Sacrificing innocent lives for political power

The Australian government has shown that it is willing to risk and threaten the lives of innocent people to 'protect' an intolerant Australia. It is willing to return innocent people to imprisonment, torture and possible murder to protect its political position. The government has shown that it is willing to break international laws and withdraw Australia from UN conventions in the name of its ideology.

The Abbott-led government is more than happy to boast that they've 'stopped the boats', yet the harsh reality is that this is incorrect. A recent UN report stated that more people than ever are taking dangerous boat journeys to escape persecution and war ⁽¹⁾.

Scott Morrison, Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, sugar-coats these brutal policies to make them palatable and appealing to the electorate. He claims to have 'taken the sugar off the table', as if asylum seekers are nothing more than ants hunting a confectionery fix. What seems to escape the Minister is that asylum seekers are escaping persecution and war. If they were 'economic' migrants then would they really risk their futures and their lives by paying off people smugglers in order to take an unsafe ocean voyage in an unseaworthy vessel.

The Department of Immigration and Border Protection, Morrison's own department, states that of the claims processed in 2012-13, 88% were found to be genuine ⁽²⁾.  Considering that the ones who are not successful in their applications are returned to places such as Sri Lanka, Afghanistan and Iraq, there is evidence to suggest that even those whose applications are rejected, are most likely genuine asylum seekers with a genuine fear of persecution in their home country. Also consider that this 88% is down from 100% in 2008-09 and 98.8% in 2009-10. Situations in many of the source countries have not improved to justify this drop given the UN report mentioned earlier that indicates a significant rise in global numbers of people seeking asylum. Instead, the figures are indicative of the harsh nature of the government's policies.

With most Australians in support of the government's callous policies and willing to believe its lies, the question has to be asked, where has the compassion gone?

Discussions with those who favour these policies will usually go along the lines of them saying that boat arrivals are taking the place of genuine asylum seekers or that they are jumping the queue. Yet asylum seekers are genuine as can be seen by the Department of Immigration's statistics. As for the jumping the queue? This is a 'queue' that was created by the government. There was a time when Australia had quotas for on-shore and off-shore applicants. The on-shore ones were those who arrived by boat. This was in keeping with the UN Refugee Convention that stated that people should not be prosecuted for arriving in a country by a means that would normally be illegal. It was Prime Minister John Howard who removed the on-shore quotas and thereby artificially creating a queue.

Morrison claims he is saving lives but this is a complete fabrication. He is allowing people to languish for years in his gulags before returning them to situations where they face almost certain persecution, torture, abuse or death.

The only protection that Morrison is interested in is protecting Australia from a threat that his government manufactured for political expediency. Asylum seekers are not a threat to Australia. Many have gone on to study, start businesses and become productive citizens of this nation. Some of the more well known ones include comedian Anh Do and South Australia's governor Hieu Van Le. Both of whom fled war-ravaged Vietnam and arrived in Australia by boat.

Instead of brutalising and demonising asylum seekers we should be welcoming them and facilitating their settlement into Australia. Embracing brutality as a means of defence is only hardening Australia, making it more intolerant, fearful and violent. There has been an increase in hate crimes against Muslims ⁽³⁾. It isn't asylum seekers that are creating the rise in hate crimes in Australia. These crimes are a direct result of Australians embracing brutal, intolerant policies that persecute and risk the lives of innocent people.

Some claim that asylum seekers don't respect Australian values. What values would those be? The values in which innocent people are sacrificed for the sake of ignorance, fear, bigotry and xenophobia?

Free the refugees and we'll see a better, more compassionate and welcoming Australia.

References:

1. 'Scott Morrison may gloat but asylum seekers' boats haven't really stopped', Sunili Govinnage, The Guardian, 11 December 2014. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/11/scott-morrison-may-gloat-but-asylum-seekers-take-more-boats-than-ever. Accessed 14 December 2014.

2. 'Asylum Trends - Australia', 2012-13 Publication. Department of Immigration and Border Protection. https://www.immi.gov.au/media/publications/statistics/immigration-update/asylum-trends-aus-2012-13.pdf. Accessed 14 December 2014.

3. 'Rise in attacks against Aussie Muslims', WA Today, http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/rise-in-attacks-against-aussie-muslims-20140924-10lhl9.html. Accessed 14 December 2014.

Freedom from fear and bigotry

'Freedom and justice cannot be parceled out in pieces to suit political convenience. I don't believe you can stand for freedom for one group of people and deny it to others'. - Coretta Scott King


The rise in Islamophobia has seen a number of hate crimes perpetrated against innocent Muslims. The bigots who protest against Islam often claim they are defending Australian values and that our ancestors didn't fight in the various wars for the country to be overrun by Muslims.

What many of the bigots don't realise is that our ancestors fought alongside other Australians' ancestors, who were Muslim or indigenous or Jewish or atheist, in order beat fascism. You know, the fascism that attacks people of differing religions, races or opinions and either imprisons them or kills them ... or both. The type of fascism that spreads lies and innuendo blaming other groups for economic or social woes. The type of fascism that demonises others.

Abuse and discrimination of others isn't new in Australia. Indigenous Australians have suffered it for generations. European migrants, such as the Italians, Greeks and Spanish, experienced it. Asian immigrants suffered it. Now, the latest targets are asylum seekers and Muslims.

The current government is doing plenty of blaming of others and plenty of demonisation of minority groups to further their popularity. They're manufacturing threats that accuse asylum seekers arriving by boat and Muslims in general (whether born here or immigrants) of increasing the risk of terrorism and crime, stealing jobs, wanting to 'destroy our way of life' or any other lie of the moment.

With such a horrid future awaiting Australians if these 'threats' are allowed to flourish, the government rides in like a knight in shining armour to rescue the bigots in distress by passing laws that strip everyone's freedom. The government is fueling fear and hatred to create policies aimed at one thing: ensuring votes from the fear-stricken.

The ignorant bigots blindly accept these harsher laws, these moves to a fascist state in order to 'protect our way of life', believing the lies that claim freedom abounds only if there are enough laws to protect it. They don't see the blatantly obvious drive for power behind these laws.

This move to fascism is exactly what our ancestors fought against.

John Adams, one of America's founding fathers and its second president, stated 'Liberty cannot be preserved without general knowledge among the people'.

In order to ensure that Australians don't have this general knowledge, that they don't question our leaders' lies, the government has attacked the media by slashing the budgets of ABC and SBS, slashing education and university funding and slashing science budgets. However, in an act straight out of the dark ages, funding of priests has increased.

The Abbott government is replacing scientists and teachers with priests.

Many people are happy to blindly accept the lies of the government and its efforts to dumb down society, without questioning its actions or challenging its claims in order to 'protect our freedom'. They are confusing freedom with security.

General Eisenhower explained the difference between the two:

'If you want security, go to prison. There you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking ... is freedom'.

It is an insult to invoke the memory of dead diggers in conflicts past to justify racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia or any other hate crime. Even though most of Australia's previous wars were fought for imperialist objectives, the soldiers who fought and died believed they were doing so in the name of freedom. Not freedom to hate, but freedom to live in peace.

The government has implemented harsh changes to 'anti-terrorism' legislation that predominantly target Muslims, and the Migration and Maritime Powers legislation which discards the human rights of asylum seekers and promotes torture and imprisonment without charge of innocent people, including children. This might give a sense of security to bigots, but it destroys freedom. Increased laws do not mean increased justice.

Coretta Scott King, wife of Martin Luther King Jr, succinctly summed up the link between freedom and justice with a message that should be heeded by all politicians: 'Freedom and justice cannot be parceled out in pieces to suit political convenience. I don't believe you can stand for freedom for one group of people and deny it to others'.

The biggest threat to our freedom is not Islam or asylum seekers, but fear. The second Secretary-General of the United Nations, Dag Hammarskjöld recognised this years ago: 'Freedom from fear could be said to sum up the whole philosophy of human rights'.

Fear is a two-edged sword. There are those, such as asylum seekers, who genuinely fear persecution. But then there are those who fear those who are being persecuted. This is the category within which many of Australia's bigots reside. It is their fear that is manipulated by the government to justify laws persecuting the persecuted.

While bigotry attracts voters to fascist policies it also acts as a distraction. While the people are running around fear-stricken and attacking others, they aren't focussing on what the government is doing. This makes it much easier for the government to not just implement fascist policy, but also to unleash neoliberalist policies on society and the economy which make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

The mettle of a government is shown by its treatment of the most vulnerable. This government, in fostering bigotry and fear for political convenience, has shown itself to be amoral and not worthy of claiming to 'defend Australian values'.

Australia - aiding and abetting global brutality

Since being elected to government in 2013, Australia's Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, Scott Morrison, has spent his time increasingly attacking, demonising and persecuting asylum seekers.

The Tony Abbott led government has failed to keep much of their pre-election promises, but the 'stop the boats' promise is one that they have ostensibly kept. They kept the promise by breaking a number of international laws and skirting with piracy. Australian forces hijacked boats and towed them into international waters or forced the passengers into life rafts and sent them to Indonesia.

Meanwhile, asylum seekers who had already arrived into Australia were left to languish in prison camps on Nauru, Manus Island and Christmas Island in breach of numerous international conventions on refugees, children and torture. The United Nations has condemned Australia's treatment of asylum seekers and stated that it breaches these conventions.

The LNP justify this by saying they have saved thousands of lives from drowning at sea. What a load of garbage!

Prime Minister Tony Abbott gave two naval vessels to the Sri Lankan government to stop people, predominantly Tamils, from escaping that government's brutal persecution of them. So while this may prevent them dying at sea, they can now be tortured and murdered by the Sri Lankan regime. This makes Australia complicit in human rights abuses.

Similar, Scott Morrison began returning asylum seekers to their countries of origin if there was a less than 50% change of torture or murder. 50%! Would Morrison send his children to the shops if there was a 49% chance they would be tortured, raped, murdered? Of course not. Morrison is aiding and abetting brutal regimes around the world with his disgraceful and deplorable policies.

If these policies are about protecting lives, then how can the government justify  imprisoning innocent people (including babies and toddlers) without charge in camps that deny basic human rights.

To top all of this off, Morrison claims to be a Christian and even worse, many Christians support his brutal policies. Thank God, there are other Christians who see Morrison and the government's despicable policies for what they are: pure evil.  The Uniting Church of Australia has condemned them. Pope Francis has condemned them. Anglican churches have condemned them. There aren't just Christian groups protesting and criticising Morrison's practices, but others including Amnesty International, Red Cross, the Greens, left wing parties and refugee rights organisations.

Image courtesy of Gosford Anglican Church

On 4 December 2014, Morrison managed to get the Migration and Maritime Powers Legislation Amendment (Resolving the Asylum Legacy Case Load) Bill 2014 through parliament by using more than 700 children in detention as a bargaining chip. Morrison said he would release all children in detention if the Bill was passed. Of course, he could have released the children anyway, so he was essentially saying he would keep children in detention if the parliament didn't let him have his inhumane way. Senator Sarah Hansen-Young reported to parliament on 4 December 2014, that Morrison had arranged for children in detention on Christmas Island to call Senator Ricky Muir begging they be released. Muir's vote was the last one needed by Morrison for the Bill to pass. Morrison has taken politics to its lowest moral point in decades. As Minister for Immigration, Morrison is the legal guardian of the children. Instead of acting like their guardian, he is acting like their kidnapper demanding a ransom for their release. His behaviour is puerile, perverse and reprehensible.

The Bill allows Morrison to send asylum seekers to anywhere in the world, including countries that have poor human rights records or aren't equipped to adequately care for them, such as Cambodia and Papua New Guinea.

The Bill re-introduces Temporary Protection Visas for the 30,000 asylum seekers awaiting a decision, with the caveat that asylum seekers on TPVs can be deported at any time and will never be granted permanent protection in Australia. The bill reduces Australia's obligations under the UN Refugee Convention. It gives Morrison unfettered power with the ability to 'fast-track' the return of asylum seekers to their persecutors.

One of the concessions Morrison made to the cross-benchers to get the Bill through, was to increase the refugee intake quota. Obviously this is a good thing, but it does not justify the disgraceful content of the rest of the Bill.

The Bill bangs on about Morrison's power over people who use false identity papers or have destroyed their papers. What he seems to have not grasped is that many asylum seekers don't have papers to start with. It's not like birth certificates are issued in the height of war. Even countries that aren't at war, don't always issue birth certificates. There are numerous people groups who are stateless, such as the Kurds, Rohingya, Hazaras. Their countries of origin don't recognise them and rarely, if ever, issue birth certificates or other identity papers.

These laws are not about 'saving lives', they are about appealing to the fear, racism and xenophobia that the LNP has deceitfully spread through the community. When the government isn't accusing asylum seekers of being terrorists, they're accusing them of being economic refugees who've come to Australia to 'take our jobs'. Again, what garbage. Sadly the gullible believe this rubbish because they want to believe it. It's easier to justify racism when there's substance to the claims. The problem is, there is no substance to these claims.

Asylum seekers come here to live in safety and security, not to unleash a wave of terror against us. They aren't here to steal our jobs. Yet most Australians still support these policies because they believe the lies the LNP has used to demonise asylum seekers. According to Morrison's own department, more than 90% of people arriving by boat are genuine. Yet the way Morrison and Abbott carry on they have accused them all of being 'economic' refugees who have come here to destroy our way of life.

The biggest threat to the Australian job market is unfettered capitalism in which businesses sack Australian workers in order to engage cheaper workers in foreign markets. Most asylum seekers, even those with qualifications, end up in low-paid, unskilled work that many Australians are not willing to do. They rarely end up in high-paying jobs. It should be kept in mind that asylum seekers may not necessarily be poor. Often times, the rich are the first targeted by brutal regimes. So saying that asylum seekers are 'cashed up' is downplaying their fear of persecution and genuine claim to refuge.

Besides that, the larger the population, the greater the demand for goods and services, which actually results in job creation, not job reduction. Regardless of the level of the job they have, the more people working means more money in the economy, supporting retail and other industries, creating more demand and therefore more jobs.

Australia's aging population means that there will soon be jobs in abundance as baby boomers reach retirement. The boom in babies born post-World War II and the lower fertility rates since the contraceptive pill was introduced means that the percentage of the population working is reducing. Australia needs to increase its fertility rate or encourage migrants to the country in order to ensure the percentage of the population working, and therefore paying tax and spending so the economy chugs along. Asylum seekers, who represent around 10% of the immigration program, are not 'stealing jobs'. They are essential to Australia's economic health and longevity.

The amendments to the Migration and Maritime Powers Legislation reveal the evil of Morrison's heart and provides reason for him to front the International Criminal Court for blatant human rights abuses. At the very least, a Royal Commission should be held into the government's breaches of international conventions and its illegal treatment of asylum seekers.

What could Morrison do? Well, he could release children into the community. For that matter, he could release asylum seekers into community detention, allowing them work and study rights, while their cases are heard. With more than 90% found to be genuine there is little risk that they won't get to stay and therefore become productive Australian citizens. He could ensure that no-one is returned to a situation in which they may be tortured or killed.

The LNP as a whole, could stop blaming Labor every time they get in front of a camera and instead take responsibility for their own actions. It isn't Labor's fault that boats came. There are push factors that drive people from their homelands. While the boats may have stopped coming to Australia, refugee numbers across the globe continue to swell. Given Australia's sponsorship of the Sri Lankan government, the LNP has to take some responsibility in the increase in refugee numbers.

The government could also stop spreading lies and fear about asylum seekers and tell the truth: that these are people who are genuinely fearing for the lives and who have a genuine claim to be settled in Australia under the UN Refugee Convention.

The government could stop aiding and abetting the brutality in other countries by not returning people to horrific situations.

With Australia being the only signatory to the UN Refugee Convention of the countries to the east of Africa, we have a magnificent opportunity to be a shining light of humanity. To show other countries how people are supposed to be treated. We should be encouraging more nations in our region to become signatories to the UN Refugee Convention instead of trying to outdo them on abusive treatment of others.

Australia should and could welcome refugees and be the safe haven that we claim to be.

The Light of love and a bushel of bigotry

'Of all religions, the Christian should of course inspire the most tolerance, but until now Christians have been the most intolerant of all men'.

So stated Voltaire, the enlightened French philosopher, who defended religious freedom and civil liberties. Voltaire lived in the 18th century, yet this quote is pertinent today.

For decades, the Christian church has seen a large shift to the right-wing with a corresponding rise in intolerance, religious hate speech and violence. Many fundamentalist pastors preach against homosexuality, abortion, socialism, multiculturalism while embracing doctrine that borders on idolatry, such as prosperity doctrine and Zionism.

Religious hate-speech has most recently been manifesting itself through Islamophobia with attacks on Mosques and Muslims. Women have been attacked for wearing burqas, hijabs or head coverings. There is even an attack on food with campaigns against halal certification because some believe money raised from halal certification funds terrorism. Australian political journalist, Malcolm Farr appeared on the ABC's Insiders program on 24 November 2014 and eloquently stated: 'to those pig-ignorant droogs who shut down a South Australian business because it had halal certified yoghurt selling to Emirates. What stupid, stupid people! If they really think that this money goes to terrorists, they should stop buying petrol'.

Attacking food, attacking Halal does nothing to further the Gospel. Even Romans 14:20 states, 'Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food'.

Christians who attack Islam would do well to consider Matthew 7:3-5, 'And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye. Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye’; and look, a plank is in your own eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.'.

What plank?

Many of the same anti-Islam brigade are happy for the West to go to war against the 'infidel', whether it be in Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq. Yet these wars have directly resulted in the terrorism and fundamentalism that they so fear. It's no secret that during the 1980's the USA funded and trained the Mujahideen and jihadists in Afghanistan to fight the Soviet Union. Out of that arose Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Zionism, a dogmatic twisting and perversion of scripture, that claims the establishment of modern Israel as the God-given homeland of Jews. This has seen the displacement and genocide of Palestinians who lived there for thousands of years, many of whom were actually Jews who converted to Islam centuries ago. Yet Zionist Christians support the ethnic cleansing by cheering Israel's human rights violations and war-crimes, and by rewriting history to delegitimise Palestinian history and the right of Palestinians to their own land. The Palestinian Nakba and ongoing ethnic cleansing has directly resulted in attacks on Israel and the creation of terrorist groups. These groups only formed in response to the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestine. The genocide that is sponsored, supported and cheered on by Zionist Christians.

The attacks on Islam in Western nations such as Australia and Britain, is a response to fear of Islamic extremism and terrorism. It's one thing to condemn terrorism, but another to attack innocent Muslims trying to live a normal life.

Why attack the burqa? Self-proclaimed experts in Islam will state that Muslims are not required to wear burqas or head-coverings. What arrogance to tell others how they should worship. Plank/speck ... Remember that the bible does tell women to cover their heads, yet how many Christian women do so? 1 Corinthians 11:5-6, 'But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered'.

Christians should know better than to be driven by fear. 1 John 4:18, 'There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love'.

Christians who preach or practice intolerance and hate are not acting in love, they are nothing but clanging cymbals. 1 Corinthians 13:1, 'Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal'.

People respond in kind to how they're treated. Treat people with hatred & violence, they respond with hatred & violence. Show love, they respond with love ... you reap what you sow.

Francis of Assisi stated 'preach the Gospel, if necessary, use words'.

The one message from the Gospels is LOVE. Love God, Love Others. (Matthew 22:27).

If you're not loving others, you are not preaching the Gospel.

Christianity has enough issues of its own. Before attacking others with mindless, ignorant and often false allegations, clean up your own mess. Get your own life right. Live the life of love that Jesus commanded you to. Be an example to the world.

Christians are called to be tolerant of others. Romans 14 expounds on not judging others and in particular, be accountable for your own actions rather than attacking the actions of others. Verses 12 and 13 state, 'So then each of us shall give account of himself to God. 13 Therefore let us not judge one another anymore'.

Rather than attacking others and opposing people we disagree with, Romans 14:19 tells us to pursue peace: 'Therefore let us pursue the things which make for peace and the things by which one may edify another'.

Islam is the religion of peace. Christianity is the religion of love. Both religions are founded on peace and love. Who are Christians to criticise those who follow a religion founded on much of the same tenets as their own?

Matthews 5:14-16, 'Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hid. Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven'.

Be the shining light of love to the world, don't smother love under a bushel of bigotry.

--0--

Other articles

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

• Bacon and dregs - Pork wars and Christianity
• Truth and lies - Taqiyya in Islam and Christianity
• Was Muhammad a pedophile?
• Religion of Peace & Love?

A tale of two war crimes: MH17 and IR655

Wouldn't it be horrendous if those who shot down MH17 were to receive a medal for their efforts?

On 17 July 2014, Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was shot down over Ukraine while flying from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpar. It is a tragedy that cost 298 innocent lives.

Investigations are continuing into the tragedy, however it is widely believed that Russian separatists shot the plane down with a weapon supplied by Russia.

Because of the Russian backing of the rebels, some are holding President Vladimir Putin responsible. There is also pressure on Putin to withdraw any Russian troops or involvement in the Ukrainian conflict which has cost thousands of lives.

Australia's Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, demanded that President Putin apologise and pay compensation to the families of the MH17 victims. He claims to have evidence the weapon was immediately smuggled across the border into Russia after the tragedy. If this is the case, Mr Abbott should present this evidence to the investigators.

It is premature to be holding Russia responsible. Investigations are still ongoing and have even raised the possibility of a Ukrainian military jet firing on MH17. There is also the possibility that the jet was shot down by forces within Russia, which would mean a direct involvement from the Russian military. Investigators claim that the plane was hit by a number of high velocity objects that is consistent with it being hit by a surface-to-air BUK missile, which would most likely have been supplied by Russia.

President Obama states Russia's aggression against Ukraine is a 'threat to the world, as we saw in the appalling shoot down of MH17'.

It is a grim irony ... or hypocrisy, in fact, that President Obama decries the tragedy when it was his own nation that shot down a civilian passenger jet, Iranian Air flight 655, on 3 July 1988, killing 290 innocent civilians. The difference between the war crimes of MH17 and IR655 is that IR655 was within Iranian airspace over the Persian Gulf, flying its usual route and its transponder was broadcasting an IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) code on a civilian frequency. The US naval cruiser, the USS Vincennes challenged the jet, got no response and then fired. The crew initially claimed that they thought it was an F-14 Tomcat fighter, even though it was ascending at the time, was travelling relatively slow on a known civilian flight path and using a civilian IFF signal. A 53 page Pentagon report found that the crew testimony was 'erroneous' yet absolved them of any blame.

The crew of the USS Vincennes had more evidence of IF655 being a civilian jet than any Russian separatist in Ukraine would have had about MH17, yet Vincennes still fired and they still attempted to cover-up their crime.

The United States never apologised for the tragedy. In 1996 President Bill Clinton expressed 'deep regret', but this was only after a settlement reached at the International Court of Justice in which the US refused to admit legal liability but agreed to pay compensation of $131 million to Iran, with $61 million going to the families of the victims (around $213,000 each).

The US pinned medals on the crew of the USS Vincennes.

Where was the world-wide condemnation? Where was the world-wide anger? Where was the media? Where was the shirt-fronting?

There is no evidence that we know of which indicates either a sophisticated radar system being used to detect MH17 or that MH17 was challenged prior to the missile being fired. Both of which the USS Vincennes availed themselves prior to shooting down IR655. Whoever shot down MH17 most likely did not realise it was a civilian passenger jet, meaning that as tragic as this was, it was a terrible accident. It is highly unlikely that there was any direct order given, or any intention to attack a civilian airliner.

It is the sentiment of a number of world leaders that Putin be held accountable for the actions of rebels. This is fair enough and should be extended to ensure other nations are held accountable for war crimes committed with their support. For instance, holding the United States, United Kingdom, Australia and other nations that support Israel responsible for Israeli massacres of innocent civilians in Gaza and Israel's breaches of the Geneva Convention in extending settlements into Palestinian territory. Or holding Australia responsible for crimes against humanity committed by the Sri Lankan government against Tamils. After all, Australia recently gifted naval ships to Sri Lanka so they can round up Tamils who may attempt to flee the brutality.

Shooting civilians out of the sky is a war crime, whether it was intentional or not and regardless of whether the perpetrator was Government or a militant. Those who kill civilians should not be exempt from prosecution and certainly should not receive medals.

MH17 is a tragedy and those responsible need to be held accountable. However, the investigation must be conducted without the hyperbole, hysteria and hypocrisy that we are seeing from some quarters.

Respect: a two-way street

Respect is sadly lacking in Australia. Even the Federal Attorney-General has stated that everyone has the right to be a bigot. Now, I'm all up for Freedom of Speech, but with freedom comes responsibility and underpinning that responsibility is respect.

This lack of respect is publicly expressed by politicians, pastors, radio shock-jocks, newspaper columnists and any bigot with a social media account. Many of whom get offended by anyone taking offense at their offensive comments. They accuse the lefties, bleeding hearts and do-gooders of being weak and sensitive.

Studies have shown that racism is usually the domain of those less intelligent. However, academia hasn't been spared its share of racists. Professor Barry Spurr of the University of Sydney was suspended after his inner racist and inner sexist was unleashed in less than eloquent emails that used some of the most vile and offensive language against women, indigenous people, Asians, Muslims, people who are overweight and those lacking education. He whinged about Australia becoming less white. It was the quintessential expression of bigotry.

Spurr had recently reviewed the national school curriculum at the behest of the Australian Government and recommended that it focus less on indigenous history and more on its white 'Judeo-Christian' history. After the emails were leaked Education Minister Christopher Pyne stood by Barry Spurr and the review. Another politician promoting racism and white supremacy.

Funnily enough, many of those who claim the right to be bigots also whinge about how disrespectful young people are today.

Why shouldn't they be?

They have a right to be disrespectful based on the Attorney-General's logic and the Education Minister's acceptance of a racist review of the school curriculum. Young people see some of the most influential people in Australia, including journalists (or those that masquerade as journos), talk-show hosts, professors, pastors and politicians all bleating about how people should just 'toughen up' and not be offended if called offensive names.

Freedom of speech? Sure. Don't curtail it. It's a great freedom for revealing the racists and bigots. It's a great freedom for revealing the hypocrites who want the right to abuse others but to ban those who are different from expressing their differences. Freedom for some but not all if you listen to the racists, the bigots, the small-minded who can't see outside their own tiny world.

This right to bigotry and hatred is being expressed through attacks on innocent women who happen to wear Islamic head-coverings. These attacks are the physical manifestation of the political rhetoric voiced by politicians and some pastors who bang on about attacks on 'our way of life' and 'our Christian values'.

Hypocrisy of the highest order.

A generation of young people are growing up watching adults behave in disrespectful, gutless and short-sighted ways. Is it any wonder then, that some of those young people adopt similar behaviours towards others, including against those same older people who have taught them disrespect.

If you want to be respected, than start by respecting others. That doesn't mean that you just respect those who are the same colour, political or religious persuasion as you. It means respecting everyone.

If you want respect, then give respect.

It's a two-way street.

Capitalism - a religion of fear, greed and envy

The difference between capitalism and socialism can be summed up as:

• Capitalism = greed, selfishness & fear of losing one's possessions. It is materialistic. It is survival of the fittest. It is economic Darwinism.

• Socialism = government sanctioned values of inclusiveness, sharing, caring for the poor and weak.

Capitalism's focus is on private accumulation of wealth and the naive idea that this wealth will trickle down to the society's less fortunate through the generosity of the wealthy. There certainly are some philanthropic capitalists out there, such as Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, but most horde their wealth and attack the most vulnerable who could benefit from a portion of it.

Selfishness is the underpinning value of capitalism which requires the exploitation of people and resources in order to amass wealth. So it's no great surprise that we see the rise of rhetoric in right wing politics regarding 'protecting our values', or put another way, 'protecting individual wealth and the right to exploit workers, the vulnerable and developing nations'.

Considering that most right-wing voters are workers anyway, demonstrates the need for capitalists to use fear-based hyperbole to manipulate the electorate. Capitalists have been selling a dream to workers for years that claims they can also become filthy rich. For most this is just that: a dream. The Great American Dream. In the end it's the poor and middle class who pay for the lifestyles of the rich and famous.

Now we are seeing this dream couched in terms of more sinister propaganda in order to manipulate those most susceptible to and necessary for the capitalist lie to propagate. Capitalism has tied itself to patriotism and Christianity with the the right-wing wrapping themselves in flags and bibles, only caring for those who share their so-called 'patriotic' or 'christian' values. Values that they defend by demonising anyone who is different. In some cases they even verbally and physically assault those who don't meet their 'standards'. The right-wing often resort to outright lies, such as false and inflammatory comments about asylum seeker entitlements, Islam, aborigines, migrants and the poor in order to whip up racism, bigotry and hatred.

The right wing are fearful of threats to their materialistic lifestyles.

To assuage their conscience, some will donate a pittance of their income or possessions to help the poor. To justify their selfish behaviour many will attend church and find scriptures to demonstrate that God loves a 'cheerful giver' and rewards giving by reigning unfettered wealth on the generous. They have the attitude that the 'tithe will set you free'. It goes to show just how much they are bound by greed and materialism.

The right-wing has hijacked religion with the evolution of political parties such as the Tea Party and Family First, and the professing of Christian values by Presidents and Prime Ministers alike.

Capitalism is not Christianity. It isn't patriotism. It's a belief system full of fear and devoid of love. Remember the bible scripture, 'perfect love drives out fear'. If the right-wing actually showed perfect, unconditional love for others, they wouldn't be so full of fear of others or of losing their precious possessions.

Most right-wing Christians believe God is a capitalist. Yet the Christian God is supposedly one of love not of money. There are two commandments that sum up the entire bible: 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and soul ... and love your neighbour as yourself'.

Funnily enough, love doesn't glow resplendent in the exploitation of people.

Apparently, 'love your neighbour', doesn't actually mean to have absolute and unadulterated love for everyone. I've heard a right-wing preacher say that we are commanded to love ... but that doesn't mean loving unconditionally ... that we are to love with 'wisdom'.

Really?

Love with wisdom?

Maybe if Jesus had shown wisdom and discretion in his love he wouldn't have been crucified. Oh well ... instead he sacrificed himself out of love for those who persecuted him. Jesus forgave those who crucified him. He died for their sins out of love for the entire world ... remember John 3:16 that the right-wing Christians like to decorate themselves with: 'For God so LOVED the WORLD that he gave his only begotten Son, that whoever believes on him will be saved and will not perish'.

I don't see any conditions put on his love for the world. Jesus was sent for the whole world ... out of love for the world, which kind of encompasses everyone.

Right-wing fanatics hijacked religion because it can be so easily used to control and dominate people while providing justification for attacking the free thinker who questions the status quo.

Of course, not all capitalists are Christians, but even the non-Christian right-wing display similar values of greed, exclusion and fear.

The fanatical right-wing judge others by how much of a threat those others are. In fact, even before that, they judge others by their own level of ignorance; criticising and condemning those they don't understand. They become experts in other people's ideologies and religions with their own slanted and often inaccurate viewpoints such as their misunderstanding of Socialism and their complete contempt and misquoting of Islamic scriptures.

Aahh ... the rabid right-wing ... driven by fear, envy, pride, ignorance and a sense of privilege. They feel they are better than others and that it's ok to exploit and persecute people who are different.

People of all demographics need to be included and considered in society. There are those who require greater care than others and it is society's responsibility to care for them, not to persecute or exploit them.

Capitalism benefits the few at the expense of the masses.  It is for this reason that government needs to be Socialist and share wealth in a sustainable manner that ensures all have the ability to live a dignified and productive life while maintaining a strong and viable economy for the benefit of all.

Neither people nor the planet should be exploited or persecuted. Creeds and religions should not be used to justify exploitation and persecution. Capitalism has become the religion of the greedy and selfish while demonising its victims: the persecuted and exploited.