Throwing stones from the glasshouse

I was listening to one of my favourite podcasts the other day, and the topic moved onto free speech. It discussed the right of journalists, newspapers, and people in general to have the freedom to say what they want. It brought a number of thoughts bubbling to my cerebral surface.

Why is it that when we are refused freedom of expression and especially freedom of speech, we jump up and down and complain, but when the skinhead Nazi’s or the Ku Klux Klan are refused, we agree wholeheartedly. Free speech is free speech. Whether we like hearing it or not, everyone has the right to say whatever they feel. What occurs then is spirited debate about whether what was said was factual, appropriate or true. That sort of debate should happen, whereas the banning of someone from saying what they wish, should not.

From what I can see, radicals and left wingers love the free speech argument, as long as they are allowed to sprout their views without hindrance. They don’t approve of it when someone of dubious character, who commits even more dubious acts, wishes the same courtesy. We like free speech when it suits us, and even though it should be ‘free’, we like to have some control over it.

So is free speech with restrictions, free speech? When we ask for everyone to be allowed free speech, do we really know what we are asking? Freedom is not all fun and games. Just ask kids when you let them be involved in an experiment where there will be ‘no rules.’ They think it will be heaven, until they realise that ‘freedom’ also means the school bully is allowed to pick on you, beat you up and take your money. Remember, freedom is his too. We like freedom when it is on our terms.

It is interesting to note that these are some of the limitations to free speech. If you look at this list, there isn’t that much left to talk about.All the fun has been taken away.

• Defamation (slander and libel)
• Product defamation (criticism of commercial products)
• Obscenity
• Threats
• Lying in court (perjury)
• Talking out of turn during a trial, or talk that causes contempt of court
• Speaking about a trial outside the court room after the judge forbids it (sub judice).
• Speaking publicly without a permit
• Speaking publicly outside of a free speech zone
• Limits on the size of public demonstrations
• Profanity
• Hate speech that is defamatory or causes incitement to violence
• Noise pollution
• Speech that contains a copyright infringement.
• Company secrets (trade secrets)
• Political secrets: campaign strategies, dirty past/deeds of a politician, etc.
• Classified information: sensitive or secret to protect the national interest.
• Sedition: speech or organization (vs Freedom of Assembly) that is deemed as tending toward insurrection against the established order.
• Treason: to talk publicly of the death of all countrymen or the overthrow of the government
• Blasphemy is illegal in several Western and Muslim countries (freedom of religion as well as speech could be given here)
• The first clause of UK’s Terrorism Act 2006 punishes “Encouragement of terrorism” with up to seven years in jail.
• In Sweden a law called “Hets mot folkgrupp” (“Agitation against an ethnic group”), usually translated to hate speech, denies promotion of racism and homophobia.
• In some European countries, Holocaust denial is a criminal offence.
• In many countries, public school teachers have limited freedom of speech, both on and off the job, regarding certain issues (e.g., homosexuality).

Probably the most malicious, vile groups that exist in the world today is the Westboro Baptist Church. If you don’t know about them, go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_Baptist_Church. There are too many incidents in the article to quote here, but if you truly believe in free speech, then this will test your will, and your patience. This is the most hate filled group that I have ever been exposed to, and their message is nothing short of abhorent. However, if I believe in free speech, then I must allow them to do what they do, and say what they say. But according to the limitations above, ‘hate speech’ is not allowed, so I finish as I have started by asking, “Is all speech free?”

If you want true free speech, then remember that old saying, ‘Be careful what you ask for.’

Enjoy your day.

Senator Barack Obama is going to have a tough enough time getting himself elected in November. As is very well known, he is black, his middle name is Hussein, and he is extremely wealthy. That combination is enough to piss off the white and the black population. To the blacks, he isn’t black enough, and to the redneck whites, most who live in the heart of moron territory (the deep south of the United States), he is more than black enough, and most likely a ‘Moozlim’, and most definitely a terrorist. So this recent front cover of The New Yorker magazine is absolute satire at its best, but is it stupid to put this type of cover out there, considering all those who want to bring him down?

From the racist, stupid corners of the world, the call will go out. “I told ya he was a Moozlim! Didn’t I?” Obama is trying to win over the southern vote, although he knows that it will be quite impossible. As said in one of my earlier blogs, I have a friend from the deep south, and he refers to southern racism as “the way it is.” He himself does not agree with it, but he does believe that there is a not a scrap anyone can do to change the majority of southerners. Yes, there may be liberal pockets of the south, but states like Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Alabama will always be the stronghold of arch conservative, fanatical Christianity. Hell, these people even think Catholicism is a cult!

If you look at the above picture, it is very clever and very funny. However, if that gets anywhere near a gullible person, or a stupid one for that matter, they are not going to be clever enough to see the satirical subtleties of it. They are going to interpret that as The New Yorker quietly telling us that all that what we have suspected about Obama and his wife are absolute truths. And as she is an intelligent and articulate woman in her own right, most ill informed idiots will see them as a tag team partnership up for ’takeover and terrorism’.

What these intellectual magazines don’t take into account is the old adage, ‘ A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.’ And the people who get this particular ’little bit of knowledge’, could end up being very dangerous when they cast their votes in November. Yes, editors of The New Yorker, these people vote! Any decent, clear thinking, vaguely intelligent person needs to get behind Obama and get him elected. Like I said about Michelle Obama, and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, in previous blog posts, we need to shut our mouths, and make sure Obama is the next President of The United States. To coin a phrase from the host of a podcast I listen to, we cannot allow John McCain, ‘the walking hemorroid with Alzheimer’s Disease’, to become President. I have become aware that recently he has achieved 10% of the overall vote, according to polls taken. This man should be seen as nothing but a stupid joke, akin to how Bob Dole was perceived when he ran for office over 10 years ago. But he isn’t, and front covers like this could very easily increase that margin to 20%, then 30% and so on, and before you know it, we are inaugurating President John McCain.

Don’t laugh. I am sure we all swore black and blue that there was no way we were going to give George W Bush another four years, and look what happened.

Like we say to kid’s when we enter a store full of fragile items:

“Walk slowly, and don’t touch anything or knock anything over”.

Well, the editor of The New Yorker is unfortunately being that inquistive kid who means no harm, but just can’t help but touch.

Enjoy your day

I suppose I should call this blog post the third installment in my ‘World Youth Day’ series, as it has turned out to be quite an event, and I’m not talking about the ‘pilgrims’ who have flooded Sydney in the name of faith. I have been quietly laughing at the incredible faux pa’s that are being made by the Sydney church heirachy.

As I said in my last post, first it was Cardinal George Pell. He was yet again put under the microscope today about the issue of sexual abuse, and again handled the matter in that robotic, stoic, unfeeling manner that he does so well. I wish someone could check under his cassock and check that he is, in fact, real.

Today, however, belonged to the youngest Catholic Bishop in the country, Anthony Fisher, who has been criticised over the Church’s response to a case of sexual abuse by a Catholic priest in Melbourne.During a news conference today, Bishop Fisher made remarks that have enraged advocates for sex abuse victims.

Cardinal George Pell, Catholic Archbishop of Sydney, has always been a person who believes he is above the rest of the common herd, and anything that is said about him, he can simply brush off as mindless insults. He is probably the most old fashioned and pompous face that the Catholic church has, and it was no surprise to me that when the last Papal Conclave was on that ushered in the reign of Ratzinger, I noticed that none of the other Cardinals were talking to him. He looked like the lonely kid in the playground, as he stood with the other Cardinals on the balcony of St.Peter’s. Well, that lonely kid is out in that playground again after putting his foot well and truly in it this week.

Pell is under the pump for the way in which he handled a case of sexual abuse by one of the priests under his jurisdiction. The man abused, Anthony Jones (pictured above), was 29 at the time, so it wasn’t a case of child abuse, but it was abuse nevertheless. Father Terrence Goodall decided that young Mr. Jones was a bit of alright, and made a pass at him, or ‘forced myself on him’ were the kinds of words he used.

However, true to form, when Mr. Jones called Fr. Goodall on his inappropriate sexual conduct, and reported him to Cardinal Pell, we find Cardinal Pell denying that this ever happened and, as has been the case all over the world, the priest abuser is believed ahead of the one being abused. But in the last few days, Father Goodall has basically admitted that the sexual interaction ‘was not consensual’. Pell is finding out what it’s like living on the back foot. Thank God these Bishops and Archbishops aren’t judges. They would simply look at a criminal, and ask,”Now, tell me, did you do it?”, to which the offender would say “Oh no, judge, I didn’t do it!”, to which the judge would let the offender go, as of course, the offender would be telling the truth.

When are these blatant cover ups ever going to stop? The Catholic Church has had to pay millions upon millions of dollars in compensation to victims. They can’t get away with the cover up any longer. But here’s George still trying to make out abuse didn’t happen, when we now find out it did. The man cares nothing for the average Catholic in the pews. He would rather protect the name of the church and the precious ‘boys club’ that it is, than protect the rights of innocent people, young and old, at the mercy of the thousands of corrupt and sexually screwed members of the clergy.

But this time, he is being hounded for failure to act. It’s almost like someone has planned to pour eggs all over Pell at this particular time. In a few days, Pell’s boss, Pope Benedict XVI, will jet in for  World Youth Day, and I don’t think he will be very pleased to fly into a scandal involving one of his ‘Princes of the church’. He has already spent one trip to the United States this year apologising for sexual abuse at the hands of American clergy. He sure as hell (pardon the pun) does not want that again in Australia.

But, this is what you get when you’re as pig headed as George Pell. Even Tony Abott, Opposition Spokesperson on Health, prominent Catholic, and buddy of Pell’s was quoted as saying, “it’s unfortunate.”

You’d better be ready to play alone in that playground a lot more, George.

Enjoy your day.

One thing that really disturbs me is when parents feed their children words to say, as a way of giving their own view credibility. Today saw The Age newspaper art critic Robert Nelson out the front of his Melbourne home pontificating about the appropriateness of having the naked photograph of his then 6 year old daughter, Olympia, placed on the cover of Art Monthly, a government funded art magazine. The photo was taken by her mother, Melbourne photographer Polixeni Papapetrou.

His daughter, now 11, was with him, and never have I seen such a display of a young person completely out of her depth. The argument she has a view on is way beyond what she can comment on, and to top it all off, she wants to tackle the Prime Minister over comments he made!

Let me pull all this back about 100 paces. Young Olympia Nelson happened to appear on the front cover of this particular publication, as the publication was trying to show support for Bill Henson, a photographic artist who used a 13 year old girl as the subject of one of his pieces. It was an explicit image, and naturally, it was suspected to be pornographic, not artistic. The exhibition was cut short, criminal charges were thought about, but then dropped.

On 6 June 2008 it was reported in The Age that police will not prosecute Bill Henson over his photographs of naked teenagers, after they were declared “mild and justified” and given a PG rating by the Office of Film and Literature Classification, suggesting viewing by children under the age of 16 is suitable with parental guidance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Henson

So Art Monthly have decided to wade into the debate, defending Bill Henson, and doing so by plastering a 6 year old girl on the cover. It is not an explicit shot, but she is still naked. In doing this, they have made it very clear that there is nothing wrong with photographing young children naked. Australian Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, stated that he didn’t approve of the cover, and this is why the young girl at the centre of all this wants to take him on in this debate.

Out of all this, I am more disgusted in Robert Nelson, father of the young girl. He has dragged his daughter out in front of the media, made her act as if she was a 50 year old art critic with a lifetime of experience, and in the process, put her in way over her head. This was very evident when young Olympia stated that, “The Prime Minister needs to look at the shots and see what they mean.” When asked “What do they mean?”, she tried to rabbit on in mature-speak, but after a few seconds, turned to her Dad and said, “Can you help me out here?” And she wants to take on the Prime Minister? What a disgrace of a father to allow his daughter to go through all this, and fill her with a sense of importance way beyond her years?

We see this all the time with stage mothers, pageant mothers, football Dads, and any other area where a parent forces their child to live their life the way they want it, and force their views on their children. Yes, we all try and instill our values on our children. That’s normal, and within reason, acceptable. However, Robert Nelson has been irresponsible, both as a parent, and as a citizen who should be doing all he can to protect the most vulnerable in our community; children.

There are some things in life that, no matter what your view on them is, really are problematic, and will never cease to be controversial. Child nudity is one of those. We all have the childhood snaps of Mum and Dad taking pictures of us in the bath, or running around the house with a nappy on our heads stark naked. This is normal, and part of everyone’s funny memories. But to take naked child photography out of that light hearted normal family context and start seeing it as ‘art’ and the 3,4,5 or 6 year old as a nude ‘model’, then you are bordering on an area that is fraught with danger, and is to be avoided. The more you try and defend it, the deeper you sink into the quicksand.

I think Robert Nelson will find it hard to defend this view for much longer. But before he does that, he needs to defend that hideous shirt and bow tie combination he was wearing. Speaks volumes, really.

Enjoy your day.

 World Youth Day begins in Sydney on the 15 July. If you’re not Catholic, and you’re not young, you may have little or no interest in this event. However, there are a number of insights that you may want to be aware of as this expression of young people jumping for Jesus in the presence of the Pope begins.

Firstly, the New South Wales state government has put in $86 million, and the federal government has put in $20 million. The entire event is going to cost $130 million dollars. The Catholic faithful and the New South Wales taxpayers are going to have to cough up the rest. This is one hell of a lot of money for what is a small section of the community. Yes, the Catholic church makes up the second largest religious denomination in Australia. But it amazes me how much sway the church has, and how much money it can pull in. The justification from both levels of government would be that this event will bring a lot of revenue into not only the New South Wales economy, but also the national economy. I agree completely. But why wasn’t that reasoning used when the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras was in financial trouble a couple of years ago.

All the Mardi Gras committee needed to stay afloat and put the event on, was $100,000. Yes, just $100,000. What did the New South Wales government say to the request? No. This event brings in hundreds of millions of dollars into the New South Wales economy each year not to mention flow on national tourism, but the New South Wales government could not pass with a miserable $100,000. But, along comes the very influential Catholic church, and bingo, $86 million appears from the heavens to shower the Catholic youth of the world.

Thank God for people like Father Peter Confeggi, a Sydney priest who is appalled at the amount of money being spent on this event. Father Confeggi said that:

“The amount of money being spent on every level of it, the publications are of the most glossy material, it just doesn’t resonate with the church where I am a priest.”

http://www.theage.com.au/national/with-a-few-cardinal-points-pilgrims-do-business-20080705-32db.html

The other insight into this event which absolutely astounded me was Cardinal George Pell, Archbishop of Sydney, approving all the tacky merchandise that is on sale, stating, “There’s nothing wrong with a little commercialism.” If another secular event was spending this much money, and was flooding the market with cheap trinkets and commercialised rubbish, Cardinal George would have a field day, and the word ‘immoral’ would be the first word out of his mouth. But, this is for God, so it’s okay. There was once a joke about Pat Robertson, the US evangelist, who said that Mother Teresa ‘wasn’t a real Christian’. The comedian’s answer to that was, “Of course she’s not, Pat. She doesn’t have a tax shelter and a University.”

So it’s a good serve of hypocrisy all around. The christian churches can snap their fingers and everyone comes running. And like Dick Cheney as VP to George Bush, Pope Benedict XVI seems to have more power than any other pontiff in living memory.

“…a chalice, Communion plate and vessel to hold Communion hosts adorned by argyle diamonds being made for a rumoured six-figure sum, would be given to the Pope, who will be in Australia for the event.”

http://www.theage.com.au/national/with-a-few-cardinal-points-pilgrims-do-business-20080705-32db.html

It stuns me that the Catholic Church can command this level of spending, and everyone thinks it’s ok. I applaud Fr. Confeggi for having the balls to stand up to his very powerful boss, and openly criticise what is a disgrace. At least the Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras has its basis in a human rights protest which originated in the 1970’s. What it has become is a testament to the struggle of those who have gone before us. What is the purpose of this event? To keep our young people narrow minded, conservative, and ignorant.

What I’m going to do is send an email to Fr. Confeggi and thank him for being a beacon of common sense. He is Parish Priest of the Catholic community in Mt. Druitt, one of the most disadvantaged in Sydney. That’s the sort of person that should be leading the world’s Catholics. It’s the closest thing to Jesus’ original vision I have heard in a very long time.

What is even more tragic is that he will probably be called up in front of Cardinal Pell and chastised for going to the media about this. Something tells me that he won’t care.

Enjoy your day.

Yesterday was the end of an era for me. For the last 5 years, I have made my home in Bangkok, Thailand. When one returns to home soil, reflective thoughts of time spent abroad tend to consume the mind. With every different chapter in one’s life, we look back on the good and the bad, and try to ‘balance the books’ so to speak.

Life abroad has been one of the greatest experiences of my life. To meet and work with people from a vast array of cultures has been invaluable, and what comes with meeting people with a broad international perspective comes deeper, more intelligent interactions. There is also a stronger sense of the broader world view. I have had the privilege of working with and counting as friends people from Canada, U.S.A, South Africa, New Zealand, Iraq, The Philippines, India, Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong, UAE, France, The Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, Luxembourg, Indonesia, Nigeria, Thailand, as well as all parts of the UK. Even though Australia is a multicultural melting pot, nothing beats being with people who are ‘the real mccoy’. This level of interaction I will miss. Walking back into a Melbourne staffroom and hearing discussions no deeper than, “What did you have for dinner last night”, is enough to fill me with dread. But I have not returned home against my will, and I am very much looking forward to discovering my city again. Being in Thailand for the last half decade has taken its toll, and I have achieved all I can there. There are also aspects of the country and its people that I think are seriously deficient, and I feel for those Thais who do want better for their country, but have to settle with the status quo.

Thailand has to seriously look at itself, otherwise it will be left behind, not only by Asia, but the rest of the world. However, it has been said that Thais are ‘arrogantly ignorant’, and even when they are wrong, they will hold to inaccurate information and mindsets as gospel, thereby closing their minds to a broader view. Foreigner input is seen as ‘wrong’ or ’stupid’. This makes Thailand a difficult place to live, as there are constant interactions like this, and normal functions of society are made incredibly difficult.

I have been told by friends that Melbourne will be expensive. What I was telling a friend just the other night was that living in Bangkok, and the rest of Thailand, is like living in a bubble. Very few places around the world can give you the cheap lifestyle that this country offers. Singapore and Hong Kong are certainly not cheap, and we need say no more about Japan. Yes, life is cheap. The taxis are cheap, the food is cheap, accommodation is cheap. But to enjoy that cheap life, one must put up with all that I have previously said. After a number of years, foreigners, or ‘farangs’ as they are known in Thailand, either succumb to the Thai standard of logic, and just go with it, or they resist it forever, and live in a perpetual state of frustration, and anger.

The political system in Thailand is about as logical as the mindsets I have outlined above. This is a country that has had more miltary coups than you can poke a stick at. Former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra was, and I could be wrong, the only Prime Minister of Thailand to serve a full term. Corruption and coups are part of the day to day fabric of Thai life. Thais know it no other way. Elections are ‘fair’ and ‘democratic’, but they are filled with vote buying, especially in the North-East of the country. But Thais care pretty much only about fun and silliness, so they don’t really care who is running the country, as long as they are not bothered by it, and life can go on quite happily for them. However, Thais do get caught up in this silly cycle of voting someone into power, then protesting in their thousands to have them ousted. People Power in The Philippines has been doing that since the days of Ferdinand Marcos. What I have said to Thai people when talking about the current Thai PM, Samak Sundaravej, is that he has been democratically voted in, so they cannot complain. Yes, he is a thug. Yes, he did order protesters to be shot when he was Interior Minister in one of the many politically tense times in Thailand’s history. But the Thai people voted him in. They made their bed. They must lie in it. The Democrat Party, Thailand’s opposition, is weak and inneffectual. The powerbrokers in Thai politics know that, and the opposition leader Abhisit Vejjajiva has no clue, and is as wet as a winter’s day in London.

Thais rely on their beloved Monarch, King Bhumibol Adulyadej. He is the glue that holds Thailand together. As long as he is alive, Thais need not think about too much. He will be there to protect them. But God, or Buddha, better help them when he passes on. He is 80 and I seriously worry about the future of Thailand after his over 60 year reign has come to an end.  His 60th Anniversary to his accession to the throne in 2006 brought well deserved praise from all corners of the world, as well as an award from the United Nations. Thais say they respect and revere their King. If they want to show that respect, then they need to get off their collective backsides and make something of this potentially great nation.

But with all their deficiencies, Thais can be some of the sweetest natured, fun people you could ever meet. No one excels in the hotel industry quite like them, and I don’t need to tell you how fantastic Thai food is. I have had some of the best experiences of my life in Bangkok, and I thank the Thai people for, on the whole, being friendly, gracious, and willing to help me.

To the friends I leave behind, it is not goodbye. Bangkok will always be a second home to me, and will always have a place in my heart like no other. I know I will return many times in my future, and I will hopefully see the Thai people seizing the moment, and embracing a more postive, secure future.

Sawasdee Khrup

Enjoy your day.