Muslims, are they also saying it is ok for radicalised Muslims to respond violently to the aggression of the West?

Most Muslims were horrified when they heard of the Woolwich murder, as they were with the Boston bombings, London bombings, September 11 and so on. There was worldwide outrage in Islamic and non-Islamic communities to each of these events.

But where is the outrage in the West, when non-Westerners are killed by terrorists?

Where was the outrage in the West when the US sponsored Saddam Hussein in the 1980s as he massacred the Kurds? Where was the outrage in the West when the US used depleted uranium in Iraq resulting in the deaths of thousands of civilians? Where was the outrage in the West, when hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians were killed or injured by the 'Coalition of the Willing' in Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan?

Where is the outrage in West regarding the ethnic cleansing of Palestine? Decades of Western financed brutality in Palestine is fueling the rage that drives most Islamic terrorists. Where is the outrage in the West, when Israel deliberately targets civilian populations, killing thousands of Palestinians? Where is the outrage in the West when Israeli settlers shoot dead Palestinian children and are not punished for it? Where is the outrage as these crimes against humanity, these war crimes, are not just perpetrated, but done so with the blessing of Western governments and MOST churches! When do Christians stand up and say that it is not acceptable for Zionists to commit genocide and ethnic cleansing in the name of God because of  misconstrued scripture?

Of course, it is not acceptable for terrorists to target civilians in Israel, the US, Britain, Bali or any country. Islamists must find peaceful ways to get their message across otherwise there will be a radicalisation of civilians in the West leading to even more violence against innocent people. In addition, the West must end the brutal occupations and invasions of Muslim countries and stop sponsoring Israeli aggression.

It is understandable that people are angry and want revenge for horrendous crimes such as the Woolwich murder, BUT ... using this and other incidents to justify violence against Muslims gives legitimacy to all terrorists who feel their actions are justified by injustice. Anger must be channeled into more productive and conciliatory actions. All people, of all walks, religions, and political persuasions, must stop reacting violently if we are to see an end to violence.

In the words of Buddha:

'Hatred does not cease by hatred, but only by love; this is the eternal rule'.

Religion of Peace & Love?

The followers of which religion killed millions during the last century?

This week the whole world has followed the terrible bombings in Boston and the incredible after-math as the two alleged perpetrators were captured and one of them killed. The big question of course, is 'why?' Why would anyone deliberately target innocent people? Regardless of their reasons, there is no justification for their actions.

However, terrorists will often target innocent people because they see their targets as responsible for the crimes of the larger group to which they may belong, such as their religion, ethnicity or nationality. It is collective punishment ... and it isn't just the domain of terrorists.

Even before it became apparent that two Muslim men were the suspects in the Boston bombings, right-wing media and organisations, including some Christian groups, were blaming Islam in general. As far as they're concerned 'all Muslims are terrorists because the religion calls for it'.

It is with the greatest hypocrisy that they blame all Muslims for the actions of a few.

There are a number of memes abounding on the internet which sarcastically ask the question 'Islam - Religion of Peace?' and then detail crimes by Muslims and blame the entire religion.

Well, if we are going to raise the issue of religion, allow me to quote the bible:

'Let him who is without sin, cast the first stone'.

One of the reasons that terrorists have targeted citizens of Western nations, and Christians in general, is because they have judged all citizens for the crimes of some Western governments. Many of these governments profess to be following Christian values, so by extension Christians are also blamed for their actions. And yes, these governments have and are committing crimes, either directly or through funding and material support of despotic regimes.

Many of these critics of Islam, will blindly support the military actions of the United States, the United Kingdom and Israel. So I have to ask, 'Christianity - a Religion of Peace?'

Most people will argue that military actions undertaken by their government are not in the name of Christianity. Well, not all terrorism committed by Muslims is undertaken in the name of Islam. Yet Western governments sworn in with their collective hands on the Bible, have committed gross atrocities. The actions were often undertaken in the name of Democracy and Capitalism; political ideals which are worshipped with almost religious fervour by some and certainly embraced as 'Christian' values by fundamentalist Christians.

Guess the Religion of Peace:

• detonates two atomic bombs killing 250,000 people - AFTER surrender had already been offered by Japan
• provides funding and material support for:
• genocide and war crimes against Palestinians - 1.5 million civilian victims killed since 1948 and more than 1 million displaced)
• genocide of Palestinians in Lebanon at the hands of Christian Phalangists - more than 3500 civilians killed
• genocide of Muslims and Christians in Iraq at the hands of Saddam Hussein - more than 1 million killed
• terrorist attacks on the Soviet Union in Afghanistan at the hands of the Mujahideen and 'extremists' recruited and trained by the CIA 
• genocide of Communists and others in Indonesia at the hands of President Suharto ('one of our closest friends', according to former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher) - over 1 million people killed.
• genocide of Socialists in Chile - more than 3,000 killed, 80,000 imprisoned and 30,000 tortured at the hands of Augusto Pinochet. 
• calls all Muslims terrorists - there have roughly been 10,000 victims killed by 'Islamic' terrorists, while there is a total of more than 3.5 million killed in just the above activities alone by people claiming to be Christian.

Answer: Christianity 

Personally, I'd love to say the answer is fundamentalist Christianity ... or Democracy ... or Capitalism. But I can't because to apply the same rule that some people are applying to Islam means that the answer is simply 'Christianity'.  Feel like justifying it? Feel like saying it wasn't in the name of Christianity? Muslims know how you feel.

I haven't bothered mentioning Hitler in the above list, so to avoid accusations of paralipsis, I'll point out that Hitler claimed to be a Christian. We all know that Hitler was responsible for the genocide of tens of millions of people. 'I believe today that I'm acting in the sense of the Almighty Creator. By warding off the Jews I'm fighting for the Lord's work', so said Hitler. Of course, Hitler was stopped by numerous Armies comprised of Christians, Muslims, Atheists, Communists and pretty much every other people group. But he was a Christian, nonetheless.

Following terrorist attacks, many people are understandably angry and want vengeance. They feel justified in bombing and invading the nations of others. For instance, following 9/11 the 'Coalition of the Willing' invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, while many in the West, including some Christians, celebrated and boasted about their superiority. Conversely, given the millions killed by the West,  there are many who are angered, some of whom feel justified in either killing or celebrating the killing of Western civilians.

What is the difference between civilians killed at the hands of 'Islamic' terrorists or those killed at the hands of 'Christian' war machines? Not much. Both are killing innocent civilians and justifying it.

Ok, so the 'Christian' war machines generally do not mobilise in the name of Christ, although many pray before going into battle, but interestingly, Muslim terrorists are generally not doing it in the 'name' of Islam, but because they feel aggrieved. For instance, the decades of genocide and ethnic cleansing in Palestine has led to a lot of animosity against Israel for perpetrating it and the United States for funding it. Palestinians are not attacking Israel in the name of Islam; they are attacking in self-defence and anger. 

There is no justification for killing civilians, regardless of whether it is in the name of religion or a political ideology.

There is certainly no justification for getting holier than thou and believing that one religion is better than another. If you believe in God and believe it is ok to kill members of another religion, ethnic group or nationality, YOU are the terrorist.

The memes that have been proliferating the internet sarcastically calling Islam the religion of peace, do nothing but spread fear and racism.  It is disturbing that Christians who supposedly have been taught to love everyone would wallow in such hatred.

Instead of retaliating with an eye for an eye, perhaps it is time to take some more sage advice from the Bible:

'How can you say to your brother, "Brother let me take the speck out of your eye", when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eyes'.

'Love your neighbour as yourself'.

Salaam, Shalom, Peace!

--0--

Other articles

This is one of a number of articles in the 'Remove the plank' series, regarding the hypocrisy of criticising Islam. Other articles include:

• Bacon and eggs - Pork wars and Christianity
• Truth and lies - Taqiyya in Islam and Christianity
• Was Muhammad a pedophile?
• The light of love and a bushell of bigotry

RIP Rachel Corrie

On 16 March 2003, American peace activist, Rachel Corrie was killed when run over by an Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) bulldozer which she was trying to stop from illegally demolishing a Palestinian house in the Rafah Refugee Camp, Gaza. The following is a brief history of the event and inspirational footage of a speech Rachel gave in Grade 5 which described her commitment to human rights.

Rachel had gone to Palestine as a member of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) to participate in non-violent protest against the illegal Israeli occupation. On the day of her death, Rachel and seven other ISM activists confronted an Israeli Defence Force bulldozer that was about to demolish the house of a local pharmacist, as part of the illegal practice of 'collective punishment'. According to the Fourth Geneva Convention, of which Israel is a signatory to, collective punishment is a war crime.

Rachel, wearing a bright orange, high-visibility vest and using a megaphone, was standing in front of the dozer in an effort to prevent it advancing on the house. She had climbed up a pile of dirt so that she was above the level of the blade, looking directly into the cabin. The Israeli soldier deliberately drove the bulldozer towards her. Rachel was pushed backwards, falling down the pile of dirt which collapsed on top of her. Despite screams from other people to stop, the Israeli soldier continued and dragged her for 10 or 15 metres, crushing her. Rachel was run over twice, suffering a fractured skull, punctured lungs and crushed ribs.

The Israelis claimed it was an accident, that the soldier didn't know she was there, even though the stand-off had been going on for three hours, there were other soldiers present outside of the dozer who could have warned the driver, and Rachel was in a high-vis vest and communicating by megaphone. The Israeli Defence Force investigated the incident and, not surprisingly, cleared itself of blame. In 2005, Rachel's parents sued the Israeli government, but in 2012 and the matter was thrown out.

No justice has been done and as usual, Israel has gotten away with murder. All of this, while the United States continues to poor billions of dollars into funding Israel, knowing that much of it is funds Israel's ethnic cleansing of Palestine through activities that breach the Fourth Geneva Convention and dozens of United Nations resolutions.

Rachel Corrie's life and message should not be forgotten. Her dedication to defending human rights is an inspiration to all of us.

In 1990, ten year old Rachel Corrie gave this incredible speech. The words are powerful and they should inspire each of us to action to overcome poverty and injustice.

I’m here for other children.
I’m here because I care.
I’m here because children everywhere are suffering and because forty thousand people die each day from hunger.
I’m here because those people are mostly children.
We have got to understand that the poor are all around us and we are ignoring them.
We have got to understand that these deaths are preventable.
We have got to understand that people in third world countries think and care and smile and cry just like us.
We have got to understand that they dream our dreams and we dream theirs.
We have got to understand that they are us. We are them.
My dream is to stop hunger by the year 2000.
My dream is to give the poor a chance.
My dream is to save the 40,000 people who die each day.
My dream can and will come true if we all look into the future and see the light that shines there.
My dream can and will come true if we all look into the future and see the light that shines there. If we ignore hunger, that light will go out.

A letter from Rachel to her mother

The following is a letter that Rachel wrote to her mother on 27 February 2003, only weeks before her death. It describes the horror of what Palestinians experience every day, and the frustration for Rachel knowing that the world looks on and ignores the genocide and gross human rights violations perpetrated by Israel.

Love you. Really miss you. I have bad nightmares about tanks and bulldozers outside our house and you and me inside. Sometimes the adrenaline acts as an anesthetic for weeks and then in the evening or at night it just hits me again – a little bit of the reality of the situation. I am really scared for the people here. Yesterday, I watched a father lead his two tiny children, holding his hands, out into the sight of tanks and a sniper tower and bulldozers and Jeeps because he thought his house was going to be exploded. Jenny and I stayed in the house with several women and two small babies. It was our mistake in translation that caused him to think it was his house that was being exploded. In fact, the Israeli army was in the process of detonating an explosive in the ground nearby – one that appears to have been planted by Palestinian resistance.

This is in the area where Sunday about 150 men were rounded up and contained outside the settlement with gunfire over their heads and around them, while tanks and bulldozers destroyed 25 greenhouses – the livelihoods for 300 people. The explosive was right in front of the greenhouses – right in the point of entry for tanks that might come back again. I was terrified to think that this man felt it was less of a risk to walk out in view of the tanks with his kids than to stay in his house. I was really scared that they were all going to be shot and I tried to stand between them and the tank. This happens every day, but just this father walking out with his two little kids just looking very sad, just happened to get my attention more at this particular moment, probably because I felt it was our translation problems that made him leave.

I thought a lot about what you said on the phone about Palestinian violence not helping the situation. Sixty thousand workers from Rafah worked in Israel two years ago. Now only 600 can go to Israel for jobs. Of these 600, many have moved, because the three checkpoints between here and Ashkelon (the closest city in Israel) make what used to be a 40-minute drive, now a 12-hour or impassible journey. In addition, what Rafah identified in 1999 as sources of economic growth are all completely destroyed – the Gaza international airport (runways demolished, totally closed); the border for trade with Egypt (now with a giant Israeli sniper tower in the middle of the crossing); access to the ocean (completely cut off in the last two years by a checkpoint and the Gush Katif settlement). The count of homes destroyed in Rafah since the beginning of this intifada is up around 600, by and large people with no connection to the resistance but who happen to live along the border. I think it is maybe official now that Rafah is the poorest place in the world. There used to be a middle class here – recently. We also get reports that in the past, Gazan flower shipments to Europe were delayed for two weeks at the Erez crossing for security inspections. You can imagine the value of two-week-old cut flowers in the European market, so that market dried up. And then the bulldozers come and take out people’s vegetable farms and gardens. What is left for people? Tell me if you can think of anything. I can’t.

If any of us had our lives and welfare completely strangled, lived with children in a shrinking place where we knew, because of previous experience, that soldiers and tanks and bulldozers could come for us at any moment and destroy all the greenhouses that we had been cultivating for however long, and did this while some of us were beaten and held captive with 149 other people for several hours – do you think we might try to use somewhat violent means to protect whatever fragments remained? I think about this especially when I see orchards and greenhouses and fruit trees destroyed – just years of care and cultivation. I think about you and how long it takes to make things grow and what a labour of love it is. I really think, in a similar situation, most people would defend themselves as best they could. I think Uncle Craig would. I think probably Grandma would. I think I would.

You asked me about non-violent resistance.

When that explosive detonated yesterday it broke all the windows in the family’s house. I was in the process of being served tea and playing with the two small babies. I’m having a hard time right now. Just feel sick to my stomach a lot from being doted on all the time, very sweetly, by people who are facing doom. I know that from the United States, it all sounds like hyperbole. Honestly, a lot of the time the sheer kindness of the people here, coupled with the overwhelming evidence of the wilful destruction of their lives, makes it seem unreal to me. I really can’t believe that something like this can happen in the world without a bigger outcry about it. It really hurts me, again, like it has hurt me in the past, to witness how awful we can allow the world to be. I felt after talking to you that maybe you didn’t completely believe me. I think it’s actually good if you don’t, because I do believe pretty much above all else in the importance of independent critical thinking. And I also realise that with you I’m much less careful than usual about trying to source every assertion that I make. A lot of the reason for that is I know that you actually do go and do your own research. But it makes me worry about the job I’m doing. All of the situation that I tried to enumerate above – and a lot of other things – constitutes a somewhat gradual – often hidden, but nevertheless massive – removal and destruction of the ability of a particular group of people to survive. This is what I am seeing here. The assassinations, rocket attacks and shooting of children are atrocities – but in focusing on them I’m terrified of missing their context. The vast majority of people here – even if they had the economic means to escape, even if they actually wanted to give up resisting on their land and just leave (which appears to be maybe the less nefarious of Sharon’s possible goals), can’t leave. Because they can’t even get into Israel to apply for visas, and because their destination countries won’t let them in (both our country and Arab countries). So I think when all means of survival is cut off in a pen (Gaza) which people can’t get out of, I think that qualifies as genocide. Even if they could get out, I think it would still qualify as genocide. Maybe you could look up the definition of genocide according to international law. I don’t remember it right now. I’m going to get better at illustrating this, hopefully. I don’t like to use those charged words. I think you know this about me. I really value words. I really try to illustrate and let people draw their own conclusions.

Anyway, I’m rambling. Just want to write to my Mom and tell her that I’m witnessing this chronic, insidious genocide and I’m really scared, and questioning my fundamental belief in the goodness of human nature. This has to stop. I think it is a good idea for us all to drop everything and devote our lives to making this stop. I don’t think it’s an extremist thing to do anymore. I still really want to dance around to Pat Benatar and have boyfriends and make comics for my coworkers. But I also want this to stop. Disbelief and horror is what I feel. Disappointment. I am disappointed that this is the base reality of our world and that we, in fact, participate in it. This is not at all what I asked for when I came into this world. This is not at all what the people here asked for when they came into this world. This is not the world you and Dad wanted me to come into when you decided to have me. This is not what I meant when I looked at Capital Lake and said: “This is the wide world and I’m coming to it.” I did not mean that I was coming into a world where I could live a comfortable life and possibly, with no effort at all, exist in complete unawareness of my participation in genocide. More big explosions somewhere in the distance outside.

When I come back from Palestine, I probably will have nightmares and constantly feel guilty for not being here, but I can channel that into more work. Coming here is one of the better things I’ve ever done. So when I sound crazy, or if the Israeli military should break with their racist tendency not to injure white people, please pin the reason squarely on the fact that I am in the midst of a genocide which I am also indirectly supporting, and for which my government is largely responsible.

I love you and Dad. Sorry for the diatribe. OK, some strange men next to me just gave me some peas, so I need to eat and thank them.

Rachel

---

RIP RACHEL CORRIE, 10 April 1979 - 16 March 2003.

For more information, or to become involved: www.rachelcorriefoundation.org

Zionism - the Crusades continue

During the Middle Ages, European Christians invaded the Middle East and waged war against Muslims in the name of God. Christian support of the modern state of Israel is a continuation of the Crusades as Palestine is ethnically cleansed.

The modern state of Israel was created when European Jews relocated to the Holy Land through the 20th century, particularly following its official creation by the UN in 1948. Following the passing of resolution 181 on 29 November 1947, Israel immediately began expelling and massacring Palestinians. It amounted to genocide and ethnic cleansing ... and it continues to this day with the blessing of most Christians who believe that the creation of Israel is fulfillment of biblical scripture and enough to justify crimes against humanity.

For centuries, Jews and Muslims lived in the Middle East in relative harmony. During the Middle Ages, Christians waged crusades by invading the Holy Land and attacking Muslims in an attempt to claim Jerusalem for Christianity. Most of the violence in the Middle East has been the result of European invasion.

In Europe, Jews suffered persecution and pogroms. Most of the violence in Europe has been the result of European racism and lust for power and territory. It's Europe that has been hell-bent on death and destruction, not the Middle East.

The support of modern Zionism by much of Christianity is a continuation of the Crusades as militant and fascist Christianity attempts to purge the Holy Land of Muslims and claim the land for God. Ironically, Jews, Christians and Muslims worship the same God.

Since 1948, Israel has aggressively expanded its borders beyond those established by the United Nations. Israel is continuing to breach the Fourth Geneva Convention through its illegal occupation of Palestine, resulting in dozens of UN resolutions being issued against its genocidal and ethnic cleansing activities. Yet, Israel continues to belligerently ignore the resolutions while Christians justify or ignore the atrocious human rights violations.

Israel claims that other nations have had fewer, if any, UN resolutions passed against them. However, this is to distract from the human rights abuses perpetrated by Israel. The UN has issued resolutions against numerous countries who have had to comply through either facing the International Criminal Court, UN inspections, international sanctions or peace-keeping forces.

Iraq faced UN sanctions over its supposed lack of cooperation regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). Yet, even after Iraq complied with the UN inspectors, they were invaded and bombed, supposedly for failing to comply with UN resolutions.

The United States has unquestioningly supported Israel while condemning other nations which do far less. The US led the invasion of Iraq on the false premise that it had failed to comply with UN resolutions and was harboring and developing WMD. Even before the US-led invasion, international experts were advising that Iraq did not have WMD. Eventually, the USA conceded that no WMD had been found. Yet a decade on and US forces still occupy the country.

Based on the treatment of Iraq by the USA and the UN, Israel should have been invaded and bombed decades ago. Israel is correct that it is treated differently to other nations because it gets away with far more than any other nation.

Following 9/11, the world recoiled in horror as US President, and self-proclaimed Christian, George W. Bush declared a 'crusade against terrorists'. The world feared this would lead to a 'clash of cultures' between Christianity and Islam. Bush tried to explain that it wasn't a war against Muslims, yet his actions didn't reflect that as the USA invaded Iraq and Afghanistan while providing billions in aid for Israel to continue its ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

Israel's arrogance is its greatest weakness. The world is becoming more and more aware of Israeli atrocities and the outrage is growing louder and louder. Israel claims to represent all Jews, yet many of its own people in both Israel and abroad are turning against the Israeli government and demanding Palestinian state-hood, Israeli withdrawal of settlements and tearing down the apartheid wall. The international community is calling for Israel to be held accountable for its actions and the United Nations is investigating Israel's breaches of the Geneva Convention.

On 29 November 2012, exactly 65 years after Resolution 181 passed, the United Nations voted to give Palestine 'non-member' status, which effectively recognised Palestine as a nation state. Of the 188 member nations, 138 voted for Palestine, while 41 abstained and only 9 voted against it. It was a massive kick in the teeth for Israel who complained that the 179 nations that did not vote with Israel to oppose Palestine (including the 41 abstentions) were anti-Semitic. The nations weren't anti-Semitic, they had finally stopped being bullied by Israel.

The writing is on the wall. Unless Israel ceases their human rights violations in Palestine, they will eventually find themselves the subject of international sanctions and most likely an appearance or two in the International Criminal Court.

Yet, they continue to unleash violence against the Palestinians, displacing, shooting and bombing civilians, as well as preventing them from accessing their own farmlands, jobs, hospitals and schools because of the hundreds of checkpoints and the expansion of the apartheid wall through Palestinian territory. When Palestinians fight back, Israel demonises them, however, under international law Palestine has a right to defend themselves from Israel's illegal aggression.

Saladin (who fought against Christian Crusaders in the 12th century) said, 'I warn you against shedding blood, indulging in it and making a habit of it, for blood never sleeps'. Israel has embraced violence as a means of purifying the Jewish state of non-Jewish occupants. Violence begets violence. There won't be peace between Israel and Palestine until Israel ceases the genocide. Israel's aggression and the US funding of it, will continue to feed the development of anti-Israeli and anti-US militants.

Most disturbing is that Christians continue to support Israel's genocidal and ethnic cleansing policies, while claiming that Muslims should move on from the Crusades because they ended centuries ago.

The Crusades have not ended, they have evolved into Christian Zionism.