Showing posts with label Hypocrisy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hypocrisy. Show all posts

Monday, 15 October 2007

Politicians' Promises

Zoe sent me this image tonight, which was perfect timing for the Election which has been announced over the weekend. Unfortunately I cannot credit the genius who organised the sign to be made, or the person who was thoughtful enough to take and publish the photo.

Congratulations to both of them, and I hope that they appreciate my respect for their collective insight into the political process.
Clearly politicians in California and in Australia are members of the same excretary species.

Friday, 12 October 2007

Howard's Promise is yet more "Weasel Words".

Miss Eagle has given run the ruler over John Howard's statements on a "preamble" to the constitution, to acknowledge "the special status of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders as the first peoples of our nation". You can read her conclusions here.

For my part, I know for a fact that one claim in Mr Howard's statement is a self-serving lie.

Prior to the Howard Government being sworn in (but after it was obvious that he had won his first election (in other words, before he even took up office), I wrote to Mr John Howard, as Prime Minister designate. I suggested that he make a visit to the Northern Territory, to sit with some of the Aboriginal Elders, and that he make this his first tour out of Canberra. I recall saying "make this your first trip - before you run off to Washington or London".

What happened? Nothing!

After about 3 months, I rang Howard's office to ask why I had had not even an acknowledgement to my letter? (I had worked much of my career as a Ministerial Correspondence Clerk, so I knew that my letter ought have been handled better than that - even if the Prime Minister (or his staff) disagreed with the point of my letter. I was entitled to have my letter responded to.

I got a letter back, about 2 weeks later, from Mr Graeme Morris, who was then Chief of Staff to John Howard. He had the impertinence to rebuke me for the tone of my letter. Unfortunately I no longer have his reply (that's what happens when you move house several times). As an exercise in democracy, this process was an insult. It was an appalling way for Howard (and his Office) to treat me, as a voter.
But anyway, we all know that it took Howard many years before he visited any Aboriginal community. (Miss Eagle has documented this.) Meanwhile he had made numerous visits to Washington, and London, and other overseas destinations. So, we know he ignored the Aboriginal situation for a number of years.

I read in his statement the following: "I’m the first to admit that this whole area is one I have struggled with during the entire time that I have been Prime Minister."

So, when I read that sentence, and recall my letter and the reply I got back from his office (eventually) - then I say: Bullshit, John Howard, pure bullshit!
*****
The promise is meaningless anyway - he promises to put forward a proposal for a referendum to include some words in the Preamble to the Constitution. Big deal!

It will be meaningless, insignificant and anyway, and it might well be rejected by the people (as his previous pathetic "preamble" was rejected).

This is John Howard doing what he does best - spouting "Weasel Words". Wikipedia quotes the original use of "Weasel Words" as follows: "Why, weasel words are words that suck the life out of the words next to them, just as a weasel sucks the egg and leaves the shell." Thus, weasel words suck the meaning out of a statement while seeming to keep the idea intact, and are particularly associated with political pronouncements. Elsewhere Wikipedia points out that the problem with "Weasel Words" is that: "it is entirely easy to write an irrelevant, misinformative, slanted article composed of nothing but true statements".

My favourite of the various responses from the Aboriginal Community representatives is this:

"Central Land Council spokesman David Ross has described Mr Howard as a snake that has shed its skin. "He's got a brand new skin, but he's the same old snake, he's got the same old venom," he said."

Source: ABC News. 12 October 2007

Wednesday, 10 October 2007

Death Penalty "debate" is a disgrace.

It violates the right to life.

************

The media is whipping up a feeding frenzy over Kevin Rudd supposedly "rebuking" the ALP's Foreign Affairs Spokesman, Robert McClelland for a statement he made yesterday about the Death Penalty.


The really disgusting thing is the way in which Alexander Downer has been whipping this issue up.I vividly remember Alexander Downer welcoming the announcement of the imposition of the Death Penalty on the Bali Bombers. I was appalled at the time, by Downer's statement, for it is in direct contradiction of Australia's bi-partisan stance in opposition to the Death Penalty - whether in Australia, or overseas. It is also in contradiction of Australia's ratification of the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. So much for Australia's Foreign minister representing this Government's official policy on international law. It is another example of the Government of Shame, in operation.

And Downer made feeble efforts to have the death penalty waived on an Australian citizen in Singapore (on the grounds of Australia's "high moral principle") - but let us not forget that the person concerned there was an Australian of Vietnamese origin. I would not dream of suggesting Downer is a racist bastard - you can make up your own mind on that. Hypocrite? Certainly!

As the Indonesian Lawyer Wirawan Adnan, who is defending at least one of the Australians convicted of drug charges in Indonesia (the so-called Bali 9) has said - this debate weakens Australia's arguments against executions of our citizens (abroad).

  • We perceive this as a little bit inconsistent with the death penalty and makes it difficult for the Bali nine to go for a lesser sentence than death," Wirawan Adnan said.

    Another lawyer for the Bali bombers, Achmad Michdan, called Australia's position hypocritical.

*************
Here is a draft letter to Alexander Downer from a website about the Death penalty.
  • [insert date]
  • The Hon Alexander Downer MP
Minister for Foreign Affairs
Parliament House
PO Box 6022
Canberra ACT 2600
Australia
  • Dear Minister
  • The worldwide trend towards the abolition of capital punishment is undeniable and Australia must establish itself as a clear opponent, unafraid to express its views.
  • We failed in our pleas for clemency for Van Nguyen hung in Singapore in Dec 05 by campaigning too little too late, our apparent double-standards and inconsistent stance was widely noted at this time and surely had some bearing on the outcome. Now six more young Australian citizens, three of whom were teenagers when incarcerated, face the firing squad in Indonesia for being drug mules. Australia cannot be content with the death penalty, even when courts have discretion in imposing it. We must press for better protections of human rights, and awareness throughout the world that there cannot be a justice that kills.
  • We acknowledge the need to address serious crimes, but there is no convincing evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than other punishments. Surely one of the principles of sentencing is rehabilitation; the death penalty renders this impossible with no opportunity to make better choices or the chance to return to society with a positive contribution, a second chance. The death sentence represents the ultimate failure of justice.
  • Officially Australia has a long-standing principled opposition to capital punishment. In 1990 Australia signed the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which commits signatory nations not only to abolish the death penalty, but to undertake "an international commitment to abolish the death penalty". Australia's traditionally strong position on the death penalty has been undermined in recent years by what appears to be double standards. If we are to restore credibility when arguing for our own citizens to be spared, Australia must maintain a clear and principled stance against capital punishment in all circumstances.
  • Yours sincerely
  • [Insert Name and Address]
REMEMBER: "IT IS BY BEING QUIET AND POLITE CITIZENS WE ALLOW OURSELVES TO BE IGNORED"