Ariel Sharon, the Butcher of Beirut - a eulogy

Ariel Sharon - born 26 February 1928, died 11 January 2013, former Israeli Prime Minister, Minister for Defence, military commander. He was 85.

World leaders are eulogising former Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon who died a few hours ago. Some are cautious in their words, such as President Barack Obama sending his 'deepest condolences to the family of former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and to the people of Israel on the loss of a leader who dedicated his life to the State of Israel'. Nothing about Sharon being a great leader, but it is true that he dedicated his life to Israel ... at the expense of Palestinian lives. Current US Secretary of State, John Kerry said that '... he sought to bend the course of history towards peace'.  British Prime Minister David Cameron stated, ' ... he took brave and controversial decisions in pursuit of peace ...'. ⁽¹⁾

There was nothing brave or peaceful about Sharon's massacres of innocent civilians.

Australia's Foreign Minister, Julie Bishop, laid a wreath at the grave of Ariel Sharon, prompting a response from the Australian Jewish Democratic Society informing her of their concern over her support for breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention and the racist policies of Israel. ⁽²⁾

In 2003, then President George W. Bush referred to him as a 'man of peace'. However, in 1982, President Reagan's special envoy, Ambassador Philip Habib stated, 'Sharon was a killer obsessed with hatred of Palestinians. I had promised Arafat that his people would not get any harm. Sharon, however, ignored this commitment entirely. Sharon's word is worth nil'. ⁽³⁾

The eulogies for Sharon should not be honouring the man, but ensuring his crimes against humanity are remembered and his victims are not forgotten.

Unit 101

With the founding of Israel in 1948, Sharon was a paratrooper in the new state's Army, and later commander. His initiation was during the so-called 'War of Independence', when a number of neighbouring Arab states attempted to repel the military forces of the newly created state of Israel that were violently forcing Palestinians from their homes, killing those who resisted. It was a war of self-defence for the Arabs against a European invasion.

In August 1953, on orders from Prime Minister Ben-Gurion, Sharon founded Unit 101, a Special Forces unit. Within one month of its founding, a Unit 101 patrol attacked civilians in Gaza, killing dozens of Palestinians. Two months later Unit 101 attacked civilians in the village of Qibya, in the West Bank, murdering 69 civilians and destroying 45 buildings, a school and a mosque. Three-quarters of the victims were women and children. Both attacks attracted international condemnation. Israel initially denied the attack and tried to blame others for it, however, was finally forced to admit that Unit 101 was responsible. Unit 101 was also responsible for other attacks on civilians, including Bedouins. The Unit committed crimes against humanity but was never held responsible. ⁽⁴⁾



1956 Suez Canal invasion

In 1956, Israel attacked Egypt in order to gain control of the Suez Canal. It also gained the Sinai. Being a war, meant that there were prisoners, and Israel had captured hundreds of Egyptian soldiers. Sharon was in charge of units that murdered 273 Egyptian prisoners of war, which is a violation of the Geneva Convention. It was a war-crime. ⁽⁵⁾

Pacification of Gaza

The so-called 'Pacification of Gaza' should have been called the 'Ethnic Cleansing of Gaza'. In 1971, Sharon led military operations into Gaza which were responsible for thinning out the population. It was ethnic cleansing. Israel massacred hundreds of civilians, blew up houses, hospitals, schools and forcibly relocated more than 13,000 civilians to the Sinai. ⁽⁶⁾

Lebanon

Over the subsequent years, Israeli forces under Sharon's command continued their brutal occupation and attacks on civilians. Whenever Palestinians fought back, Israel would respond with excessive violence. In 1982, while Sharon was Minister of Defence, Israel attacked Lebanon, bombing refugee camps for weeks, killing an untold number of people, destroying hospitals, orphanages and schools. This campaign resulted in 125,000 people fleeing for their lives.

Sharon accused Palestinian 'terrorists' of murdering Lebanese leader Bashir Gemayel. It was later proven that the attack was carried about my a Lebanese Maronite Christian. Nonetheless, Sharon unleashed Lebanese Christian Phalangists into the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila in an horrific campaign of terror in which more than 2,000 refugees, including women, children and babies were raped and murdered over the following three days. English journalist, Robert Fisk visited Shatila only days after the massacre, during which he was stepping over the corpses of 'raped and eviscerated women and their husbands and children ... ' ⁽⁷⁾

Following international condemnation, a commission of inquiry was established and Ariel Sharon held personally responsible because he knew the massacre was occurring and he allowed it to continue. His troops stood idly by, watching the massacre unfold. Sharon was dismissed as Minister of Defence, but was not charged. In fact, he continued to serve in the Knesset. In September 1984, he was appointed as the Minister for Industry, Trade and Labor. Later he became the Minister for Housing and Construction, Minister for Energy and Water Resources, and Minister for Foreign Affairs. In 2001, Sharon was elected Prime Minister.

For more on the Sabra and Shatila massacre, refer to:
http://thepandarant.blogspot.com.au/2012/09/remembering-sabra-and-shatila.html

Settlements

Sharon sponsored the establishment of hundreds of illegal Israeli settlements in Gaza and the West Bank. These settlements were in violation of international law and were often established at the point of a gun with the use of Israeli military to violently drive Palestinians out of their homes and off their lands. These were homes and lands that the Palestinians held deeds of ownership for.

In 2004, Sharon ordered settlements be withdrawn from Gaza. His supporters claimed that this showed he was a man of peace. However, military attacks on Gaza increased and often involved military jets firing on and bombing the civilian population. Israel has used chemical weapons such as white phosphorous, and nuclear warheads containing depleted uranium, in Gaza. These are war-crimes being unleashed on a civilian and undefended population.

Removing the settlers from Gaza, meant that Israel could literally imprison Gaza and control the movement of people into and out of it, as well as control supplies going into it. The military often stops deliveries of food, clothing, building products and so on, that are being legitimately delivered through either road or sea networks. Much was made of secret tunnels from Gaza into Egypt, however, these tunnels were necessary in order to ensure that Gazans received necessities that Israel denied them. Gaza has been described as the world's largest open-air prison.

Although settlements were withdrawn from Gaza, establishment of settlements in the West Bank increased and now there are more than 500,000 settlers illegally occupying the territory. Numerous UN resolutions, including resolution 22/29 adopted by the UN Human Rights Council on 22 March 2013, declares the illegality of the settlements and that Israel is an 'occupying Power' breaching the Fourth Geneva Convention by transferring 'parts of its civilian population into the territory it occupies ...' ⁽⁸⁾. This resolution was in response to a UN fact-finding mission to investigate the implications of Israeli settlements on the rights of the Palestinian people. The fact-finding mission details the history of the illegal settlements, including Ariel Sharon's decades-long involvement in their expansion. ⁽⁹⁾

Agence France Presse reported on 15 November 1998, that while addressing the extreme right-wing Tsomet Party, Sharon stated,  'Everybody has to move, run and grab as many hilltops as they can to enlarge the settlements because everything we take now will stay ours ... Everything we don't grab will go to them'. ⁽¹⁰⁾

Sharon encouraged Jews from across the globe to move to Israel. To house them annexing Palestinian land and establishing the illegal settlements. 'As long as I'm needed. I'll be ready to serve. I look forward with optimism. We need the Jews here. Move to Israel! Move to Israel!' ⁽¹¹⁾

Operation Defensive Shield

In 2001, Sharon controversially entered the Al-Aqsa mosque surrounded by Israeli soldiers. It was seen as an insult to the Palestinians and resulted in the Second Intifada, in which some Palestinians undertook a wave of attacks against Israel. The following year, Sharon launched Operation Defensive Shield, in which soldiers attacked the West Bank supposedly to end the Intifada. The Army attacked with assault helicopters and commandos, resulting in the deaths of at least 20 civilians and a number of militants. ⁽¹²⁾

Following Defensive Shield, Sharon ordered the construction of a 'security' wall which would engulf the West Bank. Sharon claimed the wall was to stop Palestinian terrorists travelling into Israel, however the bulk of the wall separates areas within the West Bank from each other, not from Israel. This has created 'Bantustans', or small enclaves, and hindered Palestinian ability to travel between each area. People have difficulty getting to their jobs, visiting hospitals and attending schools. The Wall has been declared illegal by the International Court of Justice. ⁽¹³⁾

UN Resolutions

Israel has been the recipient of, and breached, over 200 UN resolutions ⁽¹⁴⁾, relating to:

• annexation of parts of Jerusalem 
• establishment of Jewish settlements on Palestinian land, in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention 
• annexation of the Golan Heights 
• deportation of Palestinians 
• destruction of Palestinian houses and when the houses are rebuilt, destroying them again 
• denying building materials, food and water to Palestinians.

Sharon has been a key player in many of the actions that these Resolutions relate to.

Remembering Sharon

His supporters claim that as Prime Minister, Sharon was constantly offering olive-branches to the Palestinians who refused peace. The truth is that Sharon did offer peace, however, it was on conditions that cost Palestinians more than it was worth and all the while Israel continued ethnic cleansing by either killing or driving out Arabs, stealing their land and moving settlers in illegally.

Sharon was not a man to be trusted. His entire life testified to his commitment to destroy Palestine. Sharon is not a man to be revered. He was personally responsible for ethnic cleansing of Gaza and the West Bank through military operations and the establishment of settlements on land stolen from Palestine. He was personally responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians through military operations he participated in or directed.

Sharon's actions were criminal, yet he was never charged. One of the reasons that Israel and the USA opposed the admission of Palestine to the United Nations was that it could pave the way for Palestine to bring charges against Israel in the International Criminal Court for genocide, war-crimes and crimes against humanity. Sharon once declared, 'Israel may have the right to put others on trial, but certainly no one has the right to put the Jewish people and the State of Israel on trial'.  ⁽¹⁵⁾

Sharon's actions must never be forgotten.

He was not a man of peace.

Ariel Sharon was the Butcher of Beirut ... and of Palestine.


References

1. Guardian.com, 11 January 2014, Ariel Sharon death: reaction from around the world,
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/11/ariel-sharon-tributes

3.  Greens/Green Party USA, Resolution on Divestment of State Funds from Israel, Winter 2003, http://www.greens.org/s-r/30/30-05.html

4. David Blair, Why does Ariel Sharon matter, 11 January 2014.  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/10547694/Why-does-Ariel-Sharon-matter.html

5. Jeffrey Steinberg, Ariel Sharon: Profile of an unrepentant war criminal, http://www.larouchepub.com/pr/site_packages/2002/sharon/020430sharon_crime_hist.html

6. Edward W. Said, How Great Were the Injustices of Arabs to Jews; 'Pacification' of Gaza, 28 January 1988, http://www.nytimes.com/1988/02/05/opinion/l-how-great-were-the-injustices-of-arabs-to-jews-pacification-of-gaza-160288.html

7. Robert Fisk, Ariel Sharon', 6 January 2006,
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/fisk/ariel-sharon-by-robert-fisk-521809.html

8. United Nations Human Rights Council resolution 22/29, Follow-up to the report of the independent international fact-finding mission to investigate the implications of Israeli settlements on the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, A/HRC/RES/22/29, 15 April 2013.
http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/98edce37e189625b85256c40005da81b/053db1b0222d1e5d85257b6a004f2168?OpenDocument

9.Human Rights Council, Twenty-second session, Agenda item 7, Human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories, Report of the independent international fact-finding mission to investigate the implications of the Israeli settlements on the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem.
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session19/FFM/FFMSettlements.pdf

10. Joe Quinn, Peace In the Middle East? - Over the bodies of 3 million Palestinians, 17 December 2010, http://www.sott.net/article/124417-Peace-In-the-Middle-East-Over-the-bodies-of-3-million-Palestinians

11. Time World, Interview: Ariel Sharon, 14 May 2005,
http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1061419,00.html

12. Human Rights Watch, Jenin, 2 May 2002, http://www.hrw.org/node/79081/section/1.

13. BBN News, UN rules against Israeli barrier, 9 July 2004,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3879057.stm

14. The UN resolutions are available online.

• For resolutions accepted by the UN Human Rights Council refer to: http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/vCHRRes?OpenView&Start=1&Count=150&Expand=1#1

• For resolutions accepted by the UN Economic and Social Committee: http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/vECOSOCRes?OpenView

• For resolutions accepted by the UN Security Council: http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/vCouncilRes?OpenView 

• For resolutions accepted by the UN General Assembly: http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/vGARes?OpenView

15. BBC News, Clashes mar Mid East inquiry, 25 March 2001,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1241371.stm


Note, that this article was updated on 18 January 2014 to include Julie Bishop's visit to Ariel Sharon's grave and the letter sent to her from the Australian Jewish Democratic Society.

Greed & gluttony - the real War on Christmas

Every year people across the globe celebrate Christmas, whether they are Christian or not. They'll decorate their houses, sing carols and give gifts to family and loved ones. For many children, the mythical Santa Claus will visit and leave them a special gift.  'On earth peace, goodwill to all men' is one of the main bible scriptures quoted during this time (Luke 2:14 KJV).

Also every year, we hear of a 'War on Christmas', a war that is apparently attacking the very fabric of the Christmas celebration.

This 'war' is allegedly perpetrated by grinches who want to ban Santa Clause or other aspects of the Christmas celebration. A number of hoax emails that usually blame Muslims, but have no basis in fact, are circulated - check Snopes¹ or hoax-slayer². I'd have to seriously question the mental and moral state of the person who sees fit to compose a hoax email in order to spread hatred in the community. It is a sad indictment on the community, that so many people actually believe these emails without checking them out. After all, Google is but a mouse click away. It is people like this who have lost sight of the meaning of Christmas (remember the 'peace, goodwill to all men' thing?)

The 'War on Christmas' is also being waged by anyone who commits the dastardly act of saying 'happy holidays' instead of the socially acceptable, 'Merry Christmas'.

These events do not signify a 'War'.

The only War on Christmas was waged & lost years ago. It is the one in which the Christmas spirit was usurped by capitalism; by greed and gluttony. The generosity of the real St Nicholas (Nikolaos of Myra - a Greek Bishop who lived in what is now Turkey) who gave to the poor and needy, has been replaced by Santa Claus who brings unnecessary gifts to rich kids while the poor continue to suffer. Sadly, Santa either doesn't visit poorer children or when he does, the toys are not as expensive. Maybe Santa uses cheaper elves for making the presents of the poor.

Santa's gifts are based on whether you're naughty or nice, good or bad - according to one or two Christmas Carols. Yet, this has no basis in scripture. Jesus didn't come for those who 'deserved' His redemption (remember Romans 3:23-24, 'For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus').

We are told that Jesus is the 'reason for the season'.  Yet most families, Christian or not, barely (if at all) acknowledge Jesus in their haste to open their presents before gorging themselves on food and drink. Christmas was lost to greed and gluttony years ago.

Of course, the irony is that Christmas was originally a pagan festival known as Saturnalia, in which people gave themselves over to absolute pleasure and indulged their fleshly desires in unrestrained revelry: not unlike Christmas in first world countries. Greed and gluttony.

People across the globe can't wait for the fat-man to deliver gifts that may or may not be needed, and then guts themselves stupid until they feel sick - while millions of people go hungry. All of this to the accompaniment of Christmas Carols extolling the virtues of peace and goodwill. Christmas spirit or Saturnalian celebration?

This decadence is hardly a celebration of Jesus and contains a shallow concept of peace and goodwill.

The 'War' on Christmas has not come from other religions or from the benign 'happy holidays' greeting, but from capitalist exploitation and marketing. Capitalism isn't just content to sell us rubbish that we don't need, but also to force many people in retail to work over Christmas, keeping them away from their families and friends in order to satisfy the insatiable appetite of the manipulated masses to spend, spend, spend.

Throughout his life, Jesus preached and commanded love of all humanity, to eshew greed and to help the poor. If we are to truly celebrate Christmas, we should be helping the poor and loving everyone (not just other Christians or those with the 'Christmas Spirit' who indulge in the Saturnalian or Bacchanalian decadence of consumerism and over-indulgence).

It is greed and gluttony that waged the War on Christmas, and that war was lost years ago. The bulk of Christendom indulges in the capitalistic and selfish delights of what constitutes the modern Christmas 'Spirit'.

Many of us appreciate that it is our family and friends who are more meaningful than any gifts we receive. Yet, what about those who are lonely or homeless, who are languishing in prisons, detention centres or refugee camps? Again, for those who want to keep 'Christ' in Christmas, it may not hurt to check out the parable of the sheep and the goats (remember the bit about 'for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me' - Matthew 25:31-46).

Here's a thought or two. Why not give a gift to a stranger, someone less fortunate than ourselves. Of course, we shouldn't wait until Christmas to help others, but as Christmas is a time of gift-giving, it is certainly a good time to give useful gifts to the poor and needy. Or why not take the time to spend time with the lonely, the homeless, the prisoner, the refugee. Time and attention are valuable gifts, and maybe for a moment, take the focus off ourselves and our greed.

Peace on earth and goodwill to all.

References

1. 'Cardwell', Snopes, http://www.snopes.com/politics/christmas/cardwell.asp, 3 December 2013. Last accessed 25 December 2013.

2. 'Hoax - Broadmeadows Shopping Centre Christmas Celebrations Ban', Hoax Slayer, http://www.hoax-slayer.com/broadmeadows-christmas-celebrations-hoax.shtml, 10 December 2013. Last accessed 25 December 2013.

History and heresy - the crucifixion of Christ in the 21st century

Have conservative, fundamentalist Christians learnt nothing from history?

It was the religiously conservative, fundamentalist, legalistic types who:

* crucified Jesus (after all, you can't preach heresy that undermines the religious establishment)

* burnt Joan of Arc (and others) at the stake for witchcraft (after all, you can't have visions of God that give political advice which differs to the religious establishment's politics).

* established the Spanish Inquisition to torture and murder enemies of the church

* undertook the crusades to wage a holy war in order to expel the 'heathen' Muslims from the 'Holy' Land.

* supported Adolf Hitler, who claimed to be a Christian upholding Christian values, because nothing says Christian like imprisoning and killing Jews, Communists, Socialists, gypsies, homosexuals and anyone else who is perceived to be unpatriotic, or a risk to the economy or threatening 'traditional' family and church values.

* waged war in the Middle East and Afghanistan to destroy 'terrorists' and 'fundamentalist Muslims' - essentially anyone who fights back against the American capitalist war-machine as it exploits weaker economies for its own gain (reminiscent of the Crusades, but let's not go there - pardon the paralipsis).

* waged a war on the poor by supporting the rich in the mistaken belief of 'trickle-down' economics, after all, we all know how willing rich people are to give their money to the poor.

* support the apartheid state of Israel through misinterpretation of scripture, which essentially denies the need for Jesus delivering salvation to Judaism, as well as sponsoring the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestine: contrary to what Jesus preached and what's written in the bible.

What did Jesus actually preach? Well, Jesus was a revolutionary who opposed the mainstream religious institution and the hypocrisy that went with it. It wasn't so much the government that he opposed, as it was the religious elite, namely the Pharisees and Sadducees. He spoke up for the poor, the marginalised, the despised. He hung out with the tax collector and the prostitute. Ironically, many Christians today oppose tax and promote smaller government, as if this is biblical. Yet, Jesus said 'render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's'. He never opposed paying tax and didn't come to overthrow the Roman Empire.

Many Christians are happy for tax breaks to go to the rich while criticising welfare for the poor, as if this is biblical. They believe the more money given to the rich, the more money the rich will give the poor. It's refreshing to hear the current pontiff, Pope Francis call trickle-down economics out, when he said:

'The promise was that when the glass was full, it would overflow, benefiting the poor. But what happens instead, is that when the glass is full, it magically gets bigger. Nothing ever comes out for the poor'.

The right wing opposes the revolutionaries, the ones who speak up against capitalist exploitation. The Occupy movement for instance, wasn't exactly on the Christmas card list for many fundamentalist Christians. Yet, Jesus also opposed exploitation of the poor by the rich and by the religious establishment.

It's interesting that Pope Francis also pointed out that the church has been focused on the wrong priorities, such as the preoccupation with homosexuality and abortion, while people suffer from poverty. Yet, listening to some Christians, homosexuality is an unforgiveable sin. If it was so serious, then why did Jesus not mention it. Not once! It's the church and the religious fundamentalists who need to apologise for their sins against the poor, the homosexual, the reject.

The right-wing continues with its judgemental vitriol against Communism, Socialism, environmentalism and homosexuality, while standing up for capitalism, exploitation and gun-ownership.

If Mary appeared today, unwed and claiming she'd gotten knocked up by God, there'd be outrage in the church and allegations of an attack on the family unit. Imagine the uproar if Mary's son then went on to preach heresy such as 'for God so loved the world' (and by implication everyone in the world, such as homosexuals, atheists, Muslims, Communists and so on), or giving commands such as 'love your neighbour' (again by implication meaning to love the world and everyone in it, not just the right-wing, capitalist Christian), or something like,  'I tell you the truth, it's hard for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God ... it's easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God'.

With such heresy, Jesus would be burnt at the stake or crucified ... well, maybe today it would mean a lethal injection or spending the rest of his life in Guantanamo Bay for being some sort of radical, unpatriotic, terrorist hell-bent on dismantling the capitalist state and undermining Christian values.

What has changed since Jesus was crucified by the establishment 2,000 years ago?

If Jesus appeared today; a long-haired, brown-skinned, kaftan-wearing God-freak, preaching the prioritisation of the poor over the rich, love over hate, peace over war; he'd be ridiculed, abused, crucified.

Ironically, it's rebirthed capitalist Christianity that is the heresy, defending greed and hatred. Those who speak up for love and peace are the true fundamentalists, preaching and delivering the fundamental message of Christ.

For more than 2,000 years, however, the message of love and generosity has been overshadowed by those willing to kill to defend power and wealth in the name of God. Throughout the generations this heresy has been rebadged and sold to the masses in one form or another. And it continues to this day, masquerading as a multitude of Christian doctrine, such as prosperity teaching, Christian or family values, conservatism. Meanwhile, wars are waged in the name of it. Wars against the poor, the homosexual, the abortionist, the Muslim, the Communist and so on.

History is a great teacher, but only to those willing to learn. The rest will repeat the tragic mistakes of the past.

From Nanny State to Police State

For years, the Liberal Party and its supporters have accused the Labor Party of running a nanny state. Every time that legislation was introduced with the aim of protecting people from themselves or others, the 'nanny state, nanny state' squeals from the right-wing were deafening. Whether it was workplace health and safety laws, anti-discrimination laws, anti-vilification laws, even anti-fat laws which now require restaurants to state the calorie content of its food, the right wing accused Labor of wrapping society in cotton-wool.

The extreme right-wing Liberal National Party that now rules Queensland under Premier Campbell Newman, claimed that it was going to reduce red and green tape because Queensland was over-governed, over-regulated, over-legislated.

To de-nannify Queensland, Newman and his side-kick, Attorney-General Jarrid Bleije, introduced new laws:

• Name and shame juvenile offenders who commit a second offence ⁽¹⁾
• Sex offender law amendments which removed power of the courts to decide whether a sex offender should be freed, and gave it to the Attorney-General ⁽²⁾, in breach of the Westminster Convention. The Court of Appeal has rejected these amendments as invalid. Bleije is considering challenging the Court of Appeal ⁽³⁾.
• 'Vicious Lawless Association Disestablishment' Act, which outlaws dozens of motorcycle gangs, makes it a crime for three or more people to be gathered together and allows for an additional 15 to 25 years jail on top of the head sentence, for a member of an outlaw gang who is convicted of a violent crime ⁽⁴⁾. Persons convicted under the VLAD Act may be sentenced to a dedicated prison, spend 23 hours per day in a cell and wear a pink jumpsuit ⁽⁵⁾. The legislation is very broad and doesn't just apply to bikers ⁽⁶⁾.
• There also anti-Union and anti-democracy laws, aimed at weakening the rights of workers, including banning Unions from using membership funds to undertake advertising campaigns without a referendum ⁽⁷⁾⁽⁸⁾, and banning employers from deducting union membership fees from their wages ⁽⁹⁾.

Anyone who doubts the danger of Newman's fascist laws or who believe that it only targets the worst of the worst biker gangs, should take a look at what happened in Queensland on 14 December 2013. Every year bikers hold a toy run, in which they deliver toys to needy children. Newman and Bleije unleashed the Queensland Police on the charity toy run which was being conducted by Christian biker group, the Tribe of Judah. Unconfirmed reports on Facebook and Twitter claim that more than 700 bikers were stopped under the VLAD Act. Channel 10 reported that there were 300 charity bikers stopped ⁽¹⁰⁾.

Either way, this is an incredible abuse of police power. If the bikers were distributing drugs, weapons or other contraband that would be understandable, but they were distributing toys to the most needy children in Queensland society. Children who likely will have a very bleak Christmas. Children who may well be desperate and destitute. Merry Christmas kids. Your government is just waiting for an excuse to send you to jail, so don't load up on toys or other things that you might enjoy.

Instead of the Newman government attempting to fix social problems, they target the most needy. Even the 'name and shame' laws are not aimed at rehabilitating, but at victimising the victims of poverty.

Labor may have run a Nanny State according to right-wingers, but the LNP is blatantly and boldly operating a fascist Police State; one in which the liberties of all citizens are under threat.

What's next? Ban freedom of speech? Ban the media, or bloggers, or Facebook, Twitter and other social media users from making comment?

Newman and his cohorts are operating a fascist government which is getting more and more extreme.

At risk of invoking Godwin's Law, it isn't too much of a stretch to remember the words of the German Baptist preacher, Martin Niemöller who stated,  'When the Nazis came for the communists, I remained silent, I was not a communist. When they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent, I was not a social democrat. When they came for the trade unionists, I did not speak up, because I was not a trade unionist. When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out'.

All Queenslanders should be concerned and speaking up against these draconian and totalitarian laws. 

References

1. Marissa Calligeros, Brisbane Times, 'Queensland to name and shame young offenders', 26 September 2013, http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/queensland-to-name-and-shame-young-offenders-20130926-2uexk.html. Last accessed 15 December 2013.

2. Amy Remeikis, Brisbane Times, 'Bleije bypasses courts on state's worst sex offenders', 16 October 2013, http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/queensland-to-name-and-shame-young-offenders-20130926-2uexk.html. Last accessed 15 December 2013.

3. Brisbane Time, 'Jarrid Bleije announces review of dangerous prisoner laws', 8 December 2013, http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/jarrod-bleijie-announces-review-of-dangerous-prisoner-laws-20131208-2yyyf.html. Last accessed 15 December 2013.

4. Queensland Government, Queensland Cabinet and Ministerial Directory, Media Statements, Attorney-General and Minister for Justice The Honourable Jarrid Bleije, Tuesday, October 15, 2013, 'Tough penalties for criminal gang members', http://statements.qld.gov.au/Statement/2013/10/15/tough-penalties-for-criminal-gang-members. Last accessed 15 December 2013.

5. The Guardian, 'Pink for punks: Queensland plan to embarrass bikies in jail', 21 October 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/21/pink-for-punks-queensland-bikies. Last accessed 15 December 2013.

6. Anna Capellano, Independent Australia, 'Are you a vicious lawless associate?', 8 November 2103, http://www.independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/are-you-a-vicious-lawless-associate,5876. Last accessed 15 December 2013.

7. Stand for Qld, 'Fact sheet on Newman LNP Government extreme anti-Democracy Bill', http://standforqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Q-Watch-Fact-sheet-on-LNP-Bill-V2-BY1.pdf. Last accessed 15 December 2013.

8. Amy Remeikis, Brisbane Times, 'Newman government rachets up 'war' on unions', 8 August 2013, http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/newman-government-ratchets-up-war-on-unions-20130807-2rgw7.html. Last accessed 15 December 2013.

9. Alex Scott, Together Union, 'New industrial legislation by the Newman government', 11 June 2013, http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2013/s3854365.htm. Last accessed 15 December 2013.

10. Sarah Greenhalgh, Channel 10, 'Bikies spread Christmas cheer', 14 December 2013, http://tenplay.com.au/news/brisbane/2013/12/14/bikies-spread-christmas-cheer. Last accessed 15 December 2013.

Australia v Indonesia - Ego over economics

Give aid, reward with trade.

And the stand-off with Indonesia continues following the revelation that Australia had tapped the phones of Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, his wife, Ibu Ani Yudhoyono, and a number of other Indonesian officials in 2009.

Australia claims this was in response to the deaths of a number of Australians from terrorist attacks in Indonesia.  Australia and Indonesia already cooperate with each other in combating terrorism, so it is doubtful that bugging the phones of the President and his wife, would have been of benefit.

Understandably, President Yudhoyono is outraged, as is the rest of Indonesia, and has called for a formal response and an apology from Australia. Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, is refusing to apologise and has yet to formally respond to President Yudhoyono.

Whether Abbott should apologise or not is debatable. As has been pointed out numerous times, most countries spy on each other. However, Abbott should at least call Yudhoyono and discuss the matter. This is the basis of international diplomacy.

As a result of this insult, Indonesia has suspended military and people smuggling cooperation with Australia, placing additional pressure on Abbott's hyperbolic and hysterical 'Stop the boats' campaign. Cooperation with Indonesia is essential to the success of any policy regarding asylum seekers.

In opposition, Abbott often ran from the difficult questions. There is the embarrassing footage of Abbott being lost for words when confronted by a journalist over his comment, 'Shit happens' regarding the death of a soldier in Afghanistan. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wT9XS_TvzQ).

Now that Abbott occupies the highest office in the country, he is still running from difficult discussions. In relation to the spying allegations, he has hidden behind Parliament in order to make a few casual statements.

In the meantime, Indonesian anger against Australia grows while Abbott keeps his head firmly planted in the sand, hoping it will blow over.

Conversely, in Australia, there are those who agree with Abbott and angrily claim that we should cancel aid to Indonesia, as though Indonesia needs Australia more than the other way around.

It may be prudent to consider who needs who.

Remember, the crisis that Australia's farmers faced when former Prime Minister Julia Gillard banned live exports to Indonesia? The ban crippled Australia's cattle farmers.

Australia is the largest source of international aid to Indonesia, and will provide an estimated $683 million during 2013/14. In 2012/13, Australia provided approximately $541.6 million in aid. Certainly not small potatoes.

However, mutual trade between Australia and Indonesia accounted for $11.1 billion in 2012. Indonesia is Australia's 12th largest trading partner. Of this, Australian exports accounted for approximately $4.8 billion and Australian imports for 6.3 billion, according to Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (http://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/fs/indo.pdf).

Indonesia is the fourth most populous nation in the world. Its economy is growing rapidly, with real GDP growth of 6.3% in 2013. It is one of Australia's most important economic trading partners, and has huge potential for increased growth. Particularly, as Australia's aid money is used to raise the economic standards of Indonesia. Aid = better economy = increased trade = better economy etc. It's not rocket science.

Australia benefits significantly from the relationship with Indonesia. It does no good for Abbott to preference ego over economics and diplomacy.

After winning the 2013 election Prime Minister Abbott claimed that the 'adults are back in charge' of the government.  Well, it's time for Prime Minister Abbott to pull on his big-boy pants, phone or visit President Yudhoyono and resolve this issue as soon as possible.

Kristallnacht - Remembrance and Vigilance

Today marks 75 years since Kristallnacht, the 'night of broken glass', in which Nazi brownshirts and German civilians rampaged through Jewish neighbourhoods in Germany, destroying synagogues, businesses, buildings, houses and apartments. Approximately 100 Jews were killed that night, and around 30,000 were imprisoned in concentration camps.

Kristallnacht was allegedly a response to the assassination of a German diplomat by a German-born Polish Jew. However, it is likely that it would have happened anyway; if not that night, then certainly not long after. Hitler's Mein Kampf foreshadowed what was to come. He blamed the Jews for Germany's loss in World War I and for the economic crisis in Germany, amongst other things. Hitler believed in patriotism, nationalism and racial purity.

Kristallnacht is generally seen as the beginning of the Final Solution that culminated in the Holocaust, which saw the genocide of at least 6 million Jews and other 'undesirables'. However, Hitler began his campaign for the purity of Germany years before this.

In 1933, he incarcerated Communists and Social Democrats. He also targeted dissidents, gypsys, homosexuals, the mentally ill and the physically lame.

Who spoke up?

Some Germans claim that they didn't know of the massacres that were occuring in the concentration camps, however, they did know of the arrests, of the incarcerations because these were reported in newspapers and obvious on the streets as people were arrested and taken away. Few, if any spoke up. In their defence, it would have been a brave and frightening thing to protest the persecution as they would also have been incarcerated.

Hitler's persecution of those he didn't like is a pertinent reminder today that we must speak up against injustice, in all its forms. Across the globe, politics is becoming more and more aggressive with arguments aimed at specific people or groups. We see attacks on other religions and political ideologies, as well as on homosexuality or other 'undesirable' traits.

In Australia, there is the forced incarceration of asylum seekers, victims of persecution in their own land and victims of persecution in the 'civilised' society of Australia. In the USA, we see the rage against Obamacare and the wild accusations of it being Socialism. In the West, there have been numerous groups attacking the 'welfare' state, claiming that it makes people lazy and dependent. Yet, if not for welfare, who would care for those in need? If not, for socialised medicine who would care for the sick?

The polemic vitriol of modern politics sounds a lot like the arguments Hitler used to justify his persecution of Jews, Communists, Socialists, homosexuals, gypsys, the sick and lame, and anyone else who didn't fit his ideal of what a German should be.

On the anniversary of Kristallnacht, we must never forget just how slippery the slope is from 'patriotism' to persecution to pogrom.

Martin Niemöller was a German pastor who opposed Communism and initially supported Hitler. He liked what Hitler had to say. It resonated with his Christian belief and German nationalism. When he was incarcerated in 1937, it became personally clear that he'd been very wrong to not have spoken up earlier.

Niemöller is accredited with a number of quotes. The most famous being:

'When the Nazis came for the communists,
 I remained silent,
 I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent,
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak up,
because I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out'.

This quote has been modified numerous times, but is the one listed on the Martin Niemöller Foundation's website ⁽¹⁾:

I'm referencing Niemöller because his quotes are particularly relevant today.

Niemöller wrote ⁽²⁾ about whose fault the Holocaust was. It may well have been orchestrated by Hitler and the Nazis, but it was allowed to happen by the people:

'This should be our starting point, and with this very thing in mind, we have to start in earnest. Nobody wants to take the responsibility of the guilt, no one of our German people is guilty, everybody shoves the guilt over to his neighbor. The local official says: I was only a little man, the whole guilt lies with you, Herr local commander; and he, in turn says: I did not wrong anybody; I only obeyed orders. The whole guilt lies with you, you of the Gestapo. But the latter don't want it either and finally everything lands on Himmler and Hitler. These are the greatest sinners, who cannot throw the guilt on others anymore, even if they did try to do so before their death. Can it disappear into thin air this way? The guilt exists, there is no doubt about it. Even if there were no other guilt than that of the six million clay urns, containing the ashes of burnt Jews from all over Europe. And this guilt weighs heavily on the German people and on the German name and on all Christendom. For these things happened in our world and in our name. Can we of the Confessional Church have nothing to do with it? Can we say that the church triumphed on all the fronts?'

Niemöller was in no doubt about the acquiescent role that the church played in supporting Hitler's genocide and persecutions in this speech he gave on 6 January 1946 and which was published in 'Die deutsche Schuld, Not und Hoffnung' ('The German guilt, misery and hope') ⁽³⁾:

'When Pastor Niemöller was put in a concentration camp we wrote the year 1937; when the concentration camp was opened we wrote the year 1933, and the people who were put in the camps then were Communists. Who cared about them? We knew it, it was printed in the newspapers. Who raised their voice, maybe the Confessing Church? We thought: Communists, those opponents of religion, those enemies of Christians - "should I be my brother's keeper?" Then they got rid of the sick, the so-called incurables. - I remember a conversation I had with a person who claimed to be a Christian. He said: Perhaps it's right, these incurably sick people just cost the state money, they are just a burden to themselves and to others. Isn't it best for all concerned if they are taken out of the middle [of society]? -- Only then did the church as such take note. Then we started talking, until our voices were again silenced in public. Can we say, we aren't guilty/responsible? The persecution of the Jews, the way we treated the occupied countries, or the things in Greece, in Poland, in Czechoslovakia or in Holland, that were written in the newspapers. … I believe, we Confessing-Church-Christians have every reason to say: mea culpa, mea culpa! We can talk ourselves out of it with the excuse that it would have cost me my head if I had spoken out. … We preferred to keep silent. We are certainly not without guilt/fault, and I ask myself again and again, what would have happened, if in the year 1933 or 1934 - there must have been a possibility - 14,000 Protestant pastors and all Protestant communities in Germany had defended the truth until their deaths? If we had said back then, it is not right when Hermann Göring simply puts 100,000 Communists in the concentration camps, in order to let them die. I can imagine that perhaps 30,000 to 40,000 Protestant Christians would have had their heads cut off, but I can also imagine that we would have rescued 30-40,000 million [sic] people, because that is what it is costing us now'.

Kristallnacht and its ramifications must never be forgotten. We must remember the Jews who were murdered that night, the 30,000 who were taken away, most to their deaths in concentration camps.  We must also remember that it was done with the complicity and open support of most Germans, including the church.

Although most countries don't have death camps, in many cases we are complicit in the persecution of others, either because we fail to help or to speak out against injustice. We cannot defend oppression, even if it is our own country that it doing it.

Sinclair Lewis published a novel in 1935 entitled 'It can't happen here', in which he depicted the rise of a Fascist president in the USA on the back of a 'populist platform, promising to restore the country to prosperity and greatness', playing the patriotism and 'traditional values' card. In commenting on this book, journalist Harrison Salisbury ⁽⁴⁾ wrote:

'Sinclair Lewis aptly predicted in It Can't Happen Here that if fascism came to America it would come wrapped in the flag and whistling 'The Star Spangled Banner'.

We must remain vigilant against the insidious nature of politics that panders to fear, xenophobia and prejudice, for those who condone such politics are guilty of human rights violations through abrogating their moral duty to defend others from injustice, persecution and oppression.






References

1. Martin Niemöller Foundation, The quote, accessed 9 November 2013. http://www.martin-niemoeller-stiftung.de/4/daszitat/a31.

2. New York: Philosophical Library, 1947 [79 pp. 21 cm.], Of Guilt and Hope, by Martin Niemöller, accessed 9 November 2013. http://www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/marcuse/projects/niem/Niem1946GuiltHope13-16.htm

3. Harold Marcuse, Martin Niemöller's famous quotation: "First they came for the Communists ... ", accessed 9 November 2013. http://www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/marcuse/niem.htm.

4. Stephen Wylder, Sinclair Lewis never said it; the rules of misquotation, accessed 9 November 2013. http://www.examiner.com/article/sinclair-lewis-never-said-it-the-rules-of-misquotation

Dehumanisation, delegitimisation and double-speak

The LNP have become masters of dehumanisation; delegitimising the rights of victims of horrendous human rights abuses, and it starts with the terminology. Asylum seekers are not illegal.


Prime Minister Tony Abbott and Immigration Minister Scott Morrison maintain the line that they don't want to pander to political correctness in relation to asylum seekers. Therefore, asylum seekers arriving by boat will be henceforth be referred to as 'illegal arrivals'.

This is great popularism politics, however, it is incorrect under the UN Refugee Convention to which Australia is a signatory. The Convention states that anyone can enter a signatory country and apply for asylum, no matter how they arrive there. That is not illegal and they are not illegal arrivals.

What we are witnessing, is not political correctness, put political incorrectness. Political popularism appealing to the xenophobes that the Liberal Party has carefully cultivated to secure election victory. After all, one method of gaining political success is to create a bogeyman and then show yourself as the way, the truth and the light to overcoming said bogeyman.

The problem is, that it is baloney. Asylum seekers are not illegal. They are victims of human rights abuses, and the LNP is perpetuating the abuse by referring to them as illegals.

Ironically, Abbott is happy to prance around showing how much of a charity-minded individual he is through volunteer fire-fighting and life-saving (at tax-payers expense, mind), yet his charity disappears when it comes to asylum seekers. It would appear that one form of charity leads to votes and one doesn't.

Asylum seekers now live in fear of being rounded up and shipped off to the Gulags that Australia has created on Manus Island, Nauru and so on. For some, this fear has already come true. Recently, even pregnant women were shipped to Nauru, where there is very limited medical care. So much for charity, Tony.

Since John Howard, the Liberal Party has become masters of dehumanisation; delegitimising the rights of victims of horrendous human rights abuses, and it starts with the terminology. This is coupled with censorship and misinformation which we've seen since the Liberal Party banned the release of information regarding boat arrivals; confining it to the release of cherry-picked data in weekly briefings. The pathetic excuse for this is that it is a military operation. The military-led, regally sounding, jingoistic Operation Sovereign Borders was established by Prime Minister Abbott on the pretense of protecting asylum seekers from drowning. A bit of over-kill if that was his true motive. Rather, Operation Sovereign Borders is sold by the Liberal Party, particularly Tony Abbott and the Immigration Minister Scott Morrison as defending Australia from malice-minded refugees hell-bent on overthrowing this great country and establishing their own nation. Wave the flags, stop the boats.

This Orwellian double-speak needs to stop. Asylum seekers are not illegal. They are not a threat. They don't come with malice on their minds. Asylum seekers are people. Victims in their own country. Victims in ours. They have the right for their claims to be heard.

This disgraceful, deceitful dialogue of hatred and jingoism should cease, otherwise we may as well stop the pretense and remove ourselves from the UN Refugee Convention. We can then be just like every other nation that fails to recognise asylum seekers and has no respect for human rights.

Would it be so bad if Australia set an example of how to treat people humanely, rather than acting like despots, fascists, thugs and bullies to those in need?