Throwing stones from the glasshouse

John Winston Howard, former Prime Minister of Australia, today received the highest civilian award that a United States President can bestow; the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Does he deserve it? Let’s take a look at not only some of the main criteria for this award, but also the reason why Mr. Howard has that medal dangling around his neck tonight. You make up your own mind.

The official criteria for this award is:

It is designed to recognize individuals who have made “an especially meritorious contribution to the security or national interests of the United States, world peace, cultural or other significant public or private endeavors.”

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

Howard’s ‘especially meritorious contribution to the security or national interests of the United States’ consisted of seizing a chance to play with the big boys of world politics and make himself look good. I believe Tony Blair, also a recipient today, thought about his decision a little bit longer. However, Blair’s worthiness of such an award is also highly dubious.

So what is Howard’s ‘especially meritorious contribution’ to the peace and stability of not only America but the world? He, like Bush and Blair, listened to bad or even false intelligence. He sided with a President who we now know had no plan in Iraq beyond killing Saddam Hussein, needlessly bombing the shit out of a country, and shouting ‘Mission Accomplished’ from the nearest aircraft carrier.

Leaders from Germany, France, Italy, Spain, and many other countries, disagreed with the proposed military action, and refused to be a part of it.

In a 2004 U.S. presidential debate, Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry questioned the size of the coalition participating in the initial invasion, saying, “…when we went in, there were three countries: Great Britain, Australia and the United States. That’s not a grand coalition. We can do better”. President Bush responded by saying, “Well, actually, he forgot Poland. And now there’s 30 nations involved, standing side by side with our American troops”. The phrase You forgot Poland subsequently became a sarcastic shorthand for the perception that most members of the coalition were not contributing much to the war effort compared to the main three allies. The majority of the population in most countries involved did not, according to surveys, support the endeavour or their nation’s participation.

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

Howard should have felt alienated, but instead felt like he had got into a club that had once refused him entry. He most likely felt, like Blair, that if he sided with Bush, and this Iraq thing paid off, he would be regarded with the same pride as the Churchill’s, Menzies’ and Roosevelt’s.

This war has been a disaster from the start until now, and those leaders who did not side with Bush, Blair and Howard are now grinning from ear to ear. But for at least today, Mr. Howard can stand smug and egotistical, as if the world’s opinion is dead wrong. He can think that as much as he likes. What the world saw today was one of the worst US Presidents giving out medals to his ‘yes’ men. He called John Howard his ‘man of steel’. If John Howard was a man of steel, he would have had the metal to tell Bush where to get off when asked to assist in invading a country for no good reason.

With the presentation of these medals today, what George W Bush is saying less than two weeks before he leaves office, is that no matter how many people can prove that he went to war on a myth, and because of oil, he will stand by his decision, and so will Blair and Howard. Yes, they all have conviction. Yes, they all have courage to stick to their conviction. But that doesn’t make it right, and it certainly should not be the basis for the bestowing of the highest civilian honour. If the Iraq War showed George W Bush’s supreme lack of knowledge and judgement, then giving these two men this award is like writing that supreme lack of judgement on a neon sign and flashing it in Times Square. Stephen Kenny, former lawyer for Guantanamo Bay inmate, Australian David Hicks, had this to say:

“I think in view of what’s happened at Guantanamo Bay and John Howard’s involvement in it, I think that it is extremely regrettable and clearly devalues the Medal of Freedom,” he said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/01/14/2466221.htm?section=justin

But back to John Winston Howard. He beamed as he was accepting the medal, and for him, it was his only moment in the sun since being defeated in the November 2007 election. As matter of fact, the only times he does get honoured, it seems to be on American soil, surrounded by right wing Republicans. It seems Australia is not so quick to thank him for turning a respected alliance between Australia and the United States into nothing short of a bizarre Master/Slave relationship. All that was needed was the whip and the dog collar. My father’s favourite joke during those early days of the Iraq War was, “Why do they call John Howard a Bonsai? He’s a little Bush.”

If that’s an indication of how Australia and Howard were viewed around the world, then Howard, like the biblical character Judas, can take his thirty pieces of silver in the form of that medal.

My recollection of that story is that Judas felt so guilty about what he had done, he hanged himself.

I suppose Howard does have a head start there. He does have something hanging around his neck.

Enjoy your day

The continued violence in Gaza has sparked protests all around the world. It seems that Israel is winning very few friends over this and for the first time, the world is not afraid to openly criticise them.

I find it odd that the world tiptoes around Jewish relations. We openly critcise the Arab, but feel apprehensive toward doing the same to the Jew. Surely the Jew has made mistakes, been wrong, and in some cases been unlawful, selfish and unnecessarily cruel. But we stand back and say nothing, for fear of being seen as anti-semitic.

Throughout the Presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both courted the Jewish vote, but there was no such courtesy for the arab vote, as that would have been seen as gleaning votes from ‘terrorists.’ The tiptoeing continues even in the light of these attacks on Palestinians, with world leaders not saying too much. It wasn’t until British singer Annie Lennox verbalised her disgust and sadness at what Israel is doing to the Palestinians, that we actually saw someone stand up and criticise Israel for what they are doing.

What I want to make very clear here is that criticism of a race based on what wrong they do and not who they are is totally different from open criticism about a race based solely on ‘the way they look’, ‘the things they eat’ and ‘cultural differences.’ I do not, and never will tolerate blatant hateful racism. What we have tended to do over the years, in relation to members of the Jewish community, is to say nothing derogatory. The  Jew and the holocaust are intertwined. It is somehow seen in bad taste if we think of blaming the Jew for anything. They have suffered enough. It is like we have felt an enormous sense of guilt since the end of World War Two, and to make the Jew feel better, we have allowed them to become immensely powerful. It’s similar to the mother spoiling her child, because she was responsible for something bad that happened to that child earlier in his life. To hold the Jew to account is just not on.

Israel has suffered less than ten casualties out of this latest violence. Palestinians have suffered close to 500. For the Israeli’s to say that they must take this course of action, as Hamas are shelling Israel constantly, and it is Israel’s right to protect its citizens is a nonsense. Are all those 463 dead Palestinians Hamas members? Does it need a slaughter in Gaza to avenge the deaths of four Israeli citizens? Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Foreign Minister Zipi Livni are pretty gung ho about it, and have no intention of stopping what they see needs to be done.

Riyad Mansour, the permanent Palestinian observer to the United Nations, told reporters earlier that it was the Security Council’s responsibility “to bring Israel into compliance and to stop this aggression immediately”.

“Israel cannot continue to behave as a state above international law – this is the law of the jungle,” he said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/01/04/2458763.htm

The man has a point. We, as a collective, jump up and down when we see people like Robert Mugabe, Hugo Chavez, Saddam Hussein and the generals of the Burmese junta snub their noses at international law, but Israel stands alone as a nation that can do no wrong, and waves a very big stick indeed.

Hillary Clinton, as the next Secretary of State, needs to show a bit of a tougher line towards Israel than what she showed earlier this year

At a pro-Israel conference here on Monday night, Mrs. Clinton told an audience of 1,000 that Israel deserved “every bit of our support”

Barack Obama was just as strong in his support, but did at least avert to the Palestinians.

Mr. Obama, meanwhile, is making a personal overture to Jewish voters that threads together history from slavery to the Holocaust to Jim Crow. Yet he is also talking about the needs of the Palestinians.

both quotes from:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/14/us/14aipac.html

It is time we said something to Israel, and we said it loud and clear. No, we are not anti-semitic if we criticise, and no, we do not support terrorism. But we do want to see the end to the mindless slaughter of innocent Palestinians. It’s as simple as that.

Enjoy your day

How ironic that the nightclub that exploded into flames, killing over 50 people in Bangkok, Thailand, just after the stroke of Midnight on New Year’s day, was having its final big party before relocating. Thanks to the management’s appalling lack of any form of fire safety regulations, many locals, as well as tourists, had their lives ripped from them at what should have been one of the happier moments of their lives. But, this scenario is not surprising.

What people tend to forget is that Thailand is a third world country. What comes with that ranking is poor standards in nearly every aspect of their society. Infrastruture, education standards, public health, food hygiene and yes, building standards and health regulations. This tragic incident saddened me deeply, but did not shock me. Having lived in Thailand, I have been in venues that I would regard as death traps, as well as taught in a school that had a wooden building that was well over 40 years old and in any other country, would have been condemned long before now.

Health and safety does not exist in many of these third world countries. Why not? To construct buildings to strict regulations, and have all the fire safety equipment needed, as well as train staff in health and safety regulations, all requires money. Construction companies in Thailand use cheap labour, supplied by peasant workers from ‘upcountry’ and I have rarely seen any safety equipment being worn. These people are used as they are cheap and will work around the clock to get a job done. They are usually uneducated, and most probably illiterate, so the construction bosses wouldn’t even tell them much about their work apart from what is necessary. These workers have no real interest in safety, as they will never go into the building that they are helping to build, if they even live to see the final construction completed.

Once you see this scene time and time again across Bangkok, you don’t get surprised when you hear horror stories of only one exit in the Santika nightclub used for entering and exiting. Most of the clubs in Thailand look great, but are made of sub-standard concrete, and usually only one exit. Coupled with this is the absolute greed of Thai owners of the clubs who pack as many people in as they can.

I remember the bars and clubs I went to in Bangkok were down a skinny closed in ‘laneway’.  I remember saying to the owner of another club down the street how I always felt the  club I went to in that laneway was seriously unsafe and I said to him, “What if there was a fire?” He quickly responded by saying, “What if there was a fire at the end of the laneway?” This laneway contained 6 small bars and a nightclub. If there was a fire at the end of that laneway, the fatality list would be through the roof! This is the situation right across the entertainment areas of Bangkok, and there are many. Luckily, you would find the same sub standard levels of safety in only a couple of other countries in Asia. Places like Singapore, Hong Kong and Taipei, while not perfect, have a higher rate of health and safety awareness and construction standards.

So, no, I am not surprised. With this on top of everything else that has crippled Thailand in the last few months, I think it is time for this country to seriously look at itself. It won’t, but it’s time it did. Thankfully none of my friends were in that club that night. My heart goes out to the families of all those who died, and to those recovering in hospital. To think that the foreign tourists who were injured, some severely, were probably so glad that the airport was open again, as they could have the holiday they had planned for New Year. They are probably wishing they had just stayed at home.

This is exactly what many foreigners will be doing from now on. Some Thais have the saying, “Thailand for Thai people.” They may get their wish. Like with the disasters befalling Qantas, it’s going to take Thailand a long time to recover from this, if they can at all.

Enjoy your day