It was not the first time I listen to the Greens leader, Sen. Bob Brown. And I am used to his empty rhetoric. I am used to his deceptive claims. And I will mention in details examples of many of these deceptive claims and lies. But today was different.
I thought that he, and his party, became more mature and inclusive. But they did not disappoint us. The Greens is still the same old Greens: one - issue and one - colored party. For I hour address, Sen. Brown failed to mention Multiculturalism even once. Not only this. The audience was very white, with no single non Anglo-Saxon present at the address.
And when Sen. Brown started to name his party achievements, these were all about: same sex marriage, euthanasia and forests clearing. Nothing about growing attack on Multiculturalism and growing racism in the society. And nothing about the very low representation of marginalized groups of migrants, non-English speaking, indigenous people and people with disabilities. Also there was nothing about progressive foreign policy, important for majority of new migrants and refugees.
For this we tell Sen. Brown and his white “Greens” party: shame on you!
In a decade where the attack on Multiculturalism is the biggest issue, Sen. Brown is demonstrating that he and his party is still living White Australia era. Or maybe they are living on other planet. As if:
- The attack on boat people is not an attack on Multiculturalism and a bid to spread racism in the society.
- The “population” debate is not an attack on Multiculturalism.
- The participation in “war on terrorism”, occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq is not an attack on Multiculturalism and bid to spread Islamophobia.
- Attack on public services and welfare system is not an attack on new migrants and Multiculturalism.
- The northern territory intervention is not a racist attack on the historical and human rights of indigenous communities.
Despite the fact that Sen. Brown failed even to mention Multiculturalism, but could still claim arrogantly that he and his party is “progressive”. As we mentioned before, we believe that “actions are louder than talks”. We would not be so offended of Sen. Brown’s failure to mention Multiculturalism if the Greens did take steps to show their commitments to Multiculturalism. But the history track of the Greens is so shameful in this regard. And you need only to Google the names and pictures of Greens MPs around the country to discover they are from single ethnic background: White Anglo-Saxon.
Going back to the press club address, we can mention many observations on the conduct of Sen. Brown:
1- He was very proud of his party’s role in the biggest waste of common wealth, ie the so called “stimulus packages to waste billions of dollars on bogus projects. We are not against “wasting” common wealth, but on true nation building projects. These projects could include injecting billions of dollars into public housing to ease the critical rental crisis.
2- He was adamant that the Greens will control the “Balance of Power” in the coming senate. Well, if the latest opinion polls would be compared to the opinion polls conducted in the last Federal election, the Greens would need very good luck to maintain the current representation in the senate. There is good chance with the popularity of the first woman as PM combined with the obstructionist approach by Liberals – Greens alliance, that the voters could lean more away from the Greens.
3- Sen. Brown admitted that he made several deals with the previous regressive PM Howard, after short negotiation on cup of coffee. He is referring to the deal struck between him and Howard over full privatization of Telstra. The Greens retreated from the deal after the huge backfire against the Greens and the mounted huge public backlash. This is confirmation that vote for the Greens in this coming election could end up a vote for the extreme Tony Abbot. Sen. Brown was not shy in praising Tony Abbot and talked about him nicer than Liberal members do.
4- Sen. Brown and his party tuned down their rhetoric about asylum seekers debate. The official policy is that the Greens is opposing to mandatory detention system altogether. But the Greens leader and all other senators are talking about more humanly treatment of detainees, only. They are only against long detention, offshore detention and the high cost of this long detention. Nothing is mentioned for the last 2 years about the need to abolish this highly inhuman system.
5- While Sen. Brown described Labor and Liberals as “regressive right” forces, he stopped short from claiming the Greens to be “left”. And this is good indication that he does not want to upset the traditional historical figures inside the Greens who know very well that they are not lefties.
After this poor performance, I am not sure how new migrants and people from minor ethnic and religious groups would consider to continue voting for this one-coloured group who even fail to mention the word “Multiculturalism”. Let alone claim to have commitments toward it.
We are happy that Sen. Brown is not considering resigning soon. We want him to stay until the true face of the Greens fully exposed to voters. This needs continuous work from true progressive forces to join their force and present alternative real progressive politics to voters.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
The story of Greens MP Lee Rhiannon: lies, deceptions and conspiracies against all rivals
While the story of the Greens politics in general is mixture of lies, back flips, ideological emptiness and opposition for the sake of getting more votes only. But the story of Lee Rhiannon is the worst case in that camp.
Ms Rhiannon had given very bad example about political career empty of any real achievements or any principled stances. It was all about power accumulating, with no agenda of socio-economic changes.
Ms Rhiannon started her political career as Stalinist. But with the collapse of the Soviet Union and loss of platform, she chose to join the Greens. Inside the Greens and after losing the ideological grounds, she decided to change her skin and run for animal rights. She started to camp outside slaughterhouses and butcheries against killing animals or keeping animals in cages. Nobody knows how for someone who was member of Stalinist group and did not bother about Stalin butchering millions of Russians and Soviets, would accept this dramatic change. That was the first back flip.
Then and because all her campaigns outside zoos and slaughterhouses could not attract her any serious attention, she decided to run desperate campaign on the rights of marginalised groups to be equally represented. But she chose to campaign for one marginalised group: White Anglo-Saxon women rights. Her desperate repeated campaigns succeeded in changing the Greens constitution to introduce articles about the necessity to take all steps needed to promote women to parliaments. These changes and desperate campaigns won her spot in the Greens tickets for the 1999 NSW election. And she won a seat as MLC on the agenda of increasing the representation of White Anglo-Saxon women in parliaments. But when many Greens members tried to broaden the understanding of the Greens of the needs of other marginalised groups who has no representation in parliaments (Indigenous, Non-English speaking, people with disabilities) she counteracted all these attempts by her teeth and claws. She was even caught saying that language is not a barrier for integration and so not a reason for marginalisation. The same was her views about indigenous marginalisation. And that was her second big back flip. Such back flip that saw departure of majority of Indigenous, non English speaking and Muslim members after they have realised that all the noise of the Greens empty rhetoric on the rights of marginalised, was only just slogans for electoral agendas.
Before that and in her desperate bid to get rid of her strong rival and historical figure in environmental movement, Ian Cohen, she led a campaign to stop him from being elected again in 2003. She ran ruthless and vicious campaigns to impose limited tenure for Greens parliamentarians of 8 years. She made desperate allegations that staying in politics for long time will corrupt politicians. But her ruthless campaigns failed and Mr Cohen was re-elected, 2003. After that everyone inside the Greens and outside it thought that she will honour her commitments for limited tenure of politicians and she will not seek preselection after her 8 years in politics expired on 2007. Again, she upset everyone and proved that she has no principles to stick to. She ran for 2007 election and continued her political career beyond the 8 years proposed by her earlier. Recently and after running for federal election, she claims in her leaflet that she has “decade of experience in parliament” (no more talks about power corrupting politicians!)
That was her biggest back flip, but she did not care.
Examples of smaller back flips are countless.
Ms Rhiannon run very big campaign about the politicians increased privileges and allowances. But at the same time and after government and Liberals opposition would pass legislations to increase privileges (which is not compulsory privliges, i.e. politician can still save tax-payers money and refuse to use these privileges). Instead, Ms Rhiannon would use all her privileges to the last cent available. Example of this is the free $40 lunch on tax-payers money. She ran mad campaign to portray such legislation as evil and huge waste of tax-payers money. Since the introduction of this legislation, Ms Rhiannon would have free $40 lunch everyday she is at parliament.
Then she ran very vicious campaign advocating transparency and “clean politics” away from politicians’ abuse of their privileges and available resource funded by public tax-payers money. Now we know that she abused these resources and privileges funded by tax-payers money (Brown calls on Greens state MP to resign: http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2010/s2948755.htm).
My piece here mentioned just few big clear back flips committed by Ms Rhiannon. I would not go into her back flips on political promises that she never kept or honoured. May be this would be subject for another opinion piece.
Imagine that the Greens are seeking you to vote for such politicians as an alternative for the major two parties. Can you spot any difference? Or the question should be who do you think is worse?
I, definitely, would not vote for such politician that has such history of making all these lies and deceptions and back stabbing of even “comrades” in the same party.
Ms Rhiannon had given very bad example about political career empty of any real achievements or any principled stances. It was all about power accumulating, with no agenda of socio-economic changes.
Ms Rhiannon started her political career as Stalinist. But with the collapse of the Soviet Union and loss of platform, she chose to join the Greens. Inside the Greens and after losing the ideological grounds, she decided to change her skin and run for animal rights. She started to camp outside slaughterhouses and butcheries against killing animals or keeping animals in cages. Nobody knows how for someone who was member of Stalinist group and did not bother about Stalin butchering millions of Russians and Soviets, would accept this dramatic change. That was the first back flip.
Then and because all her campaigns outside zoos and slaughterhouses could not attract her any serious attention, she decided to run desperate campaign on the rights of marginalised groups to be equally represented. But she chose to campaign for one marginalised group: White Anglo-Saxon women rights. Her desperate repeated campaigns succeeded in changing the Greens constitution to introduce articles about the necessity to take all steps needed to promote women to parliaments. These changes and desperate campaigns won her spot in the Greens tickets for the 1999 NSW election. And she won a seat as MLC on the agenda of increasing the representation of White Anglo-Saxon women in parliaments. But when many Greens members tried to broaden the understanding of the Greens of the needs of other marginalised groups who has no representation in parliaments (Indigenous, Non-English speaking, people with disabilities) she counteracted all these attempts by her teeth and claws. She was even caught saying that language is not a barrier for integration and so not a reason for marginalisation. The same was her views about indigenous marginalisation. And that was her second big back flip. Such back flip that saw departure of majority of Indigenous, non English speaking and Muslim members after they have realised that all the noise of the Greens empty rhetoric on the rights of marginalised, was only just slogans for electoral agendas.
Before that and in her desperate bid to get rid of her strong rival and historical figure in environmental movement, Ian Cohen, she led a campaign to stop him from being elected again in 2003. She ran ruthless and vicious campaigns to impose limited tenure for Greens parliamentarians of 8 years. She made desperate allegations that staying in politics for long time will corrupt politicians. But her ruthless campaigns failed and Mr Cohen was re-elected, 2003. After that everyone inside the Greens and outside it thought that she will honour her commitments for limited tenure of politicians and she will not seek preselection after her 8 years in politics expired on 2007. Again, she upset everyone and proved that she has no principles to stick to. She ran for 2007 election and continued her political career beyond the 8 years proposed by her earlier. Recently and after running for federal election, she claims in her leaflet that she has “decade of experience in parliament” (no more talks about power corrupting politicians!)
That was her biggest back flip, but she did not care.
Examples of smaller back flips are countless.
Ms Rhiannon run very big campaign about the politicians increased privileges and allowances. But at the same time and after government and Liberals opposition would pass legislations to increase privileges (which is not compulsory privliges, i.e. politician can still save tax-payers money and refuse to use these privileges). Instead, Ms Rhiannon would use all her privileges to the last cent available. Example of this is the free $40 lunch on tax-payers money. She ran mad campaign to portray such legislation as evil and huge waste of tax-payers money. Since the introduction of this legislation, Ms Rhiannon would have free $40 lunch everyday she is at parliament.
Then she ran very vicious campaign advocating transparency and “clean politics” away from politicians’ abuse of their privileges and available resource funded by public tax-payers money. Now we know that she abused these resources and privileges funded by tax-payers money (Brown calls on Greens state MP to resign: http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2010/s2948755.htm).
My piece here mentioned just few big clear back flips committed by Ms Rhiannon. I would not go into her back flips on political promises that she never kept or honoured. May be this would be subject for another opinion piece.
Imagine that the Greens are seeking you to vote for such politicians as an alternative for the major two parties. Can you spot any difference? Or the question should be who do you think is worse?
I, definitely, would not vote for such politician that has such history of making all these lies and deceptions and back stabbing of even “comrades” in the same party.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Australian political parties: where is our voice!
I would like today to shout very loud: enough is enough.
I would like to whisper in the ears of our politicians: no one of you is representing me.
And no one of you represents my fellow new migrants from non-English speaking countries. And no one of you represents our indigenous people.
And no one of you is representing our citizens with disabilities, with physical ones at least.
And shame on you and your parties.
You should be ashamed of yourselves very deeply, especially the ones amongst you who arrogantly claim to be “progressive”.
For us, progressive means to allow us to voice our concerns, our opinions on problems WE face and come up with solutions we think they suit us.
But instead, you have appointed yourselves as guardians on us.
We know that guardians usually appointed when person do not has capabilities to make sound judgment. And usually person cannot make sound judgment for one of the following reasons:
1- Person is not mature enough.
2- Person suffers from symptom not allowing normal development of brain.
3- Person suffers from deep mental problems.
We do not know where you classify us (all members of marginalized groups).
I have strong feeling (from previous close experience with many of you, especially the ones who claim to be progressive) that you think we are not mature enough. This immaturity is coming because we do not have blonde hair, blue eyes and clear Australian accent.
You think that we, as previous citizens of dictatorships, cannot understand your democracy. And because of this we cannot understand your political system.
And because of that, we do not deserve to even be heard, given chance to show our performance or even to give you some ideas about how do we feel.
You think that if we step into politics, we would be stepping into unknown to us territory (because of our retarded undemocratic mind).
You think that because we do not speak clear Australian language, we are immature and cannot understand democracy designed by you.
Our White Anglo Saxon politicians: did you ask yourself what do we think about your enforced-on-us guardianship?
Did you ask yourself how do we feel about your insistence that you understand OUR problems more than we do?
Did you ask yourself if we want you to teach us how to suffer, how to struggle, how to resist and how to overcome?
Did you ask yourself how do we feel about your solutions to our problems, or at least to problems that mainly concern us, our suffering and obstacles put by you to prevent us from getting our rights in full?
Well, our fellow “progressive” White Anglo-Saxon politicians: as you do not care about our feeling, we need to ignore your idea about how we should feel about you and your progressiveness (if it would be qualified to progressiveness).
You need to ask yourself: do we understand why you oppress us, abuse our feelings, disregard our outcries and insist to treat us as inferior species?
Yes, we deeply understand.
You are not only closed-minded racist politicians. But you are so concerned that you will lose your tight grip on power. Such grip that lasted for more than 2 centuries, since your ancestors invaded this country.
Yes, you are so vulnerable and insecure.
And I will add to your vulnerability and insecurity: we are coming. And we are growing in numbers. And we are shaking ground under your feet. And we are taking away, step by step, the power that you have accumulated.
And we are not worried. We will defeat your racism. We will defeat your discrimination. We will defeat your repeated vicious attacks on us and on our cultures. We will defeat your control on our lives. And we will win.
But:
We thought that you as “progressive” forces, you will make this transition more peaceful, less painful and have less devastating consequencies.
We thought that you as “progressive” politicians will join us hand in hand in our fight to get our voice in the decision making bodies heard.
We thought that your “progressiveness” would mean to step back and push us into front line to resume the fight for OUR rights.
But we are discovering that all talks about your “progressiveness” are no more than cheap deceptions and lies.
You claimed to be “progressive” only to deceive us so that we vote for you. Then you will find suitable-for-you solutions to our problems and suffering.
You claimed to be “progressive” just to enter the election auction with higher bets by claiming moral ground over your rival political parties.
And at the end, your solution for our suffering and problems was very easy: keep shutting your mouths, as we are talking on your behalf.
And you know very well that our sufferings are vital for you to continue abusing them and keep the power in your hands.
Well, our fellow White Anglo Saxon politicians (both progressive and regressive): you do not represent us. You do not speak for us. You do not understand us.
So, please climb down our backs.
And please try to learn: learn from us something different. Please try to learn to give us some space. Please try to learn to respect our difference. Difference in understanding. And differences in needs. And difference in thinking.
You need to understand one thing: our time is coming.
But please do not make it more painful. Move on and vacate space for us.
We need our voice, and we will get it: sooner or later.
I would like to whisper in the ears of our politicians: no one of you is representing me.
And no one of you represents my fellow new migrants from non-English speaking countries. And no one of you represents our indigenous people.
And no one of you is representing our citizens with disabilities, with physical ones at least.
And shame on you and your parties.
You should be ashamed of yourselves very deeply, especially the ones amongst you who arrogantly claim to be “progressive”.
For us, progressive means to allow us to voice our concerns, our opinions on problems WE face and come up with solutions we think they suit us.
But instead, you have appointed yourselves as guardians on us.
We know that guardians usually appointed when person do not has capabilities to make sound judgment. And usually person cannot make sound judgment for one of the following reasons:
1- Person is not mature enough.
2- Person suffers from symptom not allowing normal development of brain.
3- Person suffers from deep mental problems.
We do not know where you classify us (all members of marginalized groups).
I have strong feeling (from previous close experience with many of you, especially the ones who claim to be progressive) that you think we are not mature enough. This immaturity is coming because we do not have blonde hair, blue eyes and clear Australian accent.
You think that we, as previous citizens of dictatorships, cannot understand your democracy. And because of this we cannot understand your political system.
And because of that, we do not deserve to even be heard, given chance to show our performance or even to give you some ideas about how do we feel.
You think that if we step into politics, we would be stepping into unknown to us territory (because of our retarded undemocratic mind).
You think that because we do not speak clear Australian language, we are immature and cannot understand democracy designed by you.
Our White Anglo Saxon politicians: did you ask yourself what do we think about your enforced-on-us guardianship?
Did you ask yourself how do we feel about your insistence that you understand OUR problems more than we do?
Did you ask yourself if we want you to teach us how to suffer, how to struggle, how to resist and how to overcome?
Did you ask yourself how do we feel about your solutions to our problems, or at least to problems that mainly concern us, our suffering and obstacles put by you to prevent us from getting our rights in full?
Well, our fellow “progressive” White Anglo-Saxon politicians: as you do not care about our feeling, we need to ignore your idea about how we should feel about you and your progressiveness (if it would be qualified to progressiveness).
You need to ask yourself: do we understand why you oppress us, abuse our feelings, disregard our outcries and insist to treat us as inferior species?
Yes, we deeply understand.
You are not only closed-minded racist politicians. But you are so concerned that you will lose your tight grip on power. Such grip that lasted for more than 2 centuries, since your ancestors invaded this country.
Yes, you are so vulnerable and insecure.
And I will add to your vulnerability and insecurity: we are coming. And we are growing in numbers. And we are shaking ground under your feet. And we are taking away, step by step, the power that you have accumulated.
And we are not worried. We will defeat your racism. We will defeat your discrimination. We will defeat your repeated vicious attacks on us and on our cultures. We will defeat your control on our lives. And we will win.
But:
We thought that you as “progressive” forces, you will make this transition more peaceful, less painful and have less devastating consequencies.
We thought that you as “progressive” politicians will join us hand in hand in our fight to get our voice in the decision making bodies heard.
We thought that your “progressiveness” would mean to step back and push us into front line to resume the fight for OUR rights.
But we are discovering that all talks about your “progressiveness” are no more than cheap deceptions and lies.
You claimed to be “progressive” only to deceive us so that we vote for you. Then you will find suitable-for-you solutions to our problems and suffering.
You claimed to be “progressive” just to enter the election auction with higher bets by claiming moral ground over your rival political parties.
And at the end, your solution for our suffering and problems was very easy: keep shutting your mouths, as we are talking on your behalf.
And you know very well that our sufferings are vital for you to continue abusing them and keep the power in your hands.
Well, our fellow White Anglo Saxon politicians (both progressive and regressive): you do not represent us. You do not speak for us. You do not understand us.
So, please climb down our backs.
And please try to learn: learn from us something different. Please try to learn to give us some space. Please try to learn to respect our difference. Difference in understanding. And differences in needs. And difference in thinking.
You need to understand one thing: our time is coming.
But please do not make it more painful. Move on and vacate space for us.
We need our voice, and we will get it: sooner or later.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
How to get The Greens’ attention to Gaza blockade?
Do you want to get the Greens to act promptly and demand the immediate lift of Gaza blockade?
Then we need to convince the Greens that:
1- The majority of Gaza residents are homosexuals and Israel is imposing the blockade because they (Israelis) are homophobes.
2- The drug addicts in Gaza cannot get their needs of drug freely and easily because of the blockade.
3- There is critical shortage of needles needed for drug addicts to have safe shots of drug.
4- There is shortage of prostitutes in Gaza, where Israel and Egypt is not allowing free travel of prostitutes in and out of the strip.
5- There is critical shortage of contraceptives and drugs to induce abortions.
6- The blockade is allowing Israel to hunt whales freely in Gaza waters without permission from Palestinians.
7- The blockade is preventing importing sustainable energy technologies to the strip.
8- Most of Gaza residents are blonde green-eyed English-speaking Anglo-Saxons.
9- Hamas government is in fact part of the Greens movement and they have agreed to sign Kyoto protocol.
10- Gaza residents are mostly hippies that never have shower for the last 3 years, in a bid to save water consumption.
No more comments, unfortunately.
Then we need to convince the Greens that:
1- The majority of Gaza residents are homosexuals and Israel is imposing the blockade because they (Israelis) are homophobes.
2- The drug addicts in Gaza cannot get their needs of drug freely and easily because of the blockade.
3- There is critical shortage of needles needed for drug addicts to have safe shots of drug.
4- There is shortage of prostitutes in Gaza, where Israel and Egypt is not allowing free travel of prostitutes in and out of the strip.
5- There is critical shortage of contraceptives and drugs to induce abortions.
6- The blockade is allowing Israel to hunt whales freely in Gaza waters without permission from Palestinians.
7- The blockade is preventing importing sustainable energy technologies to the strip.
8- Most of Gaza residents are blonde green-eyed English-speaking Anglo-Saxons.
9- Hamas government is in fact part of the Greens movement and they have agreed to sign Kyoto protocol.
10- Gaza residents are mostly hippies that never have shower for the last 3 years, in a bid to save water consumption.
No more comments, unfortunately.
Monday, June 07, 2010
Reflection on yesterday’s rally: satirical contradictions for obvious reasons!
While yesterday’s rally was called to protest against horrendous crimes against international activists outside Gaza waters, it witnessed very “funny” (mostly satirical) contradictions.
The first extremely satirical thing to the point of collapsing on the floor of the Sydney Town Hall is the content of the Greens MLC speech. Ms Sylvia Hale and her Greens party had just discovered yesterday that Gaza strip is under blockade. And only yesterday, Ms Hale promised to speak up against this blockade. One would, rightly, ask where these party politicians live. Are they living on the same planet as all of us? Do not they watch TV (any TV station, even the regressive Murdoch press) to discover that Gaza is under complete blockade since early 2007?
And to be fair to Ms Hale and her party, we should mention that they promised (after they woke up recently) to come to rallies and make verbal undocumented promises to speak up against this blockade. All this despite the fact that they did not issue so far any written media release about this issue.
The second contradiction was more satirical. The far left socialists and communists were marching hand in hand with the far right Fateh movement (supporters of the traitors in Ramallah). Both were happily walking side by side, shoulder by shoulder, flag by flag and voice by voice condemning Israeli aggression. And both were exchanging words of complementary praisings.
The crowd was also incredibly satirical. The Turkish nationalists were mixing with Turkish socialists. The Hamas supporters were enforced to hear Fateh representative, and they clapped their hands. The circumstances needed such “unity”. The religious crowd were enforced to hear socialists’ rhetoric. And the clever people were enforced to hear stupid ones.
The speakers were the funniest contradictions. From the far left to the far right. From the far opportunist through the far ignorant. And in this chaos, we heard one only good speaker: Andrew Ferguson, CFMEU secretary.
All these contradictions were permitted at this rally, each for own reasons.
For politicians, it is election time. The Greens would not mind to declare joining Al Qaeda if this will give them some more votes. At the end of the day, the rally and all what happens at it is no more than a deceptive phonetical phenomena. Politicians can always claim that the media misinterpreted their speeches, if they need to get more votes from Anti-Palestinians.
For the expired community “leaders”, it is an important event to declare that they are still alive and able to say few words that the crowd wants to hear.
For the imagined ideologies that died long time ago, it is an opportunity to jump and celebrate their imagined “resurrection”.
For the dominant oppressing ethnicity (in this case the White Anglo-Saxon), it is an extra opportunity to prove that they are democratic and are feeling with the oppressed feelings of sadness and anger.
And for the oppressed communities, it is a chance to feel “equal”, even if the equality is just to be equal listener, but not equal actor.
The worst satirical contradiction is the complaint by oppressing ethnicity that some sections of oppressed communities behaved outside the red lines drawn by them (by oppressing ethnicity), when large section of Muslim community started to go their own way and chant their own chanting when they started to feel that the rally was hijacked. At this time and because the oppressed communities dared to be bored, the oppressing ethnicity declared that the oppressed communities in fact have hijacked the rally by not listening carefully with full silence to the messages of verbal condemnations and solidarity.
Thank you for being so patients with our boredom and please forgive us to hijack your election bazaar. But remember that we are still grieving for the last century, and we need some space and respect. We love your solidarity, but when it is invited and welcomed. Not when it is “despite our noses”.
The first extremely satirical thing to the point of collapsing on the floor of the Sydney Town Hall is the content of the Greens MLC speech. Ms Sylvia Hale and her Greens party had just discovered yesterday that Gaza strip is under blockade. And only yesterday, Ms Hale promised to speak up against this blockade. One would, rightly, ask where these party politicians live. Are they living on the same planet as all of us? Do not they watch TV (any TV station, even the regressive Murdoch press) to discover that Gaza is under complete blockade since early 2007?
And to be fair to Ms Hale and her party, we should mention that they promised (after they woke up recently) to come to rallies and make verbal undocumented promises to speak up against this blockade. All this despite the fact that they did not issue so far any written media release about this issue.
The second contradiction was more satirical. The far left socialists and communists were marching hand in hand with the far right Fateh movement (supporters of the traitors in Ramallah). Both were happily walking side by side, shoulder by shoulder, flag by flag and voice by voice condemning Israeli aggression. And both were exchanging words of complementary praisings.
The crowd was also incredibly satirical. The Turkish nationalists were mixing with Turkish socialists. The Hamas supporters were enforced to hear Fateh representative, and they clapped their hands. The circumstances needed such “unity”. The religious crowd were enforced to hear socialists’ rhetoric. And the clever people were enforced to hear stupid ones.
The speakers were the funniest contradictions. From the far left to the far right. From the far opportunist through the far ignorant. And in this chaos, we heard one only good speaker: Andrew Ferguson, CFMEU secretary.
All these contradictions were permitted at this rally, each for own reasons.
For politicians, it is election time. The Greens would not mind to declare joining Al Qaeda if this will give them some more votes. At the end of the day, the rally and all what happens at it is no more than a deceptive phonetical phenomena. Politicians can always claim that the media misinterpreted their speeches, if they need to get more votes from Anti-Palestinians.
For the expired community “leaders”, it is an important event to declare that they are still alive and able to say few words that the crowd wants to hear.
For the imagined ideologies that died long time ago, it is an opportunity to jump and celebrate their imagined “resurrection”.
For the dominant oppressing ethnicity (in this case the White Anglo-Saxon), it is an extra opportunity to prove that they are democratic and are feeling with the oppressed feelings of sadness and anger.
And for the oppressed communities, it is a chance to feel “equal”, even if the equality is just to be equal listener, but not equal actor.
The worst satirical contradiction is the complaint by oppressing ethnicity that some sections of oppressed communities behaved outside the red lines drawn by them (by oppressing ethnicity), when large section of Muslim community started to go their own way and chant their own chanting when they started to feel that the rally was hijacked. At this time and because the oppressed communities dared to be bored, the oppressing ethnicity declared that the oppressed communities in fact have hijacked the rally by not listening carefully with full silence to the messages of verbal condemnations and solidarity.
Thank you for being so patients with our boredom and please forgive us to hijack your election bazaar. But remember that we are still grieving for the last century, and we need some space and respect. We love your solidarity, but when it is invited and welcomed. Not when it is “despite our noses”.
Wednesday, June 02, 2010
The Greens try to hijack social justice campaigns: undemocratic moves to silence criticism and to hide truth.
Yes, I am proud that I heckled the Greens MLC yesterday over her lies about the Greens commitments to oppose Israeli barbaric actions. And yes it was deliberate and calculated action, and not coincidental.
I know that the Greens are extremely unhappy about this. The Greens wanted us to be silent, swallow their lies and then clap hands and go home satisfied that there are some politicians who listen to us and feel our sadness.
But yesterday I (and many community members) felt that enough is enough. This political prostitution should be stopped and end forever.
First of all and for all Greens (and no Greens) members who think that heckling politicians are undemocratic and uncivilized, I should mention here that in fact we learnt this tactic from the Greens. Their whole rise of popularity was a result of heckling all rival politicians they can.
Yesterday, Greens members were extremely unhappy with me heckling party MLC and branded me to be “uncivilized” and following “undemocratic” procedures. Well they should go and tell their hierarchy that in the last 30 years the Greens were uncivilized and followed “undemocratic” procedures.
The Greens are very good on political prostitution. When the “uncivilized” and “undemocratic” ways benefit them, they branded it as exercising of “freedom of speech” and “political campaigning to inform public”. But when it exposes their political opportunism and political prostitution, they branded it as “uncivilised”.
Very interesting party.
Let us go back to the issue of why I heckled the Greens MLC today.
The Greens yesterday has exercised extreme degree of shameless hypocrite conduct I ever met with. The Greens party had the courage to attend rally opposing the Israeli massacre, even though the party until now (and I mean until now and for the next ten years) did not issue one media release condemning this action. Even the Liberal party was more progressive on this issue by issuing media release and had Julia Bishop (who is very regressive politician) quoted on the media saying that the violence is regrettable and demanded “credible” investigation by Israel. The Greens did not have this courage yet even to follow the footsteps of the Liberals. But the Greens had the courage to come to the rally and spread all lies of opposing Israeli barbaric actions. And when I heckled them, the Greens party (which is infamous of the ability to change colour and tone and come up with lies after lies without stop) came up with the biggest laughable mockery that the Greens politicians will put a motion in the NSW parliament to condemn Israel.
What a shame without limits.
The Israeli crime is an international crime that needs strong motion in the FEDERAL parliament, not in local parliament. And the Greens have 5 members of FEDERAL parliament.
The Greens members in the crowd wanted me to be “democratic” and stop heckling the Greens member because I am not giving her the “democratic” right to lie on us. I remind them that democracy means that she has the right to speak and spread lies, but at the same time we have the right to speak and express our disgust at this cheap lies.
But the Greens democracy is a ONE WAY democracy. It is either “you are with us” or “your are undemocratic”.
Not only this. The whole rally was hijacked by the Greens party and its puppet “imagined organisation” that made decision on the speakers without any democratic decision making process. The Coalition for Justice and Peace in Palestine (CJPP) (I will write separate article about this imagined organisation that infact was my idea before I realise that we are serving the Greens and not the Palestinians struggle), decided to enter the election campaign to promote lies about the Greens unsubstantiated and unrpoven commitments towards the Palestinian struggle.
Well, the Greens and the CJPP yesterday were shamelessly trading with the blood of innocent people for cheap election propaganda. Both were auctioneering every drop of these angels blood that fell trying to end the Gaza siege in exchange for tens of votes in the next election.
Well, the first question to be asked by every listener yesterday was: why the Greens party (who was shamelessly branded by the CJPP MC as the long time supporter of Palestinian cause) did not demand in the last 3 years and immediate end of Gaza siege? Not only this, why the Greens party was the only parliamentary political party who until today did not send any of its parliamentarians for a solidarity visit to Palestine? Why the Greens party refused to participate in any of the solidarity visit, including declining the invitation send to the Greens party 2002 to lead solidarity and fact-finding mission to West bank after the massacres of Jenin and Nablus.
Yesterday the Greens party and its branch founded to deceive Palestinians and pro-Palestinians voter (CJPP) tried to oppress us from speaking up against lies. We were speaking yesterday against Israel, as the Greens party is a strong supporter of Israel if we carefully investigate the true facts (and we will release these facts soon). And we will do all in our best to keep these heckling to expose this evil party of mainly opportunists and Zionists.
Let us ask one question at the end: imagine that a homosexual (or drug addict) was shot by Iranian police during pro homosexual rights (or pro-drug abuse rally) in Tehran, would the Greens party be silent for three days? Would the Greens party restrict it action to putting a shy motion in local parliament? Or would the Greens do all in its power to turn the world upside down!!!
The Greens and their puppet imagined organisations (and there are few of them there on other issues, and we will write about them very soon) are highly condemned yesterday for tow sins: try to shut up democratic heckling. And other sin is for their bid to trade the blood of tens of innocent persons with votes to secure election of another opportunist regressive politician.
We are committed to continue our activities to expose these acts of political prostitution by all means. And we are very creative in doing this.
The Greens should respect their teachings. For the last 3 decades they did not achieve any real change in society but heckling every rival politician. And they should expect that other rival politicians will follow their tactics. This is for us a democratic and fair process.
And in Arabic we say: if you do not like it, you can hit your head against the nearest strong brick wall.
One last question: why the regressive Murdoch media suddenly is highlighting every Greens activities as if they encourage voters to vote for them? This question needs separate analysis soon.
I know that the Greens are extremely unhappy about this. The Greens wanted us to be silent, swallow their lies and then clap hands and go home satisfied that there are some politicians who listen to us and feel our sadness.
But yesterday I (and many community members) felt that enough is enough. This political prostitution should be stopped and end forever.
First of all and for all Greens (and no Greens) members who think that heckling politicians are undemocratic and uncivilized, I should mention here that in fact we learnt this tactic from the Greens. Their whole rise of popularity was a result of heckling all rival politicians they can.
Yesterday, Greens members were extremely unhappy with me heckling party MLC and branded me to be “uncivilized” and following “undemocratic” procedures. Well they should go and tell their hierarchy that in the last 30 years the Greens were uncivilized and followed “undemocratic” procedures.
The Greens are very good on political prostitution. When the “uncivilized” and “undemocratic” ways benefit them, they branded it as exercising of “freedom of speech” and “political campaigning to inform public”. But when it exposes their political opportunism and political prostitution, they branded it as “uncivilised”.
Very interesting party.
Let us go back to the issue of why I heckled the Greens MLC today.
The Greens yesterday has exercised extreme degree of shameless hypocrite conduct I ever met with. The Greens party had the courage to attend rally opposing the Israeli massacre, even though the party until now (and I mean until now and for the next ten years) did not issue one media release condemning this action. Even the Liberal party was more progressive on this issue by issuing media release and had Julia Bishop (who is very regressive politician) quoted on the media saying that the violence is regrettable and demanded “credible” investigation by Israel. The Greens did not have this courage yet even to follow the footsteps of the Liberals. But the Greens had the courage to come to the rally and spread all lies of opposing Israeli barbaric actions. And when I heckled them, the Greens party (which is infamous of the ability to change colour and tone and come up with lies after lies without stop) came up with the biggest laughable mockery that the Greens politicians will put a motion in the NSW parliament to condemn Israel.
What a shame without limits.
The Israeli crime is an international crime that needs strong motion in the FEDERAL parliament, not in local parliament. And the Greens have 5 members of FEDERAL parliament.
The Greens members in the crowd wanted me to be “democratic” and stop heckling the Greens member because I am not giving her the “democratic” right to lie on us. I remind them that democracy means that she has the right to speak and spread lies, but at the same time we have the right to speak and express our disgust at this cheap lies.
But the Greens democracy is a ONE WAY democracy. It is either “you are with us” or “your are undemocratic”.
Not only this. The whole rally was hijacked by the Greens party and its puppet “imagined organisation” that made decision on the speakers without any democratic decision making process. The Coalition for Justice and Peace in Palestine (CJPP) (I will write separate article about this imagined organisation that infact was my idea before I realise that we are serving the Greens and not the Palestinians struggle), decided to enter the election campaign to promote lies about the Greens unsubstantiated and unrpoven commitments towards the Palestinian struggle.
Well, the Greens and the CJPP yesterday were shamelessly trading with the blood of innocent people for cheap election propaganda. Both were auctioneering every drop of these angels blood that fell trying to end the Gaza siege in exchange for tens of votes in the next election.
Well, the first question to be asked by every listener yesterday was: why the Greens party (who was shamelessly branded by the CJPP MC as the long time supporter of Palestinian cause) did not demand in the last 3 years and immediate end of Gaza siege? Not only this, why the Greens party was the only parliamentary political party who until today did not send any of its parliamentarians for a solidarity visit to Palestine? Why the Greens party refused to participate in any of the solidarity visit, including declining the invitation send to the Greens party 2002 to lead solidarity and fact-finding mission to West bank after the massacres of Jenin and Nablus.
Yesterday the Greens party and its branch founded to deceive Palestinians and pro-Palestinians voter (CJPP) tried to oppress us from speaking up against lies. We were speaking yesterday against Israel, as the Greens party is a strong supporter of Israel if we carefully investigate the true facts (and we will release these facts soon). And we will do all in our best to keep these heckling to expose this evil party of mainly opportunists and Zionists.
Let us ask one question at the end: imagine that a homosexual (or drug addict) was shot by Iranian police during pro homosexual rights (or pro-drug abuse rally) in Tehran, would the Greens party be silent for three days? Would the Greens party restrict it action to putting a shy motion in local parliament? Or would the Greens do all in its power to turn the world upside down!!!
The Greens and their puppet imagined organisations (and there are few of them there on other issues, and we will write about them very soon) are highly condemned yesterday for tow sins: try to shut up democratic heckling. And other sin is for their bid to trade the blood of tens of innocent persons with votes to secure election of another opportunist regressive politician.
We are committed to continue our activities to expose these acts of political prostitution by all means. And we are very creative in doing this.
The Greens should respect their teachings. For the last 3 decades they did not achieve any real change in society but heckling every rival politician. And they should expect that other rival politicians will follow their tactics. This is for us a democratic and fair process.
And in Arabic we say: if you do not like it, you can hit your head against the nearest strong brick wall.
One last question: why the regressive Murdoch media suddenly is highlighting every Greens activities as if they encourage voters to vote for them? This question needs separate analysis soon.
Sunday, April 18, 2010
The solution for the Tasmanian political deadlock
With the “traditional” negotiation between political parties in Tasmania has failed to reach any workable solution, the Tasmanian politicians need to examine “non-traditional” way to solve this dilemma.
Before we go deep in the “non-traditional” solution, let us examine the political situation there. The Tasmanian new parliament is composed of 25 seats: 10 Labor, 10 Liberals and 5 Greens. The traditional solution for such situation is to form a minority government by either of big parties enters a deal with the minor party (the Greens).
But with the stiff refusal of the Liberals to negotiate with the Greens for “principled reasons” (despite the Greens repeated tries to beg meeting with the Liberals to negotiate forming a coalition government with the Greens), the only other option was for the Labor to enter an agreement with the Greens. But with the Greens refusal to accept one ministerial post and the refusal of the Labor to offer the Greens more posts, the impasse had one “Greens” solution. The Greens solution is to let the Labor pre-election government continues functioning with no majority in the parliament. But this government would be very fragile and would collapse soon in the face of the first important issue to be debated in the parliament.
In other countries and when there is political or economical instability, the big parties usually come together to form a government of “national unity”. And because Tasmanians now are in deep political instability, the only workable solution is to form a government of national unity.
The solution works by forming a government of 50 – 50 Labor – Liberals where the cabinet will have equal numbers of Liberals and Labor ministers. The issues of premiership could be solved either by rotating the post between 2 premiers each 2 years. Or it could be reached by appointing première and deputy première with equal authorities.
By doing this the democracy will be partially transferred from the parliament to the cabinet. And when there is very divisive issue, they could take it to the parliament to be decided by all politicians, including the minor party’s representatives.
By doing this the Tasmanians will have more stable government. And if we recall historical experience of minority government when both the Labor and the Greens entered accord 1989, the government was very instable that it collapsed after 3 years. Not only this. Both parties that entered the accord lost heavily in the following election, where Liberals won the government and Greens lost 4%. And this is why the Labor is not keen to do this again.
The solution of forming “government of national unity” will give good stability for the Tasmanian government, until the following election happens where one of the big parties could secure majority in the parliament.
Few people think, falsely, that the failure of either big party to secure majority on its own right is because of the surge in the Greens vote. This false impression came to the mind of people because of all this noise in the Greens camp to paint a picture that we are witnessing Greens revolution in Australia. Close study of election results’ statistics could easily revealed that the Greens vote and representation was not significantly higher than the Greens vote in 2002 election (18.1% comparing to 21.3% in 2010 election). But at that time (2002 election), Labor could convince more Liberals’ voters to keep voting for Labor as a better government. This year’s election, the Liberals could not convince enough voters to abandon the Labor and vote for change of government. And the Labor government could not convince enough of its voters to keep voting for it. So the move of votes was in fact between the Labor and Liberals, and not towards the Greens. What makes this more realistic is that an election at the same date in South Australia could not see surge of Greens revolution their.
We know now that any coalition government between the Greens and any of either big party would end disastrously bad, to both sides of such coalition. Exactly as what happened in 1989.
A government of national unity would see both major parties compromise their minor differences. And that is more stable than living or working with the empty rhetoric the Greens would all of us to hear.
Before we go deep in the “non-traditional” solution, let us examine the political situation there. The Tasmanian new parliament is composed of 25 seats: 10 Labor, 10 Liberals and 5 Greens. The traditional solution for such situation is to form a minority government by either of big parties enters a deal with the minor party (the Greens).
But with the stiff refusal of the Liberals to negotiate with the Greens for “principled reasons” (despite the Greens repeated tries to beg meeting with the Liberals to negotiate forming a coalition government with the Greens), the only other option was for the Labor to enter an agreement with the Greens. But with the Greens refusal to accept one ministerial post and the refusal of the Labor to offer the Greens more posts, the impasse had one “Greens” solution. The Greens solution is to let the Labor pre-election government continues functioning with no majority in the parliament. But this government would be very fragile and would collapse soon in the face of the first important issue to be debated in the parliament.
In other countries and when there is political or economical instability, the big parties usually come together to form a government of “national unity”. And because Tasmanians now are in deep political instability, the only workable solution is to form a government of national unity.
The solution works by forming a government of 50 – 50 Labor – Liberals where the cabinet will have equal numbers of Liberals and Labor ministers. The issues of premiership could be solved either by rotating the post between 2 premiers each 2 years. Or it could be reached by appointing première and deputy première with equal authorities.
By doing this the democracy will be partially transferred from the parliament to the cabinet. And when there is very divisive issue, they could take it to the parliament to be decided by all politicians, including the minor party’s representatives.
By doing this the Tasmanians will have more stable government. And if we recall historical experience of minority government when both the Labor and the Greens entered accord 1989, the government was very instable that it collapsed after 3 years. Not only this. Both parties that entered the accord lost heavily in the following election, where Liberals won the government and Greens lost 4%. And this is why the Labor is not keen to do this again.
The solution of forming “government of national unity” will give good stability for the Tasmanian government, until the following election happens where one of the big parties could secure majority in the parliament.
Few people think, falsely, that the failure of either big party to secure majority on its own right is because of the surge in the Greens vote. This false impression came to the mind of people because of all this noise in the Greens camp to paint a picture that we are witnessing Greens revolution in Australia. Close study of election results’ statistics could easily revealed that the Greens vote and representation was not significantly higher than the Greens vote in 2002 election (18.1% comparing to 21.3% in 2010 election). But at that time (2002 election), Labor could convince more Liberals’ voters to keep voting for Labor as a better government. This year’s election, the Liberals could not convince enough voters to abandon the Labor and vote for change of government. And the Labor government could not convince enough of its voters to keep voting for it. So the move of votes was in fact between the Labor and Liberals, and not towards the Greens. What makes this more realistic is that an election at the same date in South Australia could not see surge of Greens revolution their.
We know now that any coalition government between the Greens and any of either big party would end disastrously bad, to both sides of such coalition. Exactly as what happened in 1989.
A government of national unity would see both major parties compromise their minor differences. And that is more stable than living or working with the empty rhetoric the Greens would all of us to hear.
Liberals – Greens proposed Coalition: Voters need to be both alert and alarmed!
Bravo, bravo, bravo and million bravos.
It is confirmed by the Tasmanian Greens leader and the Australian Greens leader: the Greens is seeking coalition government with the Liberals.
In politics, we understand that forces entering coalition arrangement would have policies, vision and ideologies in common. In this instance let us ask the Greens leaders how close they are with the Liberals on:
1- Pessimism on acknowledging the global warming issues.
2- The eager to clear the Tasmanian forests, and every forest in Australia.
3- Selling public assets to multi-national corporations regardless of the devastating impacts on Australians lifestyle.
4- Locking up children, women and men for indefinite times in detention centres.
5- Destroying public education, public health and public housing.
6- Invading other countries of Iraq, Afghanistan and possibly Iran and Syria.
7- Promoting Islamophobia and racism in the society and introducing draconian “Anti-Terrorism” laws.
8- Alliance with far-right Christian groups who wants to bring Australia back to dark ages of Crusades.
9- Anti gays and anti drugs policy.
And we will not accept any lies and deceptions from the Greens leaders and hierarchies, anymore. They are seeking entering far-right government that will bring Tasmania to its knees on all above mentioned issues of principles.
The Greens will say that they are doing this to pacify the extreme nature of the Liberal party in Tasmania. On this issue let us explain to the readers how the things work in any coalition government: the cabinet will meet, discuss proposals and then vote on adopting the proposals before putting these proposals to the parliament for vote. And with Greens getting only one or two ministerial posts, they can argue and argue against: clearing Tasmanian forests, selling local hospitals and schools, cutting funding of community projects,…etc. But at the end of the day, the vote will be in the side of the Liberals (who has the majority in the cabinet).
Doing this would mean that the Liberals will claim, rightly, that these devastating decisions were taken with the Greens support.
We believe that the Greens in other states, other than Tasmania, will vend more lies and deceptive claims that the Greens are uniquely a federation of independent Greens parties and groups. They will tell us lie after lie about the no support of the NSW Greens or Victorian Greens of such devastating move.
As if we have forgotten that the Victorian Greens has struck similar deal with the Liberals in the 2006 state election. And at that time, the Greens leader Bob Brown arrogantly and shamelessly tried to lie on us and said that such a deal was a “rumour” launched by the environment minister, Peter Garrett.
And we still did not forget that the NSW Greens also tried to strike a deal with the Liberals in the state election, 2007. At that time, the Liberals were more principled and refused to strike a deal with a party that “promote drugs’ abuse”. The Greens denied the move and branded it to be a “rumour” again.
And before that the Greens struck deal with the far racist One Nation party in 2001 Federal election. The deal that saw Ms Kerry Nettle elected to the senate. And the Greens is still denying this deal and calling it “rumour”.
This time the Greens cannot deny the “rumour”. It was confirmed by Bob Brown and Nick McKim. And they were proud of it. It was broadcasted by all media outlets.
We are sure that Tasmanians did not vote for this. They voted for the Greens to stop the regressive policies and lack of actions on issues that matter. Now the Greens will participate in making more regressive policies and moves.
The Tasmanian election and its aftermath should ring very alarming bills: be aware of the Greens lies and deceptions.
The Tasmanian election aftermath demonstrates that Greens does not have neither ideology nor clear politics. Hence the voters should be very alarmed and alert.
The Tasmanian election aftermath means that the voting for the Greens in the next federal election definitely means voting for the Liberals. And anyone who is conceding voting for the Greens should know that infact they are voting for an extreme right government lead by the extreme new conservatives Tony Abbot and Phillip Ruddock.
Anyone voting for the Greens in the next Federal election should be aware that they are voting for:
1- Government that will re-play the race card, which would definitely means detaining innocent people including children and women indefinitely.
2- Government that is supported by the far-right new-conservatives that will support promoting Islamophobia and division in the society.
3- Government that will sell what have left from public assets to multi-national big corporation.
4- Government that deny existence of global warming and consider taking any steps to reduce emission as a waste of public money.
While we are not surprised by Greens seeking alliance with the far right forces (as they did it before several times as I mentioned above). But for now we are saying very loud: shame on the Greens for deceiving voters by entering coalition with the far right Liberal party. And soon we will campaign to expose the Greens’ deceptive claims of being “alternative progressive” force.
And after deceiving its voters (environmentalists, gays, pro-abortionist, pro-refugees rights,…) we want to ask simple question: who can buy the Greens lies anymore in the future?!
After Tasmanian election aftermath we declare from now that in the next Federal election the Greens will be last on our preference list. The same as what we did in Auburn local government election 2008. At that election we cost the Greens a seat there.
It is confirmed by the Tasmanian Greens leader and the Australian Greens leader: the Greens is seeking coalition government with the Liberals.
In politics, we understand that forces entering coalition arrangement would have policies, vision and ideologies in common. In this instance let us ask the Greens leaders how close they are with the Liberals on:
1- Pessimism on acknowledging the global warming issues.
2- The eager to clear the Tasmanian forests, and every forest in Australia.
3- Selling public assets to multi-national corporations regardless of the devastating impacts on Australians lifestyle.
4- Locking up children, women and men for indefinite times in detention centres.
5- Destroying public education, public health and public housing.
6- Invading other countries of Iraq, Afghanistan and possibly Iran and Syria.
7- Promoting Islamophobia and racism in the society and introducing draconian “Anti-Terrorism” laws.
8- Alliance with far-right Christian groups who wants to bring Australia back to dark ages of Crusades.
9- Anti gays and anti drugs policy.
And we will not accept any lies and deceptions from the Greens leaders and hierarchies, anymore. They are seeking entering far-right government that will bring Tasmania to its knees on all above mentioned issues of principles.
The Greens will say that they are doing this to pacify the extreme nature of the Liberal party in Tasmania. On this issue let us explain to the readers how the things work in any coalition government: the cabinet will meet, discuss proposals and then vote on adopting the proposals before putting these proposals to the parliament for vote. And with Greens getting only one or two ministerial posts, they can argue and argue against: clearing Tasmanian forests, selling local hospitals and schools, cutting funding of community projects,…etc. But at the end of the day, the vote will be in the side of the Liberals (who has the majority in the cabinet).
Doing this would mean that the Liberals will claim, rightly, that these devastating decisions were taken with the Greens support.
We believe that the Greens in other states, other than Tasmania, will vend more lies and deceptive claims that the Greens are uniquely a federation of independent Greens parties and groups. They will tell us lie after lie about the no support of the NSW Greens or Victorian Greens of such devastating move.
As if we have forgotten that the Victorian Greens has struck similar deal with the Liberals in the 2006 state election. And at that time, the Greens leader Bob Brown arrogantly and shamelessly tried to lie on us and said that such a deal was a “rumour” launched by the environment minister, Peter Garrett.
And we still did not forget that the NSW Greens also tried to strike a deal with the Liberals in the state election, 2007. At that time, the Liberals were more principled and refused to strike a deal with a party that “promote drugs’ abuse”. The Greens denied the move and branded it to be a “rumour” again.
And before that the Greens struck deal with the far racist One Nation party in 2001 Federal election. The deal that saw Ms Kerry Nettle elected to the senate. And the Greens is still denying this deal and calling it “rumour”.
This time the Greens cannot deny the “rumour”. It was confirmed by Bob Brown and Nick McKim. And they were proud of it. It was broadcasted by all media outlets.
We are sure that Tasmanians did not vote for this. They voted for the Greens to stop the regressive policies and lack of actions on issues that matter. Now the Greens will participate in making more regressive policies and moves.
The Tasmanian election and its aftermath should ring very alarming bills: be aware of the Greens lies and deceptions.
The Tasmanian election aftermath demonstrates that Greens does not have neither ideology nor clear politics. Hence the voters should be very alarmed and alert.
The Tasmanian election aftermath means that the voting for the Greens in the next federal election definitely means voting for the Liberals. And anyone who is conceding voting for the Greens should know that infact they are voting for an extreme right government lead by the extreme new conservatives Tony Abbot and Phillip Ruddock.
Anyone voting for the Greens in the next Federal election should be aware that they are voting for:
1- Government that will re-play the race card, which would definitely means detaining innocent people including children and women indefinitely.
2- Government that is supported by the far-right new-conservatives that will support promoting Islamophobia and division in the society.
3- Government that will sell what have left from public assets to multi-national big corporation.
4- Government that deny existence of global warming and consider taking any steps to reduce emission as a waste of public money.
While we are not surprised by Greens seeking alliance with the far right forces (as they did it before several times as I mentioned above). But for now we are saying very loud: shame on the Greens for deceiving voters by entering coalition with the far right Liberal party. And soon we will campaign to expose the Greens’ deceptive claims of being “alternative progressive” force.
And after deceiving its voters (environmentalists, gays, pro-abortionist, pro-refugees rights,…) we want to ask simple question: who can buy the Greens lies anymore in the future?!
After Tasmanian election aftermath we declare from now that in the next Federal election the Greens will be last on our preference list. The same as what we did in Auburn local government election 2008. At that election we cost the Greens a seat there.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Open letter to our PM: why resorting to racism and Islamophobia to win next election?
Dear Hon Kevin Rudd, our PM
Yes, we have noticed that the election is approaching fast. And we have noticed that you have panicked and so resorted to the easiest way to stick to power: play on fear from unknown “terrorism”.
You have not provided us with any shred of evidence that a terrorist attack is imminent. All what you have told us is that there were many Muslims who were convicted of “terrorism-related” crimes. Many credible human rights watchdogs have deep concerns about the transparency and fairness of these trials and believe that the convictions were due to the media circus and public frenzy your government and previous government have produced.
Mr Rudd
We are very ashamed of you, your attorney general and minster for foreign affairs. You have put your interests to win election ahead of Australia’s interests to enjoy good relationships with 10 countries around the world. And we did not recover yet from the shameful wide coverage worldwide about Australian racist attacks on Indian students.
Mr Rudd
You have quoted anonymous security agencies to spread fear and frenzy in the society. The same happened under your predecessor, when he quoted the same agencies to spread lies about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. Then we have learnt that these reports and information were manufactured to give your government good excuses to invade sovereign nation and destroy it totally.
That was not the only time the security agencies, especially ASIO and Federal Police, had made such wrong moves to serve incumbent government. They did it in the case of Dr Mohamed Haneef.
After that, how can we trust you or your security agencies, who only depend on secret reports and investigations that not available to public?
What has made our trust very weak in you and your security agencies is the hypocrisy in dealing with similar matters in different ways. We assumed that the security agencies are on high alert since 11 September 2001. This has resulted in discovering “terrorist” thoughts and dreams communicated between angry persons of policy of aggression conducted by your predecessor against all Muslim nations. But at the same time, these agencies are standing impotent to finalise security checks of refugees or new migrants. Otherwise, how on earth it took the security agencies more than 4 years to reach conclusion that Mrs Lina Hamdan is not a terrorist and does not having terrorist thoughts and dreams? I can give you hundreds (if not thousands) of similar cases where your security agencies had failed to finalise Form 80 (security check on terrorism-related issues) in less than 2 years.
Mr Rudd
You have failed us. You have failed multiculturalism. You have failed Muslim communities. You have betrayed your voters who voted for your government seeking change. The only change you have introduced is that you can change your colour more easily than your predecessor.
What makes things worse is that you have failed the same communities that have trusted you and voted for your party, historically. We can understand that John Howard did not care about the feelings and interests of new migrants or Muslims, as they are not traditional voters of the Liberals. But for you to play race and Islamophobia cards, it is deeply offensive and disappointing.
We have been betrayed also by the other party who usually gets a lot of our votes. We are watching with deep concern and disappointment the complete silence of the Greens on this particular issue. The Greens also had got a lot of Muslim and pro-multicultural votes.
We could not believe that the regressive racist Liberal party politicians will stand up to expose these lies and deceptive claims. We thought that the ones who claim to be progressive should have stood up and questioned your motives in launching these lies.
Mr Rudd
Your move today has spread fear, uncertainty and social division. Instead of working to breakdown the many barriers and obstacles built during your predecessor, you have built some more.
Mr Rudd
We cannot believe that for you to cover up some of your bungles during wasting our common wealth, you chose to make more destructive moves. It was enough that you have wasted around $2 billions in dodgy insulation program. You should not have created more division and fear that will need another couple of billions of dollars to face its impact.
Mr Rudd
We are ashamed of you, your government and your Labor party. And we are waiting for the election to let you know about our feelings.
Yes, we have noticed that the election is approaching fast. And we have noticed that you have panicked and so resorted to the easiest way to stick to power: play on fear from unknown “terrorism”.
You have not provided us with any shred of evidence that a terrorist attack is imminent. All what you have told us is that there were many Muslims who were convicted of “terrorism-related” crimes. Many credible human rights watchdogs have deep concerns about the transparency and fairness of these trials and believe that the convictions were due to the media circus and public frenzy your government and previous government have produced.
Mr Rudd
We are very ashamed of you, your attorney general and minster for foreign affairs. You have put your interests to win election ahead of Australia’s interests to enjoy good relationships with 10 countries around the world. And we did not recover yet from the shameful wide coverage worldwide about Australian racist attacks on Indian students.
Mr Rudd
You have quoted anonymous security agencies to spread fear and frenzy in the society. The same happened under your predecessor, when he quoted the same agencies to spread lies about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. Then we have learnt that these reports and information were manufactured to give your government good excuses to invade sovereign nation and destroy it totally.
That was not the only time the security agencies, especially ASIO and Federal Police, had made such wrong moves to serve incumbent government. They did it in the case of Dr Mohamed Haneef.
After that, how can we trust you or your security agencies, who only depend on secret reports and investigations that not available to public?
What has made our trust very weak in you and your security agencies is the hypocrisy in dealing with similar matters in different ways. We assumed that the security agencies are on high alert since 11 September 2001. This has resulted in discovering “terrorist” thoughts and dreams communicated between angry persons of policy of aggression conducted by your predecessor against all Muslim nations. But at the same time, these agencies are standing impotent to finalise security checks of refugees or new migrants. Otherwise, how on earth it took the security agencies more than 4 years to reach conclusion that Mrs Lina Hamdan is not a terrorist and does not having terrorist thoughts and dreams? I can give you hundreds (if not thousands) of similar cases where your security agencies had failed to finalise Form 80 (security check on terrorism-related issues) in less than 2 years.
Mr Rudd
You have failed us. You have failed multiculturalism. You have failed Muslim communities. You have betrayed your voters who voted for your government seeking change. The only change you have introduced is that you can change your colour more easily than your predecessor.
What makes things worse is that you have failed the same communities that have trusted you and voted for your party, historically. We can understand that John Howard did not care about the feelings and interests of new migrants or Muslims, as they are not traditional voters of the Liberals. But for you to play race and Islamophobia cards, it is deeply offensive and disappointing.
We have been betrayed also by the other party who usually gets a lot of our votes. We are watching with deep concern and disappointment the complete silence of the Greens on this particular issue. The Greens also had got a lot of Muslim and pro-multicultural votes.
We could not believe that the regressive racist Liberal party politicians will stand up to expose these lies and deceptive claims. We thought that the ones who claim to be progressive should have stood up and questioned your motives in launching these lies.
Mr Rudd
Your move today has spread fear, uncertainty and social division. Instead of working to breakdown the many barriers and obstacles built during your predecessor, you have built some more.
Mr Rudd
We cannot believe that for you to cover up some of your bungles during wasting our common wealth, you chose to make more destructive moves. It was enough that you have wasted around $2 billions in dodgy insulation program. You should not have created more division and fear that will need another couple of billions of dollars to face its impact.
Mr Rudd
We are ashamed of you, your government and your Labor party. And we are waiting for the election to let you know about our feelings.
Friday, January 15, 2010
زمن العار العربي بقيادة مصرية: رحمة الله عليك ابا خالد
عندما تصبح الخيانة شيئا يمكن التفاخر به والتباهي امام العالم بارتكابه
عندما يصبح الانبطاح تحت البسطار الاسرائيلي المخضب بدماء آلاف الشهداء اللبنانيين والفلسطينيين والمصريين، شيئا لا يدعو للخجل بل ويقف اكثر من مسؤول في هذا النظام العربي او ذاك ليقول "اننا احرار" في انبطاحنا هذا حتی لو كان علی حساب تجويع شعب غزه باكمله وصولا الی افنائه خدمة لعدو الانسانية
عندما يصبح تشافيز وغالاوي واردوغان اكثر عروبة واسلاما وانسانية وشفقة علی معاناة شعوب المنطقة من قادة اغنی و اكبر دول فيها
عندما يصبح تهريب مواد غذائية وادوية وحليب اطفال وملابس الی غزة تهديدا لامن اكبر الدول العربية، بينما تهريب المخدرات والايدز والدعارة والجواسيس ونهب الثروات من غاز ونفط .. يعتبر نوعا من "ضرب الحبيب زبيب" حسب نصوص معاهدة كامب دايفيد الاستسلامية المذلة
عندما يصبح ابو الغيط ناطقا رسميا للعدوان اللااخلاقي واللاانساني الوحشي علی غزه، بايجاد المبررات لهذا العدوان واعطائه غطائا سياسيا من اكبر دولة عربية خلال العدوان الهمجي الاسرائيلي علی غزة، بينما يطرد الرئيس الفنزويلي والبيروفي السفراء الاسرائيليين لدی بلادهم
عندما يحدث كل هذا في وطن عربي بحجم واهمية الوطن العربي الذي حولته القيادات العربية الی دول اقل اهمية من جزيرة كوبا او جزر الكناري، فان هذا الوطن يكون قد دخل في زمن العار المطلق وغياب الوعي والاخلاق والضمير
والا فكيف يجرؤ ابو الغيط علی الاستخفاف بعقولنا وشعورنا وتاريخ نضال شعبنا وتاريخ نضال شعب مصر الأبي، فيسترسل في اطلاق تصريحاته الهوجاء والتي وبكل المقاييس هي "بلا لون ولا طعم ولا رائحة". فمرة هو حر في قتل مدنيي غزه ببناء الجدار الفولاذي الذي يشاء هو ورئيسه ولو علی جثث آلاف اطفال غزة المحاصرين. ومرة هو يتفهم مجازر اسرائيل التي جاءت ردا علی صواريخ حماس "العبثية". ومرة هو لا يتبع تعليمات "الشيخ نصرالله" بضرورة فك الحصار وله الحرية الكاملة بتكسير ايدي وارجل اطفال غزة ان تجرؤوا وطالبوا بحليب اطفال او كتب للدراسة. واخيرا فهو غاضب لان متظاهرين اجانب تركوا اعمالهم واشغالهم في بلدانهم وسافروا الی مصر للتضامن مع اهل غزة المحاصرين، فقرر ان "يلقنهم" درسا في عدم ضرورة مخالفة اوامر اسياده الامريكان والاسرائيليين
يطالعنا النظام المصري بكل هذه الترهات والتعديات علی ارواح مئات آلاف البشر في غزة، في نفس الشهر الذي شهد مولد الزعيم المصري والعربي والعالمي الخالد، جمال عبد الناصر. ويبدو ان الصدفة هي خير من الف ميعاد للمقارنة بين مشروعين ونظامين نقيضين
فمشاهدة ابي الغيط يتشدق بكل هذه الترهات يعيدنا وبكل احاسيسنا وعواطفنا الی الزمن الذهبي لعصر ابي خالد
فنظام ابي خالد كان يفاخر بانه نشط في "تهريب" السلاح والمال وكل مقومات الصمود لكل الشعوب المضطهدة، من الجزائر الی فلسطين وانغولا واندونيسيا وكوبا. بل وكان يعتبر هذا التهريب جزءا من مسؤولية اخلاقية وانسانية اتجاه مضطهدي العالم
ونظام ابي خالد كان ناشطا في معارضه كل اشكال الظلم حول العالم ويؤمن بان تضامن الشعوب المضطهدة هو خير وسيلة لمقاومة الظلم باعتبار ان الامبريالية موحدة في توحشها من اجل استمرار رؤوس الاموال والشركات العابرة للقارات في نهبها لخيرات شعوب العالم
ونظام ابي خالد كان يدرك ويعلن علانية ان القضية الفلسطينية هي قضية محورية في مقارعة الاستكبار العالمي. هذا الادراك الناتج عن الفهم العميق عن اسباب ودوافع انشاء "دولة اسرائيل" في وسط منطقة اكبر انتاج للنفط في العالم، من اجل استمرار عسكرة المنطقة ونهب ثرواتها بدواعي تحقيق الامن عن طريق مبادلة النفط مقابل اسلحة تارة "ستستخدم" للدفاع في وجه اسرائيل وتارة من اجل غزو بلدان المنطقة بعضها بعضا
ونظام ابي خالد كان واضحا في تحديد من هو العدو ومن هو الصديق. فامريكا ومن لف لفها من دول غربية ما تزال تحلم بالتفوق الابيض الغربي واحقيته بالتالي بالتمتع بالثروة والرخاء، لا يمكن ان تكون صديقة لاي شعوب مكافحة من اجل الاستقلال من الاستعمار والذي معظمه ابيض ناصع البياض
ما يدهش الجميع هي الصراحة في مجاهرة اركان النظام المصري وزبانيته في التفاخر بخدمة المشروع الصهيو-امريكي وانهم احرار في سفك دماء اطفال وشيوخ ونساء غزه من اجل تحقيق الاهداف الاستعمارية
رحمة الله عليك ابا خالد عندما حولت مصر الی دولة قادرة علی "تحويل دول من الدرجة الاولی الی دول من الدرجة الثانية والثالثة"، بينما اشباه الرجال من بعدك استطاعوا ان يحولوا مصر من دولة قائدة الی دولة لا تستطيع اتخاذ قرار كم جندي تستطيع ان ترسل الی شبه جزيرة سيناء، دون اخذ موافقة اسرائيل
رحمة الله عليك ابا خالد عندما اثبت ان مصر هي "ام الدنيا" ومركز محوري في قيادة العالم، بينما من جاء بعدك حول مصر الی "ام اسرائيل" بعد ان تبنتها في معاهدات كامب دايفيد المذلة
رحمة الله عليك ابا خالد بعد ان اعلنتها صريحة بان "ما اخذ بالقوة لا يسترد الا بالقوة"، بينما عملاء امريكا واسرائيل في قاهرة المعز يعلنون ان المقاومة لعنة يجب معاقبة من يريد ان يمارسها ولو بحفر جدار فولاذي بعمق ٣٠ مترا تحت الارض كرمی لعيون مجرمي تل ابيب وواشنطن
رحمة الله عليك ابا خالد، وعلی زمنك الذهبي، زمن "ارفع راسك يا اخي فقد ولی زمن الهزائم
ندرك ان ظلام الليل لا يمكن ان يستمر الی ما لا نهاية وان نور الفجر لا بد قريب
Monday, December 21, 2009
نرفض استجلاب الديمقراطية العشائرية الی استراليا
ما ان كتبت مقالة انتقد فيها تصرفات احد الذين قفزوا علی ظهورنا وظهر جاليتنا الكريمة لعقود من الزمان ونصبوا انفسهم "قادة" لنا ولجاليتنا، بالرغم من اننا لم ننتخبهم ولم يستشيرونا في هذه المسالة المهمة، حتی قامت الدنيا ولم تقعد. فما ان نشرت لنا العنكبوت الالكترونية مقال ينتقد ممارسات السيد جمال الريفي علی مدی العقد الماضي، حتی انهالت علي وعلی صاحب العنكبوت مكالمات من كل حدب وصوب بعضها معاتب وآخر مرعد مزبد مهدد لنا بالويل والثبور ان لم نعد عن "غينا" ونعتذر عما ارتكبناه من "هجاء" لصاحب الظل العالي
لم يزد ما كتبناه في ذاك المقال عن نقد موثق لتصريحات مهينة بحق ابرياء هربوا من ظلم اوطانهم اطلقها السيد الريفي ووصفهم فيها بالمهاجرين غير الشرعيين وانه سيعمل من خلال نشاطه في اللجنة الاستشارية في وزارة الهجرة علی وقف تدفقهم لمنع تخطيهم للصفوف. وذكُرنا القارئ بالمواقف السابقة للسيد الريفي والتي كانت في مجملها معادية لمصالح الجالية وابنائها، كدليل علی الاجندات المخفية التي جاءت بالسيد الريفي الی اللجنة الاستشارية وهو لا يعرف في قضايا اللاجئين الكثير. والا فكيف يقفز السيد وزير الهجرة عن خبراء في مجال اللجوء والهجرة والهجرة غير القانونية من امثال د. محمد الجابري او المحامية عبير حمدان او وغيرهم من العاملين في هذا المجال ليعين السيد الريفي؟
المثير للاشمئزاز هو سيل الانتقادات التي وجهت لنا لاننا تخطينا كل الخطوط الحمر في نقدنا العلمي الموثق لكل ما ادعيناه من سلوكيات للسيد الريفي. بل ان بعض المعاتبين من "قيادات" الجالية غير المنتخبة قد خرج عن ادبيات الديمقراطية ولياقاتها ووجه لنا كلمات لم نستطع الا رفضها ومواجهتها بالحجة والمنطق والدعوة للاحتكام للعبة الديمقراطیة وآلياتها المعروفة
ما خضناه خلال الاسابيع الماضية كان وصمة عار في جبين كل من يدعي التنطح لقيادة الجالية واعادة للجالية الی عشائرية بغيضة حسبنا اننا طوينا صفحتها بمجرد وصولنا الی هذا البلد الجميل وانغماسنا في لعبته الديمقراطية حسب اصولها
خلال الاسابيع الماضية اكتشفنا لماذا ما زلنا كجالية نتخبط في مشاكلنا ومآسينا لا نعرف لها حلا
فقيادات الجالية غير المنتخبين والذين سمح الكثير منهم لانفسهم "بسحل" الجالية الی مسلخ الحكومات العنصرية، والذين فعلوا ذلك علانية وعلی رؤوس الاشهاد وامام كاميرات التلفزيونات الاسترالية والعالمية دون "احم او دستور" ودون مشاورة احد من الجالية، طالبونا ان لا نكتب أي نقد حتی نستشيرهم وناخذ الاذن منهم
وقيادات الجالية التي لم ينتخبها احد، تساءلت "بحزم" عن الجهة التي اعطتنا الحق بالدفاع عن الجالية والوقوف ضد كل من يحاول سحلها وجلدها من اجل تحقيق اجندات سياسية لاحزاب باتت معروفة. فمن اعطاهم الحق بتمثيلنا "رغما عن انوفنا" ثم اعطاهم الحق بالمشاركة في سبنا وقدحنا وانكار انجازاتنا كجالية لا ندري لماذا لا يعطينا نفس الحق في التمثيل من اجل الدفاع عن انجازاتنا وحقوقنا الديمقراطية
حيرنا منطق هذه "القيادة". فمرة يزاودون علينا بضرورة السماح لمن هب ودب ان ينتقد الجالية ويكيل لها كل اشكال الذم والقدح لان ذلك هو مربط فرس الديمقراطيات الغربية التي يحق فيها لاي انسان بانتقاد ايا كان، ان التزم بشروط النقد الايجابي البناء البعيد عن التطاول والتجريح والتجني غير القائم علی دليل. وعندما نقوم بنفس العمل بتوجيه انتقادات لبعض المسيئين للجالية، نواجه بالقدح والذم والتجريح وبسؤال عمن اعطانا الحق في ممارسة حقوقنا الديمقراطية
نؤمن ان الديمقراطية الاسترالية يجب ان تطبق علينا جميعا بغض النظر عن اصولنا او أي عادات ورثناها عن قبائل داحس والغبراء
ولذلك فقد قلنا لكل من اتصل بنا معاتبا او مهددا ان للديمقراطية سيفا مسلولا لمنع الفوضی ايضا. فالسيد الريفي له الحق كاملا بالطعن بما سقناه من انتقادات له ولسلوكه المعادي للجالية. وقد شرحنا لهم ان للسيد الريفي حقا اما بالرد علينا بمقال يبين فيه رايه بالانتقادات التي اوردناها والبينات التي تثبت ارائه. كما ان للسيد الريفي الحق في رفع قضية امام المحاكم ان كان يعتبر ان ما سقناه من آراء ما هو الا اكاذيب للتشهير به
وقد فاجئنا السيد الريفي انه يرفض الانصياع لمتطلبات الديمقراطيات الغربية وانه يفضل العودة الی ديمقراطيات عشائر داحس والغبراء وحل الموضوع عن طريق عقد صلحة عشائرية تنتهي بتبويس لحی و"يا دار ما دخلك شر
ان ما يؤسف في الموضوع برمته هو استفحال ازمة القيادة في الجالية، والتي تعززها في كثير من الاحيان ممارسات الحكومات الفيديرالية والمحلية المشجعة لديمقراطية العشائر داخل الجالية
فالحكومات الاسترالية مسرورة جدا من تولي اميين واشباه اميين لقيادة الجالية، يكون من السهولة بمكان السيطرة عليهم وتوجيههم لخدمة اجنداتها، بدلا من خدمة اجندات جاليتهم. كما ان تولي هؤلاء لقيادة الجالية سيبث الياس والقنوط في صفوف مثقفي الجالية ويدخلهم في متاهات الصراع من اجل انتزاع حقوق الجالية مما سيؤدي بالكثير منهم الی الاستسلام والجلوس في منازلهم علی مبدأ "وهل يصلح العطار ما افسدته الحكومات
رفضت طوال حياتي حتی قبل الوصول الی هذا البلد الجميل وبشدة الاحتكام لديمقراطية العشائر والجلوس امام زعماء القبائل انتظارا لانهاء الخلافات بتبويس لحی. وما زلت ارفض هذا المستوی الرجعي في معالجة الامور، وخصوصا المهمة منها
ومن لا يعجبه، فعليه اما ان يلجأ للديمقراطية الاسترالية او للعودة الی مضارب داحس والغبراء واستدعائي الی مجالس "حق العرب
ندرك ان الحضارة الانسانية يجب ان تتقدم الی الامام دائما، وليس العكس. وبالرغم من اننا لسنا ضد حضارة احد، الا اننا لن نسمح ان نكون وسيلة لاخذ الحضارة الی الوراء وصولا الی عار داحس والغبراء
واللبيب من الاشارة يفهم
(يمكنكم قراءة مقالتي التي سببت الضجة العشائرية علی http://jamaldaoud.blogspot.com/2009/12/blog-post.html(
جائزة ايفي الفنية تذهب الی طبيب "مسلم" من الضواحي
بقلم ريتشاردو كورباجو
١٢ كانون اول ٠٩
بعد ان حصل علی الكثير من الجوائز، فان الدكتور جمال الريفي، وهو طبيب من ضاحية بيلمور، قد اضاف جائزة ايفي الفنية الی مقتنياته من الجوائز العالمية. وقد استحق السيد الريفي هذه الجائزة كاحسن ممثل في المسلسل الطويل "قدح المسلمين - كل يغني علی ليلاه
ويعتبر السيد الريفي بطل في الفوز بهكذا جوائز – مفاجئات. فقد حصل السيد الريفي العام الماضي علی جائزة من مفوضية حقوق الانسان وتكافؤ الفرص لاسباب لم يقتنع بها حتی مانح الجائزة. كما فاز السيد الريفي بجوائز عدة من منظمات محلية، كجوائز الصحف المحلية وجوائز البلديات. كما فاز السيد الريفي مؤخرا بجائزه من منظمة اسلامية لم يسمع بها معظم المسلمين، ولاسباب لا يمكن ان تقنع طفلا رضيعا. ويبدو ان الخطوة القادمة ستكون بادراج السيد الريفي بكتاب جينيس للارقام القياسية لحصوله علی اكبر عدد من الجوائز التقديرية باقصر فترة زمنية منحت لاتفه الاسباب غير المقنعة حتی لمانحيها
وبعد حصول السيد الريفي علی الجائزة تدفقت كلمات التاييد لهذا الفوز من كل حدب وصوب. فقد صرحت رئيسة الولاية، السيدة كريستينا كينيلي، بانها تؤيد حصول السيد الريفي علی هذه الجائزة بشدة. وقالت ان افضل دور قام به السيد الريفي هو دوره كمتسلق للجبال عندما عبر ممر كوكودا التاريخي. "لقد كان مؤثرا جدا في هذا الدور. انه يتمتع بقدرات تمثيلية هائلة تجعله يغير من ادواره واماكن تمثيله. لقد كانت قدرته علی الانتقال من تمثيل ادواره في بيلمور الی تمثيل دوره في جبال كوكودا قدرة هائلة علی التكيف مع التغييرات الدرماتيكية في كل ظروف العمل الفني
اما رئيس الوزراء الاسبق جون هاورد، فقد خالف السيدة كينيلي الراي بقوله "ان اعظم دور قام به السيد الريفي هو دوره كحكم يلبس شورتا ازرق وفانيلة ذهبية وخضراء ويحمل صافرة في فمه ليخرج كرتا احمر ويرفعه بوجه جاليته ليخرجها من الحلبة السياسية. لقد عشقت دوره هذا. لقد استطاع التمثيل بالرغم من معارضة الكثيرين من ابناء جلدته وبالرغم من ان دوره قد اساء لجاليته كاملة
وفي شوارع بيلمور فقد كان التاييد لمنح السيد الريفي هذه الجائزة الفنية المهمة ساحقا حيث اكد ابناء منطقته المسلمين ان قدرة السيد الريفي علی تغيير جلده هي قدرة فائقة لا يوازيها به احد
وقال علي، احد سكان المنطقة المسلمين، انه وعلی الرغم من كراهيته للسيد الريفي الذي مثل في احدی الحلقات كناشط ضد حزب الله ولكن فانه لا يستطيع ان يقلل من امكانيات السيد الريفي. "لقد كان يجب ان يفوز السيد الريفي باكثر من جائزة لهذه القدرات التمثيلية الخارقة، حتی لو كان فيه الكثير من التعديات علی الجالية ليؤمن مصالحه الخاصة
كاتب هذا المقال وصلته معلومات شبه مؤكدة بان قيادة حزب العمال في شارع سوسيكس ما زالت مشغولة لاسابيع تناقش الخطوة القادمة. وقد رشحت المصادر بان قيادة الحزب تبحث في انشاء منظمة جديدة مهمتها الوحيدة اختراع جائزة جديدة لمنحها للسيد الريفي. ولكن فان زعماء الحزب ما زالوا غير مستقري الراي علی اسم المنظمة او طبيعة الجائزه قيد الاختراع، خصوصا وان كل جهودهم قد استنفذت من اجل منح كل تلك الجوائز للسيد الريفي علی مدی العامين الماضيين
وما زال الكثيرين في الجالية يتساءلون عن سبب منح السيد الريفي كل هذه الجوائز خلال العامين الماضيين
وقد غمز بعض الخبثاء في الجالية من هذه الزاوية و تساءلوا بتعجب ان كان المسلسل الطويل قد انتهت فصوله او ان هذه الجوائز ما هي الا محاولات لتلميع السيد الريفي ليلعب دوره التالي في حلقات المسلسل القادمة
ويجدر ذكر ان كاتب المقال لم يتصل بالسيد الريفي للاطلاع علی رايه بالموضوع، وذلك لاننا جميعا ندرك الاجندات المخفية وراء كل هذا الاستعراض الفارغ. ولكننا نامل صادقين ان تكون الادوار القادمة للسيد الريفي اقل تدميرا علی الجالية الكريمة
هذا المقال كان عبارة عن قطعة ساخرة متشائمة كتبها حريص علی الجالية وشؤونها. ويمكنكم ابداء ارائكم عن طريق الاتصال بالكاتب
جمال الريفي يتفرغ لمعالجة الهجرة "غير الشرعية": "لم يبق في الخم الا ممعوط الذنب
واخيرا خلع السيد جمال الريفي القفازات والروب الطبي واربد وارعد وتوعد. ولا بد ان الذعر قد دب الآن في قلوب مهربي البشر، وطالبي اللجوء من عرب وعجم وبربر ومن والاهم من ذوي السلطان الاكبر
فاليوم اعلن السيد الريفي وبكل جراة انه قد استقال من عضوية الهيئة الادارية للجمعية الاسلامية اللبنانية للتفرغ لحل مشكلة لاجئي القوارب من خلال عمله ضمن الهيئة الاستشارية للهجرة
هذا التصريح الذي لا بد انه الآن في طور المناقشة المستمرة في كل عواصم العالم الذين اعيتهم الحيلة والوسيلة لوقف تدفق طالبي اللجوء وبمئات الآلاف من دول انهكتها الحروب والمحن
وكاننا لا نعرف ان هكذا لجان وهيئات استشارية ما هي الا خطوات رمزية من باب "ذر الرماد في العيون" لاضفاء شرعية علی الاجراءات التي تعتزم الحكومة اتخاذها، وانها لا تخيف لا مهربي البشر ولا نمور التاميل او حتی نمور زيمبابوي. بمعنی آخر، فان عمل هذه اللجان ما هي الا نوع من خدمات "شهادات زور" مقدمة من اعضاء اختارهم الوزير بدقة وعناية ليقدموا توصيات متفق عليها مع الوزير وعاملي مكتبه وان أي مقترح ستاتي به الهيئة قد يكون مخالفا لتوجهات الحكومة وسياساتها لن يكون مصيره الا الی سلة المهملات
لكن السيد جمال الريفي الفرح لهكذا منصب، ولو كان رمزيا خال من أي صلاحيات علی مبدا "فشخرة ولو علی خازوق"، مصر علی ان يصور دوره في تلك الهيئة وكانه دور مركزي يعتمد عليه انقاذ استراليا من مصيبة محتمة. ولذلك فان الريفي اعلن استنفارا كاملا لقدراته وطاقاته من اجل عدم التاخر عن مهمة "خطيرة" بهذا الشكل. وهو لتحقيق التفرغ التام لوقف زحف طالبي اللجوء لم يجد مفرا من الاستقالة من "قيادة" الجمعية الاسلامية، للتفرغ لقيادة الاساطيل الاسترالية لوقف زحف فقراء ومضطهدي العراق وافغانستان وسريلانكا وفيتنام وفلسطين!!!
ولذلك فقد اعلن الآن انه سيخلع "الروب الابيض الطبي" ليلبس بزته العسكرية ويقوم بنفسه بقيادة الاسطول الاسترالي المرابط امام داروين وآشمور ريف ليمنع الغزو المحتمل لهؤلاء "الصعاليك" من "المهاجرين غير الشرعيين" لشواطئنا الجميلة
وهو معتاد علی هكذا مسرحيات هزلية تذكرنا بمسرحية "شاهد ما شفش حاجة" في تعامله مع ذكائنا ومشاعرنا
فبالامس خلع الريفي روبه الطبي ولبس شورتا وتي شيرت ووضع صفارة في فمه ونزل الی الملعب رافعا كرتا احمرا ليخرج جاليتنا كلها من الملعب الاسترالي، تحت مسميات مختلفة منها وضع حد "لتجاوزات" المفتي الهلالي الذي لم ترق معارضته المستمرة لغزو العراق وافغانستان وفلسطين ولبنان لحكومة جون هاورد الرجعية بكل المقاييس، فقرروا اسناد مهمة التخلص منه (أي من المفتي السابق) الی السيد الريفي. ليضربوا عصفورين بحجر واحد: التخلص من انتقادات الشيخ الهلالي الحادة ورفع وتيرة العنصرية ومعاداة الاسلام للفوز بفترة حكم اضافية
وبعد ذلك خلع الريفي روبه الطبي مرة اخری ولبس قفطان محامي ليدافع عن اسرئيل في وجه "ارهاب" حزب ﷲ الذي قد يكون وصله اموال من الجالية عن طريق مفتيها السابق الشيخ الهلالي
ان فاتورة المواقف والخدمات التي قدمها السيد الريفي لعنصريي الحكومات الاسترالية المتعاقبة قد دفعت سلفا، وباقي الفاتورة يبدو انه متفق علی دفعه قريبا. فالسيد الريفي كان قد كوفئ علی خدماته بمنح مالية طائلة لتلميعه امام الجالية، ومنها اموالا لمشروع تدريب منقذين مسلمين علی الشواطئ الاسترالية. هذا المشروع الذي كرس انعزال الجالية ودعی لتوسيع هذا الانعزال بين الجاليات الاخری بانشاء فرق انقاذ يونانية واخری ايطالية..... وهكذا دواليك، وعلی التعددية الثقافية في استراليا السلام
كما تم اسباغ الكثير من الالقاب والاوسمة علی السيد الريفي ومنها وسام من مفوضية حقوق الانسان منح للسيد الريفي في نفس الحفل الذي تم فيه منح الصهيوني العنصري جيريمي جونز وسام حقوق الانسان من نفس المفوضية. هذه الاوسمة التي تعتبر من "عدة الشغل" لاسباغ مصداقية لافعال السيد الريفي التي تصب في مصلحة الحكومات العنصرية التي فازت علی معاناة الجالية وتخويف المجتمع منها
ان تصرفات السيد الريفي الدون كيشوتية بارساله بيانات صحفية علی انه قد جمد كل نشاطاته وانه علی وشك اغلاق عيادته من اجل التفرغ لعمله في الهيئة الاستشارية، هو محاولة اخری لاضفاء جو من المهابة والجدية علی هذا المنصب الفخري المفرغ من أي محتوی حقيقي مقدما. هذا المنصب الذي سيدفع كل افراد الجالية اثمانه غاليا علی شكل مواقف مخزية من اعتداءات تحضر لها الحكومة وتريد لها غطاءا "عربيا مسلما" قبل الانتخابات المقبلة
ان افعال وتصرفات السيد الريفي تعتبر وبحق مسخرة فيها الكثير من احتقار لذكائنا ومشاعرنا. والا فلماذا هذا الاصرار من السيد الريفي علی التصرف علی طريقة دون كيشوت، الذي اراد ان يرسم لنفسه امام خادمه صورة الفارس الشجاع الذي هزم جيشا جرارا، بينما وفي الحقيقة فانه كان يقاتل عاصفة رملية
وفي هذا المقام نحبذ من السيد الريفي ان يكون عقلانيا ويضع الامور في نصابها الحقيقي حتی لا يضطر فيما بعد للنزول عن الشجرة العالية التي تسلق عليها واعلن انه "مهم" و "مستشار" للوزير، بعد ان يكتشف كل من سمعه ان منصبه لا يعدو كونه شاهد زور لتمرير اجندات انتخابية عنصرية
نعرف تمام المعرفة ان السيد الريفي ما زال يحلم بدور سياسي في حزب العمال. ونعرف تمام المعرفة ان السيد الريفي مستعد لتقديم القرابين للوصول الی هذا الحلم، ولو كان علی حساب معاناة اللاجئين الهاربين من موت محتم في قندهار وبغداد وجفنة وغزة
ندعو السيد الريفي ان يرحم ذكائنا وشعورنا فيكف عن هذه الممارسات، قبل ان " يذوب الثلج ويظهر المرج" وتنكشف الاجندة الحقيقية لتعيينه في هذا المنصب الرمزي الفارغ من أي مضمون
نؤكد للسيد الريفي اننا قد ضقنا ذرعا بكل شهادات الزور هذه واننا لن نسكت بعد الآن
اعضاء الهيئة الاستشارية الجديدة للهجرة: "شو جاب طز لمرحبا"؟
تطالعنا وزارة كيفن راد العمالية الجديدة بهرطقات يومية لم تكن على بال احد منا. وكل هرطقة جديدة تكون لها نتائج "اسخم" من التي قبلها. وهكذا دواليك الى ان اصبحت وزارة العجائب، وبلا منازع
آخر هذه "المساخر" هي تعيين هيئة استشارية جديدة للهجرة تعاون الوزير الجديد "كريس ايفانز" لاصلاح نظام الهجرة المتهرئ في استراليا. ليفاجئنا هذا الوزير بادراج اسم السيد جمال الريفي في هذه الهيئة، بدون احم او دستور
والسيد جمال الريفي اصلا هو متفاجئ مثلنا لهذا التعيين لاكثر من سبب
فالسيد الريفي قد يكون خبيرا باسباب عسر الهضم او كيفية علاج رمد العيون، لكنه بالتاكيد، وباعترافه لا يعرف في "مصائب" دائرة الهجرة المتراكمة منذ سيئ السمعة والصيت فيليب رادوك وصولا الى السيد ايفانز،اي شيئ الا ما تذكره وسائل الاعلام او عنصريي البرلمان في كانبرا
وعندما تم تعيين السيد الريفي مفوضا لشؤون التعددية الثقافية في عهد العنصري بوب كار، لم نعرف له اي انجاز خارق يذكر في تلك الحقبة العنصرية البغيضة التي "تنذكر وما تنعاد". وفي منصبه ذلك لم نراه يصحح اي خطا او خطيئة للسيد كار، السائر حينذاك على خطى معلمه العنصري بامتياز، جون هاورد. ولم يلاحظ اي مواطن من اصل غير سكسوني وجود السيد الريفي في المفوضية، لا اثناء وجوده ولا بعد رحيله عنها
وهنا يجب ان يتبادر لذهن اي مراقب ذكي سؤال بسيط "على اي اساس من الكفاءة او الخبرة تم تعيين السيد الريفي؟
وقبل ان نسال هذا السؤال بشكل رسمي، بعث السيد الريفي بجوابه واضحا وفي اول تعليق له على منصبه الجديد. حيث اتحفنا السيد الريفي بتعليق ناري صباح الامس بشتم لاجئي القوارب وارسال تحذيرات قوية بان الهيئة الجديدة قادمة لتعمل على عودة تطبيق القانون واعادة الهدوء الى مياهنا الاقليمية بمنع هؤلاء المهاجرين "غير الشرعيين" من الوصول الى شواطئنا الدافئة
كان على السيد الريفي وقبل ان يطلق العنان للسانه بهكذا تصريحات ان يقرأ ميثاق الامم المتحدة والاعلان العالمي لحقوق الانسان، ثم يطالع بنود اتفاقية جنيف لحماية اللاجئين الموقعة من قبل استراليا عام 1951 والبروتوكول الملحق بها عام 1967، ليعرف ان هؤلاء هم لاجؤون شرعيون، حسب شرعة الامم المتحدة
انه من الواضح ان حكومة راد المأزومة والواقعة بين مطرقة المعارضة العنصرية وسندان الناخب الشريف البسيط الذي صوت لها من اجل تغيير حقيقي للسياسات العنصرية لهاورد، تحتاج الى شاهدي زور يستطيعوا ان يخلقوا لها الذرائع من اجل اخراجها من هذه الورطة
وبسبب ان الهجوم العنصري موجه للاجئين معظمهم عراقيين وافغان (اي مسلمين وعرب)، فكان لا بد ان يكون بعض شاهدي الزور عرب ومسلمين. فكان الاختيار "الموفق" للوزير الحائر هو السيد الريفي بمجرد قراءة سيرته الذاتية وانجازاته الكبيرة خلال العقد الماضي
فالريفي، اضافة الى تلميع صورة العنصري بوب كار بعد فضائح الاتهامات العنصرية "للعصابات اللبنانية" ثم "للعصابات الاسلامية"، عمل على محاولة الاستفادة من محاولة كسر عظم الجالية في كورنولا، فاعلن ان سبب المشاكل كلها يكمن في ان لاكمبا لا تقع على بحر او نهر وان حل مشكلة العداء المتزايد للجالية ياتي بانشاء بحر اصطناعي في منطقة لاكمبا، "ويا دار ما دخلك شر". حيث ان لا مشكلة في انعزال الجالية المسلمة في غيتو لاكمبا لان الافضل دائما ان "نبتعد عن الشر ونغني له". وان كان هناك مشكلة في بناء هذه البحيرة الاصطناعية، فلا باس من استشارة العقيد القذافي ذي الخبرة في هكذا مواضيع. ثم خرج علينا الريفي بحل سحري لمشاكل العنصرية المتفاقمة بفكرة تبادل الزيارات بين غيتو لاكيمبا وغيتو كورنولا، ولنبدأ بتبادل خبرات الانقاذ من الغرق، في مشروع تكلف ملايين الدولارات بدون اي فائدة تذكر، حيث ان السيد الريفي لام الطبيعة التي لم توجد بحرا في لاكيمبا بدلا من الوقوف بشكل حازم باعلان ان المشكلة هي في القيادات السياسية الرعناء التي تلعب على حبال اثارة العنصرية لتحقيق مكاسب سياسية
ولم تقف "انجازات" السيد الريفي عند هذا الحد. فقد عمل مرة اخرى على طعن الجالية التي اصبح يفخر الآن بانه من قياداتها المتقدمة عندما عمل على صب الزيت على نار قضية "القطط واللحم المكشوف". حيث ما ان تلقف القصة من سراديب جون هاورد وجوقته العنصرية، حتى اشهر "كارته الاحمر" للجالية الاسلامية بالمشاركة علانية في قدح وذم الجالية برفع وتيرة العداء للجالية ممثلة في الهجوم على مفتيها آنذاك
واكمل السيد الريفي "انجازاته" بتوجيه تهمة مزدوجة للجالية بالارهاب ودعمه، حينما وقف امام شاشات التلفزيون متهما مفتي الجالية بانه سرق اموالا وارسلها ليمول "ارهاب" حزب الله اللبناني، في وقت كان معظم الاستراليين يجرمون اسرائيل ويعلنون تعاطفهم مع المقاومة الاسلامية اللبنانية
ان "خوازيق" الحكومات الاسترالية المتعاقبة لنخر الجاليات المهمشة بتوفير الدعم لبعض ابناء هذه الجاليات من اجل ان يحجًموا انجازاتها ويمنعوا مطالباتها بحقوقها الشرعية في المساواة في الحقوق، اضافة للمساواة في الواجبات، باتت لا تنطلي على "لحية" احد من ابناء هذه الجاليات
ولو عين الوزير الف لجنة استشارية فيها آلاف "الريفيين"، فان الجاليات تعرف الآن ان لاجئي القوارب قد يكونوا لاجئين غير قانونيين، ولكنهم بالمطلق لاجؤون شرعيون، خصوصا ان كان اسباب لجوئهم هو مشاركة القوات الاسترالية في غزو فلسطين والعراق وافغانستان
ومهما لمًعت الحكومات المتعاقبة من هذه الشخصية او تلك، فان الجاليات المهمشة باتت تميز بين "الغث والسمين
بالامس عينت وزارة هاورد لجنة استشارية من ابناء الجالية المسلمة، وبدون استشارة احد في هذه الجالية، لنكتشف ان المتحدث باسم هذه الجالية المحترمة ذات المبادئ الواضحة هي مدمنة على المخدرات وان تعيينها كان من اجل اكتساب شرعية لتلك الحكومة العنصرية المهترئة للهجوم على الجالية بلسان "قادتها". قادة لم ينتخبهم احد، بل ولم يسمع بهم احد من تلك الجاليات المهمشة المبعدة عن كل مراكز القرار، حتى القرار في من يمثلها
قال اجدادنا العرب قديما "المكتوب يُقرأ من عنوانه". والعنوان كان واضحا اليوم عندما فتح السيد الريفي النار على ابناء جلدته الهاربين من جور حكامهم المدعومين ببساطير جنود التحالف، بدلا من ان يكون "كلمة حق في حضرة وزير جاهل
نفهم ان القيادة هي ان يمثل القائد اماني رعيته، لا ان يكون سيفا مسلطا على رقابهم ورقاب ابنائهم واخوانهم وابناء عمومتهم، ولو كانت اخوة في الانسانية لا في الدم
نتمنى ان تكون المسخرة القادمة اقل مسخرة من سابقتها، ولكن وفي الوقت الحاضر فان هكذا "قيادة" لا تمثلني، لانني لم انتخبها ولا اعرف من انتخبها
ويا وزير الهجرة، بالله عليك ان ترحم عقولنا وقلوبنا من هكذا مساخر، وكفانا مسخرة اننا صدقنا وعودكم وانتخبناكم
Saturday, December 19, 2009
AFI Award goes to Inner-West “Muslim” doctor
By Richardo Kurbajo
12 December 09
After reaping many awards, Mr Jamal Rifi, a doctor in the inner-west suburb of Belmore has surprisingly won the AFI Award for this year. He won the award as the best actor in the long running serial of “Bashing Muslims for own interests”.
Mr Rifi is no strange for such unexpected surprises. He won an award from Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission for no convincing reason. He also won many awards from local organisations, like local newspapers and local councils. He also won an award from unknown-to-Muslims Muslim organisation for non-related reasons. Mr Rifi could be soon listed in Guiness book for winning the largest numbers of awards in the shortest period for the silliest reasons.
The winning of AFI award has won Mr Rifi support from the NSW premiere, Kristina Keneally. She said that the best character she liked in Mr Rifi’s acting in that serial was his role as mountains’ climber on the Kokoda. “He was impressive with his abilities to change the serial narrative and settings. From acting in Belmore to act in Kokoda, it is impressive to see someone quick adapting to such dramatic change of circumstances”.
Previous Australian PM, John Howard, disagreed with Ms Keneally. “The best character Mr Rifi has performed was as referee in his blue short and Green & Gold T-shirt with a whistle in his mouth. I loved his performance. He could perform then regardless of his community’s interests and thoughts”
In the street of Belmore, there was big support for awarding Mr Rifi this high-profile award. Fellow Muslims residents agreed that Mr Rifi is gifted in his skin-changing abilities.
Ali, a fellow Muslim Lakemba resident, said that while he hated Mr Rifi part in the serial when he performed an Anti Hezbollah advocate character, but his abilities are undeniable. “He should have won multiple awards for these endless abilities to stab own community and put own interest ahead”.
The writer of this report has learned that the Labor headquarter in Sussex street is busy for the last few weeks in discussing the next move. They are exploring setting up new organisation to start new award especially to be given to Mr Rifi. The Labor heavyweights are confused about the possible name of such organisation and the possible nature of the award-to-be-created. Especially that they already have made all their best to give him all the awards he won in the last 2 years.
Many in the community is still asking why Mr Rifi was awarded all these awards in the last 2 years.
Some cunning members of the community wondered quietly whether the long running serial’s episodes had finished to this end. Or these awards are just a move to groom Mr Rifi in preparation for his role in the next episodes of the serial.
The writer of the article did not contact Mr Rifi to seek his comments. This was on purpose as we know the real agendas behind all these show offs. But we hope that the coming characters Mr Rifi will perform will be less devastating to the community.
This was another black comic brought to you by your community watch dog. If you have any comment, please do not hesitate to forward it to us and we will publish it if you wish.
12 December 09
After reaping many awards, Mr Jamal Rifi, a doctor in the inner-west suburb of Belmore has surprisingly won the AFI Award for this year. He won the award as the best actor in the long running serial of “Bashing Muslims for own interests”.
Mr Rifi is no strange for such unexpected surprises. He won an award from Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission for no convincing reason. He also won many awards from local organisations, like local newspapers and local councils. He also won an award from unknown-to-Muslims Muslim organisation for non-related reasons. Mr Rifi could be soon listed in Guiness book for winning the largest numbers of awards in the shortest period for the silliest reasons.
The winning of AFI award has won Mr Rifi support from the NSW premiere, Kristina Keneally. She said that the best character she liked in Mr Rifi’s acting in that serial was his role as mountains’ climber on the Kokoda. “He was impressive with his abilities to change the serial narrative and settings. From acting in Belmore to act in Kokoda, it is impressive to see someone quick adapting to such dramatic change of circumstances”.
Previous Australian PM, John Howard, disagreed with Ms Keneally. “The best character Mr Rifi has performed was as referee in his blue short and Green & Gold T-shirt with a whistle in his mouth. I loved his performance. He could perform then regardless of his community’s interests and thoughts”
In the street of Belmore, there was big support for awarding Mr Rifi this high-profile award. Fellow Muslims residents agreed that Mr Rifi is gifted in his skin-changing abilities.
Ali, a fellow Muslim Lakemba resident, said that while he hated Mr Rifi part in the serial when he performed an Anti Hezbollah advocate character, but his abilities are undeniable. “He should have won multiple awards for these endless abilities to stab own community and put own interest ahead”.
The writer of this report has learned that the Labor headquarter in Sussex street is busy for the last few weeks in discussing the next move. They are exploring setting up new organisation to start new award especially to be given to Mr Rifi. The Labor heavyweights are confused about the possible name of such organisation and the possible nature of the award-to-be-created. Especially that they already have made all their best to give him all the awards he won in the last 2 years.
Many in the community is still asking why Mr Rifi was awarded all these awards in the last 2 years.
Some cunning members of the community wondered quietly whether the long running serial’s episodes had finished to this end. Or these awards are just a move to groom Mr Rifi in preparation for his role in the next episodes of the serial.
The writer of the article did not contact Mr Rifi to seek his comments. This was on purpose as we know the real agendas behind all these show offs. But we hope that the coming characters Mr Rifi will perform will be less devastating to the community.
This was another black comic brought to you by your community watch dog. If you have any comment, please do not hesitate to forward it to us and we will publish it if you wish.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Open letter to executives of Mission of Hope
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
"وقل اعملوا فسيری الله عملكم ورسوله والمؤمنون" صدق الله العظيم
"وقل اعملوا فسيری الله عملكم ورسوله والمؤمنون" صدق الله العظيم
Dear brothers and sisters in Mission of Hope
We read with deep shock, disbelieve and disappointment the names of people, organisations, projects and events that received your “Australian Muslim Achievement Awards”. Before going on with the reasons of these depressed feelings, let me note in this regard that we, as Muslims and Australians, do not know:
1- What is the extent of your organisation’s representativeness of Muslim community, to organise ceremony to award such seemingly high-profile awards (as their names suggest)?
2- The terms of reference of the professional conduct of the jury?
3- Who were the jury members? How were they appointed/elected? What are their qualifications to do such job?
4- The objectives of organising this ceremony?
After reading the names of the entities that have received these awards, we can note that it is either
1- There is no terms of reference for the jury’s professional conduct, Or
2- The terms of reference are very flawed and have much political interference affected by funding bodies’ political agendas.
I will give now brief examples why we believed so. We note that the award winner of:
A- The Muslim professional of the year was “Dr Jamal Rifi”:
In the explanatory notes of the reasons behind this decision, we note no reasons depending on professional conduct of Mr Rifi as medical practioner. In these notes we note that he did not, for example, travel to work in Indonesia to help the victims of devastating tsunami. He also did not travel to his country of birth to help injured Lebanese civilians after the barbaric Israeli invasion, 2006. Nor did he travel to Gaza to help the victims of the Israeli barbaric invasion 2008. We also note that he did not act in Australia in his professional capacity to set up clinics in remote areas to help highly disadvantaged indigenous population. He also, according to these explanatory notes, did not volunteer to treat free-of-charge the refugees and asylum seekers who are not eligible for Medicare benefits. We also not aware by these explanatory notes that he invented any new vaccines or treatment for any serious illnesses. What we understand from these notes that he was granted this award because of his voluntary work with Lakemba sport club. Even in this instance, we cannot see enough grounds to grant him any award. On the contrary. All his activities were directed against the interest of Muslim community and its rights for full respect and equal treatment. He, on many occasions acted against the interest of the community, by acting as “Trumpet” for the racist politicians. He acted swiftly to support previous PM Howard in his islamophobic propaganda on many occasions. This includes his support of the Anti-Muslim “Anti-Terrorism” laws. All this because this propaganda came hand in hand with the interest of his Labor previous state premiere’s agenda to win the 2007 election on islamophobia and racism.
The only reason mentioned in these notes relating to his professional conduct was his participation of forming Muslim Doctors Against Violence. For any political analyst and activist, this organisation was indeed formed to help the Federal and state governments’ attacks on the community by blaming the “infectiveness of Local Muslim leadership” in curbing “extreme” ideas. At the time when their Australian doctors counterparts were protesting outside the Howard’s house against the war on Iraq and Afghanistan and against the campaigns of Islamophobia, these Muslim doctors were actively participating in media attacks on the community and the national resistance forces in Arabic and Muslim countries.
There were no reasons mentioning professional conduct that helped Muslim communities. To help deceiving us of such decision, there was mentioning of the many awards that were given to Mr Rifi. One of them from Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission. The same commission that awarded at the same event Jeremy Jones (the most regressive racist Zionist in Australia) the medal of Human Rights.
B- The other example is the “Muslim event of the year”, which was awarded to the Iftar organised by AFP:
We understand that the Muslim event of the year should be an event that was organised by Muslim organisation/s or individuals or combined. We all understand very clearly that Australian Federal Police is not a Muslim organisation. So one can safely question the reason for this award. As I said, we do not know the terms of reference of the jury’s work. This is why we assumed that the event should be organised by Muslim organisation or individual.
In this instance we would like to highly question your organisation’s decision in these two instances, as examples only. Not only this. We regard your decision to be an attack on our intelligence and feeling. We cannot believe that a diverse community of more than 350,000 people have no better qualities than the ones who won your awards. We cannot believe that the Muslim community is so dry of any intelligent, committed and progressive person/s that enforced your organisation to give 2 awards to the same person. And this person has so much controversy in his conduct that would make it highly questionable even to award him one award by normally functioning jury with transparent neutral terms of reference and process.
After following carefully your organisation’s annual ceremonies for second year, we have no choice but to put our hat very high for Mr Irfan Yousef in respect of his deep criticism to these ceremonies. He raised serious questions about your organisation’s credibility to organise these ceremonies, by raising very serious concerns about the process and terms of reference.
While we understand that these awards are not recognised locally or internationally, we would still raise serious concerns and very low faith in the process that resulted in this farce. While we are very sure that your organisation is very much smaller than the Noble Price institution (if any comparison could be allowed at all). We are watching very carefully how such institution (Noble price’s) never gained the faith of millions around the world, as it is very clear for everyone the political agendas influencing its decision. Otherwise how could war criminals like Shimon Perez and Barrack Obama get Noble prize for “peace”? How can anyone bother to take awards on your’s scale seriously?
In this letter we would like to urge you to take serious steps to correct such farces, on a hope to restore a hope in your organisation’s credibility. At the moment we will take all necessary steps to expose these farces to our communities. The faces you are trying to promote as local heroes include some well-exposed faces that have no respect or credibility in the society in general.
Thanks
Yours sincerely
Jamal Daoud
We read with deep shock, disbelieve and disappointment the names of people, organisations, projects and events that received your “Australian Muslim Achievement Awards”. Before going on with the reasons of these depressed feelings, let me note in this regard that we, as Muslims and Australians, do not know:
1- What is the extent of your organisation’s representativeness of Muslim community, to organise ceremony to award such seemingly high-profile awards (as their names suggest)?
2- The terms of reference of the professional conduct of the jury?
3- Who were the jury members? How were they appointed/elected? What are their qualifications to do such job?
4- The objectives of organising this ceremony?
After reading the names of the entities that have received these awards, we can note that it is either
1- There is no terms of reference for the jury’s professional conduct, Or
2- The terms of reference are very flawed and have much political interference affected by funding bodies’ political agendas.
I will give now brief examples why we believed so. We note that the award winner of:
A- The Muslim professional of the year was “Dr Jamal Rifi”:
In the explanatory notes of the reasons behind this decision, we note no reasons depending on professional conduct of Mr Rifi as medical practioner. In these notes we note that he did not, for example, travel to work in Indonesia to help the victims of devastating tsunami. He also did not travel to his country of birth to help injured Lebanese civilians after the barbaric Israeli invasion, 2006. Nor did he travel to Gaza to help the victims of the Israeli barbaric invasion 2008. We also note that he did not act in Australia in his professional capacity to set up clinics in remote areas to help highly disadvantaged indigenous population. He also, according to these explanatory notes, did not volunteer to treat free-of-charge the refugees and asylum seekers who are not eligible for Medicare benefits. We also not aware by these explanatory notes that he invented any new vaccines or treatment for any serious illnesses. What we understand from these notes that he was granted this award because of his voluntary work with Lakemba sport club. Even in this instance, we cannot see enough grounds to grant him any award. On the contrary. All his activities were directed against the interest of Muslim community and its rights for full respect and equal treatment. He, on many occasions acted against the interest of the community, by acting as “Trumpet” for the racist politicians. He acted swiftly to support previous PM Howard in his islamophobic propaganda on many occasions. This includes his support of the Anti-Muslim “Anti-Terrorism” laws. All this because this propaganda came hand in hand with the interest of his Labor previous state premiere’s agenda to win the 2007 election on islamophobia and racism.
The only reason mentioned in these notes relating to his professional conduct was his participation of forming Muslim Doctors Against Violence. For any political analyst and activist, this organisation was indeed formed to help the Federal and state governments’ attacks on the community by blaming the “infectiveness of Local Muslim leadership” in curbing “extreme” ideas. At the time when their Australian doctors counterparts were protesting outside the Howard’s house against the war on Iraq and Afghanistan and against the campaigns of Islamophobia, these Muslim doctors were actively participating in media attacks on the community and the national resistance forces in Arabic and Muslim countries.
There were no reasons mentioning professional conduct that helped Muslim communities. To help deceiving us of such decision, there was mentioning of the many awards that were given to Mr Rifi. One of them from Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission. The same commission that awarded at the same event Jeremy Jones (the most regressive racist Zionist in Australia) the medal of Human Rights.
B- The other example is the “Muslim event of the year”, which was awarded to the Iftar organised by AFP:
We understand that the Muslim event of the year should be an event that was organised by Muslim organisation/s or individuals or combined. We all understand very clearly that Australian Federal Police is not a Muslim organisation. So one can safely question the reason for this award. As I said, we do not know the terms of reference of the jury’s work. This is why we assumed that the event should be organised by Muslim organisation or individual.
In this instance we would like to highly question your organisation’s decision in these two instances, as examples only. Not only this. We regard your decision to be an attack on our intelligence and feeling. We cannot believe that a diverse community of more than 350,000 people have no better qualities than the ones who won your awards. We cannot believe that the Muslim community is so dry of any intelligent, committed and progressive person/s that enforced your organisation to give 2 awards to the same person. And this person has so much controversy in his conduct that would make it highly questionable even to award him one award by normally functioning jury with transparent neutral terms of reference and process.
After following carefully your organisation’s annual ceremonies for second year, we have no choice but to put our hat very high for Mr Irfan Yousef in respect of his deep criticism to these ceremonies. He raised serious questions about your organisation’s credibility to organise these ceremonies, by raising very serious concerns about the process and terms of reference.
While we understand that these awards are not recognised locally or internationally, we would still raise serious concerns and very low faith in the process that resulted in this farce. While we are very sure that your organisation is very much smaller than the Noble Price institution (if any comparison could be allowed at all). We are watching very carefully how such institution (Noble price’s) never gained the faith of millions around the world, as it is very clear for everyone the political agendas influencing its decision. Otherwise how could war criminals like Shimon Perez and Barrack Obama get Noble prize for “peace”? How can anyone bother to take awards on your’s scale seriously?
In this letter we would like to urge you to take serious steps to correct such farces, on a hope to restore a hope in your organisation’s credibility. At the moment we will take all necessary steps to expose these farces to our communities. The faces you are trying to promote as local heroes include some well-exposed faces that have no respect or credibility in the society in general.
Thanks
Yours sincerely
Jamal Daoud
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Open letter to Mr Rudd: Please act now on racism before it’s too late
Dear Hon Kevin Rudd, PM of Australia
I am writing this letter to sincerely asking you to act immediately to kerb the waves of racism, Islamophobia and discrimination against marginalised people. What prompted me to write this sincere pledge is the mixture of repeated news items about Arabs and Muslims mistreated and my personal experience as one of these.
If you have watched 7 news last night at 6 pm, you would have noticed the documented report about racist cops who treated driver very badly. They did this only because he was driving in “Lebanese” suburb of Punchbowl and he looked like “wog”. The police department did not even show some remorse when asked about the news item by journalist.
I remember that I wrote a letter to the NSW police minister late 2003 about similar story in Bankstown. The then minister denied any racism within the rank of the police force.
I wish to let you know that racism and Islamophobia at the moment has become an epidemic, worse than swine flu one.
You remember that every proposal to build Muslim school was faced with waves of high profile racist opposition. You had not showed any leadership in this area by standing up and defend the Muslims’ rights to build schools they want their kids to go to. Your silence was clear interpretation of supporting these racist attacks. This had led to encourage racists to continue their racist attacks, unabated.
You also had failed Multiculturalism on “Anti-Terrorism” front. We have expected that after your party’s win in 2007 election, that you will work very hard to expose the lies and deception spread by John Howard in this area. But you chose to disappoint all of us and insisted to continue the mockery trials of “terrorist suspects”. Not only this. You clearly have chosen to resort to the same Howard’s tricks by organising media circuses to arrest “suspected terrorists”, who done nothing but telling their wives that they wish to die as martyr. Today we have heard some of your government’s allegations of charges and evidences. It did not make me feel but to laugh, and very loudly. It was deep black laugh. Your department have dared to charge someone for wishing “to die defending his homeland”. Before that, your department have charged someone because he named his son “Jihad” – a very wide spread name in the Middle East. I am considering naming my son Jihad. I wonder if I will be arrested then!!! Not only this. Your government is proposing introducing new wave of “Anti-Terrorism” laws that will make Zimbabwe more democratic than Australia.
In this letter let me express to you my deep disappointment and concern about the high level of racism and Islamophobia we are experiencing under your government. Maybe you have inherited this from your racist predecessor, but your government’s impotence had made thing worse.
Your government’s lack of action on all these issues is sending clear message to the racists and “anti-multicultural” extremists that “our government is on your side”.
I, for example, have written recently to two of your ministers about serious allegations of racism and Islamophobia at workplace, in Bankstown. These practices had affected also multicultural clients with disabilities. To date, I did not receive even an acknowledgment of receiving my letter/complaint. The practices of racism and Islamophobia continue unabated in our Multicultural suburb of Bankstown, under your government’s eyes and nose.
In this letter I would go even further. Because I do care about our beautiful nation, I warn you and your government that matters are going out of hands. “We” cannot continue to live in fear and under heavy discrimination as second or maybe third class citizens. The majority of good law-abiding citizens are losing their faith in the system (I mean democracy and its sisters). If they lose faith in the system completely, you can imagine what would be the consequences. You should remember what happened in Cronulla. This time could be even worse. You also can contact your French counterpart, Mr Sarkouzi, to let you know what had happened in France four years ago when Muslims and Arabs there lost their faith in system and decided to take law in their hands.
At the moment and because of your government decision to ignore all pleads for urgent intervention to kerb racism and Islamophobia, the reasonable voices in the community are losing listening ears.
Mr Rudd
We need strong leader to regain some lost humanity in this great nation, before it is too late. You need to come out from your comfortable white suburb where you live to touch our suffering and feelings. At the end of the day, you are prime mister for all of us, not only for white, blue-eyed Anglo - Saxons.
I am writing this letter to sincerely asking you to act immediately to kerb the waves of racism, Islamophobia and discrimination against marginalised people. What prompted me to write this sincere pledge is the mixture of repeated news items about Arabs and Muslims mistreated and my personal experience as one of these.
If you have watched 7 news last night at 6 pm, you would have noticed the documented report about racist cops who treated driver very badly. They did this only because he was driving in “Lebanese” suburb of Punchbowl and he looked like “wog”. The police department did not even show some remorse when asked about the news item by journalist.
I remember that I wrote a letter to the NSW police minister late 2003 about similar story in Bankstown. The then minister denied any racism within the rank of the police force.
I wish to let you know that racism and Islamophobia at the moment has become an epidemic, worse than swine flu one.
You remember that every proposal to build Muslim school was faced with waves of high profile racist opposition. You had not showed any leadership in this area by standing up and defend the Muslims’ rights to build schools they want their kids to go to. Your silence was clear interpretation of supporting these racist attacks. This had led to encourage racists to continue their racist attacks, unabated.
You also had failed Multiculturalism on “Anti-Terrorism” front. We have expected that after your party’s win in 2007 election, that you will work very hard to expose the lies and deception spread by John Howard in this area. But you chose to disappoint all of us and insisted to continue the mockery trials of “terrorist suspects”. Not only this. You clearly have chosen to resort to the same Howard’s tricks by organising media circuses to arrest “suspected terrorists”, who done nothing but telling their wives that they wish to die as martyr. Today we have heard some of your government’s allegations of charges and evidences. It did not make me feel but to laugh, and very loudly. It was deep black laugh. Your department have dared to charge someone for wishing “to die defending his homeland”. Before that, your department have charged someone because he named his son “Jihad” – a very wide spread name in the Middle East. I am considering naming my son Jihad. I wonder if I will be arrested then!!! Not only this. Your government is proposing introducing new wave of “Anti-Terrorism” laws that will make Zimbabwe more democratic than Australia.
In this letter let me express to you my deep disappointment and concern about the high level of racism and Islamophobia we are experiencing under your government. Maybe you have inherited this from your racist predecessor, but your government’s impotence had made thing worse.
Your government’s lack of action on all these issues is sending clear message to the racists and “anti-multicultural” extremists that “our government is on your side”.
I, for example, have written recently to two of your ministers about serious allegations of racism and Islamophobia at workplace, in Bankstown. These practices had affected also multicultural clients with disabilities. To date, I did not receive even an acknowledgment of receiving my letter/complaint. The practices of racism and Islamophobia continue unabated in our Multicultural suburb of Bankstown, under your government’s eyes and nose.
In this letter I would go even further. Because I do care about our beautiful nation, I warn you and your government that matters are going out of hands. “We” cannot continue to live in fear and under heavy discrimination as second or maybe third class citizens. The majority of good law-abiding citizens are losing their faith in the system (I mean democracy and its sisters). If they lose faith in the system completely, you can imagine what would be the consequences. You should remember what happened in Cronulla. This time could be even worse. You also can contact your French counterpart, Mr Sarkouzi, to let you know what had happened in France four years ago when Muslims and Arabs there lost their faith in system and decided to take law in their hands.
At the moment and because of your government decision to ignore all pleads for urgent intervention to kerb racism and Islamophobia, the reasonable voices in the community are losing listening ears.
Mr Rudd
We need strong leader to regain some lost humanity in this great nation, before it is too late. You need to come out from your comfortable white suburb where you live to touch our suffering and feelings. At the end of the day, you are prime mister for all of us, not only for white, blue-eyed Anglo - Saxons.
Monday, August 17, 2009
When racism and Islamophobia come to our ghettoes: My story with DSA management!
We all know that the first step for recovery from any medical, social or economical problem is the recognition of the existence of such problem. Any denial of existence would mean a lack of proper diagnosis, which in turn implies a lack of strategies to solve it.
This is exactly why we are witnessing increasing racism and Islamophobia in the society. The worrying trend is that the racism and Islamophobia is coming to “our” ghettoes. We are hearing now not only racist opposition to build Islamic schools in white dominant suburbs of Campbelltown or Liverpool, but also in the heart of Bankstown. We are not only witnessing attacks on veiled women in the north shore or Liverpool, but in the heart of Merrylands and Bankstown.
My story with DSA is very clear example of racists and Islamophobic people invading “our” suburbs. This invasion is currently going unrecognised and unresisted, mainly because of lack of multicultural representation in decision making bodies at all levels.
The story began when I was offered job with non-for-profit organisation called Disability Services Australia to work with people with disabilities. The job involves trying to find them suitable job, or at least prepare them to enter employment market by identifying their barriers and put strategies to address these barriers until they become job ready.
I was offered the job on mid April 08. After offering the job, the assistant manager told me that the manager had asked him to clarify 2 things before commencing of work at 21 April:
1- What are my views on homosexuality: as many of the managers and colleagues are “lesbians and gays”.
2- Would I have trouble visiting client at their workplace if they are working in pubs and clubs?
Both comments were related to my religion of Islam. I was deeply shocked. I thought it was either mistake or joke, but made me more curious to explore the kind of organisation in the heart of predominantly Muslim and highly multicultural suburb of Bankstown.
While the questions in themselves are non-discriminatory (clearly we cannot discriminate against lesbians and gays) – the fact that I in particular was asked them was indicative of potential issues in the future. Nevertheless, despite these early comments, I had no trouble with this organisation. The organisation is truly full of lesbians and gays, as I was told initially by assistant manager – but that is something does not bother me generally, anyway. The problems with the organisation arose from other sources.
The first serious trouble happened when I was quoted by Sydney Morning Herald in the case of Aminov family demanding their grant of permanent residence immediately. I thought that the management and colleagues would be very proud of me. At the end of the day, I was helping family which included people suffering from multiple disabilities. It was within the declared objectives of the organisation. What happened is the opposite.
I was interrogated and questioned and asked to explain why on my day-off I would help marginalised people with disabilities.
Then at the end of the December 08 I was asked by assistant manager (on behalf of the manager) about why I am talking Arabic in the office. This was the peak of any discriminatory act any citizen can be subjected to:
1- We are operating in area where more than 20% of the residents do not speak English – a large proportion of these are Arabic speaking.
2- The area also has large proportion of Muslim faith – the majority of whom speak Arabic.
3- I have a few clients who do not speak English at all, and so I communicate with them only in other languages (Arabic or Russian)
4- Even if there is suspicion that that some of my time on the phone speaking in Arabic is not with clients, the fact is that other co-workers are talking the whole day about non-work related issues, and in English. No one had targeted them to tell them to speak only about work-related issues in the office. We need to be judged on our outputs – not on assumptions about how much time we spend working directly with clients
These acts of racism, Islamophobia, bullying and intimidation went on and on until I could not take it anymore.
I asked myself why these acts were committed from first place. Why has it dragged on and on unabated?
The answer is more simple than you and I can imagine.
The reason is that the officials in all decision making bodies inside this organisation are “imported” white Anglo-Saxon privileged people who never lived in these ghettoes. They only have more prejudice about “us” and “our” “funny for them” way of life. And maybe they think that they are on “holy” mission to “teach” us how to be “civilized”.
The moral crisis inside the DSA is a true copy of the moral crisis in Australia and other western countries. This is why our parliament and parliamentarian are in one valley, and the rest of us are in other valley. They are more concerned about homosexuals’ marriage or increasing the politicians’ allowances, while we are terrorised in our ghettoes, suffering from unemployment or discrimination, and lacking the access to Australian society that will in fact make our country truly multicultural.
Unless there will be enough of us in all decision making bodies, including the management positions, the situation will go from bad to worse, maybe to the extent of social explosion and serious unrest.
But we cannot remain silent. I will not be intimidated by Anglo-Saxon managerial team who was born with spoon in their mouth. And I am considering all my options in this regard, including making this issue an issue of public interest.
We need to unite our efforts to get rid of these racist and Islamophobic elements from our beautiful multicultural suburbs.
This is exactly why we are witnessing increasing racism and Islamophobia in the society. The worrying trend is that the racism and Islamophobia is coming to “our” ghettoes. We are hearing now not only racist opposition to build Islamic schools in white dominant suburbs of Campbelltown or Liverpool, but also in the heart of Bankstown. We are not only witnessing attacks on veiled women in the north shore or Liverpool, but in the heart of Merrylands and Bankstown.
My story with DSA is very clear example of racists and Islamophobic people invading “our” suburbs. This invasion is currently going unrecognised and unresisted, mainly because of lack of multicultural representation in decision making bodies at all levels.
The story began when I was offered job with non-for-profit organisation called Disability Services Australia to work with people with disabilities. The job involves trying to find them suitable job, or at least prepare them to enter employment market by identifying their barriers and put strategies to address these barriers until they become job ready.
I was offered the job on mid April 08. After offering the job, the assistant manager told me that the manager had asked him to clarify 2 things before commencing of work at 21 April:
1- What are my views on homosexuality: as many of the managers and colleagues are “lesbians and gays”.
2- Would I have trouble visiting client at their workplace if they are working in pubs and clubs?
Both comments were related to my religion of Islam. I was deeply shocked. I thought it was either mistake or joke, but made me more curious to explore the kind of organisation in the heart of predominantly Muslim and highly multicultural suburb of Bankstown.
While the questions in themselves are non-discriminatory (clearly we cannot discriminate against lesbians and gays) – the fact that I in particular was asked them was indicative of potential issues in the future. Nevertheless, despite these early comments, I had no trouble with this organisation. The organisation is truly full of lesbians and gays, as I was told initially by assistant manager – but that is something does not bother me generally, anyway. The problems with the organisation arose from other sources.
The first serious trouble happened when I was quoted by Sydney Morning Herald in the case of Aminov family demanding their grant of permanent residence immediately. I thought that the management and colleagues would be very proud of me. At the end of the day, I was helping family which included people suffering from multiple disabilities. It was within the declared objectives of the organisation. What happened is the opposite.
I was interrogated and questioned and asked to explain why on my day-off I would help marginalised people with disabilities.
Then at the end of the December 08 I was asked by assistant manager (on behalf of the manager) about why I am talking Arabic in the office. This was the peak of any discriminatory act any citizen can be subjected to:
1- We are operating in area where more than 20% of the residents do not speak English – a large proportion of these are Arabic speaking.
2- The area also has large proportion of Muslim faith – the majority of whom speak Arabic.
3- I have a few clients who do not speak English at all, and so I communicate with them only in other languages (Arabic or Russian)
4- Even if there is suspicion that that some of my time on the phone speaking in Arabic is not with clients, the fact is that other co-workers are talking the whole day about non-work related issues, and in English. No one had targeted them to tell them to speak only about work-related issues in the office. We need to be judged on our outputs – not on assumptions about how much time we spend working directly with clients
These acts of racism, Islamophobia, bullying and intimidation went on and on until I could not take it anymore.
I asked myself why these acts were committed from first place. Why has it dragged on and on unabated?
The answer is more simple than you and I can imagine.
The reason is that the officials in all decision making bodies inside this organisation are “imported” white Anglo-Saxon privileged people who never lived in these ghettoes. They only have more prejudice about “us” and “our” “funny for them” way of life. And maybe they think that they are on “holy” mission to “teach” us how to be “civilized”.
The moral crisis inside the DSA is a true copy of the moral crisis in Australia and other western countries. This is why our parliament and parliamentarian are in one valley, and the rest of us are in other valley. They are more concerned about homosexuals’ marriage or increasing the politicians’ allowances, while we are terrorised in our ghettoes, suffering from unemployment or discrimination, and lacking the access to Australian society that will in fact make our country truly multicultural.
Unless there will be enough of us in all decision making bodies, including the management positions, the situation will go from bad to worse, maybe to the extent of social explosion and serious unrest.
But we cannot remain silent. I will not be intimidated by Anglo-Saxon managerial team who was born with spoon in their mouth. And I am considering all my options in this regard, including making this issue an issue of public interest.
We need to unite our efforts to get rid of these racist and Islamophobic elements from our beautiful multicultural suburbs.
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
Kevin Howard: Why resorting to old tactics of raising Islamophobia!
Mr Kevin Howard
We have got your message today. You are in hurry to go to early election before any total economic collapse.
We understand that you need to go to early election before the blood will be spelt heavily in the streets of Kabul, Tehran, Lebanon, Tel Aviv… including the blood of Australian soldiers sent to serve the American imperialist colonial adventures (the same as the old days during all imperialist wars of I & II World Wars, Korean war, Vietnam war, …).
We understand that with your government’s lack of any major success on any level, you need to open new front fighting against ghosts not seen to any (except to ASIO agents) in a bid to score some imagined victories.
Mr Kevin Howard
Our hopes on you to restore humanity to our nation had faded earlier than expected.
We hoped that you can:
1- Restore humanity to poor people on low income or on welfare system. The opposite had happened: we discovered that under your government Centrelink offices became hubs to torture poor people, mainly with multiple marginalizations.
2- Restore humanity to people with disabilities: nothing major had happened to restore humanity for one of the most vulnerable people in the society.
3- Abolish inhumane treatment of refugees, asylum seekers and newly migrated people: we witnessed the worst attacks on students, tightening the immigration laws from non-English speaking countries and no major change on asylum seekers’ treatment.
4- Stop electoral rigging by distributing billions of dollars on voters and incumbent party’s campaigning using public money: to discover that you were more generous in buying votes where you spent $16 billions in the last 10 months only, in addition to spending millions to highlight your party’s “achievements” on tax-payers money.
5- Restore spending on public services: to discover that you are engaged in blame game with previous government on who destroyed public housing and health, with no credible money spent in these areas.
And lastly we hope that you can take decisive steps to counteract racists and Islamophobic elements in the society. But we discovered that these elements had grown extensively and started to migrate from white dominant suburbs of Cornulla and Sutherland to invade highly multicultural suburbs of Lakemba, Bankstown, Merrylands and Auburn.
Today we understood why these elements are feeling very powerful. They are encouraged by you, your government and your security agencies who will get more powers soon added to the extra powers given tot them by previous government.
Mr Kevin Howard
Can you tell me the necessity of resorting to old tactics of spreading fears and division in the society by spreading Islamophobia? Are we intelligent enough by linking your today’s poor performance of staging media circus against nameless persons who have committed unknown (and will remain unknown forever under the Anti-Terrorism legislations) sins to achieve following agendas:
- To push for Labor government’s proposal for new draconian “Anti-Terrorism” legislations.
- To increase your popularity among the racists and conservative voters in case you lose the crucial vote on climate change legislation which could lead to double dissolution election.
- To prepare us for possible Australian participation in many wide regional wars against mainly Muslim countries of Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Somalia and Sudan.
Mr Kevin Howard
Again, we should admit that we have made big mistake when we thought that you are different and hence we voted for you.
Mr Kevin Howard
If we need to continue suffering by voting for a devil, we would prefer to do it the old way: vote for the devil we know.
At least your godfather, John Howard, was openly racist. He was proud to be racist. We know that he is racist. So we could deal with him accordingly, without being fooled.
Mr Kevin Howard
If you think that we have no other choice but to choose either openly racist politicians or undercover one, you are making big mistake.
Mr Kevin Howard
In the next election, you will not get my vote or my group’s preference. You are so indifferent from your predecessor, expect in constant smiling. But smiles cannot build nation or rebuild social tolerance and cohesion.
We have got your message today. You are in hurry to go to early election before any total economic collapse.
We understand that you need to go to early election before the blood will be spelt heavily in the streets of Kabul, Tehran, Lebanon, Tel Aviv… including the blood of Australian soldiers sent to serve the American imperialist colonial adventures (the same as the old days during all imperialist wars of I & II World Wars, Korean war, Vietnam war, …).
We understand that with your government’s lack of any major success on any level, you need to open new front fighting against ghosts not seen to any (except to ASIO agents) in a bid to score some imagined victories.
Mr Kevin Howard
Our hopes on you to restore humanity to our nation had faded earlier than expected.
We hoped that you can:
1- Restore humanity to poor people on low income or on welfare system. The opposite had happened: we discovered that under your government Centrelink offices became hubs to torture poor people, mainly with multiple marginalizations.
2- Restore humanity to people with disabilities: nothing major had happened to restore humanity for one of the most vulnerable people in the society.
3- Abolish inhumane treatment of refugees, asylum seekers and newly migrated people: we witnessed the worst attacks on students, tightening the immigration laws from non-English speaking countries and no major change on asylum seekers’ treatment.
4- Stop electoral rigging by distributing billions of dollars on voters and incumbent party’s campaigning using public money: to discover that you were more generous in buying votes where you spent $16 billions in the last 10 months only, in addition to spending millions to highlight your party’s “achievements” on tax-payers money.
5- Restore spending on public services: to discover that you are engaged in blame game with previous government on who destroyed public housing and health, with no credible money spent in these areas.
And lastly we hope that you can take decisive steps to counteract racists and Islamophobic elements in the society. But we discovered that these elements had grown extensively and started to migrate from white dominant suburbs of Cornulla and Sutherland to invade highly multicultural suburbs of Lakemba, Bankstown, Merrylands and Auburn.
Today we understood why these elements are feeling very powerful. They are encouraged by you, your government and your security agencies who will get more powers soon added to the extra powers given tot them by previous government.
Mr Kevin Howard
Can you tell me the necessity of resorting to old tactics of spreading fears and division in the society by spreading Islamophobia? Are we intelligent enough by linking your today’s poor performance of staging media circus against nameless persons who have committed unknown (and will remain unknown forever under the Anti-Terrorism legislations) sins to achieve following agendas:
- To push for Labor government’s proposal for new draconian “Anti-Terrorism” legislations.
- To increase your popularity among the racists and conservative voters in case you lose the crucial vote on climate change legislation which could lead to double dissolution election.
- To prepare us for possible Australian participation in many wide regional wars against mainly Muslim countries of Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Somalia and Sudan.
Mr Kevin Howard
Again, we should admit that we have made big mistake when we thought that you are different and hence we voted for you.
Mr Kevin Howard
If we need to continue suffering by voting for a devil, we would prefer to do it the old way: vote for the devil we know.
At least your godfather, John Howard, was openly racist. He was proud to be racist. We know that he is racist. So we could deal with him accordingly, without being fooled.
Mr Kevin Howard
If you think that we have no other choice but to choose either openly racist politicians or undercover one, you are making big mistake.
Mr Kevin Howard
In the next election, you will not get my vote or my group’s preference. You are so indifferent from your predecessor, expect in constant smiling. But smiles cannot build nation or rebuild social tolerance and cohesion.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Climate change legislation: political opportunism or matter of principled stance!
We can assume that our prime minister is hoping that the opposition would make their biggest mistake and block the climate change legislation. Such move that could pave his way to call for double dissolution and have very early election. There is no doubt that he is watching very carefully the progress of the global and local recession. There is no doubt that the deterioration of the economic situation further (and there are many indications that the economy will deteriorate soon very drastically) would mix all cards and give the opposition more games to play on the claim of historic Labor incompetence in managing economy.
Would the opposition makes this biggest mistake, many political parties would dance from joy. This dance is not because they stick to their policies or that they have achieved major victory. On the contrary. Many political players would have shame in their history forever would they block this legislation. On the top of these would be the Greens party and Nick Xenophon team.
The Greens party in particular would be left with no excuse to be trusted or to be voted for, ever. Imagine that a party that was established to protect environment, would block a legislation that would reduce carbon emissions by 10 – 15 %, pave a way to other major polluters nations to convince their citizens and voters of the need to take big steps in this direction and lastly would see Australia play major role in Copenhagen conference. (I talked about this issue in more details in previous article http://jamaldaoud.blogspot.com/2008/12/greens-blocking-of-action-on-climate.html)
So why the Greens is so keen to block this legislation?
First I want to stress again here that the Greens party is merely an opportunistic party that has no ideology or principles to stick to. The Greens is just a party of populist stances to get more votes, hence get more power and makes more millionaires. I will give some examples later in this article to support this assumption.
If we go back to the issue of climate change, the Greens is so keen to block this legislation just to pave a way for double dissolution with more chances to increase their representation in the senate (and not for any principled reasons whatsoever). As the Greens is standing at the moment nationally on around 7% of the vote, there would be no guarantee that they could increase their representation in the senate. There is no guarantee even to maintain the numbers they are having now. To win a seat in the senate in normal election needs 14.5% of the vote in each state and 33.5% in the territories. The Greens would have big gamble to win any seat in normal election. They never won a senate seat on their own votes, except when Bob Brown won his seat in Tasmania on 2007.
But in a double dissolution scenario, The Greens needs only 7.5% to win a seat on their own. This means that in any double dissolution, the Greens would have big chance to win senate seat in each state and maybe 2 seats in Tasmania. This is why the Greens is so keen to block this legislation in a bid to achieve this outcome: double dissolution.
So the Greens’ blocking of the climate change legislation definitely would not be on principled grounds. Let us compare the Greens stances on other issues to realize this fact.
The Greens had the chance to block the legislation to approve 2 stimulus packages, and then they can enforce the PM to call for early election and double dissolution. I, personally, could not believe that any progressive politician could approve the largest economical vandalism in the history of this nation. The wasting of national common wealth to support mainly addictions (on gambling, drugs, alcohol or shopping), which did not create single job, would not have support of any clever semi-progressive politician. The Greens supported this major economical vandalism and major national wealth waste because it was very popular amongst the voters. The Greens could not afford to gamble by taking principled stance on issue that could cost them many votes.
The other political players who would benefit from the double dissolution scenario are the Nick Xenopohn team and Family first party.
Especially the family first senator is in very vulnerable position. His party got less than 2% in the last election. In normal election he needs a miracle to be re-elected. But in double dissolution, he needs a mini miracle to win a seat.
So what is about the Liberals? And why Tony Abbot raised alarm recently about this legislation and the possibility of double dissolution?
There is no doubt that the coalition will be the biggest losers would double dissolution be called. The Liberals were put in very difficult situation here. If they would agree to pass the legislation, the party would be seen to betraying the business sector, which are historically the loyalist voters for Coalition. So they would lose many voters in the long term. And if they block the legislation, they will pave a way for early election and so to a big defeat and possibility of losing seats in both houses.
The problem of Australian politics is that it is very static, not dynamic. Different parties are using the same rhetoric, tactics and tricks for decades. It is very difficult to introduce new concepts easily.
So what other options Malcolm Turnbul has to avoid such fate of total disastrous early election and internal fighting among different factions?
Malcolm, if he thinks deeply, can use the new – old tactics of gentle retreating with minimum casualty. With current situation in the parliament, the Liberals can vote against the legislation in the house. The Labor government has numbers there to pass it. Then Malcolm can declare that the party would block the legislation in the senate. But at the same time, he would arrange for few senators to cross the floor and vote for the legislation. By doing this, he can avoid double dissolution trigger and major loss in both houses.
The most important lesson we learned from this issue (after adding to the other issues in the past few months) is that there is total lack of principled political parties in our parliament.
Should we allow this to continue? Or may be the more important question should be: can we afford to allow this to continue?
The deterioration of the situation of marginalized groups (at all levels) is sending strong message that we should take steps to address this leadership vacuum.
The club of white, middle class and privileged politicians had proved to be incompetent to tackle any issue that matters to ordinary and marginalised citizens. The issue of climate change is a good example of the need for strong leadership to lead Australia into better future. What we have at the moment is a sold-off leadership running after their personal interests.
Would the opposition makes this biggest mistake, many political parties would dance from joy. This dance is not because they stick to their policies or that they have achieved major victory. On the contrary. Many political players would have shame in their history forever would they block this legislation. On the top of these would be the Greens party and Nick Xenophon team.
The Greens party in particular would be left with no excuse to be trusted or to be voted for, ever. Imagine that a party that was established to protect environment, would block a legislation that would reduce carbon emissions by 10 – 15 %, pave a way to other major polluters nations to convince their citizens and voters of the need to take big steps in this direction and lastly would see Australia play major role in Copenhagen conference. (I talked about this issue in more details in previous article http://jamaldaoud.blogspot.com/2008/12/greens-blocking-of-action-on-climate.html)
So why the Greens is so keen to block this legislation?
First I want to stress again here that the Greens party is merely an opportunistic party that has no ideology or principles to stick to. The Greens is just a party of populist stances to get more votes, hence get more power and makes more millionaires. I will give some examples later in this article to support this assumption.
If we go back to the issue of climate change, the Greens is so keen to block this legislation just to pave a way for double dissolution with more chances to increase their representation in the senate (and not for any principled reasons whatsoever). As the Greens is standing at the moment nationally on around 7% of the vote, there would be no guarantee that they could increase their representation in the senate. There is no guarantee even to maintain the numbers they are having now. To win a seat in the senate in normal election needs 14.5% of the vote in each state and 33.5% in the territories. The Greens would have big gamble to win any seat in normal election. They never won a senate seat on their own votes, except when Bob Brown won his seat in Tasmania on 2007.
But in a double dissolution scenario, The Greens needs only 7.5% to win a seat on their own. This means that in any double dissolution, the Greens would have big chance to win senate seat in each state and maybe 2 seats in Tasmania. This is why the Greens is so keen to block this legislation in a bid to achieve this outcome: double dissolution.
So the Greens’ blocking of the climate change legislation definitely would not be on principled grounds. Let us compare the Greens stances on other issues to realize this fact.
The Greens had the chance to block the legislation to approve 2 stimulus packages, and then they can enforce the PM to call for early election and double dissolution. I, personally, could not believe that any progressive politician could approve the largest economical vandalism in the history of this nation. The wasting of national common wealth to support mainly addictions (on gambling, drugs, alcohol or shopping), which did not create single job, would not have support of any clever semi-progressive politician. The Greens supported this major economical vandalism and major national wealth waste because it was very popular amongst the voters. The Greens could not afford to gamble by taking principled stance on issue that could cost them many votes.
The other political players who would benefit from the double dissolution scenario are the Nick Xenopohn team and Family first party.
Especially the family first senator is in very vulnerable position. His party got less than 2% in the last election. In normal election he needs a miracle to be re-elected. But in double dissolution, he needs a mini miracle to win a seat.
So what is about the Liberals? And why Tony Abbot raised alarm recently about this legislation and the possibility of double dissolution?
There is no doubt that the coalition will be the biggest losers would double dissolution be called. The Liberals were put in very difficult situation here. If they would agree to pass the legislation, the party would be seen to betraying the business sector, which are historically the loyalist voters for Coalition. So they would lose many voters in the long term. And if they block the legislation, they will pave a way for early election and so to a big defeat and possibility of losing seats in both houses.
The problem of Australian politics is that it is very static, not dynamic. Different parties are using the same rhetoric, tactics and tricks for decades. It is very difficult to introduce new concepts easily.
So what other options Malcolm Turnbul has to avoid such fate of total disastrous early election and internal fighting among different factions?
Malcolm, if he thinks deeply, can use the new – old tactics of gentle retreating with minimum casualty. With current situation in the parliament, the Liberals can vote against the legislation in the house. The Labor government has numbers there to pass it. Then Malcolm can declare that the party would block the legislation in the senate. But at the same time, he would arrange for few senators to cross the floor and vote for the legislation. By doing this, he can avoid double dissolution trigger and major loss in both houses.
The most important lesson we learned from this issue (after adding to the other issues in the past few months) is that there is total lack of principled political parties in our parliament.
Should we allow this to continue? Or may be the more important question should be: can we afford to allow this to continue?
The deterioration of the situation of marginalized groups (at all levels) is sending strong message that we should take steps to address this leadership vacuum.
The club of white, middle class and privileged politicians had proved to be incompetent to tackle any issue that matters to ordinary and marginalised citizens. The issue of climate change is a good example of the need for strong leadership to lead Australia into better future. What we have at the moment is a sold-off leadership running after their personal interests.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
My experience inside the United Australia party: why UAP’s humiliating defeat & When will Ralph defect from UAP?
After running as a federal candidate for the United Australia party in the seat of Reid, these are my observation about the reasons why UA...
-
I should mention here that when the crisis erupted in Syria more than a year ago, I was not supporting President Assad. At that time, I decl...
-
Bravo, bravo, bravo and million bravos. It is confirmed by the Tasmanian Greens leader and the Australian Greens leader: the Greens is seeki...
-
After running as a federal candidate for the United Australia party in the seat of Reid, these are my observation about the reasons why UA...