Sunday, October 5, 2014
Burqas don't kill people, people kill people
The rise of the self-proclaimed Islamic State has seen a rise in fear and racist attacks in the West. In Australia there have been numerous attacks on Muslims and mosques. The corresponding number of attacks committed by Muslims has been significantly fewer.
Muslim women in particular have reported being attacked by people screaming abuse, trying to tear away their head-coverings and physically assaulting them. The attackers threaten them with bashing, rape and beheading. Some of the attackers have even threatened to murder their children. Ironically, these attacks are ostensibly because Islamic State has beheaded a number of Westerners.
The small-minded cowards who've perpetrated these attacks have shown a distinct lack of intelligence. Many of these gutless wonder have attacked vulnerable women or snuck into mosques and defaced them.
It's not overly surprising that some elements of society lack the skills to separate true terrorism from the general Muslim community. After all, the Australian government has been feeding xenophobia and racism for years by linking asylum seekers with terrorism (even though asylum seekers are victims, fleeing war, terrorism and persecution), by linking Islam with terrorism (not mentioning the use of terrorism by Western nations in countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq, or the funding of despots responsible for much of the persecution that asylum seekers are fleeing) and by establishing Australian 'values' as some sort of whites-only club, namely Team Australia, that everyone must swear allegiance to.
The media has been responsible for peddling and expanding on the government's xenophobic mantras, thus feeding further the fear, racism and bigotry that is being manifested violently by some and repeated ad nauseum by others who can't differentiate one action from another.
Studies have found that lower intelligence in childhood often resulted in racist attitudes in adulthood. (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/millennial-media/201304/do-racism-conservatism-and-low-iq-go-hand-in-hand). This was because of a lack of cognitive skills and inability to see the 'big picture', which is constructed of individual events not a mass event. Racists lack the ability to separate the actions of a few from the larger group who disagree with it. A Muslim committing terrorism is not representative of all Muslims. Just like a Christian who rapes a child is not representative of all Christians. Racists can't see the trees for the forest. Something happens and all they see is the forest, they can't drill down and separate the individual from the overall group. It is a lack of intelligence and cognitive ability that underpins racism, bigotry and xenophobia.
A number of these mental giants will argue that religion is not a race, therefore they aren't racist. However, the same behaviours that characterise racism also characterise their anti-Islamic bigotry. If you don't want to be called racist, then don't act like a racist. Speaking of forests, as Forrest Gump said 'stupid is as stupid does'.
These bigots claim they are defending their nation or religion from the insidious actions of Islam, yet it is the behaviour and hate-speech of bigots that is the biggest threat.
Recently, Parliament House in Canberra declared that anyone in a burqa can't sit in the open gallery, but can only sit in an enclosed room that is usually reserved for noisy school children. They would be separated from the chamber by a glass window. This is a blatant attack on women wearing burqas. How many people wearing burqas have ever been to Parliament House? In addition, everyone who enters Parliament House goes through metal-detection security. A security officer at Parliament House stated that the new rule was implemented so that they could identify whoever yells abuse from the public gallery. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that no burqa wearing person has ever yelled abuse from the public gallery. It is blatant fear-mongering bigotry that is behind this rule and it is supported by the actions and rhetoric of the government.
Let's not get into the variations in Islamic head-dress - that would only confuse the racists. Actually, let's do get into the variations. This article from ABC gives a good description of the variations: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-23/why-do-muslim-women-wear-a-burka-niqab-or-hijab/5761510.
The attack on the burqa (as the racists keep banging on about), is partly fuelled by the belief that there could be someone dressed up in a burqa in order to commit a terrorist act. While it is possible that a cross-dressing terrorist might don the burqa, if they are intent on covering their face then what is to stop them dressing up as the Easter bunny, or a storm-trooper or some other fancy-dress that hides their face. If it's a suicide bomber, why would they hide their face at all? Would a suicide bomber care if anyone sees their face if they're about to blow themselves apart?
Some kind-hearted souls state that they oppose the burqa because women 'should be free'. I applaud their concern for the well-being of Muslim women, however, that is a facade and justification for another attack on Islam. Apparently, the freedom of Muslim women doesn't extend to having the freedom to chose what they wear.
Muslims across the globe have been protesting against the actions of Islamic State, and for that matter, the actions of terrorists in general. I don't see too many Christians protesting against the war-crimes, ethnic cleansing and genocide perpetrated by Israel for the last 70 years or so. Israel's crimes in the name of Zionism, and therefore in the name of God, have given rise to much of the anger in the Muslim world. Yet even with this anger, very few of the more than 1.5 billion Muslims across the globe have reacted violently. Considering a quarter of the world is Muslim, we'd soon know if they were all hell-bent on destroying the west. Obviously, they are not.
There's a whole lot of discussion around the burqa. Some politicians are even calling for a ban on it. Even Australia's illustrious prime minister, Tony Abbott, has stated he doesn't like the burqa. If we are to ban the burqa, then ban all religious garb: ban nuns from nun outfits, ban priests from priestly outfits, ban the cute little collar that some protestant ministers wear. Banning the burqa is a ridiculous argument and is fuelled by fear and hatred of Islam. It masks a deeper loathing for the entire Islamic community by small-minded individuals who should know better. Government, church and community leaders should be condemning the deep-seated racism and bigotry being manifested against Muslims. This includes ensuring their own language and actions does not give tacit or blatant support for racist abuse and attacks.
Get something straight: burqas don't kill people, people kill people.
It is time that the government stopped feeding this fear and hatred. Focus on the real problem, focus on terrorism, condemn it, but do not condemn an entire religion because of the actions of a few.
Sunday, August 24, 2014
What love is to the heart, liberty is to the soul of man
'What light is to the eyes - what air is to the lungs - what love is to the heart, liberty is to the soul of man'. - Robert Green Ingersoll
Imagine being denied your liberty. Imagine being unable to do anything all day, every day; confined to a hell-hole concentration camp where your captors deliberately and systematically destroy any hope you have of freedom. You can leave ... if you don't mind going back to the hell-hole that you left, where you were persecuted, imprisoned, tortured, your life was in danger, your families lives were in danger; death dogged you every day. What a choice. Yet it is the choice that the Australian government is giving asylum seekers who come to Australia seeking our protection.
The irony of this is that we see Australians showing support for Iraqis persecuted by the Islamic State. We see Christians changing their profile photos to the Arabic letter nun, which the Islamic State has allegedly been painting on the doors of Christians. Nun, or N, is being used to signify people who follow the Nazarene, Jesus.
But it isn't just Christians being persecuted. There's also the Yazidis and the Kurds. There are Muslims. Why limit your compassion to Christians?
With all this sympathy for Iraqis being killed and persecuted, it's surprising that Australia is still willing to detain Iraqis who come by boat seeking asylum. Even more surprising is that Australia is returning Iraqi asylum seekers to Iraq while persecution and murder is rampant. This is a breach of the non-refoulement provision in the United Nations Convention on Refugees, which Australia is a signatory to.
According to the Refugee Convention, asylum seekers may arrive by any means they can in order to seek protection, even if those means are normally considered illegal. Those who do arrive by 'illegal' means are not allowed to be punished for doing so. Yet Australia detains most of them in inadequate, offshore camps, that are little more than concentration camps, gulags. Asylum seekers are held indefinitely and told they will never be settled in Australia. Meanwhile, Australia bribes third world nations to take them at the same time as ensuring that asylum seekers aren't seen as genuine. The Australian government deliberately lies and demonises asylum seekers to justify unleashing a military operation on them for 'national security'. Its persecution of asylum seekers is designed to ensure that the majority of Australians believe they are queue jumpers who destroy their documents, hate Australia and are linked to terrorism.
Asylum seekers are not queue jumpers. What queue is there? Asylum claims are not processed in order. It isn't like taking a number at the deli. Claims are meant to be heard based on need, however, given the number of claims received it is more a matter of good fortune when a claim is processed. There are currently more than 50 million displaced persons in the world. Of these, the UNHCR has more than 16.7 million registered as refugees and 1,067,000 claims for asylum received (1). In 2012, there were only 80,000 resettlement vacancies world-wide available for the more than one million asylum seekers (2). Based on these figures, an asylum claim could take up to 13 years to be processed.
A wait in a UN refugee camp could take up to 17 years according to the UNHCR (3). Who would languish for that long in a camp? Many camps aren't safe, have limited or unreliable access to water and food. Rape and attacks are common (4). What parent would want their child to grow up in such conditions, with no education and no hope for the future?
The reality for many refugees is that they have no documents. Stateless persons, such as the Kurds, Hazara and Rohingya are rarely if ever issued documents because they're not recognised by the governments of the countries they live in. Countries such as Sudan and Somalia do not record every birth. The Refugee Convention states that people should not be penalised for failing to have the 'proper' documents.
Asylum seekers chose Australia because of its freedoms. Many asylum seekers love Australia more than Australians do. They appreciate what we have, they want to contribute to our country. They are proud to be part of Australia. They are proud to be Australian when they get citizenship. Yet the government whips up fear against them in a frenzy of xenophobia by manufacturing a threat to Australian sovereignty. They are not terrorists. They are victims of terrorists, of despots, of persecution. Why would anyone travel on a boat, risking their life, to destroy our freedom?
The abhorrent treatment of asylum seekers by the Australian government is a disgrace, a blight on our national character. This is not what Australia claims to be or what it was founded on. Australia was founded as a welcoming and free nation, a fair nation. Australia's abuse of asylum seekers is anything but welcoming, free or fair.
Self-harm is rife in detention centres. The government claims it's because of emotional blackmail. But seriously, what sort of abuse brings a person to prefer death to the abandonment and abuse experienced in Australia's gulags? Part of it is the complete removal of freedoms and their lives being placed in limbo, with all hope torn away as the government perversely enjoys declaring they have no chance of settling in Australia ... but they're free to return to war and persecution any time.
Asylum seekers in community detention or on bridging visas fair much better than those locked up in a soul-destroying prison. Not that this is ideal. They are banned from working or contributing to society. Nonetheless, releasing asylum seekers into the community presents a much lower human and financial cost than barbaric detention (5).
If Australia is truly a welcoming, free and fair nation it needs to shed its xenophobia and addiction to cruelty. It should give permanent residency to asylum seekers found to be genuine, not draw out the process and torment them through temporary visas.
The quote from Ingersoll clearly demonstrates how important liberty is to the soul of man. Instead of destroying desperate people who are fleeing persecution, war and suffering, Australia should welcome them, embrace them, love them.
References:
1. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Facts and Figures about Refugees, http://www.unhcr.org.uk/about-us/key-facts-and-figures.html, accessed 23 August 2014
2. UNHCR Executive Committee of the High Commissioner's Programme, Standing Committee 54th meeting, EC/63/SC/CRP.12, 5 June 2012, http://www.unhcr.org/5006a6aa9.html, accessed 23 August 2014.
3. UNHCR Protracted refugee situations: the search for practical solutions, page 109, http://www.unhcr.org/4444afcb0.pdf, accessed 23 August 2014.
4. SBS, Go Back to Where You Came From, Series 2, How safe are refugee camps? http://www.sbs.com.au/goback/about/factsheets/6/how-safe-are-refugee-camps
5. Medical Journal of Australia, Mental health and immigration detention, Gillian Triggs, Med J Aust 2013; 199 (11): 721-722, https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2013/199/11/mental-health-and-immigration-detention, accessed 24 August 2014.
Tuesday, July 29, 2014
Empathy for Palestine - If your country was illegally occupied by another nation, what would you do?
Many Australians, including the Government, politicians and churches support the state of Israel. This support has been declared even while Israel continues the decades-long genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestine. This support given and justifications made for the massacres of thousands of innocent men, women and children by Israel.
So, Australia, how would you react if the same thing happened here? Suppose for a moment that Israel, or maybe one of our Asian neighbours, decided that Australia was their ancestral homeland of 2,500 years ago. Suppose the United Nations agreed and allowed 55% of Australia to be taken over by Israel or Indonesia or Eastasia (looking at you, Orwell) or whatever country had set their sights on Australia.
Suppose the United Nations resolution provided only one option to Australia: agree with 55% being settled by another nation. As we know, the Arabs told the UN to shove it when given this choice. I'm pretty certain Australia would do the same thing. But there was no choice for Palestinians. In 1947 the United Nations recommended, through Resolution 181 (1), that 55% of Palestinian land be given away to Europeans who had decided their ancestral homeland was in the Middle East. On 14 May 1948,the Jewish Agency headed by David Ben-Gurion illegally proclaimed the establishment of Israel even though neither he or the United Nations had the authority to do so (2). President Truman acknowledged it that day. The new neighbours moved in and violently forced Palestinians out. Not surprisingly, Palestinians supported by other Arab nations, fought to defend themselves. They lost. More than 700,000 Palestinians were displaced, thousands were massacred. While Israel argues the Arabs attacked them in 1948, it was the illegal creation and attack on Palestine by the newly formed Israel military that saw Arab armies come together in defence of Palestinian land (3).
In 1967, Egypt and other Arab nations tried to drive Israel out of Palestine. The war lasted Six Days. The vast military might of Israel prevailed (backed by the bottomless pit of United States military spending) and resulted in Israel expanding its occupation of Palestine to 78%.
Since then, Israel has continued illegally expanding its settlements into the West Bank, where it now occupies around 93% of Palestine.
The following graph overlays this scenario on the map of Australia. Note, that Gaza is represented by the Australian Capital Territory. Gaza is a 360km2 block of land with 1.8 million people. By contrast, the Australian Capital Territory is 2,280km2 and has a population of 373,000.
Following our hypothetical partitioning of Australia in 1948, the foreign nation (let's call it Eastasia for arguments sake) forcefully settles the land, driving the population out of the populous areas of Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane into either the ACT or the West Bank, in this case Western Australia. Eastasia builds a wall around the ACT, which now holds 11.4 million Australians in a population density that mirrors Gaza: 5,000 people per square kilometre.
Following the 1967 war, Eastasia has conquered the Northern Territory and much of Western Australia. By 2014, what is left of WA is now a series of illegal settlements which Eastasia has given away to foreigners who have been paid to move in and continue the ethnic cleansing of Australia. The Australians, some 10 million of them, are now foreigners in their own land. Israel has built 'security barriers' throughout northern WA. Thousands of kilometres of illegal walls which force Australians to wait for hours, sometimes days in order to travel to schools, hospitals, jobs, farms. Movement within and between areas is controlled by Israel using a series of checkpoints. Sometimes they open the check points. Sometimes they don't.
What would you do? Would you accept this? Would you fight back? Who is the terrorist? Who is the criminal? If you fight back, you're labelled a terrorist, yet you can't access your job or your crops to feed your family, your children can't access school easily, your family can't get to the hospital with any certainty. Every step of the way is controlled. An angry Aussie fights back and Israel bombards the ACT as collective punishment, because obviously all Australians are responsible for the actions of the individual.
Your child throws a rock at a settler who has stolen your land. The settler shoots your child dead and is never charged. Do you accept this?
Australia gives its unquestioning support to Israel even while Israel attacks schools, hospitals, mosques, ambulances and houses. Israel argues that Hamas or other Palestinian militants hide weapons in these locations, yet Israel has never produced evidence of this. Even if it were the case, the attack on civilians is considered collective punishment. It is a war crime.
Israel claims that Hamas uses children as human shields, yet it is Israel that has done this very thing (4) (5). Israel claims that it launched July 2014's Operation Brother's Keeper and Operation Protective Edge in response to the murder of three Israeli teenagers who were kidnapped in the West Bank. Israel claims they were murdered by Hamas. Yet no-one was arrested for the murders. Even before the teenagers' bodies were found, Israel launched attacks on Gaza. Two weeks later, Hamas started firing rockets in retaliation for the ongoing bombardments. While the murder of the teenagers is tragic, Israeli settlers have been murdering Palestinian children for years with impunity, often simply because of rocks being thrown.
The UN has issued resolutions condemning Israel's illegal arrest, detention and torture of men, women and children in its prisons (6). It has issued resolutions condemning the 'security barrier', an illegal wall that prevents Palestinians from accessing jobs, hospitals, schools, crops (7). The expansion of settlements into the West Bank is illegal under international law. (8).
Israel is illegally using chemical weapons in Gaza, including DIME (Dense Inert Metal Explosive), white phosphorous and flechette shells (9).
Israel illegally occupies Palestine. As such it cannot claim self-defence. It is the occupier. It is the aggressor.
It is time for nations such as Australia and the United States to stop supporting Israel's illegal activities and ethnic cleansing of Palestine. It is time for the International Court of Justice to hold Israeli politicians and military accountable for war crimes.
If your country was illegally occupied by another nation, what would you do?
References:
1. Resolution 181 (II). Future government of Palestine, United Nations General Assembly, A/RES/181(II)of 29 November 1947, http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/0/7F0AF2BD897689B785256C330061D253. Accessed 28 July 2014.
2. 'Milestones: 1945 - 1952, Creation of Israel 1948', US Department of State, Office of the Historian, https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/creation-israel. Accessed 28 July 2014.
3. 'Top 10 myths about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict', Jeremy R. Hammond, Foreign Policy Journal. http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2010/06/17/top-ten-myths-about-the-israeli-palestinian-conflict/view-all/. Accessed 28 July 2014.
4. 'Survivors of massacre in Khuza'a say Israeli forces using Palestinians as human shields', Yousef Alhelou, Mondoweiss, 26 July 2014, http://mondoweiss.net/2014/07/survivors-massacre-palestinians.html. Accessed 28 July 2014
5. 'Israeli soldiers who used Palestinian boy, 9, as a human shield avoid jail', Harriet Sherwood, The Guardian, 22 November 2010, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/nov/21/israeli-soldiers-human-shield-avoid-jail. Accessed 28 July 2014.
6. 'Human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem', United Nations General Assembly, A/HRC/22/28 of 16 April 2013, Resolution adopted by the Human Rights Council, 22/28. , http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/98edce37e189625b85256c40005da81b/caa6c7c0a77bb73885257b6a004ff676?OpenDocument. Accessed 28 July 2014
7. 'Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem', United Nations General Assembly, A/RES/68/83 of 16 December 2013, Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 11 December 2013, http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/a06f2943c226015c85256c40005d359c/7e53a2de7e56a67685257c460051a00d?OpenDocument. Accessed 28 July 2014.
8. 'Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan', United Nations General Assembly, A/RES/68/82 of 16 December 2013, Resolution adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 11 December 2013, http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/a06f2943c226015c85256c40005d359c/be8ab16f47676b2d85257c450061876e?OpenDocument. Accessed 28 July 2014.
9. 'Israeli weapons add to the brutality of Gaza attack', Jessica Purkiss, 24 July 2014, https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/middle-east/13030-israeli-weapons-add-to-brutality-of-gaza-attack. Accessed 28 July 2014.
Saturday, July 19, 2014
A Prayer for Israel
Lord, we pray for Israel ...
We pray that Israel will end it's illegal occupation of Palestine,
We pray that Israel will end the ethnic cleansing of Palestine,
We pray that Israel will cease the genocide in Palestine
We pray that Israel will stop murdering innocents,
We pray that Israel will end its war crimes,
We pray that Israel will end its crimes against humanity,
We pray that Israel will end its use of experimental weapons in Gaza,
We pray that Israel will end its use of chemical weapons in Gaza,
We pray that Israel will end its use of body- and limb-melting Dense Inert Metal Explosives (DIME) in Gaza,
We pray that Israel will end its use of missiles containing Depleted Uranium (DE) in Gaza,
We pray that Israel will cease the illegal and indefinite detention of children,
We pray that Israel will cease the illegal and indefinite detention of men and women,
We pray that Israel will cease the illegal and indefinite detention of men and women,
We pray that Israel will end its illegal practice of collective punishment,
We pray that Israel will remove the illegal settlements from the West Bank,
We pray that Israel will lift its blockades of Palestine,
We pray that Israel will end the apartheid against non-Jews,
We pray that Israel will pull down the walls which stop Palestinians accessing jobs, crops, hospitals, schools, families,
We pray that Israel will stop destroying Palestinian crops,
We pray that Israel will stop destroying Palestinian homes,
We pray that Israel will stop desecrating the memory of the holocaust through its 'never again' mantra while it repeats Nazi crimes in Palestine,
We pray that Israel will stop using the fear of another holocaust to justify the massacre and land-theft in Palestine,
We pray that the genocidal lie on which Israel was founded will be exposed, 'A land without people for people without land', when Palestine was home to millions while European Jews had countries to return to.
We pray that Israel will stop coveting and stealing Palestinian land,
We pray that Zionists will stop misusing scripture to justify Israel's crimes,
We pray that Zionists will stop rewriting history in order to justify Israel's existence and to obliterate Palestine from the history books,
We pray that you'll lift the blinkers from the eyes of Zionists so they see the genocidal evil they support,
We pray that you'll lift the blinkers from the eyes of the world so they will hold Israel accountable,
We pray that the International Criminal Court will prosecute Israeli leaders for war crimes and crimes against humanity,
We pray that the world will pray for Palestine,
We pray that the world will realise Palestine does exist and has a right to exist,
We pray that the world will stand behind Palestine's right to resist Israel's illegal occupation, aggression and ethnic cleansing.
We pray that the West will stop its financial and moral support of Israel,
We pray that the West will understand they are financing and supporting ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide being committed by Israel,
We pray that the West will stop supporting the oppressor and support the victims of Israeli aggression,
We pray that Israel and its supporters will repent of their crimes against Palestine,
We pray that Zionists will repent of justifying Israel killing in the name God,
We pray that Zionists will end the idolisation of Israel,
We pray that the UN will grant Palestine full member status,
We pray for healing of Palestinians suffering emotionally or physically from Israel's actions,
We pray that Palestinians forced out of the land by Israel, will have be granted the right to return,
We pray that you'll free Palestine.
Amen
Friday, June 20, 2014
Refugees represent the vanguard of their peoples
Refugees driven from country to country represent the vanguard of their peoples.
- Hannah Arendt 1943
Many people who flee their countries represent the highest of their peoples. They may have been forced out because of their education, politics or religion. But regardless of the reason for their lives being in danger, these people have great determination to seek safety for themselves and to rebuild their lives regardless of their circumstances.
It is the small-minded in the supposedly 'advanced' nations who fear them. The same people who consider themselves better than those in developing nations because of their education or occupation. Yet, their fear is grounded in ignorance. People fear what they don't know. People rooted in materialism, selfishness and greed fear, what they may lose.
The most polarising argument regards asylum seekers who arrive by boat and then claim asylum. To prevent this, the Australian government operates off-shore detention camps at Christmas Island (Australia), Manus Island (PNG) and Nauru, while also refusing to resettle asylum seekers in Australia. The government has also literally towed boats back to Indonesian waters.
The Abbot-led government has boasted that these harsh policies have meant that not one boat has reached Australia in months. However, this doesn't explain how many boats have made it into Australian waters, only to be pushed or towed back to Indonesia. The government simply refuses to release this information, claiming that it would prejudice the military-run Operation Sovereign Borders that it uses to wage war on asylum seekers.
Prime Minister Tony Abbott and Immigration Minister, Scott Morrison, boast of stopping the boats and credit their inhumane policies with this. These policies keep asylum seekers locked up in indefinite detention with a promise to never settle them in Australia.
In essence, the government is using asylum seekers as human scare-crows, by hoping the indefinite detention and inhumane conditions that they are keeping asylum seekers in, will deter others from coming.
In an effort to torpedo the critics of this harsh policy, the government states that there have been no deaths at sea since it was implemented. While a lack of drownings is good, the policy does not genuinely care for the asylum seekers. What is the government turning these people back to? A life without hope. A life in which they are in constant danger.
The government coerces asylum seekers to return to their country of origin by assuring them that they will never be settled in Australia and if they want to leave detention, all they have to is sign documents requesting to leave. There are still thousands of people languishing in Australian detention centres. Many are being forcibly returned to their country of origin, which may include Sri Lanka or Iraq for instance. Countries which are not safe. The government even donated a Navy frigate to the Sri Lankan government to round up people trying to flee the cruelty and persecution.
The Australian government may well be breaching the UN Refugee Convention by indefinitely detaining asylum seekers in inhumane conditions. Article 31 requires members states to not impose penalties regardless of how a refugee arrived. Articles 32 and 33 also prohibit states from refouling or returning asylum seekers to countries in which they are in danger. (1) Yet Australia continues to breach the Convention.
The government continues its rhetoric that asylum seekers are illegal in an effort to delegitimise claims and manipulate the mind-set of voters into thinking that asylum seekers arriving by boat are not 'genuine'. Asylum statistics produced by the Department of Immigration for the March 2013 quarter showed that on average more than 90% of so-called 'irregular maritime arrivals' were 'genuine'. That's assuming that the ones whose requests were denied, are not genuine. Given that many are being returned to countries such as Sri Lanka and Iraq, it's likely that those denied visas should have been given them. The following is a summary of the 'genuineness' of the asylum seekers arriving by boat in the last few years:
The government has perpetuated the belief that many asylum seekers destroy their identity papers or are queue jumpers. Believe it or not, but some people are stateless. Kurds for example. This means that for many, no nation claims or recognises them and therefore refuses to give them papers such as birth certificates. Others don't have time to grab papers when suddenly fleeing their homes in fear of their lives.
Refugees arriving by boat are not 'queue' jumpers. Queue jumping would be if they were lined up at McDonald's and someone pushed through to the front. There is no orderly queue for refugees. In 2012, there were 45.2 million displaced persons, with refugees accounting for 15 million of these. The UNHCR received 893,700 applications for asylum and processed 113,000 claims (2). Based on this it would take around eight years for a claim to be processed. Considering that many refugees do not apply for asylum immediately, it could mean that from time of displacement to having an asylum claim heard could be much longer than that.
That's years out of a person's life. Years out of a family's life. For children, that could mean their entire childhood being held in a refugee camp with inadequate education and health services. The camps themselves are not particularly safe, with attacks being made on them by local Armies or militia.
It is no surprise that refugees flee for safer countries. Heading east from countries such as Sudan, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Burma the first country they come to that is a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention is Australia. They could stay in India, Malaysia, Indonesia and so on, if they want their lives put on hold indefinitely. None of these countries allow refugees to settle and build lives. So some come to Australia.
In 2013, Australia took around 5,000 refugees who had arrived by boat (3). The country hasn't fallen apart. However, for those who have been given community detention their lives are still on hold. They can't work, they can't study and they live with the fear of being sent back to their country of origin. It really wouldn't hurt for Australia to grant permanent residency and to lift the intake. Refugees represent a fraction of total migration numbers (as at March 2013, net overseas migration was 238,000) (4).
Australia really needs to review it's approach to asylum seekers. The 'out of sight, out of mind' policy of imprisoning people on remote islands is inhumane and cowardly. It is time for the major parties to show some mettle and defend these persecuted people instead of caving to populist policy in order to get elected. Both Tony Abbott and Scott Morrison claim to be Christian, yet their policies and behaviour are decidedly not Christian. Martin Luther King said, 'He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it'.
Abbott, Morrison and the entire Australian government are not just passively accepting evil, they are perpetrating it. The ALP hasn't done much better. When in power they implemented inhumane policies, although it was mainly in response to the incessant bleating of Abbott with his mindless 'Stop the Boats' slogan and fear-mongering lies about the dangers posed by asylum seekers. Abbott showed that he'd do anything to get elected, including committing crimes against humanity.
Haile Selassie stated, 'Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible for evil to triumph'. Australians must stand up against the evil that is being perpetrated against the world's most vulnerable. What would we do if faced with their decisions? To stay and face persecution, hopelessness and death, or make an attempt for a better life?
Refugees who come to Australia are here to make a better life for themselves. In so doing, they will contribute to Australian society and the economy. Yet, it is the Australian government that is preventing them from working and becoming part of our society.
As Hannah Arendt said, refugees represent the vanguard of their peoples. Sadly, it is the Australian government that is the antithesis of this. Rather than being leaders with integrity and compassion, changing the political debate, the LNP government is following a racist, xenophobic trend to shore up their own careers. They are dehumanising asylum seekers, referring to them by their boat numbers rather than their names. They are demonising asylum seekers to generate fear and hatred of them.
The Australian government's behaviour is designed to cauterise the community's collective conscience while masquerading as the defenders of Australian liberty. What a disgrace. Lying, using and abusing the world's most vulnerable for political gain.
Refugees have more integrity than many of our politicians. Release asylum seekers from detention and let them settle in Australia. Have compassion, empathy and understanding instead of being manipulated by government-run fear campaigns. It will benefit asylum seekers and it will benefit the nation.
References:
1. United Nations, Convention on the Status of Refugees (1951),http://www.unhcr.org/3b66c2aa10.html
2. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Facts and Figures about Refugees, http://www.unhcr.org.uk/about-us/key-facts-and-figures.html, accessed 19 June 2014.
3. Refugee Council of Australia, Statistics on asylum seekers arriving in Australia, http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/r/stat-as.php, accessed 19 June 2014.
4. Australian Government, Department of Immigration and Border Protection, Fact Sheet 15 - population growth, https://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/15population.htm, accessed 19 June 2014.
- Hannah Arendt 1943
Many people who flee their countries represent the highest of their peoples. They may have been forced out because of their education, politics or religion. But regardless of the reason for their lives being in danger, these people have great determination to seek safety for themselves and to rebuild their lives regardless of their circumstances.
It is the small-minded in the supposedly 'advanced' nations who fear them. The same people who consider themselves better than those in developing nations because of their education or occupation. Yet, their fear is grounded in ignorance. People fear what they don't know. People rooted in materialism, selfishness and greed fear, what they may lose.
The most polarising argument regards asylum seekers who arrive by boat and then claim asylum. To prevent this, the Australian government operates off-shore detention camps at Christmas Island (Australia), Manus Island (PNG) and Nauru, while also refusing to resettle asylum seekers in Australia. The government has also literally towed boats back to Indonesian waters.
The Abbot-led government has boasted that these harsh policies have meant that not one boat has reached Australia in months. However, this doesn't explain how many boats have made it into Australian waters, only to be pushed or towed back to Indonesia. The government simply refuses to release this information, claiming that it would prejudice the military-run Operation Sovereign Borders that it uses to wage war on asylum seekers.
Prime Minister Tony Abbott and Immigration Minister, Scott Morrison, boast of stopping the boats and credit their inhumane policies with this. These policies keep asylum seekers locked up in indefinite detention with a promise to never settle them in Australia.
In essence, the government is using asylum seekers as human scare-crows, by hoping the indefinite detention and inhumane conditions that they are keeping asylum seekers in, will deter others from coming.
In an effort to torpedo the critics of this harsh policy, the government states that there have been no deaths at sea since it was implemented. While a lack of drownings is good, the policy does not genuinely care for the asylum seekers. What is the government turning these people back to? A life without hope. A life in which they are in constant danger.
The government coerces asylum seekers to return to their country of origin by assuring them that they will never be settled in Australia and if they want to leave detention, all they have to is sign documents requesting to leave. There are still thousands of people languishing in Australian detention centres. Many are being forcibly returned to their country of origin, which may include Sri Lanka or Iraq for instance. Countries which are not safe. The government even donated a Navy frigate to the Sri Lankan government to round up people trying to flee the cruelty and persecution.
The Australian government may well be breaching the UN Refugee Convention by indefinitely detaining asylum seekers in inhumane conditions. Article 31 requires members states to not impose penalties regardless of how a refugee arrived. Articles 32 and 33 also prohibit states from refouling or returning asylum seekers to countries in which they are in danger. (1) Yet Australia continues to breach the Convention.
The government continues its rhetoric that asylum seekers are illegal in an effort to delegitimise claims and manipulate the mind-set of voters into thinking that asylum seekers arriving by boat are not 'genuine'. Asylum statistics produced by the Department of Immigration for the March 2013 quarter showed that on average more than 90% of so-called 'irregular maritime arrivals' were 'genuine'. That's assuming that the ones whose requests were denied, are not genuine. Given that many are being returned to countries such as Sri Lanka and Iraq, it's likely that those denied visas should have been given them. The following is a summary of the 'genuineness' of the asylum seekers arriving by boat in the last few years:
The government has perpetuated the belief that many asylum seekers destroy their identity papers or are queue jumpers. Believe it or not, but some people are stateless. Kurds for example. This means that for many, no nation claims or recognises them and therefore refuses to give them papers such as birth certificates. Others don't have time to grab papers when suddenly fleeing their homes in fear of their lives.
Refugees arriving by boat are not 'queue' jumpers. Queue jumping would be if they were lined up at McDonald's and someone pushed through to the front. There is no orderly queue for refugees. In 2012, there were 45.2 million displaced persons, with refugees accounting for 15 million of these. The UNHCR received 893,700 applications for asylum and processed 113,000 claims (2). Based on this it would take around eight years for a claim to be processed. Considering that many refugees do not apply for asylum immediately, it could mean that from time of displacement to having an asylum claim heard could be much longer than that.
That's years out of a person's life. Years out of a family's life. For children, that could mean their entire childhood being held in a refugee camp with inadequate education and health services. The camps themselves are not particularly safe, with attacks being made on them by local Armies or militia.
It is no surprise that refugees flee for safer countries. Heading east from countries such as Sudan, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Burma the first country they come to that is a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention is Australia. They could stay in India, Malaysia, Indonesia and so on, if they want their lives put on hold indefinitely. None of these countries allow refugees to settle and build lives. So some come to Australia.
In 2013, Australia took around 5,000 refugees who had arrived by boat (3). The country hasn't fallen apart. However, for those who have been given community detention their lives are still on hold. They can't work, they can't study and they live with the fear of being sent back to their country of origin. It really wouldn't hurt for Australia to grant permanent residency and to lift the intake. Refugees represent a fraction of total migration numbers (as at March 2013, net overseas migration was 238,000) (4).
Australia really needs to review it's approach to asylum seekers. The 'out of sight, out of mind' policy of imprisoning people on remote islands is inhumane and cowardly. It is time for the major parties to show some mettle and defend these persecuted people instead of caving to populist policy in order to get elected. Both Tony Abbott and Scott Morrison claim to be Christian, yet their policies and behaviour are decidedly not Christian. Martin Luther King said, 'He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it'.
Abbott, Morrison and the entire Australian government are not just passively accepting evil, they are perpetrating it. The ALP hasn't done much better. When in power they implemented inhumane policies, although it was mainly in response to the incessant bleating of Abbott with his mindless 'Stop the Boats' slogan and fear-mongering lies about the dangers posed by asylum seekers. Abbott showed that he'd do anything to get elected, including committing crimes against humanity.
Haile Selassie stated, 'Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible for evil to triumph'. Australians must stand up against the evil that is being perpetrated against the world's most vulnerable. What would we do if faced with their decisions? To stay and face persecution, hopelessness and death, or make an attempt for a better life?
Refugees who come to Australia are here to make a better life for themselves. In so doing, they will contribute to Australian society and the economy. Yet, it is the Australian government that is preventing them from working and becoming part of our society.
As Hannah Arendt said, refugees represent the vanguard of their peoples. Sadly, it is the Australian government that is the antithesis of this. Rather than being leaders with integrity and compassion, changing the political debate, the LNP government is following a racist, xenophobic trend to shore up their own careers. They are dehumanising asylum seekers, referring to them by their boat numbers rather than their names. They are demonising asylum seekers to generate fear and hatred of them.
The Australian government's behaviour is designed to cauterise the community's collective conscience while masquerading as the defenders of Australian liberty. What a disgrace. Lying, using and abusing the world's most vulnerable for political gain.
Refugees have more integrity than many of our politicians. Release asylum seekers from detention and let them settle in Australia. Have compassion, empathy and understanding instead of being manipulated by government-run fear campaigns. It will benefit asylum seekers and it will benefit the nation.
References:
1. United Nations, Convention on the Status of Refugees (1951),http://www.unhcr.org/3b66c2aa10.html
2. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Facts and Figures about Refugees, http://www.unhcr.org.uk/about-us/key-facts-and-figures.html, accessed 19 June 2014.
3. Refugee Council of Australia, Statistics on asylum seekers arriving in Australia, http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/r/stat-as.php, accessed 19 June 2014.
4. Australian Government, Department of Immigration and Border Protection, Fact Sheet 15 - population growth, https://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/15population.htm, accessed 19 June 2014.
Saturday, May 24, 2014
Lest we forget
'I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is a racket' - Major General Smedley Darlington Butler.
Lest we forget
These three words are spoken in remembrance of soldiers who've fought and died for their nation. We hear the words on Anzac Day. We hear them on Remembrance Day.
We repeat them often, but we still send young men and women into combat, and with any combat, we have to accept that they could die.
Sadly, war is a fact of life. However, do we need to be involved in every conflict that we're invited to? Or even that we're not invited to?
Lest we forget.
Lest we forget what?
Lest we forget the horrors of war?
Lest we forget the lives lost?
Lest we forget the impact on civilians in the war-zone? The families, the children?
Lest we forget the crimes against humanity committed in war?
Lest we forget that wars were fought on Australian soil by original inhabitants? Sadly, these wars aren't even acknowledged at the Australian War Memorial or by the Australian government.
Lest we forget the freedoms that were fought for and that we enjoy today.
Lest we forget.
And what do we do with these memories?
We go to war for fabricated reasons that mask imperialist imperatives, e.g. Gallipoli, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. Wars that were driven by politicians for political means.
Gallipoli. The battle that many say defined Australia. The battle in which Australia 'came of age'. It was a brutal battle and cost thousands of lives from each of the armies involved. But lets not forget, it was a battle fought in which WE were the invader. It was Britain that invaded Turkey, not the other way around. The excuse was that it would shorten the war. However, the real reason was that the Ottoman Empire ruled the Middle East and the Middle East contained oil. Vast reserves of oil. Oil which the British Empire needed for their new fleet of oil-fueled ships.
Vietnam? Australia wasn't even invited. Prime Minister Menzies practically begged the USA to invite Australia. In the end, he committed us to the war without the approval of Parliament. In the end, 500 Australian lives were lost and thousands were injured. Australia had gone to war as part of the US effort, which was more about geo-political reasons than it was about protecting the local population. The American involvement was under the pretext of stopping the march of Communism, which formed the crux of the domino theory (i.e. if one country falls to Communism, so will many others). It was a war in which America, supported by her allies, committed war-crimes, including the napalming and massacres of civilians, rape and torture. In the end, we lost the war and the domino theory never eventuated. Vietnam was a civil war, not part of a global Communist plot to conquer the world. Lest we forget.
Afghanistan. Invaded on the pretext that the Taliban was harboring Al Qaeda terrorists. More than a decade later, thousands of innocent Afghans killed, hundreds of troops killed, including Australians, billions of dollars spent and yet terrorism still exists and the war continues. Like the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the 1980s, the 21st century invasion by the USA has had severe economic impacts. For the Soviets, their occupation contributed directly to their downfall. For the USA, the unfunded war resulted in the borrowing of over a trillion dollars from China. It was one of the main causes of the 2007 Global Financial Crisis and for the USA almost bankrupting itself. Lest we forget ... we obviously forgot what happened to the Soviet Union (who?) in the 1980s. Oh, yeah, the Soviet Union collapsed. Remember? Lest we forget.
Iraq, 2003. Prime Minister Howard committed Australian troops again to follow the USA into a war on false pretences. The USA wanted Iraq for their own hegemonic reasons, not because Saddam Hussein was threatening America, or threatening our freedoms. This war was coupled with the war in Afghanistan. Also blowing out the economic cost. It cost the lives of thousands of troops, including Australians. It cost the lives of tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians.
Lest we forget that many of the wars Australia has been involved in were fought not for our freedoms, nor were they to defend Australia from direct, or even indirect, threats. They were marketed like that, because what better way to enlist people than for governments to fabricate a fearful enemy and wave the flag.
Lest we forget that whenever politicians commit us to war, it comes at a cost. Soldiers die. Innocent civilians die.
The only war in the last century or so that was required to be fought, was World War 2. Obviously, Hitler had to be stopped. Obviously, Australia had to defend itself against Japanese aggression. Argument of course can be made that the Japanese were defending themselves against US aggression, hence the attack on Pearl Harbor, and that the only reason they attacked Australia was because of the presence of the USA. Nonetheless, Australia defending itself is understandable in that situation.
Most recently, Australian soldiers are being tasked with the unsavoury, and potentially illegal, turning back of asylum seekers boats. Former Prime Minister Howard engaged military personnel for the purposes of either turning back boats or detaining asylum seekers and transporting them to Australia's gulags on Christmas Island, Nauru, Woomera and so on. Current Prime Minister Abbott seems to think it is a good thing to unleash the military on a persecuted civilian population that is requesting assistance. He's even given it a military focus by appointing a military general and calling it a 'war'. It is a war against the most vulnerable people in the world. It is a war against those seeking Australia's protection. Instead of protecting them, we unleash the military. We imprison asylum seekers. We force back to inhumane camps, to lives in which they are persecuted and sometimes murdered. This is not what the military is for.
All wars have victims. We honour those who served Australia, who fought and died for this nation. We must not forget the dead, nor should we forget that the survivors are often victims too, carrying a life-time of trauma with them. There are incidents of depression, mental illness and suicide among returned service personnel, and the government usually fails to care for them. Governments are quick to send soldiers into battle and milk the political gain this brings. And they are quick to forget too. Quick to ignore the pain and suffering of returned soldiers. But of course, come Anzac Day and Remembrance Day, we see the Prime Minister and other politicians reciting 'Lest we forget'. Lest we forget what?
Lest we forget, that whenever we send troops into battle, they may be going to their deaths. The question has to be: 'are their deaths worth it?' Lest we forget the returned who often carry a life-time of pain, injury and anguish with them.
Lest we forget. Certainly honour the servicemen and women who were the pawns of political agendas, but don't honour war. Don't honour the lies and fog of war that justify killing in the name of nationalism, corporatism or emotive clarion calls, such as 'fight for freedom'.
Criticising war and the wars in which we've fought does not mean that we don't support the troops. In fact, those who claim to support the troops by sending them into every conflict are the ones who are supporting our troops the least. Why send soldiers to be killed or maimed in unnecessary wars? If armies are to be deployed, make sure it is for a valid reason, not a manufactured one. 'Support the troops' doesn't mean sending them into every conflict for any reason. It means ensuring that they are used as effectively as possible for the defence of their nation.
Supporting imperialism is not 'supporting our troops'.
Lest we forget - war is a racket that sacrifices the innocent for the greed of nations, ideologies and money.
Lest we forget.
Lest we forget
These three words are spoken in remembrance of soldiers who've fought and died for their nation. We hear the words on Anzac Day. We hear them on Remembrance Day.
We repeat them often, but we still send young men and women into combat, and with any combat, we have to accept that they could die.
Sadly, war is a fact of life. However, do we need to be involved in every conflict that we're invited to? Or even that we're not invited to?
Lest we forget.
Lest we forget what?
Lest we forget the horrors of war?
Lest we forget the lives lost?
Lest we forget the impact on civilians in the war-zone? The families, the children?
Lest we forget the crimes against humanity committed in war?
Lest we forget that wars were fought on Australian soil by original inhabitants? Sadly, these wars aren't even acknowledged at the Australian War Memorial or by the Australian government.
Lest we forget the freedoms that were fought for and that we enjoy today.
Lest we forget.
And what do we do with these memories?
We go to war for fabricated reasons that mask imperialist imperatives, e.g. Gallipoli, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. Wars that were driven by politicians for political means.
Gallipoli. The battle that many say defined Australia. The battle in which Australia 'came of age'. It was a brutal battle and cost thousands of lives from each of the armies involved. But lets not forget, it was a battle fought in which WE were the invader. It was Britain that invaded Turkey, not the other way around. The excuse was that it would shorten the war. However, the real reason was that the Ottoman Empire ruled the Middle East and the Middle East contained oil. Vast reserves of oil. Oil which the British Empire needed for their new fleet of oil-fueled ships.
Vietnam? Australia wasn't even invited. Prime Minister Menzies practically begged the USA to invite Australia. In the end, he committed us to the war without the approval of Parliament. In the end, 500 Australian lives were lost and thousands were injured. Australia had gone to war as part of the US effort, which was more about geo-political reasons than it was about protecting the local population. The American involvement was under the pretext of stopping the march of Communism, which formed the crux of the domino theory (i.e. if one country falls to Communism, so will many others). It was a war in which America, supported by her allies, committed war-crimes, including the napalming and massacres of civilians, rape and torture. In the end, we lost the war and the domino theory never eventuated. Vietnam was a civil war, not part of a global Communist plot to conquer the world. Lest we forget.
Afghanistan. Invaded on the pretext that the Taliban was harboring Al Qaeda terrorists. More than a decade later, thousands of innocent Afghans killed, hundreds of troops killed, including Australians, billions of dollars spent and yet terrorism still exists and the war continues. Like the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the 1980s, the 21st century invasion by the USA has had severe economic impacts. For the Soviets, their occupation contributed directly to their downfall. For the USA, the unfunded war resulted in the borrowing of over a trillion dollars from China. It was one of the main causes of the 2007 Global Financial Crisis and for the USA almost bankrupting itself. Lest we forget ... we obviously forgot what happened to the Soviet Union (who?) in the 1980s. Oh, yeah, the Soviet Union collapsed. Remember? Lest we forget.
Iraq, 2003. Prime Minister Howard committed Australian troops again to follow the USA into a war on false pretences. The USA wanted Iraq for their own hegemonic reasons, not because Saddam Hussein was threatening America, or threatening our freedoms. This war was coupled with the war in Afghanistan. Also blowing out the economic cost. It cost the lives of thousands of troops, including Australians. It cost the lives of tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians.
Lest we forget that many of the wars Australia has been involved in were fought not for our freedoms, nor were they to defend Australia from direct, or even indirect, threats. They were marketed like that, because what better way to enlist people than for governments to fabricate a fearful enemy and wave the flag.
Lest we forget that whenever politicians commit us to war, it comes at a cost. Soldiers die. Innocent civilians die.
The only war in the last century or so that was required to be fought, was World War 2. Obviously, Hitler had to be stopped. Obviously, Australia had to defend itself against Japanese aggression. Argument of course can be made that the Japanese were defending themselves against US aggression, hence the attack on Pearl Harbor, and that the only reason they attacked Australia was because of the presence of the USA. Nonetheless, Australia defending itself is understandable in that situation.
Most recently, Australian soldiers are being tasked with the unsavoury, and potentially illegal, turning back of asylum seekers boats. Former Prime Minister Howard engaged military personnel for the purposes of either turning back boats or detaining asylum seekers and transporting them to Australia's gulags on Christmas Island, Nauru, Woomera and so on. Current Prime Minister Abbott seems to think it is a good thing to unleash the military on a persecuted civilian population that is requesting assistance. He's even given it a military focus by appointing a military general and calling it a 'war'. It is a war against the most vulnerable people in the world. It is a war against those seeking Australia's protection. Instead of protecting them, we unleash the military. We imprison asylum seekers. We force back to inhumane camps, to lives in which they are persecuted and sometimes murdered. This is not what the military is for.
All wars have victims. We honour those who served Australia, who fought and died for this nation. We must not forget the dead, nor should we forget that the survivors are often victims too, carrying a life-time of trauma with them. There are incidents of depression, mental illness and suicide among returned service personnel, and the government usually fails to care for them. Governments are quick to send soldiers into battle and milk the political gain this brings. And they are quick to forget too. Quick to ignore the pain and suffering of returned soldiers. But of course, come Anzac Day and Remembrance Day, we see the Prime Minister and other politicians reciting 'Lest we forget'. Lest we forget what?
Lest we forget, that whenever we send troops into battle, they may be going to their deaths. The question has to be: 'are their deaths worth it?' Lest we forget the returned who often carry a life-time of pain, injury and anguish with them.
Lest we forget. Certainly honour the servicemen and women who were the pawns of political agendas, but don't honour war. Don't honour the lies and fog of war that justify killing in the name of nationalism, corporatism or emotive clarion calls, such as 'fight for freedom'.
Criticising war and the wars in which we've fought does not mean that we don't support the troops. In fact, those who claim to support the troops by sending them into every conflict are the ones who are supporting our troops the least. Why send soldiers to be killed or maimed in unnecessary wars? If armies are to be deployed, make sure it is for a valid reason, not a manufactured one. 'Support the troops' doesn't mean sending them into every conflict for any reason. It means ensuring that they are used as effectively as possible for the defence of their nation.
Supporting imperialism is not 'supporting our troops'.
Lest we forget - war is a racket that sacrifices the innocent for the greed of nations, ideologies and money.
Lest we forget.
Saturday, May 17, 2014
Battle of the Budget 2014 - Conscripting the poor to fight on the fiscal frontline
Battle of the Budget 2014 - Conscripting the poor to fight on the fiscal frontline
Raise the flag, sound the warning sirens and conscript the poor to the fiscal front-line of the budgetary battle.
Joe Hockey, Treasurer of the Lucky Country, delivered his first budget on Tuesday, 13 May 2014. He declared a budget emergency and unleashed a volley of budgetary attacks tantamount to declaring war on those who could least afford them.
So what was this budget emergency from which he had to ride in like a knight in shining armour to rescue the nation by sacrificing the poor to the altar of capitalism?
Well, the emergency was that Australia had a AAA credit rating with net debt at 12% of GDP. What a shocking financial situation! An economy that had been rated the highest that it could be by the three major credit rating agencies in the world.
Of course, Hockey banged on about how bad our debt was: it was 12% of GDP (1). That's equivalent to having a $100,000 income and a $12,000 debt. No-one would panic about spending in that circumstance, nor would they sell the house and the kids in order to pay for it.
The gullible who swallow every deceitful word of the Abbott-led LNP, sincerely believe that Labor stuffed up the country. Let's not forget that it was Labor's Keynesian economics that ensured Australia successfully navigated the Global Financial Crisis with its AAA credit rating intact and it's debt relatively low. It was one of the few OECD countries to achieve this. By comparison, Germany ,who is seen as an economic power-house in Europe, has a net debt that's 56% of GDP. The United States is 89% and Japan is 143% (1).
To achieve this successful and strong economy during a major global economic downturn was no small feat considering that revenue took a hit because of the impacts of a global recession (some would say depression) on business and consumer confidence. In other words, businesses and people spent and invested less, meaning that the government collected less through its revenue measures, therefore driving the deficit up. The government had to invest money in order to keep the economy stimulated. Had it not, it would have gone the way of other OECD nations who decided to adopt austerity measures, rather than Rudd's stimulus measures.
The Rudd and Gillard governments should have been given medals and awards for ensuring the economy stayed strong while subject to demanding internal and external pressures, rather than being castigated by the vile lies and scare-mongering that the Abbott-led opposition was renowned for.
But for the LNP, it was time to raise the flag, sound the warning sirens and conscript the poor to the fiscal front-line of the budgetary battle. It's always the poor, the lower-paid, the young and the workers who pay the price and fight the wars that politicians manufacture.
This 'budget emergency' was actually made worse by the Abbott government in order to concoct a perceived crisis. In the seven months following the election, Abbott increased the debt limit from $300 billion to $500 billion (2). Only the year before, he castigated Labor for daring to raise the debt ceiling from $250 billion to $300 billion, accusing Labor of being addicted to spending. In December 2013, the deficit was around $47 billion. Within seven months of the election, the LNP government borrowed in excess of $70 billion (3). The impact on the deficit was to double it. The LNP doubled Labor's deficit in seven months. (4)
The election in 2013 was underpinned by a campaign centred on honesty and trust. Abbott made much mileage from a so-called lie by Julia Gillard. She had claimed that there would be no carbon tax under her if she won the election in 2010. Prior to the election she did say that she was going to price carbon, but let's not get hung up on semantics. The gullible reacted with shock and horror and feigned moral indignation that former Prime Minister Gillard had 'lied'. Most of those who carried on about it hadn't voted for her anyway.
During the 2013 election, Abbott ran a campaign declaring 'no surprises', 'no lies'. He also made promises such as:
You probably guessed where I'm going with this. The budget made cuts to all of the above. In fact:
The Abbott-led government has delivered a budget that breaks promises and slashes spending in essential areas. It is an austerity budget, it is a budget that will cause the economy to contract, not to grow.
Leading up to the budget, Abbott and Hockey manipulated the gullible by declaring the economy a basket-case and that tough decisions must be made. They both said that we need to 'share' the pain.
Sharing. Interesting word. By definition it means 'to divide, apportion, or receive equally'. The budget slashed $12 billion from welfare, $3 billion from high-income earners & $1 billion from big business.
This is not 'sharing', at least not in any realistic sense of the word. There is nothing equitable or fair about taking much from those who have little while taking little from those who have much. Those from a low socio-economic status are carrying the brunt of the LNP's fiscal irresponsibility. To increase revenue fairly, it would have been better to adjust marginal and corporate taxes.
While a number of the cuts are disturbing, perhaps one of the worst is the cut to Newstart. The eligibility age is being increased to 25 from 22. Those who are between 22 and 25 will only receive the Youth Allowance which is $96 per fortnight less than Newstart. However, if you're over 25 it's no bed of roses. In fact, it's even worse. You'll have to wait six months to qualify for Newstart and then it will only be paid for six months of the year until you're 30. Additionally, you'll have to complete 25 hours of 'work for the dole'.
Imagine: no income for six months of the year!
The idea is that people will either 'earn or learn' (another of the inane three-word slogans of the puerile LNP aimed at dumbing down politics for an electorate they treat as fools). Considering that the budget slashes jobs while rewarding businesses to hire older workers, means there is no job creation for young people. In addition, with the budget creating unaffordable higher education and the prospects of crippling university loans through the deregulation of university fees, there will be no incentive or capacity for many in this age bracket to 'learn'. So opportunities for young people to 'earn or learn' have been greatly diminished while their safety net is unavailable for six months of the year or dramatically reduced if they're under 25!
And just to help the belt-tightening situation for the unemployed and lower-paid out even further, the National Rental Affordability Scheme has been axed. Nothing like implementing policy that will increase homelessness and then axing programs that provide affordable housing.
What could possibly go wrong?
There will be increased poverty, homelessness and crime. There will likely be more suicides which is already the leading cause of death in young people (5).
The welfare safety net was introduced to assist people in being able to live while focussing on getting a job or an education. Now they will have nothing on which to survive for six months of the year and their ability to look for work or undertake study is further jeopardised because when they do receive Newstart, they'll be committed to 25 hours per week working for the dole.
Not the LNP's finest moment.
In terms of fixing the so-called 'financial mess' that Abbott and Hockey bang on about ad nauseum, the budget is going to result in less spending, which will affect business revenue and ultimately business investment and confidence. The flow-on effect will be lower government revenue and a resultant increase in the deficit. It is likely to also result in increased government spending to cover the costs associated with increased unemployment, homelessness, poverty, crime and the social issues that stem from those.
There is much more to be said and done in relation to this budget. There are protests planned across the country which people should participate in if they are angry about the unfairness and deceit that underpins this budget. Labor, the Greens and Palmer are talking of blocking elements of it in the Senate, potentially forcing a double dissolution which will enable people to vote while their anger is still fresh.
In closing, here are some of the highlights (6) of this short-sighted budget, starting with the increases in funding, followed by the 'cuts': the decreases in funding or restructuring of charges that will yield the government money at the expense of vulnerable.
References:
1. 'Total Net Debt (% of GDP) Data for All Countries' - 2013, Economy Watch, http://www.economywatch.com/economic-statistics/economic-indicators/General_Government_Net_Debt_Percentage_GDP/, accessed 17 May 2014.
2. 'Treasurer Joe Hockey announces debt limit to increase to $500 billion', Jonathon Swan, Sydney Morning Herald, 22 October 2013, http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html, accessed 17 May 2014.
3. 'Borrowing by the Abbott government just hit $70.95 billion', Stephen Koukoulas, 9 May 2014, http://thekouk.com/blog/borrowing-by-the-abbott-government-just-hit-70-95-billion.html#.U3at7PmSz3N, accessed 17 May 2014.
4. 'Has the Government doubled the budget deficit?', ABC Fact Check, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-06/has-the-government-doubled-the-budget-deficit/5423392, accessed 17 May 2014.
5. 'Suicide leading cause of death for young Australians', Rachel Brown interview with Megan Mitchel (National Children's Commissioner), ABC 'The World Today', 31 March 2014, http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2014/s3974978.htm, accessed 17 May 2014. Also refer to 'Statistics on Suicide in Australia', Lifeline which identifies suicide as the leading cause of death for Australians aged between 15 and 44, https://www.lifeline.org.au/About-Lifeline/Media-Centre/Suicide-Statistics-in-Australia/Suicide-Statistics, accessed 17 May 2014.
6. 'Budget 2014-15', Australian Government, http://www.budget.gov.au/2014-15/index.htm, accessed 16 May 2014.
Raise the flag, sound the warning sirens and conscript the poor to the fiscal front-line of the budgetary battle.
Joe Hockey, Treasurer of the Lucky Country, delivered his first budget on Tuesday, 13 May 2014. He declared a budget emergency and unleashed a volley of budgetary attacks tantamount to declaring war on those who could least afford them.
So what was this budget emergency from which he had to ride in like a knight in shining armour to rescue the nation by sacrificing the poor to the altar of capitalism?
Well, the emergency was that Australia had a AAA credit rating with net debt at 12% of GDP. What a shocking financial situation! An economy that had been rated the highest that it could be by the three major credit rating agencies in the world.
Of course, Hockey banged on about how bad our debt was: it was 12% of GDP (1). That's equivalent to having a $100,000 income and a $12,000 debt. No-one would panic about spending in that circumstance, nor would they sell the house and the kids in order to pay for it.
The gullible who swallow every deceitful word of the Abbott-led LNP, sincerely believe that Labor stuffed up the country. Let's not forget that it was Labor's Keynesian economics that ensured Australia successfully navigated the Global Financial Crisis with its AAA credit rating intact and it's debt relatively low. It was one of the few OECD countries to achieve this. By comparison, Germany ,who is seen as an economic power-house in Europe, has a net debt that's 56% of GDP. The United States is 89% and Japan is 143% (1).
To achieve this successful and strong economy during a major global economic downturn was no small feat considering that revenue took a hit because of the impacts of a global recession (some would say depression) on business and consumer confidence. In other words, businesses and people spent and invested less, meaning that the government collected less through its revenue measures, therefore driving the deficit up. The government had to invest money in order to keep the economy stimulated. Had it not, it would have gone the way of other OECD nations who decided to adopt austerity measures, rather than Rudd's stimulus measures.
The Rudd and Gillard governments should have been given medals and awards for ensuring the economy stayed strong while subject to demanding internal and external pressures, rather than being castigated by the vile lies and scare-mongering that the Abbott-led opposition was renowned for.
But for the LNP, it was time to raise the flag, sound the warning sirens and conscript the poor to the fiscal front-line of the budgetary battle. It's always the poor, the lower-paid, the young and the workers who pay the price and fight the wars that politicians manufacture.
This 'budget emergency' was actually made worse by the Abbott government in order to concoct a perceived crisis. In the seven months following the election, Abbott increased the debt limit from $300 billion to $500 billion (2). Only the year before, he castigated Labor for daring to raise the debt ceiling from $250 billion to $300 billion, accusing Labor of being addicted to spending. In December 2013, the deficit was around $47 billion. Within seven months of the election, the LNP government borrowed in excess of $70 billion (3). The impact on the deficit was to double it. The LNP doubled Labor's deficit in seven months. (4)
The election in 2013 was underpinned by a campaign centred on honesty and trust. Abbott made much mileage from a so-called lie by Julia Gillard. She had claimed that there would be no carbon tax under her if she won the election in 2010. Prior to the election she did say that she was going to price carbon, but let's not get hung up on semantics. The gullible reacted with shock and horror and feigned moral indignation that former Prime Minister Gillard had 'lied'. Most of those who carried on about it hadn't voted for her anyway.
During the 2013 election, Abbott ran a campaign declaring 'no surprises', 'no lies'. He also made promises such as:
- no cuts to the ABC
- no cuts to SBS
- no changes to the pension
- no cuts to health
- no cuts to education
- ABC cut by 1% and loss of $196 million over nine years
- SBS cut by 1%
- Pension supplements and concessions slashed by more than $1.3 billion
- Health cut by $50 billion
- Education cut by $30 billion
Lies? Well, you be the judge. However, it reeks of Howard's first-term lies when he claimed 'no new taxes, no tax increases and no indirect taxes'. But I digress. Of course, the gullible have made excuses for Abbott's lies even though they refused to extend the same latitude to former Prime Minister Gillard.
The Abbott-led government has delivered a budget that breaks promises and slashes spending in essential areas. It is an austerity budget, it is a budget that will cause the economy to contract, not to grow.
Leading up to the budget, Abbott and Hockey manipulated the gullible by declaring the economy a basket-case and that tough decisions must be made. They both said that we need to 'share' the pain.
Sharing. Interesting word. By definition it means 'to divide, apportion, or receive equally'. The budget slashed $12 billion from welfare, $3 billion from high-income earners & $1 billion from big business.
This is not 'sharing', at least not in any realistic sense of the word. There is nothing equitable or fair about taking much from those who have little while taking little from those who have much. Those from a low socio-economic status are carrying the brunt of the LNP's fiscal irresponsibility. To increase revenue fairly, it would have been better to adjust marginal and corporate taxes.
While a number of the cuts are disturbing, perhaps one of the worst is the cut to Newstart. The eligibility age is being increased to 25 from 22. Those who are between 22 and 25 will only receive the Youth Allowance which is $96 per fortnight less than Newstart. However, if you're over 25 it's no bed of roses. In fact, it's even worse. You'll have to wait six months to qualify for Newstart and then it will only be paid for six months of the year until you're 30. Additionally, you'll have to complete 25 hours of 'work for the dole'.
Imagine: no income for six months of the year!
The idea is that people will either 'earn or learn' (another of the inane three-word slogans of the puerile LNP aimed at dumbing down politics for an electorate they treat as fools). Considering that the budget slashes jobs while rewarding businesses to hire older workers, means there is no job creation for young people. In addition, with the budget creating unaffordable higher education and the prospects of crippling university loans through the deregulation of university fees, there will be no incentive or capacity for many in this age bracket to 'learn'. So opportunities for young people to 'earn or learn' have been greatly diminished while their safety net is unavailable for six months of the year or dramatically reduced if they're under 25!
And just to help the belt-tightening situation for the unemployed and lower-paid out even further, the National Rental Affordability Scheme has been axed. Nothing like implementing policy that will increase homelessness and then axing programs that provide affordable housing.
What could possibly go wrong?
There will be increased poverty, homelessness and crime. There will likely be more suicides which is already the leading cause of death in young people (5).
The welfare safety net was introduced to assist people in being able to live while focussing on getting a job or an education. Now they will have nothing on which to survive for six months of the year and their ability to look for work or undertake study is further jeopardised because when they do receive Newstart, they'll be committed to 25 hours per week working for the dole.
Not the LNP's finest moment.
In terms of fixing the so-called 'financial mess' that Abbott and Hockey bang on about ad nauseum, the budget is going to result in less spending, which will affect business revenue and ultimately business investment and confidence. The flow-on effect will be lower government revenue and a resultant increase in the deficit. It is likely to also result in increased government spending to cover the costs associated with increased unemployment, homelessness, poverty, crime and the social issues that stem from those.
There is much more to be said and done in relation to this budget. There are protests planned across the country which people should participate in if they are angry about the unfairness and deceit that underpins this budget. Labor, the Greens and Palmer are talking of blocking elements of it in the Senate, potentially forcing a double dissolution which will enable people to vote while their anger is still fresh.
In closing, here are some of the highlights (6) of this short-sighted budget, starting with the increases in funding, followed by the 'cuts': the decreases in funding or restructuring of charges that will yield the government money at the expense of vulnerable.
References:
1. 'Total Net Debt (% of GDP) Data for All Countries' - 2013, Economy Watch, http://www.economywatch.com/economic-statistics/economic-indicators/General_Government_Net_Debt_Percentage_GDP/, accessed 17 May 2014.
2. 'Treasurer Joe Hockey announces debt limit to increase to $500 billion', Jonathon Swan, Sydney Morning Herald, 22 October 2013, http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html, accessed 17 May 2014.
3. 'Borrowing by the Abbott government just hit $70.95 billion', Stephen Koukoulas, 9 May 2014, http://thekouk.com/blog/borrowing-by-the-abbott-government-just-hit-70-95-billion.html#.U3at7PmSz3N, accessed 17 May 2014.
4. 'Has the Government doubled the budget deficit?', ABC Fact Check, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-06/has-the-government-doubled-the-budget-deficit/5423392, accessed 17 May 2014.
5. 'Suicide leading cause of death for young Australians', Rachel Brown interview with Megan Mitchel (National Children's Commissioner), ABC 'The World Today', 31 March 2014, http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2014/s3974978.htm, accessed 17 May 2014. Also refer to 'Statistics on Suicide in Australia', Lifeline which identifies suicide as the leading cause of death for Australians aged between 15 and 44, https://www.lifeline.org.au/About-Lifeline/Media-Centre/Suicide-Statistics-in-Australia/Suicide-Statistics, accessed 17 May 2014.
6. 'Budget 2014-15', Australian Government, http://www.budget.gov.au/2014-15/index.htm, accessed 16 May 2014.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)