Suicide of nurse who connected DJs to Princess Kate - an unexpected tragedy

Kate Middleton's nurse who took her own life has been referred more to her employment rather than her name Jacintha Saldanha. Apparently her existence  was owed more to the royalty she served.

It is indeed a tragedy of the worse kind in recent times. From middle aged on, most of us would have received surprising news of deaths from causes other than terminal illnesses. Accidents and suicides that extinguish young lives are the a lot harder to accept, more so if the victims still have many good years ahead, have families who love them dearly and dependents who have most to lose with their departure. 

While it is cruel to crucify Australian DJs who are merely "doing their job" and had no intention of killing an innocent person with their pranks, they cannot totally escape indirect blame. Neither is it cool or magnanimous to absolve the two DJs from any responsibility. 

Some people are more fragile than others. Although majority may be able to sail through trials and tribulations, a minority may have complex personal issues. Setbacks could spiral into depression and resort to extreme and drastic actions to resolve their dilemma.

It cannot be denied that the victims' weak constitution, pressure of their professional pride and society's expectations are all partly to be blamed. Unfortunately, a coincidence of external events can trigger unexpected outcomes. Just because most people have the capacity and tolerance to survive pranks, bullying and backstabbing, does not mean that these actions are excusable. 

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/a-tragedy-but-who-is-at-fault-20121208-2b29q.html

It is unlikely that the case will be pursued further than the internet debate. From the legal perspective, how would the prank gone wrong be judged fairly? 


The eggshell skull rule is a legal doctrine that says the wrongdoer takes the victim in the condition he/she finds him. There is no allowance for an already weakened state of the injured party. If a defendant negligently injures someone, the defendant is responsible for all the consequences, whether they were foreseeable or not.The rule is applied in tort and criminal cases involving a plaintiff in a vulnerable, weakened state or suffering from a medical condition.

A rebuttal to the eggshell skull rule is the crumbling skull rule. This rule argues that the harm suffered by the victim was inevitable and the defendant's acts only had a minimal effect upon the already deteriorating circumstances.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/e/eggshell-skull/

In real life, incidents cannot be measured in legal terms. Human viewpoints influenced by individuals' values and experiences would continue to shout across cyberspace. These noises are unlikely to help the victims' families. Given our short memories and inability to reconcile differences, these incidents will make a mark but sadly may not help us to avoid similar tragedies in future.

Troubled Australians need help and need to help themselves

Australian professionals and aid workers are doing admirable work for the less fortunate overseas but are not given due assistance when local conditions threaten their personal safety. It is time they rethink the idealism of state protection and move to safer places before political situation deteriorates and make it untenable to live there or leave.

While domestic offices in the bureaucracy are typically bloated (until recent cost cutting and streamlining), foreign offices have always been short staff and stretched. When there was relative calm in the world, it was possible to get by. However, with the Middle East thrown into turmoil in recent years, and the increasing hostility towards Australians for its involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, DFAT resources are strained and unable to cope with quick reaction and protect Australians overseas from physical harm. It's not that Bob Carr is an ineffective Foreign Minister. Times have changed and government has to be well prepared for current and future challenges faced by Australians. There are many more Melinda Taylor out there who need Australia's help.

http://www.lowyinstitute.org/news-and-media/hot-topic/trouble-overseas-how-much-help-enough

Equitable Budget Unpopular : most voters bought Rich's arguments presented by well oiled media machinery

Growth seem to be the catchword Down Under as the Euro meltdown ensues and US struggles to keep afloat. 


Judging by the polls, more Australians have negative take on the latest Swane budget. The bottomline is that in Australia, we are caught in the bind. We detest strong leaders, and hate weak idealistic ones who try to be responsible. The enduring fact is that most people are generally selfish, regardless of their wealth and education level.  


Has everyone bothered to work out the sums and taxes just for your own interests? 


Carbon tax is a landmark for the future. Only countries which are not suffering from negative growth can afford to do so without political backlash. But one can't really say what is the best time. It's like Waiting for Godot to arrest degeneration of Mother Earth. 


It sounds all too familiar hearing Tony Abbott's superficial and hypocritical ranting. The Liberals did not have a good track record of promoting foreign languages learning to a proficient level to be able to connect with the world. Howard/Costello policies were visionary and reformist on the domestic front but drifted internationally to conservatism.


Most of us are in the middle class or on the borderline between the middle class and poor, and not entitled to any much benefits in the first place, let alone one-off from the budget. 


The key to deciding whether you should be dead against the budget  is weighing the alternatives. Would this translate that into voting the Gillard government remains to be seen as popularity polls while reflective, is not the final determinant till the last minute. 


What we do know is that majority of Australians don't care about equity, because we have not experienced how the bottom half of Australians struggle for survival. That selfish streak has been thoroughly exploited by the wealthy to perpetuate their hold on to power and riches without sharing with needy and more deserving folks. 


The Liberals mirror American Republican propaganda to exploit the workers to oppose policies that will benefit them. More educated Americans are beginning to see through the Republican ruse. What about us? 

Extracts from economist Ross Gittins' article :

But loyalty to parties on the basis of class is long gone. These days people's vote is as likely to be guided by the party divide on social issues as economic ones. Then there's the rise of the ''aspirational'' voter - people who don't mind seeing the better-off favoured by the government because they hope to be better off themselves one day.

If the public's reaction to this budget is any guide, we've either all become aspirationals or, more likely, a lot of people don't know which side their bread's buttered on. Wayne Swan brings down a Robin Hood budget and, according to last week's Herald poll, 43 per cent of respondents think it will leave them personally worse off and only 27 per cent expect to be better off. Talk about living in a fog.

But Australian shareholders - including Australian super funds - get tax credits for the company tax paid on their behalf. And tax economists argue that, in the end, the burden of company tax is borne mainly by wage-earners.

So it's not at all clear to me that company tax is a tax on business or on the rich. Business was never terribly enthusiastic about the 1 per cent cut; I'm unimpressed by the bitter tears it's shedding now.

When you combine this Robin Hood budget with the way the tax cuts linked to the carbon tax are limited to individuals earning less than $80,000, with the way the temporary flood levy was aimed at the better off, with the various previous measures to reduce upper-middle class welfare and with the 2009 discretionary increase in the age pension (the largest real increase in the pension ever), you do have to conclude this Labor government, particularly under Julia Gillard, is very redistributive - though its record isn't unblemished.

And unless you're happy to see the gap between rich and poor widening - as it has been - that redistribution is not unwarranted.

According to figures from the Bureau of Statistics, between 2003-04 and 2009-10, average household disposable income rose by 26 per cent in real terms.

But the income of the bottom fifth of households rose by 17 per cent, whereas the income of the top fifth rose by 32 per cent.

Remember that next time you hear highly paid business people banging on about the budget being ''more about how we carve the pie, rather than how we grow the pie''. It was about time.

  Read more : http://media.smh.com.au/selections/gittins-company-tax-not-a-human-concern-3297609.html

Labor's attempt at equity an achievement albeit motivated by electoral agenda

Even if sceptics argue nothing else has been achieved, at least Gillard has dragged Australia towards a more equitable tax system.
Labor has ventured into what is regarded as no-man's land.  Even the mighty USA where narrow interests are growing stronger, have blocked fairer distribution and reformist policies at every turn. 

Westpac chief Gail Kelly has little to gain by speaking up for the Gillard government.  The simple explanation is that businesses that look beyond profits would acknowledge the key to long term viability is to ensure a cooperative, stable and conducive environment. 

The 2012-13 budget has tried to shift some burden of tax to the wealthy, taken away some medicare benefits from higher income households, and redistributed some allowance to the lower income families. This does not preclude criticisms from professionals, many of whom serve businesses, of scoring points and postponing vital boost to the economy. Glad that we are no where near European state of affairs, when the whole world is just praying that the ship does not sink to the bottom. 

The likes of Kelly are rare. But they do exist. Take Warren Buffett, the world's second richest man, for instance, who supports raising taxes on the rich and urged the government to do more for the poor. While bankers have been vilified since the GFC, Kelly is worth listening for a moment.

Is there a better alternative to Labor government? Most likely we would be worse off. Would destructive Tony Abbott who seem to have gained from the negative image of the Gillard government make a better PM? I really doubt it but the danger of a worse scenario is not unforeseeable. There are few good men in the opposition Liberals as well.  

Get off Gillard's back, urges Westpac chief

http://www.businessday.com.au/opinion/political-news/get-off-gillards-back-urges-westpac-chief-20120507-1y96k.html

Quote :

Kelly's stance is in sharp contrast to some of her peers in big business, particularly in the mining industry, who have been publicly at loggerheads with Ms Gillard's government over policy issues.

In an apparent dig at miners who have campaigned against the mining tax, Mrs Kelly blasted businesses that she said were attempting to ''run an agenda through third parties or the media''.

This approach was not conducive to economic reform, she said.

Westpac has also faced criticism for job cuts at the bank.

''She [Ms Gillard] stepped into the role. She does listen, I can tell you from personal experience,'' Mrs Kelly said. ''Even if you have a different starting point she will listen. And I really respect that in politicians.''

Mrs Kelly said she had had a number of ''robust discussions'' with Ms Gillard on policy issues where they may not have agreed. ''But we work our way through them and there's a very healthy respect.''

The banks argue the higher cost of raising funds - both from offering attractive rates to depositors and raising money on global wholesale markets - is forcing them to hold back some of the reduction in official interest rates.

Seriously, do you really want Rudd to return as PM? Australia needs stability

Kevin Rudd would be best remembered as the man who helped to topple the Howard government. 


We don't expect Kevin Rudd to be the perfect gentleman but he has  many personal weaknesses that would undermine the effectiveness of national policies.


As more documents and revelations emerge, it is clearer that Rudd is partly if not mostly responsible for his own downfall.  Sympathy for the underdog is slowly running out when he turns into a persistent destabilizer for the party, government and country. 


http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/we-need-to-talk-about-kevin-20120224-1ttxx.html

Rudd may have or believed that he could continue to exercise strong leadership.  But ALP is not Liberal under John Howard. Few leaders in modern democracies could pull the party together for so long. Anyway, Australia is not a dictatorship and ought not to backtrack to those days where a PM's supremacy and views could hardly be challenged by cabinet members and community interest groups. 


How would the world would look at Australia?   It is not possible to put things "right" from the past when we are living in the present.  


Julia Gillard may similarly not be the perfect leader. However, she has steadily learned to get things done. Getting through the difficult but necessary carbon and mining tax legislation is a notable achievement. 


Once again, I appeal for pragmatism. For the sake of our citizens, Kevin Rudd and labour supporters should consider what is in the country's best interests. 

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/rudd-gillard-shape-up-for-labor-battle-20120224-1trgx.html

Power struggle drama serial must end - put national above self interests

When will Labour learn to maintain party discipline, be a good government and grow in strength. Unfortunately, Labour has a history of disunity since it lost power to the Liberals, long before Kevin Rudd became PM.  Labour has been and is still seen as a bunch of scatterbugs held together by factional leaders akin to mafia chiefs.

Yes, Julia Gillard may have done the incorrect thing to stage a coup to remove Rudd whose popularity was waning and was a poor team player. However, Labour might not have lost the elections. That's a hypothesis and no one really know what would have happened with so many "if"s.

However, since Gillard has been holding steady and trying to implement  despite disruptions from the sadistic and destructive Tony Abbott and backstabbing vengeance from Rudd. Every politician has some skeletons in the closet. The difference is a matter of degree.

Aussies are generally averse to strong leadership but good government does need time to build up. For the benefit of the nation, please stop the bickering.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-02-23/rudd-signals-he-may-challenge-gillard-for-labor-leadership.html

Anti-Social Toilet Manners - Ego or Cultural?

The two cases are probably unrelated but the journalist has put a negative spin to continue the derogation of immigrants. 

http://www.ausletters.blogspot.com/2012/01/migrants-body-odour-and-queue-jumping.html

Now, I am afraid that feminists might protest if signs have been installed in male or unisex toilets where seats are frequently wet by inaccurate aiming at the target. This is a serious issue which has been the cause of many family quarrels between husbands and wives as well as siblings. But in public places, no one knows who did it!   Ask anyone if this is unique to non-Australian culture, I fear not. 

Quote : 


A UNIVERSITY is teaching migrant students how to use a toilet correctly after complaints from cleaners that they were leaving them in an unhygienic state.


The signs were installed 15 months ago after complaints from a company contracted to clean campus toilets.


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/lifestyle/the-other-side/macquarie-university-teaching-migrant-students-how-to-use-a-toilet-correctly/story-e6frfhk6-1226242767424

Why only confine to a certain university? These signs  and more should be displayed in all toilet cubicles all over the world to educate users and make the jobs of cleaners easier, or even save payroll expenses by hiring fewer cleaners!  

Post democratic uprising Tunisian elections brought Islamists to power

Tunisia was the first in the Arab world to ignite the sparks of rebellion contagion which toppled several overstayed dictatorships. It is a defining moment in history. However, when post-revolutionary free and fair elections returned strong support for Islamists over the secular party, are supporters of Arab spring having second thoughts? There is a gap between first world ideals and aspirations expressed by the Tunisians.

Tunisia Islamists Call for Coalition After Taking Vote Lead

The results should not have come as a surprise. Those who have witnessed historical milestones would be a little cynical and less wishful.

Given the well organised setup, religious parties are more likely to succeed in mobilising widespread support. Against the backdrop of power vacuum where no single leader or group could step into the shoes, the disciplined Islamists seem to be in the best position to get the house in order. Popularity goes to the party that is able to articulate their passion convincingly. The force of religion should never be underestimated. Like secular parties, religious organisations have access to external funding, and probably more, given its strategic importance to neighbouring regimes.

Western democratic nations that supported the revolution could not go back on their words and must match their goals of promoting democracy. It would be hypocritical if western supporters of Arab spring were to denounce the victory of Islamists. Respect the will and wishes of the majority is the very core spirit of democracy. The same principle should apply to recognising Hamas (political wing) as a legitimately elected government.

Over in Egypt, Islamists too are expected to garner strong support in the parliamentary elections next month. As I foresaw and had warned on several occasions, it would be premature to celebrate democratic uprisings and failure to take a longer term perspective of the unfolding scenarios would be detrimental to foreign interests eyeing and waiting to get a slice of the economic wealth in the region.

Meanwhile, Tunisian Islamists are quick to assuage concerns by assuring observers that they are not fundamentalist in character and willing to cooperate with the secular counterparts. Whether getting the foot at the door will be a first step to fulfilling their long term hidden agenda remains to be seen. Nonetheless, Islamic fundamentalists won't approve of Tunisian Islamists in the likes of Ghanouchi deemed too liberal for their liking. Let's hope this is proven wrong and Tunisia is on the way to building a democracy unique to the country's conditions.

Democracy hinders intelligence, Apathy and Ignorance Negate Social Equity - Australia and US will not change for better unless there's a revolution?

Evidence seems to bear out the sad reality. It is difficult choice between democracy and well being of the people. Too bad, majority of people believe in the lies and wild promises of politicians that will never materialise.

Democracy is blocking intelligence

QUOTE :
Democracy is very close to our hearts. So close that we go to war in order to impose it on those too weak or benighted to grab it for themselves. But democracy, the tyranny of the majority, may yet prove an own goal for humanity, mainly because of the weird trick it does with scale; allowing us all to pursue our own happiness as if we were the only ones on the planet. Allowing us to act like a vast family of solipsistic only children, steadfastly voting for lower taxes and higher services.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/democracy-is-blocking-intelligence-20110420-1dos3.html?skin=text-only

This pathetic phenomenon is not unique to Australia. In the land of freedom USA, which is clearly not a model to follow. Unlike Australia which has a smaller population, the US suffers from a dearth of good leaders. If they do come forward, the old system of backdoor lobbying to protect vested interests will overpower any attempts at change. Though US still has some of the world's best and brightest, many are leaving for greener pastures as funding for R&D declined a decade ago. Education standards have fallen that majority of high school students could not handle basic 3 Rs (much less hard subjects) or take any interest in important domestic issues and world affairs that affect their lives.

At the national level, politicians are trying to fight fire from the explosive debt and budget deficit. Worse are poor working class who always end up with a raw bargain. Despite rising home foreclosures and increasing homelessness, high unemployment, rise in food and fuel prices, the public continued to be duped by conservative politicians to resist social change. Even Obama has been duped by the bankers for a taxpayer bailout. It's funny that those who first created unaffordable health cost and fighting in foreign lands are seen as saviours / good guys.

Sports, soap operas and saucy chain email keep restless and unsatisfied souls preoccupied. The magic engrossed, dulled the brains and lulled the voters into subservience. Instead of taking the protests to the streets, workers are disenfranchised by voting for no-change policies that will favour the rich and powerful and accelerate the demise of the American economy. They want to have their cake and eat it. More disappointments will follow.

Australia is enjoying economic growth at the moment thanks to the mining boom and avoiding some big mistakes. But the future does not look rosy if we continue to bury our heads in the sand and live like there is no tomorrow. Something will have to give sooner or later.

Tunisian Revolution - what next? power vacuum does not bode well for secular democracy

Now that the autocrat Zine Al Abidine Ben Ali has been overthrown fled the country, is there cause for celebration?

Whether the Tunisian Revolution result in better or worse for the people depends on who are the players that fill the power vacuum. There appears to be no credible political alternative.

Surrounded Islamic fundamentalists and the festering instability threatening other "autocratic" modern secular governments in Islamic states, the "jasmine revolution" does not seem to bode well for secular democracy.

Iran, Iraq, ... we've seen the mayhem that follows a revolution.

So world liberals - don't hold your breath.

Quote : "

Similarities between Iranian and Tunisian revolts cannot be ignored

The Tunisian revolt, which began four weeks ago because of growing unemployment, food prices and corruption, quickly snowballed to embody the population's accumulated grievances against Ben Ali's iron-fist rule during the past 23 years.

He imposed his secular rule largely through a repressive security apparatus and good relations with France, the European Union and the United States, which backed him for maintaining political stability and promoting socio-economic development. In the process, he stifled the opposition, and personalised power and politics, with grievous human rights violations.

The circumstances of Ben Ali's overthrow are reminiscent of those of the US-backed shah of Iran, who was forced by a mass revolution to leave the country 31 years ago, also in mid-January. Just as the shah was declined asylum by his main patron, the US - ending up in Egypt where he died of cancer in July 1981 - Ben Ali has experienced a similar predicament.

After France refused him asylum on Friday, Saudi Arabia came to his rescue. Like the shah, he has left a country in a mess, with no united democratic alternative to take over.

The Speaker of the Parliament, Fouad Mebazaa, has taken over as interim president. He has asked Ben Ali's veteran Prime Minister, Mohamed Ghannouchi, to form a government of national unity until a president is elected within 60 days.

But this may not prove enough - just as the shah's installation of the reformist prime minister Shapour Bakhtyar in the 11th hour could not contain the flood of public discontent.

In the case of Iran, democratic reformers responsible for spearheading the revolution lost out to the shah's leading religious opponent, Ayatollah Khomeini, whose legacy of an Islamic government, with an anti-US posture, continues.

Tunisia is in the throes of a similar development, although the establishment of a theocracy does not seem to be an option, given the absence of a strong Islamist movement and lasting French secularist colonial influence in the country.

The US and the EU seem to have abandoned their goal of bringing democracy to the Arab world - which was once promoted fervently as a core issue in their Middle East policy - in favour of what is called security and development. Yet this is unlikely to halt people's quest for democratic reforms.

The Tunisian uprising may fail to achieve its goals but the struggle between the forces of authoritarianism and democracy will be a dominant factor in the Muslim Middle East in the years to come.

Amin Saikal is professor of political science and director of the centre for Arab and Islamic studies (the Middle East and central Asia) at the Australian National University. "

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/similarities-between-iranian-and-tunisian-revolts-cannot-be-ignored-20110116-19seo.html

http://www.smh.com.au/world/egyptians-believe-their-turn-is-coming-20110116-19smh.html

Mourning for Victims of Arizona Shooting - Gun Laws must take part of the blame

We know our prayers for U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords have been answered when President Obama made the announcement in a passionate speech. However, many innocent victims in the vicinity of the targeted congresswoman have been mercilessly killed last weekend.

No matter what freedom fighters argue against the direct causal link between lax gun laws and random killings by mentally unstable persons, it cannot be denied that incidents of this nature will be cut down drastically with better regulation.

Don't we all know that the gun is a high calibre lethal weapon that could kill many in seconds? Why was Loughne even permitted to own a gun?

A number of Aussies have developed repungance for Howard's arrogance. But he must be praised for making innocent bystanders' lives a lot safer with the tightening gun laws in the aftermath of the Tasmania shooting.

America, we cry for you. Will the gun lobbyists, apologists and rightists will continue to win and rule America?

Expert assessment on Iran's nuclear diplomacy - Aussie leaders with big ego reject independent advice, tread dangerously on confrontations

In a nutshell, Kevin Rudd who wanted us to believe he was anti-war turned out to be really the opposite of what he projected in the election campaign. Labour might have got rid of a tough talk wimp as PM but his presence continued to be felt as FM and the successor PM Julia Gillard is just a woman with Rudd substance as far as foreign affairs are concerned. As Wikileaks are published in the local media, the more embarrassing our leaders look in the international stage.

Why aren't our politicians cleverly utilising resources from the intelligence agencies and military to go for win-win in smart and effective ways? We knew that Rudd did not pay due respect to the military commanders by turning up late for meetings. Perhaps it would help to pause and listen more to the professionals since they are less politicised, fairly independent and seem to know their craft well. The pun in intelligence must tell leaders to take heed.

After many catastrophic lessons in history, we know that the world is made of people who are not stark black and white as what some political leaders call good versus evil empires. Real world situations are a lot more complex though politicians have a penchant to simplify matters for the masses whom they believe will not understand politics. More likely, the leaders deal with world issues on the basis of their personal prejudices.

Politicians are very selective in making use of intelligence as evidence to bolster their ventures. Much rarer would they share with the public what really went on behind the scenes at real time.

Remember the episode that WMDs in Iraq which never existed. The slightest hints from untested and unreliable sources and Saddam's rhetorics were taken too seriously and sexed up to help President GW Bush muster support to invade oil-rich Iraq, remove Saddam Hussein and opened up opportunities for instability, violence and terrorism to spawn in a weak Iraq. Most of the time, intelligence has been ignored if it does not help to strengthen individual leaders' beliefs and policies. However, undertakings which involve commitment of troops (lives of Australians) and taxpayers' money ought to be measured, debated and well considered. There are times we need to be assertive but to volunteer Australia to get into more wars especially with nuclear powers is far from being responsible.

Read more :

AUSTRALIAN intelligence agencies fear that Israel may launch military strikes against Iran and Tehran's pursuit of nuclear capabilities could draw the US and Australia into a potential nuclear war in the Middle East.
Australia's peak intelligence agency has also privately undercut the hardline stance towards Tehran of the US, Israeli and Australian governments, saying its nuclear program is intended to deter attack and it is a mistake to regard Iran as a rogue state.

The warnings about the dangers of nuclear conflict in the Middle East are given in a secret US embassy cable obtained by WikiLeaks and provided exclusively to The Age. They reflect views obtained by US intelligence liaison officers in Canberra from Australian intelligence agencies.

''The AIC's [Australian intelligence community's] leading concerns with respect to Iran's nuclear ambitions centre on understanding the time frame of a possible weapons capability, and working with the United States to prevent Israel from independently launching unco-ordinated military strikes against Iran,'' the US embassy in Canberra reported to Washington in March last year.

''They are immediately concerned that Iran's pursuit of nuclear capabilities would lead to a conventional war - or even nuclear exchange - in the Middle East involving the United States that would draw Australia into a conflict.''
Australian concerns about a possible Israeli military strike against Iran are also recorded in another US embassy cable, sent to Washington in December 2008, reporting on discussions between Peter Varghese, then chief of Australia's peak intelligence agency, the Office of National Assessments (ONA), and the then head of the US State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), assistant secretary of state Randall Fort.

The embassy's report of the meeting says that ''ONA seniors and analysts were particularly interested in A/S Fort and INR's assessments on Israeli 'red lines' on Iran's nuclear program and the likelihood of an Israeli strike against Iranian nuclear facilities''.

An earlier cable, sent in July 2008, records that former prime minister Kevin Rudd was ''deeply worried'' that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's intransigence concerning Tehran's nuclear program meant that the window for a diplomatic solution was closing and that ''Israel may feel forced to use 'non-diplomatic' means''.

Last week Mr Rudd called on Israel to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty as part of a broader effort to establish the Middle East as a nuclear-weapon-free zone.

The US embassy's March 2009 report told Washington that the Australian government was ''more broadly concerned about the potential for renewed nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, driving south-east Asian states to abandon the [nuclear non-proliferation treaty] and pursue their own nuclear capabilities, which could introduce a direct threat to the Australian homeland''.

Australian intelligence views on Iran were solicited by US officials in response to a request from Washington to ascertain reactions to the possibility that the US might seek to discuss regional security issues with Tehran.

The US embassy cables confirm the presence in Canberra of representatives of all US national intelligence agencies: the CIA, the National Security Agency, the National Reconnaissance Office, the National Geospatial Agency, the Defence Intelligence Agency and the FBI.

US intelligence liaison officers engaged all their Australian counterpart agencies on the Iran question including ONA, the office of the National Security Adviser, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Australian Secret Intelligence Service, the Defence Intelligence Organisation, the Defence Signals Directorate, the Defence Imagery and Geospatial Organisation, the Defence Science and Technology Organisation, and the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation.

In its July 2009 report to Washington, the embassy noted that the Australian intelligence community had ''increased its collection and analytic efforts on Iran over the past decade, demonstrating Australia's strategic commitment to engage substantively as a significant US partner on Iran''.

US diplomats expressed ''high confidence'' that the Australian government would have no objections to US efforts to engage Iran, noting that while Australian troops remain stationed in Afghanistan ''the Australians will look to increased US engagement with Iran to improve upon creating a realistic framework for an accelerated reduction and eventual cessation of Iranian support to the Taliban, al-Qaeda and related groups, and Hezbollah. Simultaneously, Australia will look for increased US-Iranian engagement to lead to a more stable governance environment for Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, and the Levant.''

The US embassy's cable on the December 2008 intelligence exchange in Iran reported ONA director-general Varghese's view that possible conflict between Israel and Iran ''clearly represented the greatest challenge to [Middle East] stability''.

ONA analysts said the Iranian government appeared determined to acquire nuclear weapons, though this was probably driven by the desire to deter Israel and the US rather than an intention to strike against other Middle East states.

''ONA viewed Tehran's nuclear program within the paradigm of 'the laws of deterrence,' noting that Iran's ability to produce a weapon may be 'enough' to meet its security objectives,'' the US embassy reported.

''Nevertheless, Australian intelligence viewed Tehran's pursuit of full self-sufficiency in the nuclear fuel cycle, long-standing covert weapons program, and continued work on delivery systems as strong indicators that Tehran's preferred end state included a nuclear arsenal.''

ONA analysts told their US counterparts they were not alone in this assessment, asserting that ''while China and Russia remain opposed to it, they view Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons as inevitable''.

However, ONA urged a balanced view of Tehran as a sophisticated diplomatic player rather than a ''rogue state'' liable to behave impulsively or irrationally.

Mr Varghese said ONA was telling the Australian government: ''It's a mistake to think of Iran as a 'rogue state'.''

The embassy cable reported: ''ONA analysts assessed that Tehran 'knows' about its lack of certain capabilities, but plays 'beyond its hand' very skilfully … ONA judged that Iran's activities in Iraq - both overt and covert - represented an extreme manifestation of Iranian strategic calculus, designed to 'outflank' the US in the region.''

However the Australian intelligence analysts ''asserted that … the most effective means by which Tehran could ensure its national security would be a strategic relationship with the US via some 'grand bargain'.''

http://www.theage.com.au/national/nuclear-war-our-fear-of-iran-20101212-18u0q.html


x x x x x

ISRAEL'S ambassador to Australia found Kevin Rudd to be ''very pro-Israel'' and senior Australian diplomats warned the former prime minister that his condemnation of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad risked retaliation against Australia's embassy in Tehran, according to leaked US diplomatic cables.

A highly experienced Israeli diplomat, ambassador Rotem told US officials in July 2008 that during his first meeting with Mr Rudd after Australia's 2007 federal election, the newly elected prime minister had described Iranian President Ahmadinejad as a ''loathsome individual on every level'' and said that the Iranian leader's anti-Semitism ''turns my stomach''.

Asked by the US embassy about whether Mr Rudd's views on Iran had elicited any response, Mr Rotem said the Iranian government had reacted to the prime minister's statements by taking ''retaliatory measures'' against the Australian embassy in Tehran.

''These measures make it harder for the embassy to conduct its day-to-day business,'' Mr Rotem observed.

The Israeli ambassador added that the Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Michael l'Estrange, and Office of National Assessments director-general Peter Varghese had ''met several times to convince the PM to think through the consequences of his rhetoric on Iran''.

The ambassador added that Israeli officials would normally have been concerned at the prospect of an Australian Labor government: ''However, this was not the case because Rudd had long gone out of his way to stress his strong commitment to Israel and appreciation for its security concerns. Rotem said that he has had excellent access to Rudd and noted that the PM has taken a strong interest in even minor issues involving Israel.

''Commenting that DFAT officials are very frank in expressing their annoyance with the PM's micromanaging of foreign policy issues, Rotem laughingly said that 'while I understand their point of view, how can I complain about having that kind of attention from the PM'.''

The Israeli ambassador's enthusiasm for the Labor government extended to deputy prime minister Julia Gillard, with the US embassy reporting in January 2009 that Mr Rotem was ''very satisfied'' with the Australian response to Israel's military offensive in Gaza.

Mr Rotem added that Ms Gillard's statements surprised many Israeli embassy contacts as being ''far more supportive than they had expected''.

Ambassador Rotem added that he would be ''playing to Rudd's vanity'' to encourage him to pay an early visit to Israel and continue to speak out in support of a hard line against Iran's nuclear ambitions.

In a meeting with US diplomats in October 2009, First Assistant Secretary Patrick Suckling and then assistant secretary, now Australian ambassador to Israel, Andrea Faulkner, said Australia ''fully supports US efforts to engage with Iran'' but expressed ''deep official scepticism'' about the prospects for diplomatic progress. Mr Suckling said: ''Australia wants the most robust, intrusive and debilitating sanctions possible.''

http://www.watoday.com.au/national/rudd-derided-loathsome-ahmadinejad-20101212-18u0s.html

Culture of Corruption and Incompetence built up in NSW - where has all the money and work gone to?

Cracks in Aussie System allow Corruption to grow

This may debunk commonly held beliefs that corruption exists only in autocratic and closed systems. Usually so, but it seems that Australia has regressed from being a free and fair system to one ridden with irregularities, inadequate checks and justice system. Despite pumping in money, much of state funds had been wasted on consultancy, studies, red tape, inefficiencies rather than generate benefits for the people. There are reasons why the first state NSW is no longer number one. It has been bleeding for two decades. How long more can it sustain with the ongoing incompetence and malaise?

Citations

Vice files buried as law fails to cope

Natalie O'Brien December 12, 2010

PROSECUTORS have left scores of the state's highest-profile corruption cases on the shelf because they are ''chronically understaffed'' and too swamped to handle the rising workload.

Delays of up to four years in deciding on criminal charges against more than 100 people have been condemned as ''unacceptable'' and ''unfair'' by a former head of the Independent Commission Against Corruption, Jerrold Cripps, QC.

Since 2007, ICAC has found that 165 people acted corruptly but 110 of them are still awaiting a decision on whether they will be charged, a Sun-Herald investigation has found.

The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions is yet to decide if there is enough evidence to prosecute public officials such as former Wollongong council manager Joe Scimone and former town planner Beth Morgan, who were caught up in the ''sex for development'' scandal.

Also waiting are RailCorp contractors including Adam Azzopardi, Nat ''the Bobcat'' Severino and William Kuipers, who were found to have acted corruptly. Former ferries chief Geoff Smith is also awaiting word on whether he will be prosecuted.

In the case of ICAC's 2003 inquiry into the NSW Grains Board, it took so long to lay charges - five years - that the key witness died and the charges were withdrawn earlier this year.

Mr Cripps said the delays meant vital evidence may be lost as the memory of witnesses faded. And it was unfair to people who might later be acquitted to spend such a long time under a cloud.

''Criminal prosecutions should be dealt with as quickly as possible,'' said Mr Cripps, who stepped down last year after five years at ICAC.

A spokeswoman for the prosecutions office cited reasons for the long delays including ''chronic understaffing'', ''chronic overwork'', inadequate resources and the sheer size and complexity of the ICAC matters.

She disputed the numbers of people waiting for outcomes, saying they had calculated it as 101, not 110, out of 25 cases dating back to 2007.

But shadow attorney-general Greg Smith, SC, said: ''The community would expect people who are the subject of an ICAC finding of corrupt conduct to pay the price. Instead, Labor's failure to resource the bodies properly sees them roam free. This is symptomatic of 15 years of Labor neglect of the state's watchdogs.''

The head of the joint parliamentary committee which oversees ICAC, Labor MP Richard Amery, did not want to comment.

A Sun-Herald investigation this year revealed a number of RailCorp contractors recommended for prosecution for acting corruptly had returned to working with the corporation or other government-related rail companies. The inquiry was concluded in 2008 and ICAC recommended prosecutions of 33 people; of those, only two have faced charges.

In the Wollongong inquiry, ICAC recommended in 2008 the prosecution of 11 people. Of those, five have faced charges. There has been no decision on the remaining six.

ICAC's investigations have been steadily increasing and were up by 186 per cent in 2009-2010, according to its annual report.

The prosecutions office spokeswoman said ICAC matters were ''markedly different from general criminal prosecutions''. Their complexity often meant returning to ICAC for more information.

''All matters brought before the court rest on the admissibility and strength of the evidence … Frequently the evidence these agencies have gathered will include evidence given under objection - that is, the person has admitted to taking part in a criminal enterprise on the basis that the evidence will not be used against him/her in criminal proceedings - or evidence that is otherwise not legally admissible.''

Asked about some criticisms of the way briefs had been prepared, she said: ''ICAC briefs have been improving in quality over the past two years or so.''

http://www.smh.com.au/national/vice-files-buried-as-law-fails-to-cope-20101211-18tgs.html

NSW MP rorted expenses, corruption watchdog finds

Sean Nicholls December 7, 2010

The Labor MP for Drummoyne, Angela D'Amore, has been sacked as a parliamentary secretary, but the Premier is refusing to call for her resignation from Parliament after the corruption watchdog found she acted corruptly in falsely claiming thousands of dollars in entitlements for two staff members.

More details in :
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-mp-rorted-expenses-corruption-watchdog-finds-20101207-18ndh.html?from=smh_sb


'Culture of corruption' in MP's office: inquiry

Brian Robins May 3, 2010

The Independent Commission Against Corruption is holding public hearings into claims that Penrith MP Karyn Paluzzano and her staff may have made false claims relating to staff payments.

The inquiry has heard Ms Paluzzano and others devised a scheme to defraud the NSW parliament and benefit her relief staff, including her mother.

It is alleged Ms Paluzzano made false declarations in claim forms for an allowance called sitting day relief, which an MP can claim when one of their permanent electorate officers works at Parliament House on a sitting day.

The allowance covers the wages of relief staff who work in the MP’s office to replace a staff member working at Parliament House.

The ICAC inquiry has heard that between August 2006 and June 2007, 22 sitting day relief forms were submitted by the Penrith electorate.

Ms Paluzzano holds the post of parliamentary secretary for education.
Premier Kristina Keneally last week refused to stand her aside while the ICAC inquiry is under way.

Read more in :
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/culture-of-corruption-in-mps-office-inquiry-20100503-u2dn.html


What a waste: how NSW blew $2m a day

Heath Aston December 12, 2010

THE NSW government has squandered more than three-quarters of a billion dollars of taxpayer money in a year.

A Sun-Herald review of 12 months of reports by the NSW Auditor-General has found $778 million flushed down the toilet - more than $2 million a day.

Cases where money has been wasted directly or where the taxpayer has lost out through poor oversight, budget blow-outs or governmental blunders include:

$356 million spent on the abandoned CBD Metro for no result.
$188 million overspent on the Building the Education Revolution stimulus spending scheme.
$150 million lost on the sale of NSW Lotteries, which the Auditor-General found was too low.
$10 million dropped on the bungled handling of the V8 Supercars contract by former minister Ian Macdonald.

Over the year, Auditor-General Peter Achterstraat also found NSW had lost out on $8 million in coalmining royalties due to poor enforcement, and the final budget for World Youth Day had run $66 million over forecast.

Despite Youth Day being held in 2008, the Auditor-General's report did not come out until May this year.

Mr Achterstraat, who has been scathing about the flagrant approach by the NSW government in a succession of reports, is bound by legislation not to comment outside the times when he hands down a report.

The Sun-Herald understands he will drop a pre-election bombshell by taking the unusual step of releasing a year-in-review report in February.
Premier Kristina Keneally defended her government, saying reports such as the one on the CBD Metro showed she had taken the tough decision to redeploy $4.5 billion for better use.

Opposition Leader Barry O'Farrell said: ''These hundreds of millions of dollars could have started the South West or North West rail links, or upgraded the Pacific and Princes highways.

''It could have hired more nurses, teachers and police or upgraded Tamworth, Dubbo or Port Macquarie Hospitals.''

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/what-a-waste-how-nsw-blew-2m-a-day-20101211-18tgy.html



Country Democracy Rank Press Freedom Rank Corruption Rank
Australia 9 22 8

http://www.worldaudit.org/democracy.htm (November 2010)

Despite the drop in ranking, Australia still holds a high position based on the criteria used by most studies. How long can we keep up the top ranking, if only others are worse than us.

AWB hits Australia’s corruption reputation The scandal involving AWB and payments to the regime of Saddam Hussein has cost Australia its position as one of the countries globally perceive to be the most corruption-free, according to a new report.

Transparency International’s (TI’s) 2007 Corruption Perceptions Index reported that Australia has slipped out of the top 10 countries perceived to be corruption-free for the first time. While the Cole Royal Commission laid the blame for the $300 million in bribes paid to the Iraqi regime with certain AWB executives, the TI index, which tracks perceptions of public sector corruption, suggests the scandal has impacted Australia’s image as a whole.

http://www.riskmanagementmagazine.com.au/articles/e8/0c050be8.asp

http://www.smh.com.au/business/australia-is-sliding-down-the-international-corruption-ladder-20100424-tknv.html

Kevin Rudd : Wikileaks blunt talk confirms he is the most undiplomatic highest level diplomat of Australia

The open secret of Kevin Rudd's undiplomatic ways is confirmed by the latest series of Wikileaks. Kevin Rudd, Australia's highest level diplomat, is the most undiplomatic official that has ever represented (or misrepresented) Australia.

The best interests of our great nation is not served by stoking war with China, ironically, from a professed scholar of Chinese history with many years of international experience.

http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2010/s3085341.htm

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion-old/call-to-arms-reflects-badly-on-rudd/story-e6frfifx-1225967323156

Kevin Rudd's ignorance, bluntness, recklessness and ruthlessless shine through.

Even the US patron would not go to the extent of war mongering after the the debacles of misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan. The US is adept at posturing but has tried to avoid wars in the tense but otherwise peaceful economically driven Northeast Asia region.

The latest documents revealed Rudd's true colours. This will be point of no return for Rudd's political career. It is well known that Rudd has pissed his party colleagues but his abrasiveness apparently did not stop at the domestic arena.

With a friend like Rudd, you don't need enemies. That's probably the thinking of many countries out there now.

After Wikileaks, China and other neighbouring countries will no longer believe the friendship gestures of the Australian Foreign Minister or the government he represents. There will be ramifications on economic relations with Australia's largest trading partner which has thus far helped to avoid economic recession that many parts of the world endured.

Rudd's indiscretion has also annoyed our closest friend and ally, the USA. The American ambassador was apparently enraged by Rudd's last minute cancellation of a meeting with Bush which he had earlier pushed roughshod to obtain. It may be alright for a political satire cartoonist to take pot shods at former US President GW Bush but certainly out of sync for Rudd as a head of a friendly state to partake in gossips and offend his counterpart.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/technology/technology-news/americans-enraged-by-pms-insults-to-bush-20101207-18obs.html

http://www.theage.com.au/world/the-day-kevin-stood-up-george-20101207-18oc4.html

On the domestic front, Rudd and the Labour party came to power on the vote of diversity and equity. The constitutencies too will not believe in Rudd's sincerity.

While most politicians are hypocrites and generally untrustworthy, the image of good old clean cut Kevin Rudd will disappoint many people. Sadly, we have to approach every nice guy with distrust and examine beneath the superficial pleasantries and promises.

- c.g.

Wiki Leaks - Australian hacker Julian Assange in hot soup for revelations of the truth

Much of the juicy details are just adding meat to the skeletal bones that we already know. Most people with some level of intelligence, education and interest in world affairs would have an inkling of the fakeness of diplomacy and know better not to believe the words of politicians.

http://www.aolnews.com/opinion/article/opinion-wikileaks-finally-goes-too-far/19737083

How much harm has been done? The leaks touch on past issues, not assessments and future actions. It is not as big a deal as governments citing security concerns would like to have ordinary citizens believe in.

So was WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is guilty of "a reckless action which jeopardizes lives." Long have we been championing to protect the anonymity, rights and immunity of whistleblowers. But not in this case because the stakes are too high and embarrassing for key figures in the American powerhouse.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704584804575644510268871730.html
What next? Damage control of course is mean feat. The fallout will inevitably affect those in power who have to work out how not to jeopardise war and peace efforts.

The value of truthfulness and honesty has limits or even negative effects. This may be a lesson that absolute "freedom" of information could cause indiscretion, unhappiness and more trouble. To many who unconditionally worshipped the goddess of liberty, it was a dream dashed. Americans' allies include dictators, despots, autocrats and even terrorists! It should also come as no surprise that Australia is a faithful follower of the USA and will back its patron, longtime friend and cultural partner all the way.

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/world/view/20101129-305997/Australia-vows-to-back-any-US-legal-action-against-WikiLeaks

Someone or some people must be make to look like the fall guys and scapegoats to take the blame away from stakeholders. Not the rich and powerful even if they had done wrongs. Guess who?

Where is the hero/villian?

An international arrest warrant was issued in mid-November against Assange, a 39-year-old Australian, on suspicion of rape and sexual molestation of two women in Sweden.

Attorney-General Robert McClelland said yesterday that Wikileaks will be investigated to determine whether or not its whistle-blowing actions violated Australian law.

http://www.zdnet.com.au/wikileaks-assange-offered-ecuador-home-339307631.htm?feed=rss

Burma - movement by all parties

Burma is facing a new dawn despite scepticism of the election facade largely directed by the military junta to ensure its continued hold on to power.

Significantly, everyone's attention is on the release The Lady and her willingness to compromise and bring about real change for her people. Western countries who had cut off ties with Burma are keen to jump on Aung San Suu Kyi's call for dismantling of economic sanctions.

Quote :

After spending 15 of the last 20 years in confinement Mrs Suu Kyi, the Nobel peace laureate and democracy advocate, acknowledged that her release marked a potential moment of great change in the stand-off between Burma/Myanmar and the West. The freeze in relations has seen the former British colony grow increasing reliant on China.

Kevin Rudd, the Australian foreign minister and former prime minister, has told Mrs Suu Kyi that "reliable" friends were ready to be flexible on sanctions if she could make headway on domestic reform with the generals that run the country.

Mrs Suu Kyi used her second full day of freedom to indicate that her position on Burma's international isolation had undergone changes from the view that the military regime could only be overthrown by sanctions and isolation. "I don't want to see the military falling. I want to see the military rising to dignified heights of professionalism and true patriotism," she told the BBC. "I think it's quite obvious what the people want: the people just want better lives based on security and on freedom."

International sanctions mostly target regime figures – banning travel, financial transactions and business dealing – and many Western countries have imposed an arms embargo on the regime.

As recently as last Thursday, the EU added judges responsible for sentencing Mrs Suu Kyi to the visa ban list and President Barack Obama of the US renewed sanctions in May.

However Senator Jim Webb, a prominent supporter of President Obama, has warned that sanctions and Western business boycotts had rendered Burma as little more than a "province" of China. And the sanctions were already deeply unpopular within Asia, including among intellectual opinion. Jose Ramos Horta, the president of East Timor and a fellow winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, hit out at the isolation of Burma as not "morally good". "I'm very happy with the release of Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest after more than 15 years without reason," he said. "I see it as something good and I congratulate the military regime in Myanmar for handling this," he said.

"I'm also waiting and hoping for two blocs, namely America and Europe, which have been applying harsh sanctions against Myanmar, to lift them."
Derek Tonkin, a former British ambassador in Bangkok, said: "Suu Kyi's reappearance is something that will be utilised at a time when the US and EU are looking for some kind of engagement. There are areas where she can play a considerable role. Suu Kyi could hold consultations with diplomats, even if the regime isn't prepared to talk to them at this stage. There are things she can do with the West that they can't do with the regime."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/burmamyanmar/8134988/Western-states-hint-at-support-for-easing-Burma-sanctions.html

It was easy for outsiders living in the free world to rally to liberal academicians' agitation for sanctions, not realising that blockades hurt the Burmese people more than the military regime. Similar experience in South Africa showed that sanctions against apartheid did not work.

Idealists who denounce that the military junta absolutely gives up all their power are harbouring unrealistic expectations. The military must have a continued and key role in nation building as it has the machinery to keep the country from falling apart. As history has shown, removal of autocrats and tyrants forcibly would most likely leave a power vacuum for militants, religious fundamentalists, or other tyrants to fill its place.

The generals would have more to gain to include ASSK into its fold. Together they could achieve more and deliver economic growth to the impoverished nation. Too many opportunities for unity have slipped away and it is high time that the Burmese people deserve what they are entitled to.

The world can look forward to helping the Burmese people through engagement rather than cold shoulder.

- copyright of c.g.

Gains and governance overshadow politicised "national Interests" in a globalised economy : proposed Singapore-Australian Stock Exchange merger

Most articles on the issue of the proposed Singapore-Australian stock exchanges merger have been replete with emotional outbursts on national interest and the impact on investors' profits.

Here are some objective analysis by economic, industry, legal and regulatory experts that should be considered seriously than politicising an economic issues.

The main players are keen but each side is worried that they have the short end of the deal. Most Australians' concerns focus on compromises on regulations of companies' listing, complaince such as disclosure requirements and independence. Singaporean analysts, on the other hand, are uncomfortable that the venture is overpriced and laden with obstacles on approval as well as potential management and competition issues from Chi-X.

It is a perennial challenge to achieve an optimal balance between regulation and economic vibrance.

QUOTE :

[Lawyers Michael Wilton and Jill Gauntlett say : ... shareholders should be comforted by the long historical links in regulation between Australia and Singapore. When Singapore fashioned its corporations law almost 50 years ago, it modelled it on the uniform Companies Act passed by all Australian states in 1961. Revised uniform listing rules took effect in Australia at the same time.]

[Singapore has different financial track record requirements and does not have an equivalent of Australia's assets test that allows mining exploration companies to list before they turn a profit.]

[Jennifer Hill, Professor of Law in University of Sydney says :
Australia and Singapore allow their exchanges to grant waivers case by case. This ''may potentially constitute a form of selective regulation'' ... the corporate governance consultancy ISS released a report in 2007 that concluded that the Australian waiver scheme lacked transparency, especially compared with New Zealand, but was substantially more transparent than London or New York .... such disparities could be a concern as global competition among exchanges increases.]

[''During the 1990s, it was often assumed that the trend towards cross-listing of foreign firms in the United States was itself a new form of regulatory competition, under which foreign companies from jurisdictions with poor corporate governance would cross-list to gain regulatory credibility,'' she says.

But this assumption was questioned after the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was passed in 2002, when many high-profile Asian companies bypassed the New York Stock Exchange in favour of other international exchanges.

''This suggested that overly stringent governance may repel, rather than attract, cross-listing,'' Hill says. ''This remains a danger for securities exchanges, particularly given increased competition for listing and trading revenues.'' ]

http://www.theage.com.au/business/asx-merger-plan-raises-questions-of-governance-20101028-175s7.html

Wilkie : whistleblower of Iraq invasion gets apology and acknowledgement

The private apology by a Coalition leader to independent MP Andrew Wilkie who criticised the Howard government's invasion of Iraq based on fabrication of intelligence is long overdue.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/national/national/general/abbott-apologises-to-whistleblower-wilkie/1924006.aspx

Recalling some time ago, we showered accolades on many brave truthseekers who wanted to correct moral hazards by exposing powerful wrongdoers. http://ausletters.blogspot.com/2010/02/australian-whistleblowing-cases-more.html

It may take many years, a decade, or even a generation for the truth to be known but it must come forth. The psychological sufferings Wilkie underwent of being vilified as "unbalanced" are impossible to compensate materially or verbally in the light of now widely known foreign policy mistakes.

Some may even ask if Abbott really felt sorry and had approached Wilkie if he did not need to rope in independents to form a government.

Heroes like Wilkie are owed not just a government's apology but deserve to be commended publicly.

Future Australian governments must deliver promises

One good lesson that emerged from the ambiguous and tenous cirumstances is that politicians would not take the electorate for granted. Instead of looking around for scapegoats and pointing fingers to put someone carry the burden of failures, politicians must buck up and get their act together. They are supposed to serve the people not their own narrow interests.

With Labour leading by a razor thin majority in the latest vote count, they must now work hard on healthcare to win back sceptics. They must prove they really mean business and deliver on their promises.

There is no second chance as the nation is divided and Labour could have easily lost this elections. It was not so much that Julia Gillard was popular and people wanted a Labour government but that . The message is loud and clear but it it is unheeded, it will lead to an unreserved and crushing demise for Labour in the next round.

The setback, however, would be the government's inability to push for the bills to be passed by the legislature.

On the brighter side, Liberals might be compelled to do some internal reorganisation and soul searching if it wants to gain the confidence and trust of voters in three years' time or sooner for the state elections.

First Muslim cricketer for Australian team

Games are colour blind.

Usman Khawaja's selection in the test squad shows the panel's confidence in his abilities. Racism and politics should be kept out of games.


Sceptics who question his loyalty and beliefs based on his country of birth are not giving him a chance to prove himself and do Australia proud.


On the other hand, the Muslims commentators should not play up his religious background since Usman himself admitted his practise of Islam is light. His assurance of torn loyalties should not be a major hindrance to his performance when Australia plays against Pakistan.

Usman has been raised in Australia and fully integrated into society at large. Traces of his Pakistani origin as scarce and very much diluted over the years. He should be a model to some who find excuses either could not or refuse to adapt to Australian way of life.

This is testimony of Australia's multicultural success.






http://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/accomplished-calm-elegant--and-a-muslim-in-test-squad-20100622-yvsw.html


http://au.sports.yahoo.com/cricket/news/article/-/7441790/australia-names-muslim-player-test-squad