The case against Australian Prime Minister John Howard
John Howard's politicising of the military
John Howard is never one to miss a photo opportunity with the military (or for that matter a winning Australian sporting side). A classic example of a media stunt by Howard was bringing George W Bush to the War Memorial to lay a wreath to Sergeant Andrew Russell, an SAS soldier who died in Afghanistan. So caught up in his idolisation of Mr Bush, Howard somehow forgot to invite the widow of Seargent Russell to the service in what his spokesman called an 'oversight'. Could it be that Mr Howard cares more about using the military for his own selfish political gain, without any thought of the people concerned? Or worse, was Howard punishing the widow who had been critical of his Government's policy on war pensions. She certainly thought so.
Reducing air safety
Australia has one of the best air safety records in the world, yet this Government has insisted on introducing a dangerous new system allowing recreational pilots to fly in commercial airspace without radio contact. The airlines are apparently in favour, but the professionals who have to deal with it, pilots and air traffic controllers, are dead opposed on safety grounds. The system is not as claimed the same as used in the US because there they have 85 per cent radar coverage compared to only 15 per cent in Australia. Unions have nothing to gain by opposing this system - only their member's safety and that of the travelling public. So let it be clear. The National Party Leader John Anderson and his government want to reduce Australian air safety in the name of profits and a small and rich amateur flyer's lobby group. Let us hope it doesn't take a tragic air collision to push this point home.
Anti-Australian
The hypocrisy of the Howard Government is revealed by its attitude to the Australian crew working on a Canadian Steamship Lines ship in December 2001. CSL wanted to replace the Australian crew with cheaper Ukranian labour. The Howard Government was complicit in this. Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson said his sympathy was with CSL in their efforts to minimise costs. He said: 'It is a question of Australian industries having to be efficient and having to be world competitive'. So the Howard Government was actively encouraging guest workers to enter Australia and take Australian jobs. As union delegate John Smith said, 'you have to wonder if their(the Coalition's) blue print for Australia is to turn it into a third world country'. Patrick Wright of the University of Adelaide Labour Studies Department agreed, stating the Government's 'interest in free trade is greater than the national interest'. Interestly, Government supporters argue against asylum seekers because they will take Australian jobs(!)
Neutering the public services and our intelligence agencies
It is ridiculous that this Government is trying to run on national security as a strength when they are guilty of neutering our intelligence agencies! Even John Howard himself admits that intelligence is vital in the war on terrorism. He obviously doesn't consider intelligence as important when it threatens his political interests. This was the case when Australian Federal Police Commissioner Mick Keelty dared suggest Australia's involvement in the invasion of Iraq has increased our risk of a terrorist attack. He was treated so shabbily he admits publicly he almost resigned. I wonder if the Government still expects him to give advice without fear or favour? The Government also cherry-picked the intelligence it liked to justify a very contentious war with Iraq. It was done to make life politically easier for itself. It ignored a CIA report which found that the allies would increase the risk of terrorism by attacking Iraq. All for political reasons. This Government is only concerned with its own political survival, not the interests of Australia. And the intelligence community have learned the hard way there are some things the Government just doesn't like to hear. They now save the Government the problem of cherry picking and only present it with favourable intelligence. It's just common sense - if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, etc it probably is one. It seems to me somewhat unlikely that the intelligence community is not being politicised by the Government - if not, why on earth does it look so much like that is the case? This Government badgers anyone who doesn't follow their spin and accuses them of being 'elitists'. Lieutenant Lance Collins, Captain Martin Toohey, Andrew Wilkie - how many more Defence and intelligence figures need to come out before people realise? WAKE UP AUSTRALIA!!!
Selling off Telstra and Australian jobs
The outcome of Federal Government plans to sell Telstra were clear for all to see when the company announced it will cut 450 IT jobs and hire cheaper employees in India. If the company was fully privatised there would be nothing to stop this gross breach of the national interest. As it is the Government is the majority shareholder and could easily stop it by exercising its controlling interest. But instead the Government has done nothing to protect Australian jobs - merely asking the telco to reconsider. This is the true agenda of this Government - abandoning its responsibilities to Australian workers in favour of those overseas.
The code of misconduct
Howard's code of conduct is a shambles. When Assistant Treasurer Helen Coonan sent correspondence with her ministerial letterhead in efforts to resolve a private insurance dispute, Howard said it was 'not a hanging offence'. Regional Services Minister Wilson Tuckey recently made a blatant attempt to pressure the SA Government into overturning a road fine for his son using his ministerial letterhead. Mr Howard's response? He hasn't broken the law. On that interpretation Mr Howard would only sack criminals! Now it appears former communications minister Richard Alston is heavily involved in a family trust with Telstra shares. Does the dishonesty of this Government ever end?
Queue jumping
Only economic factors matter to this Government, it makes no consideration of other equally important factors. This is why it is attempting to privatise the university and healthcare systems, where it is encouraging queue jumping by the rich.
Destroying public healthcare
The Howard Government created the crisis in the healthcare system, so it could claim it needs 'reform', and then be justified in destroying public healthcare. Under the 'Medicare Plus' package doctors will only have incentives to bulk bill low income earners. Everyone else has to spend $1000 in a year at the doctors before they can get any reduction of the gap fee. You would probably have to be dying to qualify for this - some safety net! Most Australians on the other hand will remember that up until recent years finding a free doctor was easy due to high rates of bulk billing.
Running down public education
Mr Howard has recently criticised public education for being politically correct and values neutral, as if this were the reason more people were choosing private schools. If there are problems with public schools the Government should take action to fix them - the public system is the Government's responsibility. The biggest problem public schools face is a lack of funding while Howard is pouring money into rich elite private schools. But all he has to say about this is to complain about some obscure values he feels should be taught in school - perhaps to sing God Save the Queen each morning? If Mr Howard is referring to Christianity not being taught at public schools, he should remember that religion is a choice of the individual and should not be imposed. If parents want that they can send their kids to Church-run private schools. As far as being politically correct goes, this is a gross generalisation and in reality would depend on the individual teachers. But it is my experience that public schools teach the beginnings of critical thinking, allowing students to make up their own minds about their principles and the merits of various arguments. I suspect it is in fact critical thinking that Mr Howard truly feels offended by.
Crony capitalism
Big Liberal Party donor Manildra benefitted greatly from the Government's decision to impose a tariff on imported ethanol. In Parliament Mr Howard denied he had a meeting with Manildra boss Dick Honan prior to making the decision. However a Freedom of Information request by the Opposition revealed Mr Howard did in fact discuss the matter with Honan just weeks before the decision was made. The decision badly disadvantaged Manildra's competitors, particularly Neumann Petroleum which had just ordered ethanol from overseas. The introduction of the tarriff meant the company was forced to send their shipment to Switzerland as distressed cargo. This is made worse by the fact that Paul Moreton of Neumann Petroleum was part of a trade mission to the US with Trade Minister Mark Vaile, who gave him no warning of the Government's impending decision.
Playing politics with national security
John Howard seems to see foreign policy as nothing less than a forum for political point-scoring. He consistently puts his own political fortunes ahead of the national interest every time, whether it's following US President George W Bush's line on Iraq; or offending the whole of South-East Asia with talk of attacking them to defeat terrorists. Mr Howard is George Bush's 'Mini-Me', except when he talks he does not have the economic or military power to back him up. And now he has forced Australia to take part in a war which has made it a top terrorist target. I believe this Government wants there to be a terrorist attack, so it can keep people scared and unthinking.
Having said that, it now beggars belief that the Howard Government was so incompetent as to ignore the warnings from our own intelligence agency of the liklihood of terrorist attack on Bali. The Office of National Assessments said a full year before the bombings that a hotel in Bali would be an important symbolic target for terrorists. And yet the travel warning immediately prior to the Bali bombing warned Australians to defer non-essential travel to Indonesia, except to Bali which is considered safe. This gross incompentence was the difference between life or death for 88 Australians. A classic recent example of Mr Howard playing politics is his stand on the legislation to increase the powers of ASIO. Mr Howard didn't allow the legislation to pass before the next Parliament sitting in February after Labor objected to its draconian elements which risked Australia becoming a police state. He preferred ASIO not to have any new powers so he can blame the Labor Party for any subsequent terrorist attack. The original legislation was deliberately designed to take away people's civil liberties, aimed at encouraging opposition from Labor. In this way the Government could then portray Labor as being 'soft' on terrorism, just as they so successfully portrayed them as being soft on 'border protection' during last year's election. Border protection by the way means protecting Australia from refugees fleeing from oppressive regimes often bombed by the Western powers. For Howard, the threat of terrorism, largely a result of his closeness to the US, is just a means of gaining political advantage without concern for lives of ordinary Australians. He is quite prepared to loudly proclaim to Islamic terrorists that Australia closely identifies with the US. This posturing is purely for political reasons, if there is a terrorist attack it gives him even more chance to play the 'fear' and 'security' cards in elections while blinding the public to his continually undermining our society by stealth.
Another example of the despicable conduct of this Government is its treatment of an Australian taken hostage in Iraq. The woman said she was taken hostage and made the disturbing allegations that her life was in danger becuase of statements made by the Federal Government. And instead of investigating the allegations, Foreign Minister Alexander Downer reacted hysterically accusing the woman of being irresponsible for putting herself in danger. He furthermore made much of the fact that she was a Labor Party member. This Government is supposed to look after the welfare of all Australians, not just those who are not members of an opposition political party! This despicable response was purely for political effect and is further evidence of why the Howard Government has to go.
Blindly following the US
On the war on Iraq. As it becomes clear there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the Howard Government has tried to change the reason for the war as being 'to free the Iraqi people'. What happened to the immiment threat of an Iraqi attack on the Western world? What happened to the urgency to get rid of UN weapons inspectors and just attack Iraq before it was too late? Now, apparently, it doesn't matter where Iraq's fabled WMDs are. But don't worry, as US President George W Bush says, 'I am absolutely convinced with time we'll find out that they did have a weapons program.' I thought we went to war because we already knew for certain that Iraq had thousands of WMDs and an ongoing weapons program. Now it sounds like Mr Bush was acting on a hunch.
Iraq is an utter disaster for the US and Britain. It is attracting militants and terrorists where previously there were none. It has become a self-fulfilling prophecy for the US - Saddam Hussein's regime had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda and terrorists, but the power vaccum left by him is being filled by these extremists.
And given all of this, and his role in giving legitimacy to the Iraq war, John Howard is trying to quietly tiptoe away. 'It wasn't me', and 'that was the best information I had at the time'. Always excuses. Like a child, he never admits responsibility. It is time the electorate holds him accountable.
The Howard Government has attempted to deflect criticism on the issue by accusing critics of being 'Saddam lovers'. Basically they are saying you cannot disagree with them or they will insult you, and your intelligence. Will the people of Australia stand for this? Especially since this Government has been inconsistent on the question of Saddam Hussein's regime. It was only at the last election the Government was slamming Iraqi refugees as not being genuine, even though it now bleats with compassion about Saddam's treatment of his own people prior to the war. It is a case of blatant, political hypocrisy and rank opportunism.
Supporters of the invasion of Iraq, Australia's involvement and our hyper-close relationship with the US talk about moral courage. How about showing some moral courage by not following the US when it plainly is following a dangerous path. You wouldn't let a friend go off in a blind rage attacking people he didn't like, would you? That's what mates do. Also, there is a fine line between moral courage and plain stupidity. Australia has crossed that line, and now is a prime terrorist target for extremists who probably hadn't heard of our country before John Howard kindly informed them all about us. You and I are at risk as a result.
George W Bush planned the Iraq war back in 2001, it has since been revealed. Humanitarian reasons as motivation were only given in the final days prior to the Iraq war, a pathetic and transparent shifting of the goal posts at the 11th hour. Remember, Howard said regime change by itself is not reason enough for the war. These are the actions of men desperate to keep their jobs. Bush and Howard would never admit they have made a mistake with Iraq, for fear of looking 'weak'. At least Labor leaders like Peter Beattie and now Jon Stanhope are man enough to say sorry for their mistakes.
Attempting to invade and transform Iraq into a democracy in such a short time span, with such incompetent leaders as Bush and toadies like Howard and Blair behind him, without giving these as the real reasons for the war, was extremely naive and unwise. It has set a very dangerous world precedent, according to which North Korea could attack South Korea on the basis of pre-emption, as could China with Taiwan. Somewhat ridiculously, Iraq itself was justified in attacking the US in the lead up to the war on the very basis that it was in obvious danger of attack itself. I suspect the only reason it didn't was because it didn't have the means - thus defeating the reasoning for attacking the regime in the first place! You don't just attack a country simply because you don't like it. You might as well go back to the law of the jungle if you do. Ever since the creation of the United Nations there has never been a world war. It has provided a forum for nations to negotiate and debate. It helped avert world war III in the Cuban missile crisis. Imagine George W Bush in such a situation - I shudder at the thought!!
The most obvious motivation for the Iraq war is explained in the website for the Project for the New American Century. Most of the senior members of the Bush administration are members of this elite minority group which call for the extension of US power to dominate the world.
The war was wrong because the US is supposed to be setting an example to dictatorships of tolerance, restraint and observance of international law. The fact is, the US will not always be the world's greatest power. We may not live to see it, but one day another country will overtake it. And after that happens, we may then see the ill consequences of trashing international law and world opinion for the sake of a minority group of extremists in the US.
The Howard Government's approach to terrorism is bellicose, thoughtless and dangerous. The Government values security over democracy, it curbs civil rights over a threat largely of their own making, it increases military spending at the expense of social services, it makes no attempt to understand terrorists and their motivations but only to destroy them, it offers uncritical support to a dangerous right-wing US administration, and it tries to silence debate through ridicule and policies such as ending media diversity. Who says that not following the Howard Government's policy is not fighting terrorism? Would you accuse New Zealand and Canada of that? There are ways of fighting terrorism - more subtle means certainly! There was utterly no need for Howard to so closely and obviously identify us with the US without even pausing to consider the implications. We are a bigger terrrorist target now when we needn't be. It would have shown principal were Australia to have only fought in Afghanistan but not in Iraq, recognising it would only inflame the situation and was nothing to do with terrorism at the time. Now Iraq is to do with terrorism - it has acted as a magnet for terrorists. Where previously there were none! What a great success the war has been.
Pork barrelling
Only marginal electorates matter to the Howard Government. This is made most clear by its blatant pork barrelling to National Party electorates and its punitive actions against Labor electorates. This is making people in marginal seats first class citizens, and the rest of us second class. What makes the sugar industry more important than the poor old workers in the textiles industry?
Privatisation
So strong is this Government's ideological agenda to privatise, they have sold off the R G Casey Building, home of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. The building was sold in 1998 and is now being rented by Foreign Affairs, meaning taxpayers who owned the building outright are now condemned to pay for it over and over again! That's just one example of the incompetence of this Government.
Child sex abuse
The Howard Government is soft on paedophilia. Mr Howard said he does not want a royal commission into child sex abuse because he wants to use the money instead on practical measures - yet has allocated no further funding for such measures. And it has been revealed on the ABC's Four Corners program that the Government has done nothing to prevent child sex abuse within detention centres.
Corruption - cash for visas
Ironically Mr Howard's bold statement 'We will decide who comes here, and on the circumstances in which they come,' has turned out to be true. There appears to be a strikingly strong and consistent link between large donations to the Liberal Party and Immigration Minister Philip Ruddock's granting of visas. Mr Ruddock claims to wish to protect the integrity of the immigration system. Yet in one example, he allowed the issuing of a Visa to Dante Tan, a man wanted for corporate fraud in the Phillipines, after he made a $100,000 donation to the Liberal Party. It has become quite clear who the real queue jumpers are - Liberal Party donors!
Lying about refugees
Furthermore, it has now been revealed that Mr Howard lied when he rejected the Tampa vessel holding asylum seekers, in stating no one on board required medical treatment. In fact, a military doctor said two people on board required urgent medical treatment. Howard has shed some tears for people who died in the Bali atrocity. He hasn't however for refugees, who are apparently worthless in his one-eyed world.
Mr Howard used fear-mongering over the issue of refugees to cling onto government in 2001 when it seemed nothing else could. He and the Liberals want you to believe that boat people are responsible for all of Australia's problems. One flaw in this is that the boat people he is complaining about were arriving in Australia from 1996 until late 2001 while Howard was in Government, until he finally decided to turn a ship back. The second is the refugees have nothing to do with the hardships facing ordinary Australians. They are a scapegoat. Sending armed troops in against helpless men, women and children is soley an exercise in public propaganda. Apparently doing so means Howard is 'strong' on the issue. To me it seems more a sign of weakness to intimdiate and bully unarmed civilians fleeing oppression.
Stories by newspapers like the Daily Telegraph stating that detention centres in which asylum seekers are detained are five-star hotels are clear acts of right-wing propaganda. If true, you have to ask yourself why why the United Nations and a large number of humanitarian organisations have condemned the running of the centres as being in breach of human rights.
Which brings me to last year's fires and rioting at detention centres. The condemnation of this by the Howard Government and many of the general public is breathtaking in its ignorance. Although I would suggest in the case of the Government it was well aware such incidents were completely understandable, given that the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists said a 'crisis of mental health' was raging in the centres. Think about it. If you were held in substandard facilities for an indeterminate amount of time, and treated like criminals when you've taken a long journey to flee from oppression, how would you feel? I would suggest that Australia's failed upper class, the Liberals, wouldn't know the first thing about hardship.
It must be added that the Howard Government and its supporters' labelling of asylum seekers as 'illegals' is an utter misrepresentation. The 1951 UN Refugee Convention, to which Australia is signatory, clearly states that refugees have the right to seek asylum using any available means. To expect them to wait in an orderly queue in totalitarian coutries rampant with human rights abuses reveals a complete lack of understanding or deliberate misrepresentation of the situation.
Anti-human rights
Now the Howard government has tabled legislation that aims to destroy the limited powers of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC). The move demonstrates that the Federal Government is scared it will be sued for the conditions in which it has held refugees. It also shows that the Government is opposed to human rights. Also it raises serious questions about the Government's complicity with the US in the disgusting and systemic prisoner abuse revealed recently. It puts paid to the Government's pathetic crocodile tears over the treatment of the Iraqi prisoners.
John Howard is never one to miss a photo opportunity with the military (or for that matter a winning Australian sporting side). A classic example of a media stunt by Howard was bringing George W Bush to the War Memorial to lay a wreath to Sergeant Andrew Russell, an SAS soldier who died in Afghanistan. So caught up in his idolisation of Mr Bush, Howard somehow forgot to invite the widow of Seargent Russell to the service in what his spokesman called an 'oversight'. Could it be that Mr Howard cares more about using the military for his own selfish political gain, without any thought of the people concerned? Or worse, was Howard punishing the widow who had been critical of his Government's policy on war pensions. She certainly thought so.
Reducing air safety
Australia has one of the best air safety records in the world, yet this Government has insisted on introducing a dangerous new system allowing recreational pilots to fly in commercial airspace without radio contact. The airlines are apparently in favour, but the professionals who have to deal with it, pilots and air traffic controllers, are dead opposed on safety grounds. The system is not as claimed the same as used in the US because there they have 85 per cent radar coverage compared to only 15 per cent in Australia. Unions have nothing to gain by opposing this system - only their member's safety and that of the travelling public. So let it be clear. The National Party Leader John Anderson and his government want to reduce Australian air safety in the name of profits and a small and rich amateur flyer's lobby group. Let us hope it doesn't take a tragic air collision to push this point home.
Anti-Australian
The hypocrisy of the Howard Government is revealed by its attitude to the Australian crew working on a Canadian Steamship Lines ship in December 2001. CSL wanted to replace the Australian crew with cheaper Ukranian labour. The Howard Government was complicit in this. Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson said his sympathy was with CSL in their efforts to minimise costs. He said: 'It is a question of Australian industries having to be efficient and having to be world competitive'. So the Howard Government was actively encouraging guest workers to enter Australia and take Australian jobs. As union delegate John Smith said, 'you have to wonder if their(the Coalition's) blue print for Australia is to turn it into a third world country'. Patrick Wright of the University of Adelaide Labour Studies Department agreed, stating the Government's 'interest in free trade is greater than the national interest'. Interestly, Government supporters argue against asylum seekers because they will take Australian jobs(!)
Neutering the public services and our intelligence agencies
It is ridiculous that this Government is trying to run on national security as a strength when they are guilty of neutering our intelligence agencies! Even John Howard himself admits that intelligence is vital in the war on terrorism. He obviously doesn't consider intelligence as important when it threatens his political interests. This was the case when Australian Federal Police Commissioner Mick Keelty dared suggest Australia's involvement in the invasion of Iraq has increased our risk of a terrorist attack. He was treated so shabbily he admits publicly he almost resigned. I wonder if the Government still expects him to give advice without fear or favour? The Government also cherry-picked the intelligence it liked to justify a very contentious war with Iraq. It was done to make life politically easier for itself. It ignored a CIA report which found that the allies would increase the risk of terrorism by attacking Iraq. All for political reasons. This Government is only concerned with its own political survival, not the interests of Australia. And the intelligence community have learned the hard way there are some things the Government just doesn't like to hear. They now save the Government the problem of cherry picking and only present it with favourable intelligence. It's just common sense - if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, etc it probably is one. It seems to me somewhat unlikely that the intelligence community is not being politicised by the Government - if not, why on earth does it look so much like that is the case? This Government badgers anyone who doesn't follow their spin and accuses them of being 'elitists'. Lieutenant Lance Collins, Captain Martin Toohey, Andrew Wilkie - how many more Defence and intelligence figures need to come out before people realise? WAKE UP AUSTRALIA!!!
Selling off Telstra and Australian jobs
The outcome of Federal Government plans to sell Telstra were clear for all to see when the company announced it will cut 450 IT jobs and hire cheaper employees in India. If the company was fully privatised there would be nothing to stop this gross breach of the national interest. As it is the Government is the majority shareholder and could easily stop it by exercising its controlling interest. But instead the Government has done nothing to protect Australian jobs - merely asking the telco to reconsider. This is the true agenda of this Government - abandoning its responsibilities to Australian workers in favour of those overseas.
The code of misconduct
Howard's code of conduct is a shambles. When Assistant Treasurer Helen Coonan sent correspondence with her ministerial letterhead in efforts to resolve a private insurance dispute, Howard said it was 'not a hanging offence'. Regional Services Minister Wilson Tuckey recently made a blatant attempt to pressure the SA Government into overturning a road fine for his son using his ministerial letterhead. Mr Howard's response? He hasn't broken the law. On that interpretation Mr Howard would only sack criminals! Now it appears former communications minister Richard Alston is heavily involved in a family trust with Telstra shares. Does the dishonesty of this Government ever end?
Queue jumping
Only economic factors matter to this Government, it makes no consideration of other equally important factors. This is why it is attempting to privatise the university and healthcare systems, where it is encouraging queue jumping by the rich.
Destroying public healthcare
The Howard Government created the crisis in the healthcare system, so it could claim it needs 'reform', and then be justified in destroying public healthcare. Under the 'Medicare Plus' package doctors will only have incentives to bulk bill low income earners. Everyone else has to spend $1000 in a year at the doctors before they can get any reduction of the gap fee. You would probably have to be dying to qualify for this - some safety net! Most Australians on the other hand will remember that up until recent years finding a free doctor was easy due to high rates of bulk billing.
Running down public education
Mr Howard has recently criticised public education for being politically correct and values neutral, as if this were the reason more people were choosing private schools. If there are problems with public schools the Government should take action to fix them - the public system is the Government's responsibility. The biggest problem public schools face is a lack of funding while Howard is pouring money into rich elite private schools. But all he has to say about this is to complain about some obscure values he feels should be taught in school - perhaps to sing God Save the Queen each morning? If Mr Howard is referring to Christianity not being taught at public schools, he should remember that religion is a choice of the individual and should not be imposed. If parents want that they can send their kids to Church-run private schools. As far as being politically correct goes, this is a gross generalisation and in reality would depend on the individual teachers. But it is my experience that public schools teach the beginnings of critical thinking, allowing students to make up their own minds about their principles and the merits of various arguments. I suspect it is in fact critical thinking that Mr Howard truly feels offended by.
Crony capitalism
Big Liberal Party donor Manildra benefitted greatly from the Government's decision to impose a tariff on imported ethanol. In Parliament Mr Howard denied he had a meeting with Manildra boss Dick Honan prior to making the decision. However a Freedom of Information request by the Opposition revealed Mr Howard did in fact discuss the matter with Honan just weeks before the decision was made. The decision badly disadvantaged Manildra's competitors, particularly Neumann Petroleum which had just ordered ethanol from overseas. The introduction of the tarriff meant the company was forced to send their shipment to Switzerland as distressed cargo. This is made worse by the fact that Paul Moreton of Neumann Petroleum was part of a trade mission to the US with Trade Minister Mark Vaile, who gave him no warning of the Government's impending decision.
Playing politics with national security
John Howard seems to see foreign policy as nothing less than a forum for political point-scoring. He consistently puts his own political fortunes ahead of the national interest every time, whether it's following US President George W Bush's line on Iraq; or offending the whole of South-East Asia with talk of attacking them to defeat terrorists. Mr Howard is George Bush's 'Mini-Me', except when he talks he does not have the economic or military power to back him up. And now he has forced Australia to take part in a war which has made it a top terrorist target. I believe this Government wants there to be a terrorist attack, so it can keep people scared and unthinking.
Having said that, it now beggars belief that the Howard Government was so incompetent as to ignore the warnings from our own intelligence agency of the liklihood of terrorist attack on Bali. The Office of National Assessments said a full year before the bombings that a hotel in Bali would be an important symbolic target for terrorists. And yet the travel warning immediately prior to the Bali bombing warned Australians to defer non-essential travel to Indonesia, except to Bali which is considered safe. This gross incompentence was the difference between life or death for 88 Australians. A classic recent example of Mr Howard playing politics is his stand on the legislation to increase the powers of ASIO. Mr Howard didn't allow the legislation to pass before the next Parliament sitting in February after Labor objected to its draconian elements which risked Australia becoming a police state. He preferred ASIO not to have any new powers so he can blame the Labor Party for any subsequent terrorist attack. The original legislation was deliberately designed to take away people's civil liberties, aimed at encouraging opposition from Labor. In this way the Government could then portray Labor as being 'soft' on terrorism, just as they so successfully portrayed them as being soft on 'border protection' during last year's election. Border protection by the way means protecting Australia from refugees fleeing from oppressive regimes often bombed by the Western powers. For Howard, the threat of terrorism, largely a result of his closeness to the US, is just a means of gaining political advantage without concern for lives of ordinary Australians. He is quite prepared to loudly proclaim to Islamic terrorists that Australia closely identifies with the US. This posturing is purely for political reasons, if there is a terrorist attack it gives him even more chance to play the 'fear' and 'security' cards in elections while blinding the public to his continually undermining our society by stealth.
Another example of the despicable conduct of this Government is its treatment of an Australian taken hostage in Iraq. The woman said she was taken hostage and made the disturbing allegations that her life was in danger becuase of statements made by the Federal Government. And instead of investigating the allegations, Foreign Minister Alexander Downer reacted hysterically accusing the woman of being irresponsible for putting herself in danger. He furthermore made much of the fact that she was a Labor Party member. This Government is supposed to look after the welfare of all Australians, not just those who are not members of an opposition political party! This despicable response was purely for political effect and is further evidence of why the Howard Government has to go.
Blindly following the US
On the war on Iraq. As it becomes clear there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the Howard Government has tried to change the reason for the war as being 'to free the Iraqi people'. What happened to the immiment threat of an Iraqi attack on the Western world? What happened to the urgency to get rid of UN weapons inspectors and just attack Iraq before it was too late? Now, apparently, it doesn't matter where Iraq's fabled WMDs are. But don't worry, as US President George W Bush says, 'I am absolutely convinced with time we'll find out that they did have a weapons program.' I thought we went to war because we already knew for certain that Iraq had thousands of WMDs and an ongoing weapons program. Now it sounds like Mr Bush was acting on a hunch.
Iraq is an utter disaster for the US and Britain. It is attracting militants and terrorists where previously there were none. It has become a self-fulfilling prophecy for the US - Saddam Hussein's regime had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda and terrorists, but the power vaccum left by him is being filled by these extremists.
And given all of this, and his role in giving legitimacy to the Iraq war, John Howard is trying to quietly tiptoe away. 'It wasn't me', and 'that was the best information I had at the time'. Always excuses. Like a child, he never admits responsibility. It is time the electorate holds him accountable.
The Howard Government has attempted to deflect criticism on the issue by accusing critics of being 'Saddam lovers'. Basically they are saying you cannot disagree with them or they will insult you, and your intelligence. Will the people of Australia stand for this? Especially since this Government has been inconsistent on the question of Saddam Hussein's regime. It was only at the last election the Government was slamming Iraqi refugees as not being genuine, even though it now bleats with compassion about Saddam's treatment of his own people prior to the war. It is a case of blatant, political hypocrisy and rank opportunism.
Supporters of the invasion of Iraq, Australia's involvement and our hyper-close relationship with the US talk about moral courage. How about showing some moral courage by not following the US when it plainly is following a dangerous path. You wouldn't let a friend go off in a blind rage attacking people he didn't like, would you? That's what mates do. Also, there is a fine line between moral courage and plain stupidity. Australia has crossed that line, and now is a prime terrorist target for extremists who probably hadn't heard of our country before John Howard kindly informed them all about us. You and I are at risk as a result.
George W Bush planned the Iraq war back in 2001, it has since been revealed. Humanitarian reasons as motivation were only given in the final days prior to the Iraq war, a pathetic and transparent shifting of the goal posts at the 11th hour. Remember, Howard said regime change by itself is not reason enough for the war. These are the actions of men desperate to keep their jobs. Bush and Howard would never admit they have made a mistake with Iraq, for fear of looking 'weak'. At least Labor leaders like Peter Beattie and now Jon Stanhope are man enough to say sorry for their mistakes.
Attempting to invade and transform Iraq into a democracy in such a short time span, with such incompetent leaders as Bush and toadies like Howard and Blair behind him, without giving these as the real reasons for the war, was extremely naive and unwise. It has set a very dangerous world precedent, according to which North Korea could attack South Korea on the basis of pre-emption, as could China with Taiwan. Somewhat ridiculously, Iraq itself was justified in attacking the US in the lead up to the war on the very basis that it was in obvious danger of attack itself. I suspect the only reason it didn't was because it didn't have the means - thus defeating the reasoning for attacking the regime in the first place! You don't just attack a country simply because you don't like it. You might as well go back to the law of the jungle if you do. Ever since the creation of the United Nations there has never been a world war. It has provided a forum for nations to negotiate and debate. It helped avert world war III in the Cuban missile crisis. Imagine George W Bush in such a situation - I shudder at the thought!!
The most obvious motivation for the Iraq war is explained in the website for the Project for the New American Century. Most of the senior members of the Bush administration are members of this elite minority group which call for the extension of US power to dominate the world.
The war was wrong because the US is supposed to be setting an example to dictatorships of tolerance, restraint and observance of international law. The fact is, the US will not always be the world's greatest power. We may not live to see it, but one day another country will overtake it. And after that happens, we may then see the ill consequences of trashing international law and world opinion for the sake of a minority group of extremists in the US.
The Howard Government's approach to terrorism is bellicose, thoughtless and dangerous. The Government values security over democracy, it curbs civil rights over a threat largely of their own making, it increases military spending at the expense of social services, it makes no attempt to understand terrorists and their motivations but only to destroy them, it offers uncritical support to a dangerous right-wing US administration, and it tries to silence debate through ridicule and policies such as ending media diversity. Who says that not following the Howard Government's policy is not fighting terrorism? Would you accuse New Zealand and Canada of that? There are ways of fighting terrorism - more subtle means certainly! There was utterly no need for Howard to so closely and obviously identify us with the US without even pausing to consider the implications. We are a bigger terrrorist target now when we needn't be. It would have shown principal were Australia to have only fought in Afghanistan but not in Iraq, recognising it would only inflame the situation and was nothing to do with terrorism at the time. Now Iraq is to do with terrorism - it has acted as a magnet for terrorists. Where previously there were none! What a great success the war has been.
Pork barrelling
Only marginal electorates matter to the Howard Government. This is made most clear by its blatant pork barrelling to National Party electorates and its punitive actions against Labor electorates. This is making people in marginal seats first class citizens, and the rest of us second class. What makes the sugar industry more important than the poor old workers in the textiles industry?
Privatisation
So strong is this Government's ideological agenda to privatise, they have sold off the R G Casey Building, home of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. The building was sold in 1998 and is now being rented by Foreign Affairs, meaning taxpayers who owned the building outright are now condemned to pay for it over and over again! That's just one example of the incompetence of this Government.
Child sex abuse
The Howard Government is soft on paedophilia. Mr Howard said he does not want a royal commission into child sex abuse because he wants to use the money instead on practical measures - yet has allocated no further funding for such measures. And it has been revealed on the ABC's Four Corners program that the Government has done nothing to prevent child sex abuse within detention centres.
Corruption - cash for visas
Ironically Mr Howard's bold statement 'We will decide who comes here, and on the circumstances in which they come,' has turned out to be true. There appears to be a strikingly strong and consistent link between large donations to the Liberal Party and Immigration Minister Philip Ruddock's granting of visas. Mr Ruddock claims to wish to protect the integrity of the immigration system. Yet in one example, he allowed the issuing of a Visa to Dante Tan, a man wanted for corporate fraud in the Phillipines, after he made a $100,000 donation to the Liberal Party. It has become quite clear who the real queue jumpers are - Liberal Party donors!
Lying about refugees
Furthermore, it has now been revealed that Mr Howard lied when he rejected the Tampa vessel holding asylum seekers, in stating no one on board required medical treatment. In fact, a military doctor said two people on board required urgent medical treatment. Howard has shed some tears for people who died in the Bali atrocity. He hasn't however for refugees, who are apparently worthless in his one-eyed world.
Mr Howard used fear-mongering over the issue of refugees to cling onto government in 2001 when it seemed nothing else could. He and the Liberals want you to believe that boat people are responsible for all of Australia's problems. One flaw in this is that the boat people he is complaining about were arriving in Australia from 1996 until late 2001 while Howard was in Government, until he finally decided to turn a ship back. The second is the refugees have nothing to do with the hardships facing ordinary Australians. They are a scapegoat. Sending armed troops in against helpless men, women and children is soley an exercise in public propaganda. Apparently doing so means Howard is 'strong' on the issue. To me it seems more a sign of weakness to intimdiate and bully unarmed civilians fleeing oppression.
Stories by newspapers like the Daily Telegraph stating that detention centres in which asylum seekers are detained are five-star hotels are clear acts of right-wing propaganda. If true, you have to ask yourself why why the United Nations and a large number of humanitarian organisations have condemned the running of the centres as being in breach of human rights.
Which brings me to last year's fires and rioting at detention centres. The condemnation of this by the Howard Government and many of the general public is breathtaking in its ignorance. Although I would suggest in the case of the Government it was well aware such incidents were completely understandable, given that the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists said a 'crisis of mental health' was raging in the centres. Think about it. If you were held in substandard facilities for an indeterminate amount of time, and treated like criminals when you've taken a long journey to flee from oppression, how would you feel? I would suggest that Australia's failed upper class, the Liberals, wouldn't know the first thing about hardship.
It must be added that the Howard Government and its supporters' labelling of asylum seekers as 'illegals' is an utter misrepresentation. The 1951 UN Refugee Convention, to which Australia is signatory, clearly states that refugees have the right to seek asylum using any available means. To expect them to wait in an orderly queue in totalitarian coutries rampant with human rights abuses reveals a complete lack of understanding or deliberate misrepresentation of the situation.
Anti-human rights
Now the Howard government has tabled legislation that aims to destroy the limited powers of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC). The move demonstrates that the Federal Government is scared it will be sued for the conditions in which it has held refugees. It also shows that the Government is opposed to human rights. Also it raises serious questions about the Government's complicity with the US in the disgusting and systemic prisoner abuse revealed recently. It puts paid to the Government's pathetic crocodile tears over the treatment of the Iraqi prisoners.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home