Saturday, January 29, 2005

Australia Day (and a quick look at 21st century penal colonies)

It was Australia day this week. Australia day commemorates the "first fleet's" arrival in Australia a few hundred years ago. The first fleet was a convict transportation. The first of many. Australia was considered largely inhospitable desert by other new continent standards and didn't seem to have much going for it apart form being far away. Far away being a good place to locate a penal colony.

Colonisation was a pretty big thing at the time and although Australia wasn't exactly considered high-brow destination material, it did seem like a good place to off-load lower-class citizens. European prisons were overcrowded cesspitts, reflecting to some degree overcrowded city life, and social architects of the time were on the look out for alternative prison "solutions". It was quite an idealistic time, empirically, so the idea was sort of to "cleanse" Europe by exporting undesirables and then once the surviving thieves and thugs had served their sentences they could go forth and "colonise" their new location. Which they did. Much to the local indigenous population's dismay .

I was reading transportation records this Wednesday. The handwritten records show name, crime and sentence. Crimes consist of four to five words and run along these lines ~ "stealing a bolt of cloth" (remarkable number of bolts of stolen cloth thieves, the same charge appeared several times on just one page) "stealing a silk handkerchief" (seriously, that was a charge, a crime worthy of deportation) "stealing a loaf of bread" etc etc. Most crimes seem fairly mundane and at times one wonders if they even occurred at all, the intriguing "receiving a bundle of papers" for instance. I saw one "highway robbery" and one "pickpocketing", almost a welcome change from the repetitively dull fabric thefts. I guess seamstresses were a shifty lot back then. Sewing notes into hems and stealing cheesecloth. I used to sew myself. Where was I. Oh yes. Sentence terms ~ seven years, fourteen years, twenty-one years, life. Fairly standard, if allocated on whim. One bolt-of-linen stealer was sentenced to seven years while a cheesecloth thief got life.

Anyway. Every Australia day our current prime minister avoids Australia's penal colony history and talks about soldiers instead. This year was no exception. As usual, the prime minister named an "Australian Of The Year" and made a speech that managed to include something about "diggers" (what Australians call ANZAC soldiers) and something about Iraq/East Timor/Indonesia/wherever else Australia is meddling with guns and bombs and things. He usually forgets to talk about Australian detention centres and Aboriginal non-emancipation and Australian involvement in off-shore torture camps. The same week that Mamdouh Habib arrives back in Australia and our prime minister misses the opportunity to talk about the draconian conditions of 18th century prisons in the context of 21st century ones. So I will instead.

Much as imprisonment was outsourced in 17 to 18th century Western Empires, so it is in 21st century Western Empires. In October 2001 Mr Habib, an Australian coffee shop owner who lived in Australia for 21 years, was detained while traveling in Pakistan. He was tortured and transported from location to location before arriving at a US off-shore camp in Cuba's Guantanamo Bay in 2002. Where his torture continued with the Australian Governments full knowledge. Mr Habib was released this week and arrived in Sydney today. Mr Habib was held for four years with no charge. This is inexcusable in itself. Our law system is based on the principle "innocent until proven guilty". Torture is in contravention of human rights at all times. And yet these two fundamental principles of 20th century law were dismissed within 10 months of the 21st century.

Surely Mr Habibs release, coinciding with Australia day, is worthy of mention in an Australia day speech by an Australian prime minister who considers himself globally aware. Nope. Don't count on it. Our (Australian) prime minister pretends not to know while his foreign minister issues such statements as ~

"Al-Qaeda is the world's most evil terrorist organisation."


and

"We've told the Americans we will provide appropriate security for Australian people."


Right. Because the last thing we need is for Americans to get the idea that Howard and Downer can't secure Australian people. We all know what happens to unsecured peoples in the 21st century. Don't we. Bit bloody late Downer.

Current security rating ~ I would feel much more safe if Howard and Downer had stood up for Mr Habib's human rights and denounced torture camps.

Uppers and Downer

Mamdouh Habib is free. Our (Australian) Foreign Minister is being an arsehole. I can't be bothered being polite about this. Mr Habib has been detained and tortured in Pakistan, Egypt, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay since October 2001. And this is what current Foreign Minister Alexander Downer has to say ~

"ASIO and the Australian Federal Police and the NSW police will monitor his activities...We will make sure that at no time he becomes a threat to the Australian people."


Mr Downer's un-reasoning would have placed Nelson Mandela under surveillance too.

Mr Downer also says ~

Al-Qaeda is the world's most evil terrorist organisation.


Right. And Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay are angelic institutions of freedom.

Never again.

Haven't been posting here much the last few weeks. Have been posting a bit here (exercise in balance/dissent/virtual democracy) and doing other things IRL, like meditating.

Sunday, January 16, 2005

Word

Noticed a few references to Gollum and Golems lately. Mark Levine posts about "Twin Golems of Violence" and gets all political about militants.

Me? The first time I heard about a Golem (not to be confused with Gollum) was about 10 years ago, fiction on paper. A Rabbi in a Berlin ghetto, pre WWII, creates a monster to protect the ghetto inhabitants and help out with labour. I can't quite remember what happens in the end but the tale always stirred my sympathies, for the ghetto dwellers, the Rabbi, and for the Golem - in essence a slave to the downtrodden. After a while the Golem seeks to gain a conscience of it's own - to "self improve". I have a feeling it ends up perishing in flames defending the ghetto inhabitants. It's an old story. Centuries old. The Berlin Ghetto retelling is a modernised version. The theme is familiar. It would be kind of "been there done that" to draw comparisons with Mary Shelly's Frankenstein or the Will Smith version of Asimov's I Robot.

Anyway it seemed kind of relevant to blogging. The Golem is created from a lump of clay and bought to life with words. Initially senseless and unable to speak the Golem receives written instruction on pieces of paper which it ingests. It is a tool, a labourer, a task toiler - but in toiling for humans it gains curiosity and seeks to become more human itself. Can you imagine what might happen, if some day, a virus mutated of it's own accord, by some queer one in ten billionth of a chance and sprung to life in the primeval slime that is our world wide web - our ocean? Amongst all our daily meanderings and postulations and backing and forthing and toing and froing a small spark of life springs into being - a conscience amid us, online.

Anyway after thinking these thoughts I found this children's Golem story. It's the last few paragraphs that got me.

What are we creating here, with all our words? Ah, choose your words carefully gentle blogger ~ lest you create by accident a Golem.

Change of tone

I've noticed a decided change in the tone of US Admin rhetoric re war since the tsunami.

Now, nature offers Bush's speechwriters a new alternative - in which US troops can go galavanting off to provide disaster relief in the Asia Pacific while everyones attention is distracted from Iraq and War Crimes Hearings.

Well, it just makes some politicians look like opportunists if you ask me. If these guys were really so moved by human suffering they'd be waving Asia Pacific depts and pouring resources into hospitals and UN initiatives instead of into military coffers.

In Utopia, we have no need for troops...

Just had a few re-reads of Kamil Mahdi's reply to Lakshmi Chaudhry. He finishes;

The peace movement must fight for the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops, and also for the U.S. and the whole world to accept its responsibility to help Iraq recover. It is absurd to hold that the U.S. can only help Iraq through troops and contracted mercenaries.

A remark, perhaps, on one of Chaudhry's closing questions;

can we bring our soldiers home and fulfill our responsibility toward the Iraqi people?


Ok, well I already did my spleich about "the peace movement" after reading Lakshmi Chaudhry, so now I'll move on to my "troops out" spleich.

The interesting thing about the "Troops Out" versus "Troops fulfill responsibility by Presence" debate is the position it unwittingly put US spin doctors in - perpetually squirming from one opinion poll's results to the next. "Flip-flopping" as it were, between trying to justify war and trying to control a blown out defense budget. In short "the peace movement's" internal discussions have made certain pro-war administrations look curiously melleable.

As the world's public floundered over reports and images emerging from Iraq, Bush's speech writers seemed to follow suit. If voters claimed war was wrong, Bush's speech writers choreographed a "the war is over" declaration. If voters felt somehow their countries war-faring governments should pay penance by "sticking it out", pro-war presidential and prime ministerial speechwriters had their mouth-pieces vowing to remain in Iraq and "get the job done". If voters swayed shocked over Abu Ghraib, pro-war speech writers scripted in equal feigned shock.

Personally, I never thought calling for "troops out now" cut it as an anti-war slogan. It almost compromises the original "No War" sentiment. Simply calling for the withdrawal of troops seems to accept the inevitability of troops. Surely it would be better if we had no troops at all. "No War" just seems so much more decisive. How could anyone possibly argue with it's beautifully simple logic? Why only campaign for troop withdrawal? I mean, frankly, it's a bit below even a bloggers station to be making such compromising suggestions. "No War" is marvelously cross border - it applies to all troops, regardless whose, and all war atrocities, regardless where. In fact, you don't even really have to say it anymore, you can just fix a steely gaze on some pro-war rhetorical trollop and make cynical movements with your eyes and everyone knows damn well what you mean.

Movement ?

After reading Kamil Mahdi's examination of Lakshmi Chaudhry's "Rethinking Iraq" (via Liminal) I couldn't resist adding my own two cents worth (not that anyone'll ever much notice, being a lowly humble office clerk with no superhero suit to speak of).

Lakshmi writes ;

To be both responsible and effective, the anti-war movement has to mature into a tightly organized, disciplined political campaign with a plan of action.


Well, firstly. What exactly is "the antiwar/peace movement" ? I mean to read Lakshmi one might be forgiven for thinking it's an actual functioning, erm, "movement". In my experience I have to say, I really don't think that it is. The peace "movement" was (past tense in reference to peace marches which do appear to be "over") a spontaneous global expression made public by millions of people. The little organisation that ever existed within the peace "movement" was stickytaped together from disparate minority political parties with makeshift resources who just happened to be in line with public sentiment, for once, and produced an abundance of flyers and posters to match ~ a bit like throwing a party I guess, which the world gatecrashed.

Most of the political parties involved with the dissemination of peace march publicity material were for one brief moment in February 2003 united in opposing war. The rest of the time they squabbled and bickered amoung themselves and now continue to do so, competing for the honour of olive branch bearer. For this reason I cannot call the peace marches or the ensuing political oneupmanship a "movement". It is something much larger then a movement or an organisation. It is a global shift in conscience. A shared awareness approached from many directions by many people who have little or nothing to do with the fractious political factions that now remain.

While there are staunchly active people who dedicate their lives to working onsite during war in an effort to provide some small respite during pretty bleak circumstances and many other people who work within administrative and journalistic roles, there are millions of citizens globally who may never belong to any tightly organized "plan of action" but who nevertheless are the ones who have made it clear how undesirable war is.

Too big to be an organisation and too aware to constitute a political campaign the No War sentiment is a culmination of years living under the pendulous threat of nuclear war and unforgotten memories of every prior war humanity has ever experienced. Frankly most people have just had enough of war. There is no discipline and no plan of action. Anyone can say what they damned well like about it and they probably will, for years to come. Which is a good thing I suppose. And is where blogs over the last few years have probably provided an outlet for individuals unmoved by any particular political theme tune.

"The anti-war movement" is less a movement and more a stage in human growth. The effect will be insideous, constant and played out in small ways by many individuals for many years. It will probably never be especially organised, thank goodness.

(Oh damn, I exhausted myself pontificating over only two of Laksmi's lines and didn't even get to write what I was thinking about Kamil's response. I'll have to write a separate post).

Oh No ! We Didn't ! Did I ?

Ever woken up and cringed with embarrassment remembering half remembered events of the night before? Thought that only ever happened in real life? Well yes, so did I. And I had hoped that it had stopped happening in my twenties. Then I noticed this comment on my blog;

Hi... I've been surfing around the blogs of some of the contributors of iraq blog count, and I noticed something curious I thought you should know. In the comments section of Liminal's Jan.5th post, someone with the ID of 'Tom' commented using your Jan. 6th post. And then added a little to it. Anyways, identity theft bugs me whether in reality or cyberspace, so I thought you should know. Cheers.
And I really enjoy your blogging by the way.
Peace Out

smokey spice


Goodness, how odd.

But I confess, I think one of those comments was me - my warped sense of humour had the better of me that week and I thefted my own identity. Completely unlike my normal dependable self, must have been too much new years spirit. I so hope I haven't embarrassed myself in other unremembered ways. There is a lesson to be learnt in this, do not drink/whatever and blog.

It is consoling however, to know there are people out and about who notice such things. Perhaps there is some accountability online afterall.

Thankyou smokey, for alerting me to my misdemeanors. And please accept my apologies if I have caused any inadvertent offense. Oh one other little weird thing, Smokey - I noticed someone had almost word for word copied your comment on my blog onto Liminal's blog and signed it "Identity theft bugs me as well.

Being an accountable deviant is hard work. I seem to be accidentally offending everyone these days. I have no way of explaining this except to say there are many mysterious things in life and I think the role of House Goblin finally revealed it's importance to me for a day or two by creeping into my browser and leaving a remarkably incoherent trail of footprints across several frequently read websites.

Oh yes, just to clarify - smokey spice and emigre are two completely separate identities in two completely separate bodies. I have no idea who that "Tripoli" is and while I can claim responsibility for one "some other guy" I'm not sure who Tom was, although I have a sinking feeling it may have been, um, me. Sorry (feeling very small). Lim, can you forgive me, um, us (if you have ever contravened the Multiple Identity Polynymic Act you may not mind?). I can't think what got into me, except that one minute I was fending off impostors on IBC and the next moment I had become one.

This is really bad. We have seriously got to do something about it.

Thursday, January 06, 2005

Wouldn't it be

Just off the topic (will get back on it later). Wouldn't it be nice to do a job that you enjoyed all day. Like blogging. On the other hand, might be nice to see some daylight sometimes.

Eloquence

Choice between beauty and zenlike needless. More. We are not sure if we were made to tip-toe.

Perhaps we will not care, too much.

Tuesday, January 04, 2005

New Order Democracy (world)

Yushchenko calls for cabinet blockade

December 30, 2004 KIEV: Ukraine opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko called on his supporters yesterday to blockade government headquarters to prevent his presidential rival, Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich, from holding a cabinet meeting there today.

Hmm. Not sounding especial democratic.

"I call on everyone to reinforce the blockade of the government," Mr Yushchenko said in an address to tens of thousands of his supporters massed in Kiev's central Independence Square to celebrate his apparent victory in Sunday's repeat presidential poll.


Apparent victory? Sharing cynicsm.

"In what country is it possible for a government that has been dismissed to say that it doesn't want to go?"

Resounding peal of irony.

No meeting of an illegitimate government can take place," Mr Yushchenko said.


Illegitimate government? Most democracies just call the losing party the opposition. Then again, most insurgents do away with the opposition. Guess is just to do with whole new world order thing ~ new one party type democracies to match.

Prophecy

Year Of Accountability

A few predictions for 2005.

2004 was a year of playfulness, in some respects. In spite of war and other disturbing political patterns, a gentle year for the blogger. Bloggers found solace in one another and lifted each others spirits (for the most part). Friendships waxed (and waned) bloggers drifted from site to site, grazing upon one anothers in-sights.

Foreseeing - a year of solidification ahead. A "maturing" if you like. Bloggers who withstood the trials and tribulations of 2004 will be all the more stronger in 2005. The sphere may appear to "shrink" a little, as it condenses. The world grow a little smaller.

Bloggers will seek truth and desire honesty in their dealings. Perhaps becoming firmer and more "no-nonsense". Perhaps combining the real with the imagined, online with offline endeavor.

Bloggers have always said and linked to what they want but perhaps bloggers will have gained courage from 2004 and in 2005 become braver, choosing to challenge their readers (if they have any) and even their own ideas. Some may paddle into controversial thought provoking waters where formerly they paddled on the beach. Others may form unexpected dalliances, taking up unexpected opportunities.

2005 will be a year of accountability for bloggers. A year when a blogger seeks honesty in her/his dealings with others and perhaps, even goes the extra step and looks deeply within. To examine his/her own shortcomings. The world is not perfect. It is not all endless hell and it is no heaven either. Nobody knows this better then the fearless blogger. The sooner a blogger can bring their eyes to rest upon the foul, the sooner they shall be able to remedy it.

Fearless bloggers will blog and blog it all. The good and the bad, fears and hopes, nightmares and their sweetest dreams. Unhalted by the blindfolded in the seeking of inner truths. Admitting mistakes and forgiving others for theirs. Delighting in fresh pages and allowing themselves to mourn the casualties. Sparing no emotion, no shred of logic, in their travels. Speaking freely as they seek peace. Fearing not what others think. Laughing a little at others, and at themselves.

How absorbing rhetoric is, when one gets going at it.

Serious

Words to keep that I may never use;

Deadly serial.

Spine

What makes a thug. What makes someone incite anger to maim the guiltless. What makes people accept the trash they are fed even though gut instinct tells them it's wrong. What makes people put up with obvious bullshit. What makes people say what they think other people want to hear. What makes other people offload a bunch of criticism but be unable to take criticism in return. What makes a bunch of people play shitty games for a bunch of other people?

I don't know. It could be any number of reasons. The last time humanity collectively asked itself these questions was around about 1970. Either we never worked out the answer or we worked it out too well. Because, the web is crawling with these miserable creatures.

Define

How is individual defined?

Let's see. Not liking labels, could try - "passive anarchy" (hybrid) (self-styled). Seeking to clear the middle ground, on the fringes (far left centrist). Conservative. In a weird way. Oh, and swings. Pendulously. Between wrong and right. In a kind of neutral way (PH). Like vinaigrette, all balsamic and oil (pure olive).

Nope none of it fits. Thinking left to right on a linear graph (with a centered point). Extending infinitely left on the lefthand side and infinitely right on the right hand side.

Now moving slowly slowly backward for a better overall view, till many miles away. A curvature of the line becomes apparent and moving out into the furthest reaches of space the curve becomes a circular rim. The rim of a glass (half empty and half full) and I am sitting running a finger round and round the rim of the glass, listening to it sing.

Monday, January 03, 2005

Lifetime detention without court trial

Terrorism suspects may be detained forever

By Dana Priest in Washington
January 3, 2005 Washington Post *SMH

Bush Administration officials are preparing long-range plans for indefinitely imprisoning suspected terrorists whom they do not want to set free or turn over to courts in the US or other countries.
Oh Oh.

The Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency have asked the White House to decide on a more permanent approach for potentially lifetime detentions, including for hundreds of people now in military and CIA custody whom the Government does not have enough evidence to charge in courts.
Yeek. Lifetime detentions? Not enough evidence to charge in courts? Once apon a time in a land long ago, where people were innocent until proven guilty...

The outcome of the review, which also involves the State Department, would also affect those expected to be captured in the course of future counter-terrorism operations.
Future operations?

A senior Administration official involved in the discussions said the current detention system has strained US relations with other countries. "Now we can take a breath. We have the ability and need to look at long-term solutions."
Long term solutions?

One proposal under review is the transfer of large numbers of Afghan, Saudi and Yemeni detainees from the military's prison camp in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, into new US-built jails in their home countries. These would be operated by those countries but the State Department, where this idea originated, would ask them to abide by recognised human rights standards and would monitor compliance.
Nech.

Exporting POW's from country to country in a bid to avoid responsibility for violations under the Geneva Convention is unconscionable.

"Since the global war on terror is a long-term effort, it makes sense for us to be looking at solutions for long-term problems," said Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman. "We are at a point in time where we have to say, 'How do you deal with them in the long term?"'
"How do you deal with them in the long term?" No doubt every dictator asks himself the same thing.

*Registration required to view smh link.

Where

If I am not here, I may be here or here.

UN assesses Damage In Emergency Summit

It'll take billions and 10 years: UN

By Matthew Moore, Herald Correspondent in Jakarta, and Penelope Debelle
January 3, 2005

The head of the United Nations is expected to use an emergency summit this week to tell world leaders that the $US2 billion ($2.6 billion) pledged for tsunami relief is not enough to fund an unprecedented recovery effort that could last a decade.


The UN has come under a lot of fire in the last few years from both conservative and liberal sectors, each accusing the UN of being the others tool. I have always maintained that although the UN could be improved it does fill a significant role where global cross-border events are concerned. This is one of those events. My concern is that UN resources are currently stretched by war and monitoring human rights abuses while also providing relief in the event of natural disaster.

There is no doubt the world needs an independent body that can bring countries together on relatively neutral territory during a tense global period to provide assistance. The UN certainly seems to be filling that role honestly and openly in this case, coming into it's own as it accesses shortcomings and musters support in an instance where the rest of the world reels in shock.

The US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, is going to Indonesia and Thailand this week but it is unclear whether he will attend the summit.


This concerns me. While the US can afford Rumsfeld the expense of a Christmas tour addressing US troops in Iraq, it cannot afford the expense of it's current Secretary Of State to attend a summit organising relief for a global event of this magnitude.

The British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, yesterday gave his support for UN leadership in the crisis and revealed that Mr Bush had clearly told him that "he wanted the UN to be in the lead".

Evidently the US has overstretched it's resources by engaging in war with regions rich in raw natural resources. US administrators seem only to happy to pass global responsibility on to others in an unprofitable scenario.

Yes, I am highly critical. I cannot excuse an administration that claims to be a global interventionist yet cannot put it's muscle where it's mouth is in regions that are currently suffering. If US defense forces weren't tied up in war they could be employed in cases of civil emergency such as this. The Asia Pacific is an ocean region and the US military has extensive naval resources that could be employed in shipping help to these areas. Why is it not offering this assistance?

Saturday, January 01, 2005

Just one more.

When all discrimination is abandoned, when contact with things is broken, the mind is brighter than the sun and moon together, cleaner then frost and snow

- Zen Prayer.


Ah. Feeling calmer already.

The power of a man's virtue should be measured not by his special efforts, but by his ordinary doing.

Blaise Pascal 1623-1662

It may be agreeable for certain people to live a retired life in a quiet place away from noise and disturbance.

But it is certainly more praiseworthy and courageous to practice Buddhism living among your fellow beings, helping them and being of service to them.

Walpola Sri Rahula


Thank goodness. Shall unpack bags and cancel tickets to quiet place.

Men are suffering the fever of violent emotion, and so they make a philosophy of it.

- Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan


Philosophy, is the talk on a cereal box. Religion is the smile on a dog.

- Edie Brickell.

Another Viktor

Viktor Janukovic has resigned overnight.

UKRAINE'S Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich resigned from his post overnight and admitted his appeals over a presidential rerun vote were unlikely to be granted - Herald Sun.

You know, I have no more faith in the outcome of the latest Ukraine election result then I did in the first. Viktor Janukovic won by a million votes in the first, Victor Yushchenko by 2.2 million in the second. As far as I'm concerned, it's rorted. Democracy is busted and doesn't work anymore. Neither Janukovic nor Yushchenko gained any credibility in their elections. The Ukraine lost a democracy, that is all. Welcome, Ukraine, to the democratic world. Let us mourn together, as we watch our democracies sell out one by one.

Wikipedia excerpt from Janukovic's resume;

Yanukovych was born in the working class neighborhood of Makiivka to a family of Belarusian immigrants. As a teenager, he was orphaned and was brought up by his grandmother.

In 1968 and 1970, Yanukovych (according to officials) was convicted and imprisoned for robbery and bodily injury. It was recently announced that he was acquitted in 1978, although without documentation.

In 1972, Yanukovych became an electrician in a local bus company and later finished tehnikum. In 1980, he graduated (by correspondence) from Donets'k Polytechnic Institute, where he qualified as a mechanical engineer. Immediately after that, Yanukovych was appointed chief manager of a transportation company in Yenakiyeve (Donets'ka oblast') and admitted to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. This was the start of a quick management career in regional automotive transport. Yanukovych's political career began when he was appointed Head of State Administration (i.e., oblast' government) of Donets'ka oblast', in 1997.

In 2001, he graduated from the Ukrainian Academy of Foreign Trade as a Master of International Law. Later, Yanukovych was granted the titles of Doctor of Science and Professor.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Site
Meter