Footprints In The Sands - Poem Fr Derrick Mendis SJ

Politics in Lanka is a dirty game
Sans sense of honesty, honour or shame.
On election-campaigns that squander millions,
When in power, make illicit billions.

Full of corruption, nepotism, crime,
They leave no footprints in the sands of time,
Self-seeking, self-serving, power-drunk quacks,
Cover up their crab-like, crooked tracks.

Parliament's pack of jokers, jerks,
Abuse their power for self and perks,
Goons and buffoons, men of straw,
Brazenly bend and break the law.

They promise us the sun and the moon.
Pledges broken or forgotten soon,
Barefaced, through their teeth they lie,
On hollow words can we rely?

They flagrantly flout every rule in the book,
To come into power by hook or by crook,
From one party to another they jump,
Kiss President's feet and lick his rump.

In sumptuous luxury they wine and dine,
Make ample hay while sun doth shine.
Of life's best things they have their fill,
The taxpayers have to foot the bill.

They trot the globe and have a ball,
In five-star hotel, shopping mall,
Lavishly splurge like duke or count,
On bankrupt Lanka's state account.

Their life is sweet, a bed of roses,
Gobbling Lanka's scarce resources,
Our so-called rulers, leading lights,
Are a bunch of social parasites.

Their hands are soiled, palms well greased,
Our people, rich and poor are fleeced,
Most of them to the core are rotten,
They flaunt and flash their wealth ill-gotten.

How could these robbers ever dare
Their numerous assets to declare?
An auditor's test they will not pass,
Many would end up behind bars.

Crime and corruption they cannot battle,
In their own cupboards many skeletons rattle.
A sincere statesman I fail to see
Among Sri Lanka 's powers-that-be.

Idolized heroes of yesterday,
Made traitors, villains of today..
Free-media muzzled, my country's bane.
Journalists, editors attacked and slain.

Many politicians are vermin, pests,
Who earn fast-bucks and feather their nests,
They leave no footprints in the sands of time,
But craftily cover up their tracks of crime.

Fr Derrick Mendis SJ

Colombo 4.

Send a message to our Prime Minister

Dear Friend,

It's hard to believe -- but a few days ago the Rudd Government announced a policy that many thought could only be dreamed up by John Howard himself. Australia has become the first country in the world to stop processing asylum-seeker applications from Afghanis & Sri Lankans fleeing persecution in their war-torn countries.

On the day of the Government's announcement, a young Sri Lankan teenager gave in to despair and attempted suicide, after languishing in detention for 11 months on Christmas Island. Today there's news of more desperation, with a hunger strike by 50 Sri Lankan and Afghan asylum seekers.

Can you take a stand against this frightening return to the dark days of refugees in custody? Tell Immigration Minister, Chris Evans, that Australians reject a return to this shameful past:

www.getup.org.au/campaign/peopleabovepolitics

The Government claims that circumstances are changing in Afghanistan and Sri Lanka, making them safer places to live.

The truth? We've been consulting with sources on the ground in these troubled and turbulent nations. Hazarras, an ethnic minority in Afghanistan, continue to be arbitrarily imprisoned and face violence and death, while in Sri Lanka even independent journalists are under threat and seeking escape.

Refugee opponents are busy sending hundreds of messages to our leaders urging a return to the 'Howard' style hard-line approach. Their messages are piling up on the desks of decision-makers. That's why we need to ensure that Chris Evans, the Minister for Immigration, is met with a pile of messages of support for a humane refugee policy so high that he literally can't see those sent by the forces of fear and intolerance.

Can you take a minute to send the Minister a message?

www.getup.org.au/campaign/peopleabovepolitics

While the Liberal Party drums up their election year rhetoric with hyperbole, the Government sticks with an old favorite - hypocrisy. We know the script. But what happens next?

Newcomers to Australia's shores face a very bleak future: indefinite detention or the prospect of being sent back to face violence and possible death. We must make no mistake - these policies will see a return to the dark days of 2004: suicides, hunger strikes and our nation's reputation in tatters.

Join other GetUp members in sending the Minister a powerful, timely message before things get further out of hand:

www.getup.org.au/campaign/peopleabovepolitics

The events of the last few days show that this Government needs a wake up call. In the past we've proven that our leaders will only ever soar as high as we demand -- and they'll fall as low as we allow. That's why, as voters, we must stand together and demand that we never go back to the dark days of the past.

With hope,
The Getup Team

P.S. This policy shift breaches a pre-election promise to process 90 percent of arrivals within 90 days and to not engage in 'indefinite detention'. But it's just the latest in their broken promises on refugees and asylum seekers. Take action here.

More arrivals inevitable: People smugglers might take advantage, but we have a responsibility to refugees.

The National Times, March 25, 2010


TWO facts help put in context Australia's biggest immigration challenge - the arrival of asylum seekers by boat. Fact one: right now, the number of boats bringing people to Australian waters to claim asylum is among the highest on record. In only three years since the mid-1970s - from 1999 to 2001 - have more people arrived on boats than in the past year. More than 60 boats arrived in 2009 carrying more than 2850 people, and another 25 carrying more than 1200 people have arrived this year.
Fact two: the only sustained period in which not one boat landed was from 1980 to 1988. Since then, the lowest level of boat arrivals occurred in the six years after the 2001 Tampa episode.
An obvious conclusion stems from the resurgent number of arrivals. Changes to the processing of asylum seekers by the federal government have encouraged people smugglers to step up their marketing and the inescapable result is that more people are attempting the journey to Australia.
The government denies that its policy changes are responsible for the increase, pointing instead to an increase in the so-called ‘push factors’ - conflicts driving people to flee, thus lifting the number of asylum seekers worldwide.
It is true that recent fighting in Sri Lanka and Afghanistan, especially, has swelled global refugee numbers. Yet the smugglers still must convince people to take the long passage to Australia. That means giving desperate people hope that they will be granted asylum, a responsibility Australia accepts under the international refugee convention.
The Howard government used its ‘Pacific solution’ to shirk this commitment by processing arrivals in third countries. Labor's decision to junk the policy was easily portrayed by smugglers as a chance to begin their trade again. There was nothing wrong with the decision to dismantle the Pacific solution; the old policy had damaged Australia's reputation and distorted national priorities. But it's foolish to pretend the policy could be abandoned without consequences.
Before the 2007 election, Labor was unwilling to acknowledge that a rise in people smuggling was the likely consequence of getting rid of the Pacific solution. This was despite a widespread community desire for the system to be scrapped. Labor had the chance to show political leadership and confront an unpalatable reality - that the goal of stopping all the boats is simply unrealistic.
Australians have a choice: accept that the country will remain a target for people smugglers, or abandon our international commitments.
This is where that second fact would have been useful back then. Labor might have explained that Australia cannot return to the 1980s and a long period of zero boat arrivals. Times have changed, radically.
We may not share land borders with any country, but we are not cut off from the world. The experience in the 1980s was very different, before what is often termed the ‘new wars’ of the modern era. Today, conflicts are usually within countries rather than between them; they occur when ethnic or religious divisions are deliberately stoked and civilians are targeted. That pushes ever more people from their homes - and encourages them to believe the false promises of smugglers.
Criminal smuggling syndicates are also more sophisticated and adept than in the past, and boats are only one manifestation of their activity. Smugglers are engaged in document fraud and move many of their clients on airlines. It's striking that in recent times no boats have travelled directly from Sri Lanka to Australia, despite the violence directed towards Sri Lanka's Tamil minority. Instead, smugglers have moved people to countries in south-east Asia and assembled them at points in Indonesia before attempting to reach Australia.
And while boat arrivals inflame passions, most asylum seekers arriving in Australia actually travel by plane. Well-established systems are in place at airports to deal with their claims, so the challenge is more easily managed.
But the boat arrivals to Australia remain - relative to the rest of the world - at very low levels. Spain and Italy must cope with tens of thousands of people arriving each year, as must the United States.
None of this is to suggest Australia should surrender control of its maritime border. Intercepting and disrupting the criminal smuggling networks is crucial - not least because of the great risk to people who attempt passage on overcrowded vessels in treacherous waters. But it's a question of setting realistic expectations. As long as political leaders pretend that it is possible to stop all the boats, we will suffer episodic outbreaks of fearmongering over spikes in irregular migration.
This also affects the way Australia engages with its neighbours. We waste enormous diplomatic capital in the region each time the asylum-seeker issue flares. When Tony Abbott spoke before Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's speech in Parliament this month, he said, ‘we have worked to end people smuggling before … and we can stop it again, provided it is done co-operatively’. It sounded to Indonesian ears like he was blaming Jakarta for the surge in arrivals. Of course, his intention was to score a point off Kevin Rudd, but it shows just how badly this debate distorts Australia's interests.
Daniel Flitton is diplomatic editor.

Pastoral plan Published: 21 March 2010 By: Paul Dobbyn

Pastoral plan: Bishop Joseph Grech

CHRISTMAS Island's asylum seekers, many having fled traumatic situations in their home countries, will soon have more structured pastoral care from the Church.

Australian Catholic Bishops Conference delegate for refugee and migrant issues Bishop Joseph Grech said the Church was planning a more constant pastoral presence with a roster of priests for the immigration detention centre there.

The decision, made in response to increasing numbers of boat people being taken to the island, follows discussions between Perth archdiocese, which includes Christmas Island, and Catholic refugee assistance bodies including the Jesuit Refugee Service Australia.

Australian Catholic Migrant and Refugee Office director Scalabrinian Father Maurizio Pettena will soon be visiting the island to update information on pastoral needs there.

Late last year, the Institute of Sisters of Mercy of Australia formed a partnership with JRS Australia to provide pastoral services for asylum seekers at Christmas Island.

In a story on the Mercy Sisters' national website Mercy Sister Maureen Lohrey, who recently returned from a two-month placement on the island, spoke of hearing "terrible stories" from detainees who have come from many countries including Afghanistan, Burma, Iran, Iraq and Sri Lanka.

Missionaries of the Sacred Heart priest Fr Jim Carty is on the island having taken over from Perth priest Fr Armando Carandang who had spent five weeks there.

Bishop Grech said Fr Carty, who has more than 20 years' experience working with refugees, would be leaving Christmas Island the week after Easter.

An as yet unnamed Jesuit priest with extensive experience in pastoral care with refugees in detention situations will take over from Fr Carty.

"Obviously a more structured presence is needed to support the pastoral needs of the asylum seekers being detained on the island," Bishop Grech said.

"This is why a roster of priests is being arranged."

Recent reports have indicated that the immigration detention on Christmas Island has reached almost bursting point with the arrival earlier this month of the 24th asylum-seeker boat this year.

There are only 151 spare beds for a facility designed for 800 but now accommodating 2042 people. This year 1121 asylum seekers have arrived.

Numbers of Catholic asylum seekers are difficult to ascertain. However, two Masses are held each Sunday - one at the community centre is regularly attended by about 80 people and another at the detention centre draws about 35 worshippers.

Christmas Island's Catholic community is also providing pastoral support.

The priests' work is very well received by all on the island, including the authorities, Bishop Grech said.

"The presence of the Catholic Church is a true pastoral presence, not only to Catholics, but to all people regardless of their belief.

"People just come up and want to talk about their lives.

"Priests have an excellent opportunity to bring peace, harmony and social cohesion to a difficult situation.

"Some asylum seekers are getting impatient and talk of acts of defiance.

"(Father) Jim (Carty) has advised on several occasions this is not going to help and that patience is best."

Bishop Grech said the Australian Government had been very supportive of this "difficult pastoral mission" even as far as making available a seat on flights to the island several times.

Sr Lohrey, in the story on the Mercy Sisters' website, said she was frustrated by "the fear-mongering, sensationalism and negativity of some Australians about the number of asylum seekers arriving in the country by boat".

"We have no idea of their suffering," she said.

"All they want to do is get their families out and have a life. Their way to get to freedom and a life is unbelievable. You'd have to have nerve and courage beyond anything to attempt what these people have attempted."

AFP admit Haneef evidence is 'wrong'

The Australian Federal Police have admitted that crucial evidence against Gold Coast doctor Mohamed Haneef - that his mobile phone SIM card was found at the scene of a British car bombing - is wrong.

It had not been confirmed the SIM card was found at the scene of the Glasgow Airport attack, as prosecutors alleged during the terror suspect's bail hearing last weekend, federal police sources have told Fairfax newspapers.

The revelation has cast fresh doubts over police handling of the Haneef case.
Criticism has come from Peter Faris QC, who has backed the government's new anti-terror laws, and Queensland Premier Peter Beattie, who has expressed concern.
The SIM card, the smart card in mobile phones, was found in the possession of one of Haneef's cousins, Sabeel Ahmed, in Liverpool, hundreds of kilometres away from the failed Glasgow bombing.

No official attempt has been made to correct the public record, despite police sources telling Fairfax they had been aware of the error for some time.
Asked why Haneef would have provided his SIM card if he knew it was to be used for the purposes of terrorism, prosecutor Clive Porritt, from the Office of the commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), told the court it had been intended that the SIM card would be destroyed in the planned explosion when the Jeep was rammed into the Glasgow airport doors.
A spokeswoman for the DPP said: "It is not appropriate for us to comment on matters before the court."

Brought to you by AAP

Australian Anti-Terrorism Act 2005

Australian Anti-Terrorism Act 2005
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Australian Anti-Terrorism Act 2005 (Revised) is legislation intended to hamper the activities of any potential terrorists in Australia. It was passed by the Commonwealth Parliament on 6 December 2005. [1]
Contents[hide]
1 Chronology
2 Constitutional issues
3 Deficiencies in the existing law
4 Summary of changes
5 The "Shoot to Kill" Clause
6 The "Reckless Funding" Clause
7 Judicial oversight
8 See also
9 External links
10 References

Hiroshima Day 2007

HIROSHIMA DAY
PEACE RALLY AND MARCH

1 PM, SUNDAY 5TH AUGUST 2007
QUEENS PARK cnr George & Elizabeth Sts, Brisbane

NUCLEAR LEGACIES IN AUSTRALIA & PACIFIC
mining – tests – reactors – weapons - waste
say NO to John Howard’s project for a nuclear Australia

Speakers
Nic Maclellan * Nuclear Free Independent Pacific
Journalist on disarmament, human rights, self-determination

Lew Rice
Atomic Ex-Servicemen’s Assoc. A.C.T. Inc
Maralinga Emu Field Monte Bello BCOF
other speakers to be confirmed

Rally for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament Inc
contact ph 3855 9497 jshears@powerup.com.au

Protect Article 9 of Japan's Peace Constitution

Article 9 of Japan’s Constitution says:
Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.
In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.


Dear friends,

Today more than ever, the world desperately needs a new path towards peace. Japan’s constitutional prohibition against the use of military force is a model for non-violent international conflict transformation and war prevention to be supported and encouraged by all peace loving countries and peoples in the world.

Originally required by the US after Japan’s surrender in 1945, this key article of Japan’s Constitution has been embraced by the people of Japan.

There have been a number of compromises in regard to Japan’s peace constitution, and right now, Article 9 is coming under attack. It is a fact that Japan as a nation does have its armed forces. The government of Mr. Koizumi supported the US led war against Iraq and the subsequent occupation. His unconditional support of the government and policy of Mr. Bush led this country to send the Self Defense Force to Iraq. This is the first time since the Second World War that Ground Self Defense Force soldiers have been dispatched to a conflict situation, and this despite strong opposition within the country and from the neighboring countries of Asia that suffered aggression and occupation by Japan’s Imperial Army in the 1930’s and 40’s.

The new government of Mr. Abe seeks to revise Article 9 of the Constitution of Japan in order to permit Japan to maintain de jure military forces to be dispatched anywhere in the world. The move is strongly supported by the US government to allow Japan to take a proactive military role in such US led ventures as “the coalition of the willing” in the War on Terror. Already a referendum bill to revise the constitution has been introduced to the national diet and the government is determined to form the bill by May 3, 2007, which is Constitution Day in Japan.


We need your solidarity to support a global action, to be organized around May 3, 2007,
to protect Article 9.
Please write to
Prime Minister of Japan
2-3-1 Nagata-cho Chiyoda-ku Tokyo 100-0014 Japan
Fax. 81-3-3581-3883
The homepage of the official residence of the prime minister provides a means of expressing views, opinions and protests to the Prime Minister and his cabinet. Please use this to communicate your protest. The address is http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/forms/comment.html

Sample letter
Dear Prime Minister Abe,

Article 9 of Japan’s Constitution is a clear promise by the people of Japan to the world to never repeat its history of war and colonization.

Article 9 sets the important challenge of working towards world peace through dialogue, confidence building, and mutual cooperation, and not through military means.

A change in Article 9 would instantaneously turn Japan’s already powerful Self defence force into a threat to neighboring countries, further destabilizing an area whose stability is already placed at risk by tensions on the Korean Peninsula and across the Taiwan Strait. It would therefore create a serious threat to global peace.

We join with the people of Japan in requesting that you respect and maintain Japan’s Peace Constitution with its ARTICLE 9.




Thank you very much. Your solidarity action is vitally needed. Please send a copy to Catholic Council for Justice and Peace Secretariat.


Peace in Christ,

Bishop Michael Goro Matsuura President
Japan Catholic Council for Justice and Peace
2-10-10 Shiomi, Koto-ku, Tokyo, Japan 135-8585
Email: jccjp@cbcj.catholic.jp
Fax 81-3-5632-7920