Is it practical or relaistic to ask somebody to get rid of their skin?

Brother Asem Judeh had circulated about 2 weeks ago email urging the Greens senators to put a motion in the senate to remove Hamas from the list of terrorist organisations. In this instance I would like to explain why this invitation is both unpractical and unrealistic.
First of all, to ask someone to push for an issue, he/she should have believed in the justice of the issue. To ask the Greens to put such motion, it seems that there is pre-assumption that the Greens consider Hamas to be legitimate national resistance force.
I listened to all Greens MPs and other hierarchy’s speeches on rallies in different states. During these speeches, there is no one word mentioning Hamas. There is no one word to condemn occupation. All speeches were about:
- condemning “the use of disproportionate force” by Israel.
- Condemning bloody Hamas rockets.
So infact the Green is not condemning the occupation. It is very clear that the Greens is only against use of “disproportionate force”. This means that the Greens does not mind if Israel “gently” kill Palestinians. They are not against killing maybe 500, but not 1500. And they may accept Israel to destroy 1000 house, but not 10, 000.

I even went back to explore the Greens official stance on the legitimacy of Hamas.
The only stance was contained in Bob Brown’s (The Greens leader) parliamentary speech, on 7 November 03, when he said “The bill is to proscribe the Lashkar-e-Taiba and Hamas organisations, respectively in Pakistan and in Palestine, which have terrorist components. The Greens will have no opposition to these or other terrorist organizations being proscribed …” as the Greens “have no truck with terrorism”.

So the only official stance on Hamas by the Greens is that it is a terrorist organization.

So before we ask the Greens to put a motion to remove Hamas from Federal list of terrorist organizations, the Greens should remove Hamas from the “Greens” list of terrorist organizations.
I have no problem to spend tons of hours and energy to lobby the Labor or Liberals to change their stance on Hamas and Islamic Jihad, but not the Greens.
Why?
The Labor and Liberals are big parties. They govern Australia alternately. They can direct our UN ambassador to vote in certain way or another. They can increase or decrease aid. They can lift or impose bans. But the Greens is too small to make any effect.
Instead of wasting our time and energy trying to lobby the Greens, we can do it in an easy way. Before the next election, we can conduct campaign to expose their opportunist stance. Making them lose few hundred votes could cost them dearly. They infact could disappear, except from Tasmania. After that, they will run after our votes in the following election, exactly as they did before 2001 Federal election.
The story with the Labor or Liberals is different. They are big. We need to make the issue big electoral issue to cost them government. Even if we could do this, we would not be able to make them disappear. We can cost them 1, 2, 3 seats out of hundreds of seats. On the other hand costing the Greens 1, 2 or 3 seats, this would mean to reduce their representation by 60%. And that is significant. And we can do it.
We can ask the Greens to proactively act on facilitating prostitution, encouraging drug abuse, approve homosexual marriage,… I would even assume that they will not wait for us to ask them to act on these issues. They are proactively acting on them, as they have deep commitments to them. They have detailed policy and stances.
But let me assure all of you that the Greens would not go further than “crying” on rallies of sadness of loss of lives “on both sides”. I am sure that they will not take different path. I hope that they can take different path (at least to make me look like liar), but they would not as I know the deep ideological commitments of the Greens.
Let us remember that the Greens hierarchy is made either of:
- Zionists
- “Ex-Stalinists” who still believe that “religion is the opium of the masses”.
- Opportunist white-racist who joined the Greens for better “job” and power grab

So, tell me who will push for these “revolutionary” changes!
I would prefer that we do it by intense lobbying the big parties. We can also take another approach by start building “real” alternative left force (which we started to do). But we cannot ask racists and Zionists to get rid of their real skin. And they would not do it, at the end of the day.

The Greens party supports environmental vandalism in Auburn!

I have written a lot recently about the Israeli barbaric attack on Gaza, but here I will try to highlight another issue. It is issue more related to Australian politics.
We can debate for days or even weeks about the Greens party commitment or lack of commitment towards social justice issues, including refugees’ rights, Palestinians’ rights, marginalised groups’ issues...., but I never thought that we should debate the Greens commitment to environmental issues.
Well, we discovered that we underestimated the Greens party’s opportunism.
In the attached article by the Auburn Review, you will discover something that will make you wonder what is the real “colour” of the Greens party.
During the last local government election, the unified message of ALL Greens candidates was “Oppose High Rise buildings”, in addition to the complementary statement “oppose the developers’ greed” and “Community needs, not developers’ greed”. This includes especially the electoral materials of the Greens candidate for Auburn Malikeh Michales, as more than half of Auburn councillors are developers or real estate agents. And Auburn council was in all media outlets for the last decade for “corruption” investigations related to dodge development approvals.
In the attached article, you will discover that the Greens councillor had aligned herself with Liberal – Unity councillors to discuss approval to increase the height and density of high rising buildings near St Johns Catholic Primary School. She did this, despite the Labor – RAGAA councillors’ fierce opposition to this proposal.
To tell the truth, I did not believe my eyes. I again underestimated the opportunism of the representatives of this party. Where are the Greens claims of “sticking to principles”?
I thought that the first and most important principle of the Greens party is to protect the environment. This issue indeed was the object of founding the Greens.
At this stage I recalled my conversations with many well-known environmentalists who quit the Greens for its failure to advocate for environmental sustainability, and instead engaging in power-thirst infightings.
The Greens councillor in Auburn should be proud that she already broke all her election promises and propaganda. Her election leaflet has only 2 main promises:
1- To increase services for refugees and marginalised groups.
2- To protect the environment, by opposing attacks on local (and global) environment by standing against developers’ and big corporations’ greed.
Earlier and before the end of the last year, the same Greens councillor was proud to propose amendments that could have seen the closure of one of the organisations serving mainly the refugees. Without intense lobbying from us, community members and local media, we could have seen the Greens councillor achieving the opposite of “increasing services for refugees”.
Now she wants to fulfil the second promise: to attack our fragile environment and help “greedy” developers to make more millions of $s by creating more noise and pollution in the heart of our suburb, in addition to all other implications.
This article is supporting what I have noticed in the last month, when the Greens (for political cheap score-pointing purposes) opposed any new Labor government action to tackle climate change. The Greens sent a clear message that if the government won’t approve its (The Greens’) sharp emission’s cut, the Greens would prefer to keep the lack of Howard’s government action on this issue.
But, let us discuss the issue more closely. What did the Greens achieve since they took the Democrats’ votes (in addition to large Muslim votes) and increased its political representation on all levels?
The simple answer is: NOTHING.
With intense attacks on our environment, one could start to seriously ask: what is the main platform of the Greens? Why it is still called the Greens?
My advice to the Greens hierarchy is to adopt new name: The Rainbow party. By doing this they can change the colour of the party’s skin as required. Sometimes they can be red, other times can be green. And if required they could be hidden anywhere silently with no colour at all.

Rallies business: enough trading with blood of innocent Palestinians!

I was always critical of people not participating in rallies on important issues. I even fought several times with friends as they refused to attend rallies “supporting” refugees’ rights, Palestinians’ rights … But last Saturday I was convinced that they have good point of view.

I traveled from Sydney to Canberra to protest against the Israeli barbaric invasion of Gaza. We traveled to Canberra, even though we did not know many details of the rally. We did not know who was the organizer, who were the speakers and the route of the rally. The most important issue for us was to send a message of unequivocal condemnation of Israel’s barbaric action and express our opposition to Australian official silence in condemning these actions.

Outside the lodge where our prime minister, Kevin Rudd, is living, we knew the hidden agenda of the organizers.

Suddenly a lady emerged from nowhere and gave all of us a good lecture. The lecture was not about the history of Israeli occupation of Palestine nor was about the history of Israeli barbaric actions. The lady who wore a t-shirt with “Vote 1 The Greens” gave us a good lecture about the climate change and environmental sustainability. She then went into lengths with what are the Greens 4 principles and why we should vote for the Greens in the next election.

Then she told us, with no explanation that she was crying the whole night before, when she saw the victims on the TV. She spoke with highly ambiguous language. She did not specify if she was crying for the loss of the lives of Israeli soldiers killed by Palestinian resistance. I should be fair here. I heard her counting the numbers of people who lost their lives, on both sides. She was equalizing between the victim and the oppressor. She was putting on the same hand the loss of lives among the occupiers and the ones under occupation. I did not hear her condemning unequivocally the barbaric actions.

Sorry for this mistake. I heard her totally and utterly condemning the government. But she condemned Australian government, and not the Israeli.

With her late appearance only at the time of her speech, her T-shirt designed for election and her score-pointing speech, the goal of this farce was very clear. It was indeed an election auction: votes for each dead.

Shamelessly she was happy. Shamelessly the organizers were happy. Shamelessly some of the Greens supporters in the crowd were happy. Shamelessly we were there listening to this contempt of the 400 martyrs - heroes killed in Gaza.

I would not feel so bad if the Greens was the “revolutionary” party that stood up for Palestinians in the past.

However when I went back little bit into my memory I recalled that the Greens:
1- Refused to send any solidarity delegation to Palestine.
2- Strongly supported the listing of ALL resistance groups (except Fateh) as terrorist organizations (November 2003).
3- Presented to Australian politics the largest proportion of Zionist politicians.
4- Was deadly silent about the latest barbaric actions from 27 December 08 – 5 January 09. And when they put out a media release it was total disgust and shame, where they were equalizing between the victims and the oppressors.

I was astonished by the courage of both the organizers and the Greens politician in their contempt of the feeling of the crowd. Many among the crowd were from Gaza and have relatives there.

How dare they do this?

On another occasion, I learnt that Labor MP attended a rally and spoke about the issue. Unfortunately he said nothing about needing to convince his leader to abandon his pro-Israeli stance.

I understood now why the majority of community members refuse to be stupid and naïve and participate in rallies which are in contempt of human lives lost in conflicts. I understood why community members would laugh at us saying: enough is enough.

After last Saturday I said to all around me: enough is enough. Enough trading lives of innocent people for cheap electoral gains. The last time the auction was a heavy price for us. The blood of innocent Palestinians and Iraqis put another Greens Zionist to NSW parliament. We lost on both sides: in Palestine and Iraq and also in NSW.

I told everyone this time: not anymore.

Shame on me if I will silently participate in these auctions of blood for votes.
And there are many ways to express our feelings about the barbaric actions and how to help the victims of them.

The Greens blocking of action on climate change: Striping own skin or displaying true colour!

I was laughing deeply when I saw Bob Brown, the Greens leader, threatening to block in the senate the proposal from the government to take action to reduce the emissions by 5 – 15 % by 2020. Such threat that was shared by Liberals and Nationals.

What does this actually mean?

It means that no action would be taken in regard to reduce the effect of climate change, let alone take action to reverse its effect. Then we will be lost watching all political parties engaging in blame game, for electoral reasons only.

Who can believe that the Greens, who was established to fight for this particular reason, would abandon this big goal? And for what in return?

The failure of the government to pass its bill will give all political parties the excuses not to do anything in this regard. The Labor government would say that “we” had failed to pass this bill, and will blame the alliance between the Liberals and The Greens for it. The Liberals would declare that John Howard was right not to take actions, and will declare that jobs are saved and we do not need to take any action in this regard.

But what the Greens would achieve from this lack of actions?

The Greens will maintain its viability by maintaining its loud voice on opposing any steps in this regards.

But would this be classified as childish move or opportunist one?

For the Greens supporters it’s called “sticking to principles”, even if this means that no real action to reduce the destructive effect of emissions on our environment will be ever taken. The Greens hierarchy would think that this means that the expiry date of this party would be prolonged, by prolonging the empty rhetoric on doing anything on environment and just resorting to political score-pointing.

For any political analysis this would be the biggest betrayal for the issue of protecting environment. The Greens infact stopped any actions taken to acknowledge the issue and take any step in this regard.

The Greens empty rhetoric and demands of “take full step or no step at all” are neither acceptable nor viable. If the Labor would adopt the agenda of the Greens in this regard, one of these political parties should disappear. In politics you negotiate, take what you can take. And then if it is not enough, you ask for more.

It is very clear that the Greens had many reasons to abort any action on climate change:
1- It wants to continue acting as “vocal syndrome” in Australian politics, where they complain about almost everything, but practically achieve none. By this way they think that they can just keep loud voice, before people start to forget about their presence.
2- It wants to establish good basis to justify its growing alliance with the racist far-right Liberals party. This relationship is not new, but it needs to be born in light, after years of secret dealings.

By doing this, the Greens would fail to fulfill its role and infact would reach its expiry date, exactly as happened to the Democrats. For the small “left” parties, who know that they will never govern a country, the philosophy behind its activities should be just to “keep bastards honest”, try to extract compromises and enforce them to make socio-economic changes. The philosophy is so easy. Small party should be active on few important issues, to get some votes from the current big governing parties. Then the government would act in a bid to stop the exhaustion of its votes. Also any presence in the decision making bodies (Parliaments and councils) is just to access a platform and resources to highlight the issues that matter. Through this process, the most important issue is that the power thirst should not divert the attention of such party to start making compromises, to achieve more power grabbing instead of more socio-economic changes. If this happens, the party would become part of the problem and not part of solution.

And this is exactly what happened to the Greens.
The power thirst of their hierarchy made them start to make compromises to “look attractive” for the “undecided” voters.

This is why the Greens had departed many platforms, departed its direct-action style and started to engage in behind-doors deals with “any” political force to attract “any” votes to keep its viability by “any” means.

Who remember when was the last time a Greens member had jumped on a tree and tied him/herself to it? When was the last time the Greens talked about the occupation of Afghanistan?

On the contrary. The Greens was talking recently about Afghanistan asking for more troops to be deployed to ensure that “the job had been done”.

Going back to climate change action.
If I was the Labor party hierarchy, I would invest millions of dollars to expose the Greens on these particular issues.

The Greens block of the bill in senate means that there will be no actions to reduce the emissions for long time to come. I will also remind people that the Greens is allying in their position with the Liberals, whose leaders were denying, and are still denying, the existence of climate change.

If I am in Labor party, I would be dancing for this opportunity to expose the true colour of the Greens: transparent colourless (to allow them change their colour when needed).

We are praying that the Greens opportunists will continue in their political naivety in displaying their pure opportunism.

When Australia’s humanity is worth less than $80,000.00!

The Aminovs case had exposed a very bitter reality: after 12 years of the neo-liberal agenda, the humanity of this great nation has been reduced to a worth of less than $80,000.00.
When Aminovs son called the Immigration Minister’s office yesterday, the Minister’s Adviser was talking only about the $80,000.00 (required for the visa to be granted within months, instead of decades). The Adviser did not care and did not want to discuss any humanitarian circumstances that could change the Minister’s opinion and heart. She also would not agree to arrange for meeting with the Minister to try to convince him of the logical reasons why this family should have been granted permanent visas a long time ago.
All the evidence of humanitarian circumstances we provided the Minister’s Office was either ignored and regarded as irrelevant or were never presented to the Minister. We believe that the latter is the case. This is why the Aminovs were left with no other option but to try to attract the attention of the media, in a bid to reach the Minister, instead of dealing all the time with his advisers and secretaries.
What had shocked us all is the lack of any interest by any media outlet to speak about this highly humanitarian issue that (until now) had devastated the life of a young Australian permanent resident, turning it into complete misery. This misery has the potential to progress to worse consequences if the issue continues to be totally ignored by the Minister and media outlets.
The latest report by the Aminov’s son’s mental therapist (which was definitely not read by the Minister or his advisers/secretaries) pointed out very clearly that the highly inhumane treatment of this family resulted in the suicidal thoughts and attempts by the son (who will become an Australian citizen early next year, if he will be still alive!!)
The heartlessness of all ministerial staff and other politicians in the Federal parliament casts a very dark shadow about the status of humanity in this great nation.
The Federal government is now talking about spending billions of $s of tax-payers money to correct the mistakes, the greed or the irresponsible actions of a few investors, money borrowers and lenders, or to compensate for the inaction of an irresponsible previous government. How is it that the same government can be so obsessed with the $80,000.00 it wants to collect eagerly from the Aminovs?
What kind of nation have we been reduced to by this current government and the previous government, where everything is calculated by “fiscal management” yardstick, by dollar measurement and by inhumane laws which were introduced by a government that was condemned by all national and international human rights organisations, by its own members and by historical figures of its party?
But even taking this “fiscal management stance” – why would the government not grant the Aminovs a permanent visa?
The decision to prolong the mental torture of Aminovs by prolonging the period until they will be granted PR (11 years so far, in addition to possibly 17 years of waiting) did cost me as a taxpayer the following:
1- The son, Marat, became very sick and so he was unfit for work for the last year and he is expected to retire soon on a disability pension. We lost an average of $8,000.00 taxes from his work.
2- His repeated admission to a mental health institution (north shore hospital – mental health unit) cost me as a tax-payer tens of thousands of dollars
3- The cost of looking after Marat after becoming mentally ill as a result of this ordeal could run to tens of thousands of dollars in rehabilitation programs, specialised employment programs, specialised home-care programs and other related programs.
4- The cost borne so far by community supporters trying to save Marat or any of his family members from physical collapse or attempted suicide to end their suffering has so far been huge.

5- The cost of measures taken by the family and its supporters to reach the Minister to try to change his heart and decision to end its ordeal is becoming more and more expensive. The current and latest effort required several people to travel to Canberra, leaving their families and jobs behind.

And after all these costs, we heard from the Minister’s office one demand to end this family’s deep humanitarian suffering: you should have paid $80,000.00!
How cheap has our great nation’s pride and humanity become?

And so we say: Dear Minister, Please act to end this family’s suffering, before it is too late. If anyone of this innocent family’s members would be lost through the process to reach you and your heart, our nation would suffer a lot. Our suffering will include moral suffering for generations to come. So please grant them permanent visas before it is too late.

Morris Iemma: A Politician or Neighbourhood Thug!

I met Morris Iemma, NSW Premier, for the first time on the election day of 2003 state election outside one of the polling booths. I was shocked.

On the election day, all politicians behave themselves in a highly respectable and clever way.

He was acting as neighbourhood thug, and not a politician seeking to get the highest possible votes to keep his seat. He arrived to the booth in a very arrogant way, his nose was up touching the sky and surrounded with many of his supporters behaving as merely supporter thugs. He did not offer his hand to shake anyone’s hand, did not offer to help any voter and did not make any promise, even cheap deceiving ones.

He approached me, and I was helping his opponents, and said “anyone than Labor would need hundreds of years to snatch this seat from us”. I immediately shook my head in mockery and said “but Labor did lose Cunningham last year. It was very safe Labor seat for more than half century when your party behaved as thugs and ignored the people voting for them”

I was sure at that time that this arrogant “politician” who displayed no sense of political experience, would never climb beyond his current position. I judged this in a balanced pragmatic way.

A politician who lives on tax-payers money, should have acted in dealing with tax-payers better than this, to keep his employment at least.

But this thug was acting just as neighbourhood Al Capone gangster, using the argument that “you do not have any other alternative”.

Then I was shocked when he asssumed the top position in the state, after bloodless coup orchestrated behind closed doors in Terrigal.

But we say in Arabic “You bring curse on yourself”. And this is what happened.

The Terrigals, a newly formed Labor faction of mainly opportunists and named after secret meeting in the house of one of them in Terrigal, decided to absolutely control NSW Parliament. By appointing Morris, they actually decided to destroy their faction just shortly after its foundation.

The period of their control was marked only by scandals and chaos: fraud, corruption, sexual abuse (including child abuse), economic mismanagement, spreading culture of intimidation, bullying and racism... etc.

And I discovered more about Morris Iemma yesterday. In a visit to his electoral office, I discovered that it is not only him who is arrogant and ignorant. All workers at his office have the same attitude, or worse.

The worker there treated me as a criminal or at least beggar, who is hoping to get anything from this office. She treated me as parasite on them and the society. They forgot that they are the one who are getting the tax-payers money to help me and other residents of the area.

They forgot when they started to intimidate me when they could not fight my logic with similar logic that they are working in the office of the local MP and not at an office of ASIO or at correction service facility. They also forgot that I am a good law-abiding citizen, and not a criminal seeking some sort of amnesty.

The first thing that drew my attention at Morris’s office was the mono-colored ethnic background of the employees. At the office of one of the most multicultural seats in Australia, all the employees are very blonde, blue eye-colored and can speak only English. And the only English they are fluent in is the language of intimidation and bullying.

I compared Morris’s office with other MP’s offices.

At Tony Stewart office the picture is very different. The employee that I met earlier at the day was olive skin; spoke English with an accent, very polite and willing to help. She listened a lot, never lectured me and even went further to criticise the government action.

At the office of Ms Linda Burney, the atmosphere was very similar: very multicultural, polite and helpful. No intimidation or trace of any threats or bullying.

Usually the office of the local member is there (at tax-payers money expense) to help residents solve the obstacles they face or listen to their issues and try to address them (or take them into account and act upon them).

Usually, if the resident walks in the local member’s office with a bad image about the member or his party, he/she should walk out of the office with a better picture.

I walked in Morris Iemma’s office with bad image about him and his government. I walked out with a worse image.

Before I walked out the office, I swore to the employee there that I will soon move form the area which Morris represents its local member and in which they work as his employees. I also swore that we will do our best to get rid of such arrogant politicians.

Mr Morris Iemma,
If you think that Lakemba is a very safe Labor seat and it could take us hundreds of years to unseat you, you should think more. You should ask your colleague in arrogance and racism, Mr John Howard. He thought that Bennelong was very Liberal seat for about half century. Voters of his electorate sent a strong message last year to him, and to all arrogant politicians who acts as gangsters.

They sent him to the history dust bin, a lesson for you, Morris, to learn from.

And we have many alternatives.

WHY boycott the next state election?

What made more than 25% of Marrickville voters boycott the last by-election, 2005?

What makes more than 10% of the state’s residents regularly express their total loss of faith in ALL political institutions, by boycotting the elections somehow?

What are the reasons behind our campaign to boycott the current state election in 2007?

The simple answer is: because there is a total absence of a true visionary leadership at the moment.

It is very clear that the Labor has abandoned its commitments to social justice issues, and is trying to creep more and more towards the right. Equally clear is the increasing influence of the Labor right faction on the decision-making inside Labor.

But what about the smaller parties? Why could they not present alternative leadership?

There is no doubt that the increase in popularity of the largest 2 small parties (the Democrats and Greens) were just as protest votes against the major parties.

The increased popularity of the Democrats was a protest vote against the Liberals ignoring some social justice issues like Environment, Refugees and Racism.

The increase of the vote to the Greens was a protest vote against Labor’s lack of true leadership to stand against the far-right extreme politics of John Howard. It was never because of the Australians’ awareness about the Environmental issues became suddenly high (if we can assume that the Greens are strong on defending the environment anyway). There was a core group who supported Environmental issues. However up to now even though more people support Environmental issues, this is only one of the “protests” which they want to make against the big parties.

But why this assumption that the increase of the vote of the Greens was in fact a message of no-confidence in Labor, rather than message of confidence in the Greens?

I can explain this by giving one simple example.
From all statistics, we can easily assume that more than half of the Muslims who voted in the last state election voted for the Greens.

Can anyone suggest that Muslims voters (who are socially conservative) did vote for the Greens because indeed they supported the Greens’ very liberal social policies? Can anyone suggest that this socially conservative group of voters support the Greens pro-abortion policy, pro-euthanasia policy, pro gay marriage policy, Greens drugs policy…?

It was clear that the vote for the Greens was just a protest vote against Labor’s loss of vision. It was a pragmatic move from the voters to see if the new emerging political force will present a real alternative and incorporate their issues in its agenda.

It is very clear, at least for me, that the small parties did fail the trust and the test.

We saw how the Democrats failed the voters on the GST (and even before).

And we did see how the Greens failed the voters.

The Greens, whose increased popularity in the last few years came on pure social justice issues, failed to take any practical step to advance these issues.

The party that promoted itself as a pro-Multiculturalism party is still a pure white party, with no trace of any other color in its leadership or membership. The party that claimed to seek better public education, public transport, and public housing did some attempts at campaigning on some of these issues, but with no practical effect. May be this is because it has no real grassroots supports and just puts intellectual arguments for electoral gains only. So of course it could not achieve any of these promises. The party that promotes the slogan of “clean politics” started to make very dirty deals and steps; the last was the deal with the extreme-right to swap preferences in Victorian state election late last year.
And this is why it could not attract any of the 25% of the voters who boycotted Marrickville by-election.

But more importantly is that our message of no-confidence in Labor was lost in the Greens translation as confidence in the Greens. And because of this, the Greens were able to fool us in the last few years. They got our vote, we got nothing in return (and I am not talking about “us” as Muslims only, but about all decent Australians who are looking for a real alternative)

So who would I vote for in the next state election?

In the last state election, we sent an ambiguous message (by punishing Labor by voting the Greens). This time (and until we build a real alternative political force to truly represent us) I will send an unequivocal and clear message. I will boycott. I will go to the polling booth, but will drop the ballot paper blank: no names and no votes.

It is not a waste of a vote, as some people who are members in these political parties are claiming. In fact it’s tripling my voting strength. If I vote for the Greens to punish Labor, I am only sending a message to the Labor. But by boycotting, I am sending multiple messages: one to the Labor, one to the Greens, one to the Democrats and one to the Liberals. The message is that: we still have an alternative – at the same time that we are still looking for better alternatives, ones which actually work with us at the grassroots level on things which matter to us.

Researchers found why Muslims are boring and violent

www.theaustralian.hatred.au/multiculturalismsux

Richar Kurbaji

15 November 2006

The researchers of human behavior in conjunction with genetic engineers are very close to isolating a unique gene in Muslims that determines why they are boring, depressing, depressed and violent.

Professor John Howard, the renowned expert on racial and religious hatred at the White Australia University (WAU) announced this discovery last night. He described his team researchers’ discovery as a milestone in solving global terrorism.

“We found a unique gene in each Muslim’s genetic material, regardless of their ethnic background, that makes them all terrorists by birth” said Prof Howard. “At last we can prove that the war on Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria... are not because of any economic reasons related to Oil, but as counter-terrorism exercises.”

His colleague on the reasearch, Prof Phillip Ruddock, made similar observations and claims. He said that the team put a few Muslims from different backgrounds and different social and economic classes under different circumstances. These were ranging from total isolation at Long Bay jail to total isolation at desert detentions in Woomera, then total isolation in the Ghettos of Lakemba and Bankstown. They all showed the same symptoms of depression which were then translated into violent actions. These violent actions were ranging from trying to run away to trying to commit suicide by drinking bleach or swallowing razor blades.

Another colleague on the research, Dr Tony Abbot, observed very clear signs of mistrust, inability to adapt and integrate and high inclination to easily explode among the Muslims under research conditions.

“They were very depressed, never understand humor, easy to jump to conclusions and believe in conspiracies” said Dr Abbot. “We acknowledge that we put them under big pressure, humiliate them immensely, degrade their humanity and torture them badly. But in a Western democracy, they should not act so depressed then violently. They should remember the suffering of our ancestors, the convicts, who (regardless of the circumstances) never reacted so violently”

Support for the results of this research also came form Prof Bob Brown, in his section on Biodiverse-related human behavior. He said that the only Muslims he saw in his life were the environmentally ignorant, violent and never smiling heavy-bearded men and totally covered women.
“I never saw a Muslim tying themselves to a tree to stop its uprooting” said Prof Brown. “I also never saw muslims in the park trying to plant a tree at the Tree day celebration. The only time I see Muslims in the park is when they are having BBQs cutting several trees branches to use them as charcoal. They only know how to destroy, never how to plant and construct”

Prof John Howard is now expressing his optimism for the future.

“Once we will isolate the gene, we will be able to produce peaceful genetically-modified Muslims. The new-born Muslims can fit easily in the Western societies, alongside their counterpart born-again Christians”

It is expected that the production of new generation of genetically modified Muslims will start within one year.

This was another satirical opinion piece, proudly brought to you by Jamal Daoud (http://www.jamaldaoud.blogspot.com)

Al Hlialy and Muslims to be blamed for the global warming

www.theaustralian.lies.au/conspiracies/getridofthem

Ritchar Kurbaj
10 November 2006

While the row about the Hilaly's comments on rape and “uncovered meat”, did not finish totally yet, Al Hilaly and his community have been blamed by members of parliament, both state and federal for escalating global warming.

Those experts noticed that Al Hilaly is not preaching against his followers from the smoking of the Argilla, a type of water pipe (widely known in the western world as Hubbly Bubbly). The Argilla was found to emmit a large quantity of Carbon Dioxide and other poisonous gas. Taking into account that the Muslim numbers are exceeding 1 billion in population around the world, the emmited gases could cause a lot of damage to our environment and possibly contribute to global warming.

In one religious ceremony during last Ramadan, Al Hilaly was stressing that smoking the Argilla, while not promoted, it is not forbidden. He was quoted as saying “at the moment you can smoke Argilla without any fear of divine punishment”

On another occasion, he was saying that global warming is a “divine punishment” for following secularism. It is very clear that he urges his folowers not to care about the damage to environment.

The Australian prime minister has described his comments as “unAustralian” and urged his community to sack him immediately.

“It is very clear that the Egyptian born shiekh who cannot speak English well, does not feel the 'heat' caused by global warming and other events” said Mr Howard.

Kim Beazely, the federal opposition leader has questioned the reason why Shiekh Al Hilaly cannot feel the “heat”, as if he is not really from this earth. He demanded a royal commission to investigate these claims and the Muslim's responsibility for the global warming. He blamed the government for not doing enough to measure the amount of CO2 emmision from the Argillas, a policy vacuum he promised to fill when he wins government. He also questioned the ignorance from the Department of Immigration to stop the Argilla's smokers to gain residence in Australia, and later, Citizenship. Mr Beazely said, “they should at least learn to speak English before they go smoking the Argilla”.

Kevin Rudd was quick to demand an apology from the Mufti and his community. He also asked the Attorney General to investigate if the Mufti's act was such a serious breech of national security that it should warrant deportation.

Bob Brown, the leader of the Greens Party, demanded that the Muslim community to sack the Mufti immediately and replace him with environment-friendly Mufti, who would commit himself to sign the Kyoto protocol. Mr Brown noted that the Mufti and the Muslim community had the least participation in the rally on global warming last week.
“I did not see the Mufti at the rally last week; I was told that he refused an invitation to attend and commit himself and his community to the principles of Kyoto” Mr Brown noted.

When asked about these claims outside Lakemba Mosque, the Mufti shook his head, smiled and kept going. This could be translated that he cannnot find any excuses any more.

Some Muslims who are long term opponents of AL Hlilay said that he does not represent the Muslims, and without him as Mufti, the community could have easily signed the Kyoto Protocol decades ago. They added their voices to the chorus of politicians asking for his immediate sacking and for a candlelight vigil outside the Mosque until he does.



For more satirical comment, contact: Jamal Daoud (0413 467 367 – that's real!)

Note: The above text does not actually represent the views of those mentioned but the satirical position of our collective existence.

David Hicks, Al Hilaly and the three Muslims in Yemen: Conviction by media because of faith!

In any civilised society, every citizen has the right of presumption of innocence, except in Howard's Australia. The golden rule of natural justice in any secular democratic society is that every “accused” is innocent until proven “guilty”.

For David Hicks who was in detention for more than 4 years, Howard and his ministers decided that he deserves this, even though there was no trial or conviction. They have not only abandoned him, but sent an envoy to England, to encourage them to refuse him English citizenship. After this attempt failed, the Australian envoy was sent to abort any diplomatic intervention on his behalf.

For Al Hilaly, he should be sacked, possible jail and prospective deportation. All this without any court conviction, sacking through legitimate channels or losing in polling boxes.
The Australian government is ready to spend millions of dollars following him from country to country, taping all his speeches and ceremonies, translating all these into English and then staging media and political circus after circus.

For the three Australians arrested in Yemen for possible links to a “terrorist organisation”, Howard has already decided that they “broke the laws and they deserve everything”; full-stop, no need for any further evidence, a fair trial or conviction.
Howard knows as a legally trained person that the ‘accused is innocent until proven guilty’. Does not he know as PM, who controls many security agencies, that Yemen is a very corrupt government from its head to toes?

What kind of a leader are we having in Australia?

Let us compare his response on other issues!

Do we remember Schapelle Corby?
She was caught red-handed trying to smuggle drugs into Bali. John Howard wrote a letter to her personally promising that he will use all in his power to save her.

Do you also remember Fred Nile, member of NSW Legislative Council. He attacked Muslim women's rights. Howard did not stage any media circus to sack him. On the contrary, he supported his right to express his personal and religious views, even if they are bigotted.

And I do not want to remind you with his response to Pope's remarks of “we should really move on.”

What hypocrisy?
Mr Hicks, Al Hilaly and the three Australians arrested in Yemen are all still innocents (not like Corby) and deserve fair treatment and presumption of innocence, until proven otherwise.

It is very clear that in Howard's Australia, you are guilty according to either your faith or your appearance.

You are guilty until prove your innocence if:
●You are Muslim.
●You are of Middle Eastern appearance.
●You speak English with an accent, unless you prove that you are not Arab or Muslim

This is a better and cheaper-to-run system, where any politician can decree a conviction. Even an ordinary policman can do this job. All what it needs is to add ethnic origin and faith/religion to the driving licence or ID card.
This Howard has a very good non-conventional method for every agenda item. This time he invented the persecution of his opponents by media. No need to spend money to construct cases, no need to spend money for diplomatic missions to help “accused”, no need to spend money for judges and courts.....

On the contrary: he will save a lot of money: ‘if you do not do what I want, I will withheld funds for your community’!

The actions of the Howard government mirror that of a kangaroo court process and affront the Australian constitution as it severely compromises the doctrine of the separation of political power and judicial power, an integral part of the Westminster system of government he supposedly cherishes so much.

And we still believe that we are living in a secular democratic society, not in a banana republic!!

Why mixing religion with politics again: Sheikh Hilaly's comments should not be gone on air?

In the context of the media circus about Al Hilaly's comments sparked by The Australian today, we want to put facts into context:

٭ There are no justifications for the violence inflicted on any rape victims. The perpetrators of such violence should be tried and punished accordingly.
٭ In a secular democracy like Australia, it is unacceptable to interfere in people's choice of their dress or the way they choose to go in their life, as long as it does not harm others.
٭ The issues of criminal justice, defamation and inciting hate and violence should be dealt with in the courtrooms, and not in the media by creating a circus that will interfere with the natural justice.

And here we want to ask basic questions:
٭ Why was a religious ceremony blown out of context and leaked to the media?
٭ Why did this happen at this particular time, and after a month of its delivery?
٭ What is the role of Howard's government in this leak and circus, taking into consideration the unacceptable remarks of Howard and his ministers about Islam and Muslims and their wish to change the Muslim “leadership” to a more “Liberal-friendly” one?
٭ Why did Pru Goward, the Liberal candidate who failed to be preselected for Epping seat because she is not far right-extremist, enter the debate in such provocative way?

And we can conclude:
٭ There is a fishy conspiracy here by the Liberal right-extremists to blow things out of its context to achieve electoral gains. As since when in a secular democracy, security agencies and media are spying on religious ceremonies? And why only on a Muslim ceremony? And why dealing with this ceremony in the media instead of appropriate channels, if there is no fishy conspiracy to use all these for electoral victories?
٭ The Al Hilaly's comments, while highly inappropriate, could not amount to inciting hate or rape. He was stating his opinion about events concerning some members of the community. He was not urging Muslim youth to rape any “uncovered meat”, but was urging them to stick to Islamic code of dress and behavior.
٭ By the same token as Al Hilaly cannot direct Australian women how to act, Muslims have the right to promote socially conservative code of dress and behavior according to their religion. As far as there is not incitement of hate or violence, this right should be respected for all (including Muslims).
٭ The Pru Goward attempt to match the Liberal extremists to win a candidacy somewhere by demanding deportation of Al Hilaly is not more than a pathetic move. Pru Goward should go and read the immigration law, principles of natural justice and principles of separation of powers in the secular democracy. She appointed herself as prosecutor, jury and Judge. She even gave instant judgment before looking into the evidence or heard the “accused”. Then Al Hilaly is an Australian citizen and, if convicted of inciting hate, should be sentenced in Australia and not sent overseas. We did not hear any suggestions that the “white” criminals should be deported and sent back to England.

We would like to stress here that this media circus about Al Hilaly's comments are not more than another episode from the Federal government to interfere in Muslim community affairs to further marginalise and criminalise the whole community on one hand. And it is another move to enforce Liberal-friendly “leadership” on the community that will work hand-in-hand with the government agenda to dehumanize the community to legitimise the neo-conservative attacks on Islam and Muslims.

Did the Greens senators convert to Islam lately?

Since my attack started (on 18 July 06) on the hypocrisy and lack of any real commitments or vision of the Greens party (especially handling of the crisis in the Middle East) the election machine of the party are sending very strange messages.

I should mention here that the disgraceful stances of the Greens on these issues started when the Greens politicians were deadly silent on the banning of Hizboullah, on 14 June 03. Then they very noisily and enthusiastically supported the banning of Hamas and Lashker e Taybeh, 7 November 03.

After that, there was silence on all related issues, after I led a campaign against these disgraceful stances inside the Greens. This continued until this cease-fire was finished when the Greens federal election machine 04 re-opened fire on our community and its central issue, Palestine. The Greens machine put out a very disgraceful media release on 1 September 04 condemning Palestinian military factions and holding them responsible for the halt of the peace process (which peace process!!).

At that time I had no choice but to break my silence. I did condemn, publicly, such political prostitution to gain some Zionist support. I, proudly, attacked the Greens media release and the shift to total loss of principled stands and a visionary approach, in the media and the community. I also participated in collecting signatures and names to condemn this prostitution in a petition sent to both senators.

After the disgraceful media release of the Greens on the Israeli attack on Lebanon, 17 July 06, I had no choice but to attack in full force and on all fronts to expose the real colour of the “Greens”.

Since my initial attack on 18 July, the Greens were putting out media releases at the rate of one media release per week. Then they were keen to start talking about some issues that they refused to touch in the last half decade.

On November 2002 (during my campaigning in Victorian election), I organised a meeting with Senator Nettle and Asem Judeh, to encourage the Greens senators to talk about the issues that matter. We urged them to talk about the tax-deductibility of the money sent to be used in illegal activities (like building illegal settlements, buying arms and financing confiscation of Palestinian lands), Israeli army recruitment in Australia,... etc. All our requests were ignored and fell on deaf ears. No motion or discussion on such issues was initiated in the parliament by the Greens politicians.

Suddenly, and after my recent attack on the credibility of the Greens as a left party, The Greens senators showed a strong appetite to talk about some of these issues. We saw the pathetic motion after motion (including a motion to ask about arms trade with Israel), with no coordination with anyone in the Parliament, then media release after media release on the issue and many media interviews on the issues.

What a hypocrisy!!!

Could not these senators move these motions, ask for debate, and demand answers since 2002? Why this postponement?!!

Then came the biggest lie of its kind!

I should mention that the Greens was promoting for the last decade the “clean politics” slogan as an essential part of their claim of “political alternativeness” to the major parties.

On 30 July 06, The Greens senator Kerry Nettle claimed, on the air on the SBS radio – Arabic program, that the Greens regarded Hizboullah as national resistance and not a terrorist organisation, and they did oppose the legislation to put it on the list of terrorists organisations.

What a cheap lie!!

Let us start exposing this lie from recent events. This is strange and a total contradiction to the content of Bob Brown's media release on 17 July 06.

Where were the senators when Hizboullah was banned on 14 June 03? The Greens senators were deadly silent among a very noisy and big debate in the senate. And at the end of the session, they did not even abstain from voting.

I read the senate Hansard. The Greens tried to treat us (as a community) as naive immature children, who can receive any piece of lie unquestioningly. The truth is that the Democrats, while they supported banning Hizboullah as terrorist organisation, sought amendments to stop the retrospectivity of applying this legislation. The Greens supported these amendments and objected to this issue, not the issue of banning.

After the deterioration in the reputation of the Greens among the Muslim and Arabic communities, the election machine is desperate to do anything to gain some ground before the state and federal elections next year. They could even go to the extent of supporting Hizboullah as national resistance and not terrorist organisation!!!!!!
And they are keen now to pursue the issue of Israel’s arms trade with Australia. They are even organising a forum about this issue.

Halleluyah!!!

But why are they keen to talk about this irrelevant issue, where the trade is less than 2 million dollars and is non important item. Why are they not keen to ask about the tax-payers money which is going to support illegal activities like building settlements or buying arms!!

Then they cried for long time for the death of the Lebanese civilians.

If I was not a Greens member for long time, and read in those days the Greens' many media releases, speeches at the rallies, motions in the Parliament and interviews with the ethnic media, I would suspect that the Greens senators did convert to Islam and became members of Hizboullah, or maybe Hamas (at least they have the same Green flag).

There are a few questions to ask here:
1- Why did they convert to Islam just now?
2- Will they stay members of Hamas or Hizboullah after the end of the federal election, 2007?
3- Would they defy the Australian governments ban on sending money to help Hamas and Hizboullah?
4- How long will this cheap political prostitution last?

And in Arabic we say: “and your intelligence is enough”! (وفهمكم كفايه)

Howard and North Korea: Courage without limits!

Really this time, I am proud of you Mr John Howard.
You showed the whole world that you have both vision and courage, with your description of North Korea as an “International Outlaw”, and then demanding International collective measures against it.

Your words, vision and integrity should be taught in all universities around the world.

You cannot allow the proliferation of nuclear weapons around the world. Frankly, I share your vision in this.

But...

I recall that months ago you did sign an agreement with India to export to them Uranium. To the best of my knowledge, India is a member of the nuclear countries club.

And to the best of my knowledge, you did not criticize Israel for the last 10 years.

To the best of my knowledge, North Korea does not occupy any other country's land.
But as I recall, Israel is occupying lands of at least 4 neighbouring countries.

To the best of my knowledge, North Korea did not stage any war against any of its neighbors in the last half century.
But for the same period, I know that Israel waged 5 major wars against its neighbors, in addition to the daily incursions and violation to their sovereignty.

To the best of my knowledge, North Korea did not violate any UN resolutions.
On the other hand, Israel is refusing to implement more than 65 UN resolutions, the latest is resolution 1701.

To the best of my knowledge, North Korea did not violate any international treaty.
On the other hand, Israel violated almost every major International treaty, starting from the IV Geneva Convention, Convention on the Rights of Children, Convention to Protect the Rights of Indigenous People,......

Despite all of this, you “have always admired Israel's extraordinary fortitude and resilience” (as you stated in an interview with Australian Jews News Weekly, 22 September 2006).

Then you added another reason to why you are condemning North Korea's nuclear test: the arrogance of the North Korean government to spend the money to build nuclear weapons, while depending on the International community to “feed” its citizens.

A clever argument that shut up the North Korea's argument forever.

But was Israel not dependent on the many billions of dollars from the US to “feed” its population, but is still too spending the biggest proportion of this money on arms, army and stacking non-conventional arsenals.

Why is Howard not threatening to stop the millions of tax-payers money to Israel, until it stops producing nuclear, chemical, biological and other internationally-forbidden weapons of mass destruction?

Do we call this genius or hypocrisy?

In Arabic we say “if you have no feeling of shame, do whatever you want”.

Douglas Wood cowboy-like press conference

Originally posted on 21 June 2005

It was deeply disappointing to see an Australian citizen act in arrogant irresponsible cowboy-like way. Watching Douglas Wood's press conference let me feel deeply ashamed as Australian.

Douglas Wood was outraged of his kidnapping(and I can understand this), but he was not outraged or ashamed of kidnapping of 25 million Iraqis, killing of hundreds of thousands of them, humiliation of hundred of thousands of Iraqis and destroying the country of the first civilization on earth, as a direct result of the invasion that he supports.

Douglas Wood, who was in Iraq profiteering from the misery of millions of Iraqis, did not show any sign of humanity when he supported the invasion and then destruction of Iraq by the "Coalition of Willings". Douglas Wood would like to make more profit by sending more racist supremacist "cowboy" accusations and challenges on Channel Ten this Sunday.

Douglas Wood "Cowboy-like" remarks and promises to make "Rambo-like" return to Iraq was in deep contrast of his family members' pleads during his kidnapping, when they "traveled" several times to Lakemba to ask for help, then traveled to the Middle East and appeared on all TV channels and newspapers there pleading for help.

Douglas remarks are most unhelpful because it will definitely put the life of all "White Anglo" Australians under immediate risk, not only in Iraq, but in the whole Middle East. It provoked even the most moderate people there, who expected some restraints, respect and fairness from Douglas, who thinks that the life, freedom and human rights of "Westerners" are the most important while the life, dignity and well-being of Iraqis are irrelevant.

Not only me who should be ashamed of these remarks and attitude, but every descent Australian who read the Universal Human Rights Declaration and believes that human life and rights are sacred regardless of nationality, race, skin color, gender, religious affiliation ...

It seems that the attempt of Muslim community and Muslim leaders to reduce the division and fear among the society because of Howard's racist and barbaric policies was failed miserably and even got opposite effects.
Lastly I personally advice Douglas Wood to abandon his  "Rambo-like" dreams of returning to Iraq, as such move would mostly (taking into account the personality of Iraqis and the lawless situation there) result in another disaster for him, and this time I do not think that he will win any sympathy from anyone, in Australia or abroad.     

Citizenship test: an opportunity for good lies!

My father thinks that he is, at the age of 70, past the time for tests. He thinks he does not need any more to remember and be reminded of things, accept rubbish as facts, fed up with reading unnecessary items and trying to digest their contents.

He thought that he would have peace of mind at this age, but he was wrong.

Howard will test him now about Australian values.

Howard will ask him the dumb questions like: what are the NRL rules? Do you play cricket? Which beach you are going to usually? And what is the slip-slop-slap? What is the official language of Australia? Where can you find wombats?...

But how will Howard ask him about the Australian civilization?

Would he ask him: who conducted the first genocide of the Aboriginal people? Or would the question be more tricky as: who did bring civilization to Aboriginals? Would he dare to ask him about his feeling about the meaning of Australia Day?

How would the questions be formulated about the Australian participation in Imperialists' wars in Vietnam, Korea ... and before that in the First and Second World Wars?

Would my father be asked about his opinion on the dumbness of Sir Menzies and how did he succeed in fooling Australians for around 2 decades? Or he would be required to mention the achievements of the “Greatest Australian PM”?

Would my father be enforced to lie about his opinion on the war on Iraq and its legitimacy? Would his criticism of the lies of this government about “illegal migrants”, “queue jumpers”, “kids overboard”... be tolerated?

My father asked me a tricky question. He asked what is the relation between the timing of this discussion paper and the fact that English migrants are refusing to take up citizenship. He let me know that there are more than 800,000 (mostly Britsh citizens) who are refusing to give up European citizenship for an Australian one.

Now, and knowing my father's progressive views, I am wondering how many decades under a Liberal government it will take him to pass this simple test?

I until now cannot see how the people can be tested for their feelings?

Does anybody think that citizenship is an issue that can be tested in the same manner as Chemistry and Physics? Can any clever creature compare feeling of belonging with the understanding of the English grammar?
Although I know that my father is speaking English very well, I also know how stubborn he is.

He would not accept the logic of “terra nullius” to justify genocides and colonisation.

He would prefer to stay stateless rather than to accept the lies of why we invaded Iraq.

My father lived all his life in a country where football (or what Aussies call soccer) is a religion, but failed to learn its rules. He also considers it as a “waste of time, energy and a stupid thing to run for hours to catch “a piece of rubber”.

I can imagine that we would need a miracle to convince him to watch a cricket match, let alone to learn its rules.

He lived all his life in a tribal country where everything could be done easily by “connections” and bribes, but refused to participate in this and lived his life the “hard way”.

I am sure that none can convince him to lie just on the day of this citizenship test to say things like:

- Australian government was right to lock up innocent kids, women and men in detention for years.

- Australian government is the most pro-multiculturalism government this land had in the last century.

- Robert Menzies was not a lying fool, and James Cook was not a criminal butcher

- Australian government is not committing war crimes by invading Iraq and Afghanistan

Frankly, it would need a “divine intervention” to convince him to start lying at this age, start eating sausages, walk nude at Bondi, accept the lies of Menzies and Howard and support the war on Iraq.

Would he ever pass this test and get Australian citizenship!!!

But if this is what is required: do you think he cares!!!

The Liberal Party's media release on Hungarian unrest

Media release The Liberal Party of Australia

The Hungarian hooligans should go home

The Liberal Party of Australia is expressing its deep disappointment at the unnecessary unrest in Hungary against the PM Ferenc Gyurcsany, and demanding an immediate end to the street protests. The Liberal Party leader and Australian Prime Minister John Howard expressed his deep concern over the Hungarian people intolerance of “political lying”.

“It is very clear that the Hungarian people are suffering from naive insensitivity to political pragmatism” said Mr John Howard. “The Hungarian people need to open their minds and look to other people’s bright experience in this field”

The Liberal Party leader is urging his Hungarian counterpart not to give in to the hooligans’ demands and hold onto the top position. Mr Howard is urging the Hungarian government to urgently introduce to Parliament tough “Anti-Terrorism Laws” and link the hooligans to the Al Qaeda group.

“We are ready, if asked by Mr Gyurcsamy, to send our experts to show him how to deal with this crisis” Mr Howard announced today. “Mr Ruddock had demonstrated his fine capability to cook up conspiracies here in Australia and can easily do the same and save Mr Gyurcsamy's political future”.

Mr Howard indicated his readiness to send the Hungarian PM a ready-to-use kit on how to avoid any accountability. This could include expressions like “I was not told”, “I did not know”, “I was misinterpreted”, “the tape was manufactured in Tora-Bora mountains” and “I cannot give you details for security reasons”. Any of these would see end of the crisis immediately.

But for longer term, Mr Howard advised his Hungarian counterpart not to be bothered to rule such people that cannot tolerate “simple lies”. He advised Mr Gyurcsamy to seek a new political career somewhere else, where these kinds of lies could be accepted as “necessary steps” to “finish the job”.

“But I will not accept his application to join the Liberal Party of Australia” stressed Mr Howard. “To be a good Liberal politician he should be able to lie for a long time without being caught by media or other politicians”

Mr Howard said that there is still a lot for Mr Gyurcsamy to learn about how to be a good Liberal politician. He reminded the disgraced Hungarian PM that he had been successfully lying in Australia for 10 years, no tapes were leaked to the media or to the opposition politicians. His hero and founder of the Liberal party, Sir Robert Menzies, was successful in lying for more than 18 years.

For further information on how to keep lying without being caught, you can ring the Liberal Party headquarter or ring Kiribilli House directly.

Open letter to His Grace Cardinal George Pell

Dear Cardinal Pell

First of all, I should stress that I am not theologian, but your remarks about violence and Islam prompted me to write you this letter.

I heard you on the ABC radio this morning and heard your questions to your Muslim cleric counterparts.

I would remind you that if you do not know things about Islam, there should be other venues and ways to ask clarifications. Your questions in this way (by creating a media circus), is not constructive and does not help anyone but the extremists on all sides. You should be able to ask for a religious conference with Muslim clerics and direct your questions to them.

After hearing your questions, I have few questions for you:
1- What is the official position of the Catholic church about the successive Popes using Christian faith to invade other people to achieve politico-economic goals? Should I remind you of the blood in the Holy Land by crusade wars for hundreds of years called by the Pope of the day? What about the war between the Catholics and Protestants? Then the colonial movement and re-occupation of the Holy Land by the French and British, in the beginning of the 20th century, with the blessing of the church leaders of the day? And the brutal murder and torture of thousands of Muslims and Jews in Spain when they refused to convert to Catholicism ?

2- What is the benefit of having a very peaceful and fantastic holy book (the Bible), if the followers do not follow its commandments?

3- What is the relationship between the fact that your church is losing followers to the evangelical churches and your (and your Pope's) comments on Islam? Does this have anything to do with competing to attract (or to keep, in your case) church attendees?

4- What is your church definition of “terrorism” and “violence”? Does your church recognise that the invasion (by Chrisitian evangelicals supported by their Governments) of Iraq and Afghanistan is in fact state-terrorism, and subsequently the people of Iraq and Afghanistan have the right to defend themselves?

5- With a long history of your church's complacency in raging violence in many parts of the world at different stages of history, who gave you (and your church) the moral ground to question other people beliefs and commitments to peace and social-justice?

I would appreciate your reply and further discussion on this issue.

Jamal Daoud

John Howard: go to hell with your values!

Did you all not notice the change in John Howard's rhetoric lately?

From purely xenophobic “we will decide who will come to this country” into Nazi rhetoric of “Australian vs unAustralian” and the need for migrants to embrace “Australian values”.

So what is wrong with Indian values? Why is Howard upset from Germans? Are the Nigerian values inferior to Australians?

Does John Howard mean that Australia is the only country that has “codes of ethics”?

Do I hear here Hitler's arguments of German superiority?

To the best of my knowledge, every culture on the earth is advocating for good behaviors against the evil of lying, stealing, deceiving, killing...etc. No difference between the Indian, Chinese, German, Arabic, Nigerian etc unless there are hobbit politicians who use lies and deceptions to achieve some political scoring.

Let me ask now what is the “Australian values”?

If playing cricket is Australian, should the government ban soccer?

If eating sausages is “Australian”, why is “Tabbouleh” still in our markets?

If having sex once mature is “Australian”, why are the “virgins” not rounded up and sent to the “cultural correction camps”?

If English is the test for good citizenship and good manner, why are the “English illiterate” still wandering in the streets and not in Silverwater jail ?

If drinking beer is “Australian”, why did the government included it in the GST, instead of giving it away with each immunization injection?

If “Australian” includes to be racist, why is Paul Keating not in jail?


Well, John Howard, go to hell you and your values especially if they include detaining kids, women and innocent people without any charges.

Go to hell with your values if they include abandoning drowning people in the middle of the ocean, to succeeding electorally on their bodies.

Go to hell with your values if they justify sending troops to wipe out nations, destroy countries and kill innocents.

Go to hell with them if they include depriving the working class of their rights to a fair share of wealth.

Go to hell if they include spreading racial and religious hate, leading to face-spitting on followers of certain religion/culture.

Go to hell with them if they include the requirement to strip me from my cultural, linguistic and religious/irreligious beliefs.

Go to hell with your “values” if they include spreading lies and deception of “illegal immigrants”, “queue jumpers”, “kids overboard”, and “Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction”.

John Howard, if to be Australian, I should do all these evil things, take my citizenship and deport me to Mars.

If we come as a nation to define what is “Australian values”, which should include to be truthful, tolerant, compassionate and hard-working, I am sure who will be deported.

So John Howard, go to hell with your values.

Howard's Anti-Muslims remarks and IR “reforms”

What a great leadership we have in this country!!

A Prime Minister that is master only in fabricating lies and farces, inciting religious and ethnic hatred, sending our troops to invade other countries to destroy them and “wipe them off the map”, ...etc

Was I shocked to hear his latest messages of religious hatred, after all his lies of “queue jumpers”, “kids overboard”, “Saddam's weapons of mass destruction”......??

Frankly? Yes. I was shocked.

I was shocked because he could not stop after all his claims of “Muslim” extremists that want to carry out terrorist attacks on Australian land, which turned out to be not more than cheap farces and lies (after the re-aquittal of “Jihad Jack” and “Zack Mallah” and no charges to any of the rest.)

I was shocked at the low level of desperation that he is showing at the moment.

I was shocked at his assumption (but maybe his assumption is right) that the Australians are the dumbest people on the earth!!

I was shocked that his deeply discriminatory and offensive remarks did not spark immediate widespread condemnations, rallies and civil unrest.

I was shocked at what a beautiful community we have. A community that after 10 years of constant viscious attacks and disgraceful remarks, is still deep calm on the streets of Lakemba, Auburn and Bankstown.

I was shocked at the lack of any alternative leadership in Australia at the moment. All other political forces were very shy to take any practical steps in the last decade and resorted only to very shy media releases (mainly for political scoring).

I was shocked that a few so called “Muslim leaders” were quick to “self flogging”, by blaming the problems on the “extremist” elements in the community.

Let me go back to the remarks and try to understand why I am deeply shocked.

John Howard is urging the Muslims migrants to learn English language “as quickly as possible”.

Very nice words. But how?!!

Did not this Howard know that his government slashed all funding for English teaching since 1996?

Does he recall that his government is stopping (by the law) migrants from studying English language. Do I need to remind him that his government created so many “temporary” visas that are not allowed to study English. Let me remind him of some of these visas: “Temporary Protection Visa” (at least 3 years), “Temporary Spouse Visa” (at least 2 years), Temporary Bridging Visas (unlimited time)..... and all of them are not allowed to access Federally funded English classes.

Even holders of Permanent visas are allowed to access very limited numbers of hours (if any).

So how can this genius assume that these new migrants would learn English!!!

Do his remarks at this moment indicate that he and his government are in crisis!!

Do these remarks have any relation to the Industrial Relation Laws “reform” and their devastating effect on the society??

Have these remarks any relation to the deterioration of the situation in Iraq and the increasing revelation of how much the government knew about the “weapons of mass destruction lies”, the kick back to Saddam's regime and how much they knew about the abuse of Iraqi human rights at Abu Ghreeb?

Would I be shocked for longer than the next year???

المقاومه اللبنانيه – الفلسطينيه و اوراق التوت المتساقطه

الصمود البطولي لمقاتلي المقاومه اللبنانيه لحوالي شهر، والمقاومه الفلسطينيه لاكثر من 6 سنوات، في وجه اله الدمار الوحشيه الاسرائيليه اسقطت كل اوراق التوت وكشفت عورات الكثيرين، بدءا من الرياض، مرورا بقاهره المعز وعمان انتهاءا بواشنطن ولندن وكانبرا.

فالمقاومه التي منعت "الجيش الذي لا يقهر" من الاستقرار في بنت جبيل ومارون الراس وغيرها من القرى الحدوديه واجبرته على التقهقر عده مرات تاركا عشرات القتلى والجرحي، كشفت اولا عوره اسرائيل التي كانت تسترها بعجز النظام العربي وتآمره على شعوبه المسحوقه، متدثره بعجز الامم المتحده المتشابك مع مصالح الدول العظمى في المنطقه.

فالجيش الذي احتل عام 1967 الضفه الغربيه وقطاع غزه وسيناء والجولان واجزاء من الاردن ولبنان في عده ساعات، يقف هذه المره عاجزا لاكثر من شهر امام مارون الراس وبنت جبيل والخيام، الواقعه على الحدود مباشره. وطائراته الجباره وبوارجه الحربيه تستطيع حصد الاطفال الرضع والنساء والشيوخ، ولكنها غير قادره على تركيعهم. كما انها تستطيع تدمير الجسور والمدارس والمستشفيات، ولكنها غير قادره على حسم المعركه في شريط حدودي لا يتجاوز الكيلومترين.

اسرائيل العاريه تماما الان، اخلاقيا وعسكريا وسياسيا واعلاميا، لا تستطيع الا ان "تفش خلقها" باطفال قانا والنبطيه وبنت جبيل وخطف اطفال ومدنيين من بعلبك،انتظارا للفرج ياتيها من واشنطن ليدثرها بورقه توت زرقاء بختم اممي.

وبنفس العري التام، تقف كل الانظمه العربيه العاجزه الان حتى عن كلمه شجب واستنكار، قد تغضب واشنطن وحلفائها وتعرض قائلها لمخاطر اضافته الى قائمه دول “محور الشر”. هذه الانظمه التي تنتظر هي الاخرى الفرج من اروقه البيت الابيض و"مجلس امنه" في نيويورك.

فالانظمه التي ضحت بالغالي والرخيص من اجل الانفاق العسكري وبناء جيوش جراره، فشلت في تحرير شبر من اي ارض عربيه محتله، لتحررها مقاومه بدون جيوش وبدون جنرالات تعج صدورهم بنياشين لا نعرف لماذا منحوها. والمليارات التي انفقت لتكديس سلاح لم يستعمل الا في قمع تظاهرات طلاب المدارس او تظاهرات الخبز، لم تستعد شبرا محتلا او تحرر اسير من سجون الاحتلال كما فعلت المقاومه اللبنانيه التي حررت اراض واسرى ونفوس.

النظام العربي بمجمله يقف الان فاشلا في الاجابه عن اسئله بسيطه يسالها كل مواطن بسيط مثل "لماذا فشلت الجيوش العربيه خلال ستين عام من تحقيق ما حققته المقاومه بسنوات قليله وبعتاد اقل وميزانيه لا تذكر، بالمقارنه مع ميزانيات جيوشكم؟". ليس هذا فحسب، بل السؤال الاكثر الحاحا هو انه "الا يكفي عجزكم الكامل والشامل، فلماذا تحاولون طعن المقاومه في ظهرها والتامر عليها؟" ام انكم من جماعه الذي "لا يرحم ولا يريد من الله ان يرحم"؟

النظام العربي العاري تماما امام شعوبه المنكوبه به، يعرف انه ان لم يجهز مع اسرائيل وحلفائها على هذه المقاومه، فان الامل الذي بثته المقاومه في النفوس العربيه المنسحقه بعد عقود من الهزائم وثقافه الاستسلام، قد يحيي امالا ظنتها الانظمه قد تلاشت بلا رجعه: امالا بالكرامه والعزه والتحرير.

النظام العربي الواقف على مفترق طرق بعد اسقاط نظام صدام حسين الدموي والذي اثبت ان العماله والانبطاح لشروط الهيمنه الامريكيه، لا يعطي اي مناعه من السقوط بدبابات امريكيه، ان رات سيده العالم الحر ان ذلك مهم من اجل "شرق اوسط جديد". هذا النظام امام خيارات احلاها امر من العلقم: اما السقوط بدبابات امريكيه او بانتفاضات امل قادمه من بنت جبيل ومرجعيون.

النظام العربي الذي احرجته (قبل ان تحرج حكومه اسرائيل) قدره المقاومه على تدمير بوارج حربيه، ومطارات عسكريه ودبابات متطوره وطائرات حربيه، يقف الان حائرا كيف يجيب على اسئله اطفال قانا وبئر العبد: كيف استطاعت المقاومه من فعل كل ذلك، ولم تستطع جيوشكم؟

النظام العربي الذي حاول ان يقنعنا ان المواجهه مع اسرائيل لم تجلب الا الخراب والدمار، في تسويقه لمشاريع الاستسلام،ولكنه لم يستطع تحقيق اي امن اقتصادي او اجتماعي لمواطنيه طوال سنوات الاستسلام الماضيه، بل راينا كيف ان ذلك الاستسلام لم يجلب الا الاميه والجهل والتخلف والياس، الذي قاد الكثيرين اما للادمان او الهجره والتشرد في دول العالم.

النظام العربي برمته لا يستطيع مجرد النظر في وجوه اطفال قانا وبنت جبيل ومرجعيون والرشيديه وباقي القرى والمدن التي طالتها ايدي الهمجيه. النظام العربي الان في مازق خطير لتبرير وجوده بالاصل. فما مبرر وجود نظام ان كان يعاني من ازمه كلام حتى، ناهيك عن اي قدره على فعل.

تحيه لاطفال ونساء وشهداء وصامدي بنت جبيل ومارون الراس ومرجعيون وقانا والرشيديه ورفح وخان يونس والشجاعيه وكل من يدافع عن شرف هذه الامه ووجودها في ظل الفاشيه الجديده ومشروعها لشرق اوسط جديد.