How being a Zionist bigot earns power in the US
20 Sep 2010

Zionism, Arab hatred, elite American thinking and being feted at Harvard.
The Marty Peretz story in all its ugliness.


Asylum seekers all over the news but Serco’s role remains covered
20 Sep 2010

From this morning’s ABC AM:

TONY EASTLEY: A police investigation will continue today into the death of a Fijian man at the Villawood Immigration detention centre in Sydney.
The 36-year-old, who jumped to his death yesterday morning, was due to be deported back to Fiji.
Overnight, tensions remained high at the centre when a group of 11 inmates continued a protest on the roof and threatened to jump if their cases were not reviewed.
The Australian of the Year and mental health expert Professor Patrick McGorry says the incident highlights the need for a complete overhaul of immigration detention policies.
Lindy Kerin reports.
LINDY KERIN: In a letter obtained by the ABC, 36-year-old Josefa Rauluni said he’d rather die than be forced to return to Fiji. Just hours before he was to be deported from Australia, he jumped from the roof of the Villawood detention centre.
Refugee advocate Brami Jegan has spoken with some of the inmates who witnessed the man’s death.
BRAMI JEGAN: Well the first person I spoke to, he was a babbling mess and just ended up crying and wasn’t able to say anything other than “I saw it, I saw it, I saw it” and just kept bawling his eyes out. The second time I called, and it was a different person, as soon as he heard my voice he started sobbing and saying “he’s dead, he’s dead, why are they doing this to us?”
LINDY KERIN: Brami Jegan had been out a Villawood the day before the man’s death and had spoken to detainees from Afghanistan, Sri Lanka and Iraq. She says tensions were already high.
BRAMI JEGAN: Apparently they’d had a visit from an immigration official earlier in the week who’d said that, given that the situation in countries – and he’d named a few countries – was getting better, or was better, they could expect that some of them or more of them could be sent home and this had kept them in a real heightened state of anxiety.
You know, two of the guys from Afghanistan that we, our group, met with, they were just bawling their eyes out because they were so upset and scared. And I think that’s kind of the mood that then, kind of escalated when they saw this, this young man die.
The Immigration Department’s spokesman, Sandi Logan says staff and inmates who witnessed the man’s death have been offered counselling.
SANDI LOGAN: We have provided, for the detainees, counselling assistance. We have on staff, of course, health professionals through the health services provider, including trauma and torture counselling.
LINDY KERIN: Louise Newman is a Professor of Psychiatry at the Monash University and the head of the Immigration Detention Advisory Group.
Professor Newman says in some cases, inmates displaying mental health issues should be given help outside the detention centre.
LOUISE NEWMAN: Particularly where self-harming behaviour and serious suicidal behaviour might occur, to not need to be in immigration detention centres; they should be removed to mental health facilities.
LINDY KERIN: Throughout the night a group of asylum seekers at the centre continued their rooftop protest. They raised a white bedsheet painted with the words, “we need help and freedom”.
They’re demanding to see officials from the UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees).


Roll up, tourists; Israel would like to show you its occupying heart
20 Sep 2010

While Haaretz calls on Israel to embrace peace talks with Syria – something many in the Zionist establishment have no intention of pursuing; far easier to have another “enemy” in the region – the priority of the Netanyahu government is organising tourist trips into the occupied West Bank settlements:

While the Americans are struggling to arrange a continued construction freeze in the territories, there are those in Israel who are already preparing vigorously for the next stage.  Tourism Minister Stas Misezhnikov intends to transfer in the near future millions of shekels to settlements in Judea and Samaria for the purpose of developing tourist sites and attractions in the territories.
An internal Tourism Ministry document shows that in total, over NIS 9 million will be transferred to Judea and Samaria and East Jerusalem.  Minister Misezhnikov, who is strongly opposed to the freeze, wishes to let the local authorities develop the tourism branch within their boundaries.


Detaining children seems to be a Western speciality
20 Sep 2010

While Australia detains hundreds of children in immigration detention, the situation in the UK is depressingly similar (also housed by private companies such as Serco):

When David Cameron declared that his government would “end the incarceration of children for immigration purposes once and for all”, those familiar with the horror of it were cautiously optimistic. That cautious optimism is now tempered with anxiety that his passion for radical reform of this grotesque abuse of human rights is on the wane. The emerging picture is at best confusing, at worst ominous.
Last week the charity Medical Justice, whose doctors, lawyers and supporters assist detainees in immigration detention pro bono, published a report. The title – State Sponsored Cruelty: Children in Immigration Detention – was taken from Nick Clegg’s attack on Gordon Brown in an open letter last year: “Very young children who find themselves locked up even though they’ve done nothing wrong are suffering weight loss, post-traumatic stress disorder and long-lasting mental distress,” Clegg wrote. “How on earth can your government justify what is in effect state-sponsored cruelty?” The report catalogues the effects of immigration detention on children. Three have attempted suicide, some have regressed, others become withdrawn. Many have shown signs of deep disturbance.
So far, little has been done to implement Cameron’s pledge and follow up on Clegg’s passionate denunciation.
The Home Office, it seems, is having trouble defining detention, as borne out by conflicting information given to me last week by its press office. On Tuesday, a spokesman said there had been 24 families in immigration detention since May. On Wednesday it sent an email which said that figure was wrong because it failed to include those held under immigration legislation in mother and baby units in prisons and those refused entry at borders and held in immigration removal centres pending deportation – some of whom are not asylum seekers. It’s a complex picture. But whichever way you cut it, these are children detained under immigration law, despite Cameron’s promise to end the incarceration of children for immigration purposes.
The Home Office email said that between May and August, 45 families – including 80 children – had been detained. The next day the figure changed again – 59 children from 32 families have been in immigration detention since May, 31 of the children at Yarl’s Wood immigration removal centre [run by Serco]. I was told these are not official statistics but “purely UK Border Agency management information”. I was asked to refer to them as “figures supplied by the Home Office or something along those lines”.


Hello Canberra; most fleeing refugees are Tamil
19 Sep 2010

This is what the Australian government is spending our money on (courtesy of Crikey):

Sri Lanka into bat for boat people. Australian immigration officers are giving out free cricket bats in Sri Lanka emblazoned with messages to deter asylum seekers. The town of Negombo was provided with 700 of these cricket bats courtesy of the Australian government:


On the back of the bat there is a sticker that reads in Sinhalese: “Rata yanawa nam, hari paren” (if you are going overseas, go the right way) and “Warathi margayen rata yama yana ena mang nathi cara gamacri” (if I go the wrong way I will not even see the inside of the country).


Zionist lobby’s achievements are seen in the maddest colonies
19 Sep 2010

Who says Americans have a love affair with Israel?
A new study by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs offers some insights:

“Contrary to the long-standing, official U.S. position, fewer than half of Americans show a readiness to defend Israel even against an unprovoked attack by a neighbor. Asked whether they would favor using U.S. troops in the event that Israel were attacked by a neighbor, only 47 percent say they would favor doing so, while 50 percent say they would oppose it …This question was also asked with a slightly different wording in surveys from 1990 to 2004 (if Arab forces invaded Israel). In none of these surveys was there majority support for an implicitly unilateral use of U.S. troops.”
Americans “also appear to be very wary of being dragged into a conflict prompted by an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities. In this survey, conducted in June 2010, a clear majority of Americans (56%) say that if Israel were to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities, Iran were to retaliate against Israel, and the two were to go to war, the United States should not bring its military forces into the war on the side of Israel and against Iran”
“While Americans have strongly negative feelings toward the Palestinian Authority … a strong majority of Americans (66%) prefer to ‘not take either side’ in the conflict.”
“There is some tangible worry regarding the direction of relations with Israel. Although 44 per-cent say that relations with Israel are “staying about the same,” a very high 38 percent think relations are ‘worsening,’ and only 12 percent think they are ‘improving’.”
“Americans are not in favor of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, a major sticking point in the conflict, with 62 percent saying Israel ‘should not build’ these settlements.”

As John Mearsheimer writes: “The bottom line is that the lobby is largely responsible for America’s special relationship with Israel, which is harmful to both countries.”


Please sir, can I buy some votes for you?
19 Sep 2010

Powerful editorial in the New York Times on the weekend that shows the kind of kabuki democracy at play in the US of A:

For all the headlines about the Tea Party and blind voter anger, the most disturbing story of this year’s election is embodied in an odd combination of numbers and letters: 501(c)(4). That is the legal designation for the advocacy committees that are sucking in many millions of anonymous corporate dollars, making this the most secretive election cycle since the Watergate years.
As Michael Luo reported in The Times last week, the battle for Congress is largely being financed by a small corps of wealthy individuals and corporations whose names may never be known to the public. And the full brunt of that spending — most of it going to Republican candidates — has yet to be felt in this campaign.
Corporations got the power to pour anonymous money into elections from Supreme Court and Federal Election Commission decisions in the last two years, culminating in the Citizens United opinion earlier this year. The effect is drastic: In 2004 and 2006, virtually all independent groups receiving electioneering donations revealed their donors. In 2008, less than half of the groups reported their donors, according to a study issued last week by the watchdog group Public Citizen. So far this year, only 32 percent of the groups have done so.
Most of the cash has gone to Republican operatives like Karl Rove who have set up tax-exempt 501(c)(4) organizations. In theory, these groups, with disingenuously innocuous names like American Crossroads and the American Action Network, are meant to promote social welfare. The value to the political operatives is that they are a funnel for anonymous campaign donations.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.