Only Thus?

Jan 13, 2009 | Cultural Values, Democracy, Racism, Religious Values, Terrorism, Values, War

Only Thus?

 

Let’s get one or two things clear:

  1. We are not against Jewish people in general.
  2. We are opposed to the actions of some individuals in particular.
  3. We are not opposed to their religion in particular.
  4. We are opposed to all religious belief (except, of course, the Flying Spaghetti Monster) in general, all religious practice and especially all religious coercion.
  5. We are not opposed to the State of Israel.
  6. We are opposed to some Israeli politicians, apparatchiks and apologists, their actions and their dishonesty.
  7. We are not pro-Hamas or pro-Palestinian
  8. …except in the sense that we are pro-humanity and pro-human beings.
  9. We are opposed to the killing and harming and exploitation of human beings by any person or any group in the pursuit of political agendas.

So that said…

There is an Israeli election coming up. Tzipi Livni is up against Netanyahu.

Also, George Bush, well-known for being the easy pushover for American Zionists, is about to be stop being President.

Livni has had one last window of opportunity. And, coincidentally enough, she is now claiming that the “Gaza job” is almost complete. Just in time to be over for Obama’s inauguration.

So who is Tzipi Livni? [Most of this from Wikipedia]

Tzipi Livni is a child of the Jewish struggle for a homeland, the daughter of Eitan Livni (born in Poland) and Sara Rosenberg, both prominent former Irgun members.

Irgun was a militant Zionist group that operated in Palestine between 1931 and 1948. It was established as a militant offshoot of the earlier and larger Jewish paramilitary organization Haganah.

The Irgun was the armed expression of the nascent ideology of Revisionist Zionism founded by Ze’ev Jabotinsky. He expressed this ideology as

“every Jew had the right to enter Palestine; only active retaliation would deter the Arabs and the British; only Jewish armed force would ensure the Jewish state”.

Some of the better-known attacks by Irgun were the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on 22 July 1946 [killing 92 people] and the Deir Yassin massacre (accomplished together with the Stern Gang) on 9 April 1948.

In the West, Irgun was described as a terrorist organization by The New York Times newspaper, The Times of London, the British Broadcasting Corporation, the Anglo-American Committee of Enquiry, and prominent world and Jewish figures, such as Winston Churchill, Hannah Arendt, Albert Einstein, and many others.

Irgun attacks prompted a formal declaration from the World Zionist Congress in 1946, which strongly condemned “the shedding of innocent blood as a means of political warfare”.

Irgun was a political predecessor to Israel’s right-wing Herut (or “Freedom”) party, which led to today’s Likud party. [And Kadima, Livni’s party, is a splinter from Likud.]

“ The symbol of the Irgun, with the motto “Only Thus” alongside a hand holding a rifle in the foreground of all of mandatory Palestine (both sides of the Jordan River), symbolized the striving for Hebrew independence over the entire land of Israel, to be achieved only by the power of Hebrew weapons.

In 1948, Albert Einstein, Hannah Arendt and other prominent American Jews signed a Godwin’s-Law-compliant letter that began:

“ Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the “Freedom Party” (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine.

Soon after World War II, Winston Churchill said “we should never have stopped immigration before the war”, but that the Irgun were “the vilest gangsters” and that he would “never forgive the Irgun terrorists.”

Are we drawing too long a bow, or is the spirit of Irgun alive in Israel today?

The Times:

“ British anger at terror celebration

July 20, 2006

The commemoration of Israeli bombings that killed 92 people has caused offence.

The rightwingers, including Binyamin Netanyahu, the former Prime Minister, are commemorating the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, the headquarters of British rule, that killed 92 people and helped to drive the British from Palestine.

In 2006, Simon McDonald, the British Ambassador in Tel Aviv at the time, and John Jenkins, the Consul-General in Jerusalem at the time, wrote in response to a pro-Irgun commemoration of the King David Hotel bombing:

“ We do not think that it is right for an act of terrorism, which led to the loss of many lives, to be commemorated.”

They also called for the removal of plaques at the site which blame the deaths on “ignored warning calls.” The plaques read:

“ For reasons known only to the British, the hotel was not evacuated,”

but McDonald and Jenkins asserted that no such warning calls were made, adding that even if they had,

“ this does not absolve those who planted the bomb from responsibility for the deaths.”

It is hard to think that Livni’s politics are not deeply influenced by her family’s past and by the history, politics and culture of Irgun. There are scarily striking echoes here. To Livni and the Israelis, Palestinians who act militarily for what they believe are their rights are “terrorists” who, along with their children and families, need to be shot, bombed and killed. Israelis, in stark contrast, are “freedom fighters” whose deeds deserve commemoration.

Livni this week blamed the Palestinians for their own deaths, for the very same reason that her political forbears blamed the Brtitish for their deaths at the King David Hotel 62 years ago: the Palestinians had been phoned to warn them that their homes were about to be bombed. It was up to them to evacuate. Ah, yes. The good old game of “blame the victim”.

How would Israelis react if people said of the Holocaust, “Well, you know, you have only yourselves to blame. If you weren’t jewish….” Of course they’d be outraged, and rightly.

“ A military spokeswoman, Maj. Avital Leibovich, said Monday that the army had “no intention of harming civilians.”

The height of the disingenuousness of the Israelis comes in saying they don’t “intend” to kill civilians, while knowing that they certainly will, and proposing that, since they didn’t ‘intend’ the inevitable casualties they will certainly cause, they are not therefore accountable for them. In fact they go further and sheet the responsibility home to Hamas. Or accident. In this way, of course, they kill and maim any number of innocents without, supposedly, troubling their conscience at all. The Israelis seem to be proposing that ‘lack of intention’ is exculpatory. It is not.

Whether they ‘intend’ the deaths of innocent civilians or not, the Israelis are responsible for them and accountable for them. Their squirming avoidance of responsibility and their refusal to admit blindingly obvious agency is the real awfulness in the matter and the true indication of the national character flaw. Not to mention their retreat behind the magic mirror of the past — you know, the one that makes everyone who looks into it turn into an anti-semite at the slightest suggestion of criticism of their ruthless, immoral, bloodthirsty 21st century politicians.

The awfulness doesn’t stop there. Israeli spokesperson, sleazy — and unfortunately and shamefully Australian — Mark Regev, said wtteo “we are sorry a UN truckdriver was killed. We don’t know if Hamas was operating in that area on that day and the UN trucks got accidentally caught in the crossfire, but it is terrible that they were”, sliding from barely plausible scenario to probable fact in the course of a single sentence.

All the people who have acted to shed blood, or failed to act to stop it – Israelis, Hamas, Bush, Tony The Fixer Blair, the UN – must be called to account for the consequences of their actions and inaction, particularly given their sleazy attempts to avoid accountability.

The greatest lie may have been that told by Condolleeza Rice, that a ceasefire was desirable but that it must be sustainable and must include disarming Hamas.

No! That is not what was required.

What was required was for Israel to stop killing people.

That’s all.

Stop killing innocent people, children, babies, husbands and wives, brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers. The rest can be worked out later. It’s like someone saying, “The Indians are attacking, they’re firing arrows at us. Quick, find some wood and nail it across the windows,” and you say, “No, no, if you’re going to alter the appearance of the windows first we need to discuss colour, and call in the interior decorator to make sure it’s done nice. And I want frilly curtains.”

Just stop killing each other. That is not difficult. At all.

The stupidity of the Israeli action in Gaza is that it is blindingly obvious that it ensures that hostility towards Israel and Israeli citizens is perpetuated and increased and not just amongst Palestinians.

Anti-Israeli feeling is growing globally. People are impatient with Israel’s politicians. They are over its immature tantrums, its childish emotions and bullying excesses.

The Israelis have lost much of the grassroots international support they had and it is going to be increasingly difficult in the future for liberal-democratic regimes around the world, – or even America – to carry their populations with a pro-Israeli stance.

But surely that is not what Israelis want – permanently to play the role of self-inflicted victimhood.

If the Israelis should listen to anyone, I plead with them, listen to the great souls amongst you, past and present.

Listen to Daniel Barenboim. Watch what he does; see how he reconciles Israeli and Palestinian. Hear what he says and listen to the music he makes with his Israeli/Palestinian, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra.

 

 

UPDATE:

Oops! Wonder what Regev (née Freiberg) will say about the Israeli shelling of the UN compound in Gaza. How will he blame Hamas for this one? Will it be another case of crossfire or did the gunner swallow a muslim-sympathising fly just as he was pressing the button?

Israeli Defence Minister, Ehud Barak, said it was a “grave mistake” and he took it “very seriously”. He assured Ban Ki-Moon that “extra attention” will be paid to U.N. facilities and staff and this will not be repeated.”

Unfortunately the Israeli track record is not good on the “never again” scale. They killed the UN truckdriver just the other day, and during their glorious fight against Lebanon recently, remember they shelled a UN observation post killing at least two UN officials.

“Oops, sorry, I’ll try not to do it again,” isn’t really good enough, is it.

‘I’m Sir Roger and I’m Fucked’

Oct 5, 2008 | Arts, Australian Values, Border Security, Capital Punishment, Citizenship, Corruption, Cultural Values, Democracy, Economic Values, Fame, Freedom of Speech, Global Warming, Humour, Immigration, Indigenous, Legal, Lifestyle & Life, Media Values, OzPol Values, PedoPriests, Racism, Religious Values, Science Values, Terrorism, Uncategorized, USPol, Values, War

‘I’m Sir Roger and I’m Fucked’

 

This is not for you

 

Really. We just want to acknowledge ourselves privately but publicly (it makes sense to us, anyway). It’s not meant to be onanistically self-congratulatory, except in the sense that we have achieved some things and we want to record them.
So this is a stocktake for posterity, if you like, that marks a moment, a milestone.

Yes, ValuesAustralia is two years old. This is our 712th post. Singlehanded, eh, Clubtroppo, Larvatus Prodeo, RoadtoSurfdom etc. etc.? That’s almost one a day. (There used to be a billboard for One A Day vitamin pills at the corner of Victoria Rd and Rowntree Street at Blackwattle Bay in Sydney. There was a picture of a man and a woman. The woman was saying, “I’m Jenny and I give John One A Day.” Soon a graffiti artist had added, “I’m John and I’m fucked!”)

And, yes, we’re just about fucked, ourselves. We’ve got a rotator cuff from all the typing and mouse clicking, especially during October and November last year.

(We went to the radiologist. “What seems to be the problem?” “I’ve got a sore shoulder.” “Hmm…we’ll do an ultrasound and an x-ray…… Hmm…. Hmmmmmm, our expert analysis of the ultrasound and x-ray indicates you have a sore shoulder. You’ll have to stop using it for a while.” “Thanks….What?)

We’ve never paid for any advertising. We’ve never submitted ValuesAustralia to any search engine. Nevertheless, we got ourselves listed on Google within 24 hours of launching the site. We tried to register the site with dmoz.org (The Open Source Directory) – as you do – but it wasn’t taking orders, and by the time it came back on line months later, ValuesAustralia was already magically listed!

We’ve been #1 for “Australian Values” on Google, Yahoo, Live and Ask most of the time for more than a year and a half. We’re #12 for “values” on Google worldwide, out of 314,000,000 results and on google.com.au we’re #2 for “values” out of 307,000,000. We’re #1 on google worldwide and Australia for “Australian political values” out of about 400,000 results.

Our Google Page Rank is 4 (used to be 5 but they changed the algorithm) which is respectable but we’d prefer a 5 or a 6.

We’ve had over 300,000 aggregate visitors and more than 75,000 spam messages (thank you, Akismet).

Earlier this year we were consistently getting more than 1000 visitors a day – over 30,000 a month, which is okay, although nothing like the big guys.

We’ve made friends all over the world and especially in Australia. We are in the top 1% of websites worldwide. We are popular in Saudi Arabia – amongst the top 42,000 favourite sites for Saudis. (That worries us just a bit…Say hullo to Al for us…) We appreciate our readers and those who choose to comment from time to time. We thought a scarcity of comments was a Bad Thing, a Failure, but we noticed that one of the most popular, most entertaining bloggers we know of, Whatever It Is, I’m Against It, doesn’t get heaps, either – a few, but not tens like Possum or hundreds and thousands like William the PollBludger.

In May 2007 ValuesAustralia was picked up by the “Stay In Touch” column at the Sydney Morning Herald, accusing us of “rhetoric”.

One of Sir Roger’s posts was selected by ClubTroppo and On Line Opinion in January 2008 as one of the top 40 posts in Australia for 2007. We’re very proud of that.

But it’s a post we made early in 2007 that we are still most proud of. Ken Parish at ClubTroppo called it

“quite possibly the best piece of passionate, angry polemic I’ve ever read, certainly on a blog. ‘Roger Migently’ is roused to extraordinary heights of eloquence… ”

Yes, Troppo has been good to us and we mourn the passing of Missing Link and Ken’s prolonged work-induced(?) absence. We were also congratulated by Richard Neville (HomePageDaily) and Steven Poole whose Unspeak blog is our benchmark for economy, clarity, style and wit.

We have enjoyed the journey so far and we have no intention at this stage of stopping, although we have slowed down (work, you know).

Bobbo the Clown

Our favourite person in the world, of course, is the clown, Bob Correll (above), Deputy Secretary of DIC, OPM, because he wrote us the letter which inspired our outburst. As we discovered he was (and appears still to be) the person who had taken over departmental responsibility for “Borders, Compliance, Detention and Technology”, or in other words, perhaps, for keeping innocent kiddies locked up in the desert, deporting Australian citizens, supporting the failed state of Nauru, making the lives of genuine refugees a misery, doing it to please the Minister, and all at the touch of a computer key. Previously he had been the driving force behind developing and implementing Job Network, or “how to design exquisite, personalised punishment for people who are already struggling with the stress of being unemployed”. Godluvvya, Bob! How’s the Volvo? How’s the kids? How do you sleep at night?

One of the most satisfying things is how we always beat the Immigration Department on Google.

Our second favourite person is Mick Keelty, just for being such a hopeless buffoon and continually making appalling stuff-ups for us to make fun of. G’bye, Mick.

Anyway, just for the record.

(And a special “hi!” to Lang!)

Not a Civil Society Just Yet

Apr 13, 2008 | Australian Values, Border Security, Citizenship, Corruption, Cultural Values, Democracy, Freedom of Speech, Immigration, Legal, Media Values, OzPol Values, Racism, Religious Values, Terrorism, Values

Not a Civil Society Just Yet

 

 

We have a new hero at Values Australia (no, not Manning Clark).
His name is Julian Burnside QC. Not that we didn’t respect him before and agree with him and all like that. But, well…see it’s like this:

We got an mp3 player, for the train or whatever, and to fill it up we scoured ABC Radio National for podcasts.

Science Show, All in the Mind, Philosopher’s Zone, By Design, Ockham’s Razor.

You know the stuff. And of course there’s Big Ideas.

So we downloaded a likely lump about a Manning Clark Lecture:

“Citizens’ rights and the rule of law in a civil society: not just yet”.

It was by Julian Burnside, on the 10th of March this year.

Thought it might be a bit dry but we were so wrong about that!.

We were astonished.

He covers everything we had been trying to say but with such authority and knowledge. So we recommend you have a listen, too.

In his lecture he covered the Sorry statement and the appalling case of an aboriginal man called Bruce Trevorrow.

In the end we were far more inclined to agree with Burnside that some sort of compensation for the stolen generations is appropriate, rather than just the more nebulous idea of an improvement of aborigines’ lot, generally, over time.

“ In the first sitting of the new parliament, the Government said ‘sorry’ to the stolen generations. It seemed almost too good to be true: the apology so many had waited so long to hear. And it was astonishing and uplifting to hear some of the noblest and most dignified sentiments ever uttered in that place on the hill.
[ … ]
The apology was significant not only for marking a significant step in the process of reconciling ourselves with our past: it cast a new light on the former government. It set a new tone. And I think it reminded us of something we had lost: a sense of decency.

 

Most of the worst aspects of the Howard years can be explained by the lack of decency which infected their approach to government:

 

they could not acknowledge the wrong that was done to the stolen generations;

 

they failed to help David Hicks when it was a moral imperative – they waited until his rescue became a political imperative;

they never quite understood the wickedness of imprisoning children who were fleeing persecution;

they abandoned ministerial responsibility;

they attacked the courts scandalously but unblushing;

they argued for the right to detain innocent people for life;

they introduced laws which prevent fair trials;

they bribed the impoverished Republic of Nauru to warehouse refugees for us.

It seemed that they did not understand just how badly they were behaving, or perhaps they just did not care.

He also spoke about the rule of law, incommunicado detention, control orders and preventative detention, the right of the State (and its secret agencies) to withhold evidence, civil rights, erosion of rights, a Bill of Rights and more.

His lecture went further than the ABC podcast includes. Nevertheless the podcast is excellent.

Here’s a transcript of part of his speech which is on the podcast:

“ In 2005 further anti-terror legislation was introduced. The Commonwealth Criminal Code was amended to provide that a member of the Federal Police may apply for a preventative detention order in relation to a person. A preventative detention order will result in a person being jailed for up to 14 days in circumstances where they have not been charged with, much less convicted of, any offence. The order is obtained in the absence of the person concerned, and authorises that the person be taken into custody. When the person is taken into custody, they must not be told the evidence on which the order was obtained.

Thus, a preventative detention order can be made not only without a trial of any sort, but in circumstances where the subject of the order will not be allowed to know the evidence which was used to secure the order, even after the event.

We believe that few Australians are aware of just how far John Howard and his morally-neutered hired guns like Ruddock, Andrews, Vanstone and Mick Keelty went, in the name of “security” to tear down their legal rights and liberties.

Australians generally, we think, are unclear how little of what they believe they have they really have left. Perhaps, as Burnside suggests, they don’t want to know, as long as they’re doing all right and it’s not affecting them. But of course it does affect them and it will.

Habeas corpus is dead and stinking not only in the US but now here in Australia as well. Dwight D. Eisenhower must be rolling in his grave over what John Yoo and Alberto Gonzalez, with Dick Cheney and George Bush and the supine American Senate, did to habeas corpus in the US:

Here are Ike’s Remarks Upon Receiving the America’s Democratic Legacy Award at B’nai B’rith:

“ Why are we proud?

We are proud, first of all, because from the beginning of this Nation, a man can walk upright, no matter who he is, or who she is. He can walk upright and meet his friend – or his enemy; and he does not fear that because that enemy may be in a position of great power that he can be suddenly thrown in jail to rot there without charges and with no recourse to justice. We have the habeas corpus Act, and we respect it.”

With this lecture Julian Burnside — for standing up and saying what is so — has for us moved from “respected” to “hero”.

Here is the recording  of Burnside’s Manning Clark Lecture from ABC’s Big Ideas:

Not Just Yet

by Julian Burnside QC

The Front Fell Off

Nov 16, 2007 | Australian Values, Corruption, Economic Values, Humour, Media Values, OzPol Values, Racism, Science Values, Terrorism, Values

The Front Fell Off

All the sage analysts and opinionators, as well as the “’King Makers‘” – as News Ltd “’journalist’s” like to refer to themselves – seem to be agreed that there is a mood for change in the electorate. They agree that it’s not really about John Howard blowing it, as much as that after twelve years people want a change. It’s not that they dislike Howard, they say, but that they’re bored with him.

Values Australia begs to differ.

We assert that a large percentage of people have actively disliked Howard for most of his twelve years, and particularly in the last six.

It seems to us that Beazley wasn’t it. Nice enough bloke and all but he didn’t have the guts to chest up to Howard. Crean was a joke, frankly. Latham was, well, clearly a fruitcake, they thought. And yet almost anyone would have done, except that they had to be able to be credible enough to manage some pretty important stuff.

So along comes Kevin Rudd at last and everyone holds their breath hoping and praying that ‘Neo’ Rudd is “The One”. And Rudd does stand firm enough and plausible enough, and he has more than held his own against Howard for long enough. The people decided months ago. The election result was decided as soon as Rudd looked safely electable.

The country is already heaving a sigh of relief that it finally looks as if it is about to be able to cut loose John Howard and his corrosive regime.

What we are now seeing of Howard is that he is not after all the political genius he has been reputed to be. We are seeing Howard ‘unplugged’ – unplugged from Arthur Sinodinis who was the real genius.

Howard solo.

So Rudd, in a way, can’t take too much credit for his own success except for being good enough.

Whateverrr.

Anyway, we were just chatting amongst ourself and wondering whether on Sunday morning 25 November, Brian Dawe might interview John Howard about how his Front Fell Off.

He’s done it before.

Well, we dare to hope.

UPDATE

Well, the front really has fallen off. Tony Abbott has revealed all about WorkChoices.

” I accept that certain ‘protections’, in inverted commas, are not what they were, I accept that that has largely gone. I accept that,” he said.

“I accept that the ‘Industrial Relations Commission’ doesn’t have the same power to reach into the nook and crannies of every ‘business’ that it used to have.”

We knew that, actually. That’s one of the reasons why the coalition is so unpopular.

But we do appreciate the birth of a new euphemism.

“The best ‘protection’ for someone who’s unhappy in their current job is the chance of a new one,” said Abbott.

No more ‘down-sizing’, ‘right-sizing’, ‘reorganisation’, ‘rationalisation’, ‘surplus to requirements’, or ‘changes to production’; no more “letting you go, Wayne”.

We now look forward to hearing employers telling their staff, “We’re excited to be able to offer you the chance of a new job, Frank.” Or, “Beryl, we’re happy to say we’ve arranged some excellent job protection for you!”

So John, we’re delighted to announce we’ve arranged the chance of a new job for you. We’re sure you’ll appreciate this is the kind of protection you could only dream of.

In other news…

“Don’t forget to be frightened about those evil sand-niggers!”

On television last night the National Security Hotline commercial was on TV.

8 days away from a ‘federal election’.

Originally badged as “Authorised by the Australian Government Canberra” it is now authorised “M Keelty, Chief Commissioner, Australian Federal Police“.

Can there be any more transparently cynical attempt by Howard to get around the election advertising laws to blow the anti-muslim dogwhistle?

In fact, is it actually legal for them to do this?

And can there any longer possibly be any question that the appalling, scandal-ridden, utterly discredited and totally compromised Keelty is irredeemably politicised – in fact has offered himself up to the political game by his own choice?

Trust Me…I’m From the Feds…

Nov 14, 2007 | Australian Values, Citizenship, Corruption, Cultural Values, Democracy, Freedom of Speech, Immigration, Legal, Media Values, OzPol Values, Racism, Terrorism, Values

Trust Me…I’m From the Feds…

 

Wha..!? I woun’t not of never of dun nuffink so bad like wot you say!

 

Federal agent Bruce Pegg, who interviewed Mr Ul-Haque in prison, told NSW Supreme Court judge Michael Adams he had done nothing improper by questioning Mr Ul-Haque without a caution.

” Why didn’t you caution him when you were going to ask him questions which were capable of exposing him to a criminal charge?” Justice Adams asked him.

 

“There was no intention in my mind of using that conversation in any proceedings against Mr Ul-Haque,” Agent Pegg said.

 

Justice Adams: “It would rather depend on what he told you, wouldn’t it?”

Thank christ for judges like Adams.

Supposedly Ul-Haque declined the kind offer to wear a wire to attempt to incriminate another person. He had an opinion about that, he told an AFP officer, who allegedly said:

“Well you know what they say about opinions: opinions are like arseholes; everyone’s got one.”

And you know what they say about arseholes: Mick Keelty’s got thousands of them. That’s how he shits on Australia. 

Justice Adams said ASIO officers

“committed the criminal offences of false imprisonment and kidnapping.”

When do they go to prison?

Have they been arrested and charged yet?
Where are they being detained?
Are they being pursued and prosecuted by the AFP with the same vigour and determination that it showed against…oh, I don’t know…Mohamed Haneef, say?

Dear Bob Correll

Nov 13, 2007 | Australian Values, Border Security, Citizenship, Corruption, Cultural Values, Democracy, Freedom of Speech, Immigration, Legal, Media Values, OzPol Values, Racism, Values

Dear Bob Correll

 

To: Mr Bob Correll,
Deputy Secretary
Department of Immigration and Censorship

 

Dear Bob,

Bob, you aren’t replying to any of my messages. Is everything all right? I thought we had something really special for a while.

Bob, you wrote to me earlier this year, explaining to me all about “Australia’s reputation overseas”, of which you were clearly most protective. You talked about “the important business managed by the Department, including the processing of visa applications”.

But now, Bob, this shocking news; I’m having trouble working out how it all fits with what you have said.

Bob apparently, according to the scurrilous Mainstream Media , in 1999 your department detained a certain Tony Tran in a breach of the necessary procedure which requires your department to notify a person that their bridging visa has been cancelled, before, in fact, locking them up.

Now, I know that you are the go-to guy about visas and their clever use as a tool of government policy, so I know that you will have been appalled — appalled !— at this oversight when you found out about it. And you will have been terribly upset that the said Tony Tran was bashed by another inmate while enduring his five years of illegal detention at the hands of your important department.

Of course, we can all understand that your department can’t be held to blame – or to account – for Tran’s broken marriage, or his separation from his baby son for … how long? Just because Tran says,

“I never got to say goodbye and I never got to kiss my son”,

I mean, we need a sense of perspective, don’t we?

After all, your department has lots of really “important business” to manage which takes precedence over the human concerns of mere “people”; important business such as making stirring speeches at expensively-catered conferences for the high-flying and influential; speeches with impressive titles like 

‘Managing our shared future: the use of the visa as a whole-of-government policy tool’[!], or

‘Enhancing ethics and governance while transforming the business[!]’.

“The business”, Bob?

It’s “a business“?

Does the Department consider what it does to unfortunate, desperate refugees as “giving them the business”, perhaps?

Ah, yes. Now we remember!

It was you yourself who was able to turn unemployment into just such a “business“.

A business is not about people, is it.

It’s about “Outcomes” and “”, “Deliverables” and perhaps your favourite, “Compliance”.

A business has the wonderful ability to remove those pesky “human beings” from the equation almost entirely.

Well done!

No wonder John Howard and Kevo Andrews love you!

Bob, I understand now what you meant about ‘the important business managed by the Department’.

And, look, I know it may not look so generous in hindsight, that thing about changing Tony’s baby’s name to a more Korean-sounding one so he could be deported to Korea. It might look somewhat … I don’t know … callous? … cruel and heartless? … unbelievably inhumane? … to some.

But I’m sure that in some way which, in our ignorance, mere people like myself can’t grasp, “Australia’s reputation overseas” has been immeasurably enhanced by this episode.

By the way, I have discovered your website. I like its design very much and would really like one just like it for my very own one day.

Anyway, I came across a page called “Success Stories of Australian Migration”. And I searched and searched but I couldn’t find anything there about Tony Tran! Nor could I discover anything about Vivian Solon or Cornelia Rau, or about Robert Jovocic.

Nothing at all.

Odd, I thought, when they were all examples of success stories of your Department’s important business.

On a personal note, Bob, I just noticed you have five kids! Geez, mate, bit of a stud, eh! Eh? How do you fit them all in the Volvo?

Just, you know, Bob mate, keep your eye on them. Please. You wouldn’t want them being renamed and packed off to some strange country before you’ve had a chance to kiss them goodbye. Would you?

P.S. How’s the job-hunting going? You’ve only got a couple of weeks.

… Oh, Bob, I’ve just been informed that Tran’s case was only one of more than 200 others in which the Ombudsman has determined people have been unlawfully detained, just like Tony Tran. That really is some success story for your department and its important work.

Don’t you agree all these cases really ought to be shown on your beaut website? It seems you might be required to front a Royal Commission if Labor succeeds in a few days. That would be exciting for you, wouldn’t it!