(We) can do better

Environment East Gippsland shouldn’t be forced down this costly road but they are … and it works! If anyone would like to share in this winning strategy you can send us a few bob so they can keep it going. Donations are tax-deductible (but we understand if people have thin piggy banks after Xmas). EEG has quite a few large bills to pay now. But their work isn’t over yet! Please drink a toast to all the players tonight – the EEG lawyers, the risk taking EEG team, and the GECO and FFRC surveyors – what a force! You can donate here.

Thursday 4th Feb 2015: Legal action forces VicForests to survey

Action taken by Environment East Gippsland and their lawyers, Environmental Justice Australia, has resulted in VicForests today agreeing to halt logging and survey for rare wildlife and plants in a stand of East Gippsland’s forests rich in threatened species.

“Sadly, since mid-January and while negotiations have been going on, VicForests continued to clearfell this amazingly valuable forest where four rare and threatened wildlife and two plant species were discovered by volunteer surveyors” said Jill Redwood from EEG. “It’s a shame that so much has been destroyed in this time, in an area that clearly should have been surveyed by trained biologists before the chainsaws moved in.”

The species recorded in the Kuark forest about 30km NE of Orbost, were the Long-footed Potoroo, Yellow-bellied Gliders, a new species of galaxias fish that only occurs in Kuark, a likely new, as yet undescribed species of crayfish, and two rare plants that should have 250m Special Management Zones applied.

“We have to wonder what gems we have lost over the years because the state government’s logging company calls the shots on whether an area should have a survey before it is clearfelled and burnt.”

“Sadly, Minister Neville’s Environment Department consistently refuse to order VicForests to survey for rare and threatened flora and fauna in areas slated for logging, so it’s left up to community groups to engage lawyers” said Felicity Millner of Environmental Justice Australia.

“We welcome this belated action by VicForests in this instance” said Ms Millner.

“We will be watching closely how their actions are carried out and are leaving our options open at this stage”, said Jill Redwood.

Malls and “destination” shopping are something I avoid, but I found myself in a retail center on January 2 to exchange a gift for another size. (My dislike for the mall world is such that if the transaction could have been handled online, I would have.) The relative tranquility in Los Angeles between the Christmas and New Year holiday due to significantly fewer people in town was gone by then, and the mall parking lot traffic lanes were filled by vehicles with nowhere to move – complete gridlock in a parking lot. Find original article here.

Maria Fotopoulos is a Californians for Population Stabilisation (CAPS) Senior Writing Fellow. This article was first published on Janurary 7, 2016.

Alas, the enjoyment of a much less crowded, less populated L.A. and the hope that rides in with a New Year quickly dissipated. Back to reality!

For us at CAPS, that means back to the issues that challenge us – overimmigration and overpopulation. As I sat in gridlock, my mind started running through ideas on how to better get the word out about what it means for the U.S., and the world, to continue on the path of growth. Something we often discuss is the importance of getting more people of like-mind about these issues engaging their family, friends and colleagues with information and facts.

There are many myths that still are bandied about as truth about immigration and overpopulation. A few of the most common myths are:

All of the people on the planet fit in Texas (or the Grand Canyon).
We are a nation of immigrants; we’re all immigrants except for American Indians.
Immigrants – illegal or not – are needed to do the work Americans won’t do.
Racism is the motivation behind limiting immigration.
Economic well-being depends on growth; illegal immigrants strengthen the U.S. economy.

In general conversation, be prepared to be a myth buster this year when you see these myths arise and when you read or hear inaccuracies from elected officials, politicians and the media (call, email and/or post on their social media pages).

CAPS has prepared responses to these myths here, and below.

All of the people on the planet fit in Texas (or the Grand Canyon).

Indeed, technically, they would, although extremely uncomfortably. In fact, all of the people on the planet can fit on home plate; we just need to stack them 7.3 billion high.

But, of course, it’s not about space, and it never has been.

The impact of humans, our ecological footprint, extends far beyond our living space. We build highways, homes, shopping centers, power plants and more. We drill for oil in the land and sea. We use forests, meadows, grasslands and deserts. In fact, we use 40 percent of the planet’s land just to produce food for humans, and we consume an additional 12 million acres for agriculture each year. The result is less space for other critters. Scientists say our planet is now in the sixth mass extinction of plants and animals, caused this time not by crashing asteroids, but by human activity, primarily the depletion of habitat for other species.

Beyond the environmental degradation, what do we gain from an ever-growing population? What can humanity accomplish with 9 or 10 billion souls that it cannot achieve with 7 billion? More people results in more crowding which means less open space and a lower quality of life. Who needs that?

We are a nation of immigrants; we’re all immigrants except for American Indians.

We are a nation of immigrants – as are all nations of the world – if one examines an appropriate period of history. No one on this planet can trace her or his ancestry back the 200,000 years of human existence within the confines of a present nation-state. American Indians, like all Americans, like all peoples of the world, are descendants of immigrants. Their ancestors immigrated across the Bering Strait at some point in history. The fact that various peoples have migrated at various times in history offers us little insight into how to manage migration in a modern world of nation-states on a crowded planet of more than 7 billion people. America has the world’s most generous immigration policy, but no country in the world allows unlimited immigration.

Moreover, we are largely a nation of native-born citizens, a nation governed by the laws we enact. Until this current surge, each wave of high immigration was followed by a period of low immigration. From 1925 to 1970 – a period in which the United States overcame the Great Depression and fought and prevailed in WWII – immigration to this country averaged only 200,000 per year. Since then, Congress has raised the level to 1 million per year, not including illegal immigration. The 2013 Senate immigration bill (S.744) would have increased that even more significantly, by another 50 percent.

A lax immigration policy might have made sense in 1900 when the U.S. population was 76 million and there was plenty of open space. It makes no sense in this century when America – the third most populous nation after China and India?– has a population that is more than four times as high at 323 million (per U.S. Population Clock, January 2016).

Immigrants – illegal or not – are needed to do the work Americans won’t do.

Anytime someone says, “Immigrants do work Americans won’t do,” ask that individual to finish the sentence – “Immigrants do work that Americans won’t do AT THE WAGES OFFERED.” The solution to labor shortages is to increase wages, not to import cheap, foreign labor. That is how a market economy works. That is what built the American middle class. Massive immigration has flooded the labor market, contributing to 40 years of wage stagnation in America. Since the 2007 recession, all the employment gains have gone to immigrants. The number of native-born Americans working remains well below 2007 levels.

A similar argument is, “We need illegal immigrants for farm work. Otherwise, lettuce would cost $5.00.” A study by Philip Martin, agricultural economist at UC-Davis, found that labor costs comprise only 6 percent of the price consumers pay for fresh produce. Thus, if agribusiness increased farm wages by 40 percent, enough to bring in native workers, and if all the costs were passed on to consumers, the cost to the average household would be about $8 a year. That $1.15 lettuce would be $1.18, not $5.00.

Racism is the motivation behind limiting immigration.

It’s the modern American way – when you are losing an argument, call your opponent a racist. The fact is that hundreds of millions of people from all over the globe, including millions from Europe, would like to immigrate to America. A Gallup poll found 3 million just in the UK, yet you don’t hear groups of British-Americans saying, “Let my people in.” The paramount issue of immigration policy is the how many, not the who. Massive immigration leads to a strain on resources and society, regardless of who they are.

In 1999, Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal ruled that its constitution allowed 1.6 million mainland Chinese to immigrate to Hong Kong. The Hong Kong government immediately asked China to overrule the court. In 2014, Swiss voters approved a referendum to place immigration quotas on European Union citizens. The very European citizens of Switzerland – the country has four official languages?– opted out of the EU’s free movement of people policy.

Chinese limiting the immigration of Chinese, Europeans limiting the immigration of Europeans – it probably isn’t about racism. But the racial ambulance-chasers aren’t interested in such inconvenient facts.

Economic well-being depends on growth; illegal immigrants strengthen the U.S. economy.

Population growth and immigration increase population size, which increases total GDP, but that does not increase per capita GDP. It seems that many reporters and politicians failed high school math and cannot understand this simple distinction. For instance, one often reads a glowing economic report that the U.S. gained 100,000 jobs last month, ignoring that the country’s population grew by 200,000.

Economics is hardly a precise science, and economists still are debating the cause of the Great Recession. With an annual economy in the U.S. of $17 trillion, immigration is not a major driver of economic issues, and its impact on the economy should not form the core of the debate about immigration. Still, several prestigious studies have repudiated the “growth is good” economic argument:

An OECD study of 27 industrialized countries found that, on average, the fiscal impact of immigration was slightly negative. The U.S. was among those countries where immigration had a negative fiscal impact.
A UC-Berkeley demographer and University of Hawaii economist concluded, “Encouraging more childbearing today would make everyday Americans worse off now and in the future.
The Heritage Foundation found that the amnesty of the Senate bill “would generate a lifetime fiscal deficit (total benefits minus total taxes) of $6.3 trillion.

While there is debate about the economic impact of immigration-driven population growth, it is clear who suffers most. Harvard Professor George Borjas, described by both?Business Week and The Wall Street Journal?as “America’s leading immigration economist,” put it succinctly, “Affluent Americans gain; poor Americans lose.” Massive immigration floods the labor market, increasing unemployment and depressing wages for low-income workers. During the recessionary years of 2010-2013, unemployment in the U.S. averaged 8.5 percent. In the low immigration countries of Germany and Japan, it averaged 5.9 and 4.5 percent, respectively.

If you bust some immigration myths this year, please let us know!

Wednesday 3rd February marks the 19th anniversary of an agreement that has allowed the logging industry a legal exemption from Australia’s environment laws. Jill Redwood from Environment East Gippsland, where this exemption from commonwealth laws was first introduced says the Turnbull government is planning to instate another 20 years of this special treatment. When the agreement between the state and federal govt was signed, EGipp was promised a multi-million dollar economic boost – 400 new jobs – a bright future. There were 20 sawmills at the time – it’s now down to 5. It employs less than 0.05% of the regional workforce. The joint MR of 3rd Feb 1997 promised world class protection of old growth and biodiversity – both of which have declined rapidly in that time.
“We have one more year before this archaic agreement expires. To continue this out-dated, anti-environmental exemption to the laws for a passé and declining industry is deplorable”.

“Being exempt from environmental laws has caused the status of many forest dependent wildlife to take a nose dive. Some are now critically endangered, like the Leadbeaters Possum (Victoria’s faunal emblem) and the Swift Parrot while others like our Gliders are being added to threatened species lists”.

“We need to make native forest logging accountable” said Jill Redwood. “It’s time to bring it in line with other Australian industries and strip its preferential treatment. It has had 19 years of immunity from the law at great cost to our forests and the public purse”.

“Such critical wildlife habitat is worth far more standing than as a cheap export commodity. Our timber needs are 85% supplied by tree plantations. This is where the jobs and security for the industry is”.

“Over the past 19 years our forests in East Gippsland and across the country have been systematically clearfelled, mostly sold cheaply to overseas pulp and paper factories”.

“It’s time to set in place a new phase of valuing forests, keeping them upright and onshore for the many values they provide for Australia”.

"God, Sydney’s just unmanageable now. The traffic is beyond control. The roads just can’t cope! I’m not against growth but there’s not enough room on our roads for all the traffic!”

The young woman was inviting her friend in Melbourne to visit her in Sydney.

“We have the same problems here." her friend replied. "The traffic is so terrible that if you head off to do something in a particular suburb, chances are you will have to change your plans due to traffic. You never know really where you are going to end up. One night recently I needed to cross to the other side of the city to meet friends for dinner and I had to just give up and go home. I didn’t even make it to the city, let alone out the other side. I was in gridlock. Of course, I’m not against growth either. How could one question it with all the benefits even though, I must admit, it’s hard to see what they are.”

"I do wonder myself," her friend from Sydney mused. "But they say we must have it." She continued: “They’re constructing a new major road in Sydney for the traffic overflow and people have had to sell their houses to the government and, you know, they don’t even get market prices for them! I’m not against growth but…"

"Yes, it’s the same here in Melbourne. Houses belonging to people who had lived in them for 60 years were acquired by the government to make way for a new tollway but then, with the change of government, it did not go ahead. It was too late for some people as they had moved on but many were very relieved to be able to stay. But then they will have to go through it all again with another change of government as the Libs are determined to build it. If or when it is built it will go right through Royal Park which will be a terrible pity, it will wreck it, actually."

" Oh that's terrible to put it through a park, although I'm not totally surprised."

"I don't live near Royal Park, but it is still upsetting. Nearer to home most of the houses in my area that come up for sale are bought by developers. Then they're demolished and replaced with high density living. We're even getting high rise towers. No wonder parking in the local shopping centre is almost impossible now! But that’s progress isn’t it? And neither of us is against growth.”

"No of course not!! But the same problem afflicts our suburb in Sydney. All the gardens near us have gone. We used to have lots of birds but we see very few now. I used to really enjoy hearing them in the morning. It’s sad but I guess we have to live without a few things we used to enjoy. Oh well, we can’t have things all our own way I suppose and you can't stand in the way of growth."

“I guess it’s all very well for us to say this but what about the kids? There are not enough schools in and around Melbourne and what about the poor train and tram commuters? The trains are terribly overcrowded, by about 50% over maximum capacity. It can’t be healthy to be crammed in like that.”

“Yes it’s the same in Sydney. It’s really not as nice a place to live in as it was when I arrived from London with my parents 12 years ago.”

“Well if it’s anything like Melbourne, it will have grown by about a million people since then. They have to be packed in somewhere!”

"I guess our family have been part of all this! Oh well, at least we subtracted a family of five from London but then London’s kept growing too! Where will it end? What will it be like in 50 years? “

"It’s too far ahead to think about really, but it’s happening so fast in Melbourne and we can see it happening. Maybe we don’t have to worry about 50 years from now but we sure as hell need to worry about five or ten years from now! Already it’s not as good as it was when I was a kid and it sounds as though it was much more free and easy when my parents were young and Melbourne was not so huge”

The two young women pause , deep in thought for a moment.

“If things are not getting better in Melbourne and they certainly are not in Sydney, then something is wrong!"

Neither of us opposes growth but this actually seems to be the problem! What do you have when you don’t have growth? How does that work?"

(Both together) "Oh God! This is doing my head in!”

"Don’t worry about it now , let’s go and have a drink and start planning your trip to Sydney. Oh!! that’s where this whole discussion began wasn’t it?!”

A growing number of French people own their own homes. Ownership runs at 64% today, and is expected to grow to 68% in the next six years. France is well behind other European countries though in home ownership. The champions are in Eastern Europe. 96% of people own their own homes in Romania. 70% own their own homes in Italy. Seven out of ten French home owners have entirely paid off their home loan. For people purchasing today, the average time to pay off a home is 17 years. This is a situation to dream of for Australian home-buyers, who are only second to Hong Kong's in suffering under a terrible system. The French system discourages land-speculation in a number of ways which therefore deter the flourishing of a malignant property and growth lobby there. This article is based on a France2 news item "L'achat immobilier, une valeur sure plébiscitée par les Français," 29 January 2016.

Five million people in France own more than one property. 700,000 own more than four properties. Bricks and mortar are the preferred investment - more than the National savings account (le Livret A), bank shares, life insurance or gold.

Over the past 15 years, French property values have risen by 62%. [Ed. This is considered to be very high in France, although does not of course compare to Australian or Hong Kong prices. It is a testimony to the underlying stability of the French housing market. See Sheila Newman, The Growth Lobby in Australia and its Absence in France, (Chapter 3 and ff) to understand why.] So, for the French, housing - mostly for rental purposes - is considered a good investment [Ed. even though rents have been reregulated by the State recently, at least in Paris].

The most numerous investors are those who rent their homes out for short-term rental, typically via AirB&B or similar. There are regulations to limit this practice to four months maximum a year. Beyond that permits are required by local government. Profits must be declared but abuses are frequent. Hotels criticise these businesses because they compete with them but don't pay the same taxes and are not subject to the same social responsibilities. Careers are evolving in managing multiple sublets of this kind and in servicing them financially.

A frank discussion about the consequences of Merkel's open borders on Denmark, with a number of references to the Australian system for processing refugees. Note, however, that refugees do not usually achieve permanent resettlement in Europe, whereas they usually do in Australia. When European governments talk about taking in refugees, they are talking about a temporary situation. In this interview Oksana Boyko of RT asks Ft. Anders Vistisen about the Danish plan to confiscate valuables from refugee applicants to pay for their costs and how many more refugees can Denmark accept. Why is Denmark moving refugees to rural camps? Won't that detract from their integration?

You stay, you pay Ft. Anders Vistisen, Danish member of the European Parliament

"As spring approaches, refugee flows from the Middle East into Europe are expected to intensify, putting Europe in a race against time to get a handle on the refugee challenge. Is a collective solution still possible or will EU members have to go their separate ways? To discuss that, Oksana is joined by Anders Vistisen, a Danish member of the European Parliament." (Introduction to program.)

Four months ago, France committed to taking 30,700 refugees over two years, but after four months only 62 refugees have been sent from the processing centres. The European Union planned on 11 reception centers in the 'hotspots' of Italy and Greece, but there are only 4 functioning ones. Seven countries voted against the redistribution of immigrants by the EU and one is taking the EU to court for breaching the rights of national parliaments and the European parliament itself. Greece says it was depending on other EU countries sending reinforcements to its coastguard, but so far, the number of reinforcements has been minute, with France far in the lead. This article is a translation of a news item from France 2 and the illustrations are taken from that item. (Translation by Sheila Newman)

L'oeil du 20h [France2, 8pm News special] of 27 January 2016, puts European cohesion in the face of migrants to the test. One news item chases the next and we forget quickly. Four months ago, Europe came to an agreement on how to redistribute 160,000 migrants. Where are we with this today?

In order to solve the migrant crisis, Europe decreed a general mobilisation. Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission (9 September 2015) said: Enough poetry, enough rhetoric. We have to act now."

This was more than four months ago. Did the 28 countries of the European Union act on this emergency plan? A year ago, a million migrants have crossed the Mediteranean, but the European Plan only concerns a small proportion of them. The 28 member countries have two years to allocate 160,000 refugees originating from three countries, Syria, Iraq and Eritrea.

A the end of 4 months, only 414 have been allocated in accordance with the plan. How can this be explained? First problem, according to our understanding, one quarter of member countries of the EU have not allocated any place for this refugeee program.

Austria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, Estonia and Slovakia. Special mention for Slovakia, which actually issued a complaint [against immigrant quotas to the EU Court of Justice] [1] against the plan to redistribute refugees.

And is France playing the game? Our country committed to opening the doors to 30,700 refugees over two years. State of play after 4 months: Only 62 people have been taken. That's not much, but, according to the Minister of the Interior, [2] France is waiting for the EU to allocate more to it.

GOVERNMENT SPOKESPERSON FOR THE MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR: "Over the last three months we have indicated that we have more than 900 places that could be used. But today the number of arrivals is very much less than the capacity we have."

REPORTER: So you are being sent fewer people than France ...

GOVERNMENT SPOKESPERSON FOR THE MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR: Than the number we could take.

REPORTER: So the problem lies upstream in what Europe calls 'the Hotspots' - those redistribution centers where the immigrants are registered and orientated. The European Plan required eleven in the two countries on the front lines: Italy and Greece. There are only four functioning ones, however: three in Italy and one in Greece.

Why such a delay in a country where 80 per cent of refugees arrive? We contacted the Greek Minister for the Interior. He puts the blame back on his European partners.

GREEK MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR: We need more coast guards. ... Help from European countries is taking too long to arrive.

REPORTER: It's true that seven countries have sent no money to help processing function in the 'hotspots'. Other countries have only sent reinforcements that could be counted on one hand. Four agents from Belgium, only two from Finland. France, at 59, has sent the most.

Ten days ago, Jean-Claude Junker called European countries to order: "Each week 1200 more immigrants arrive in Greece. We need to begin implementing the emergency plan. While we are waiting, the people-smugglers are prospering.

Original article accompanying filmed report

Crise des migrants, l'Europe en fait-elle assez ?

Source: http://blog.francetvinfo.fr/oeil-20h/ ( If you don't find it, seek the title with the date: 27 January 2016.)

Pour résoudre la crise des migrants, l'Europe a décrété la mobilisation générale. Il y a un peu plus de quatre mois, le président de la Commission européenne, Jean-Claude Juncker exhortait les pays membres de l'UE à "agir, maintenant." Nous avons voulu comparer les efforts réalisés par les 28 pays membres.

Depuis un an, un peu plus d'un million de migrants ont traversé la Méditerranée. Le plan européen ne concerne qu'une petite partie d'entre eux, soit 160 000 réfugiés originaires de Syrie, d'Irak et d'Erythrée. Au bout de quatre mois, seuls 414 migrants ont été accueillis dans le cadre de ce programme. Comment l'expliquer ?

Soixante-deux personnes accueillies en France

Premièrement, un quart des Etats-membres n'ont à ce jour prévu aucune place d'accueil pour les réfugiés de ce programme. C'est le cas de l'Autriche, la Croatie, la République-Tchèque, le Danemark, la Hongrie, l'Estonie et la Slovénie. La Slovaquie a même déposé un recours contre le plan de répartition.

Qu'en est-il de la France ? Notre pays s’est engagé à ouvrir ses portes à 30 700 réfugiés sur deux ans. Mais au bout de 4 mois, seulement 62 personnes ont été accueillies. C’est peu, mais selon le ministère de l’Intérieur, la France attend que l’Europe lui en confie plus.

Le problème se situerait donc en amont, dans ce que l’Europe appelle des “hotspots”, ces centres de répartition où sont enregistrés et orientés les migrants. Le plan européen en prévoit 11 dans les deux pays qui se trouvent en première ligne : l’Italie et la Grèce. Mais seuls quatre de ces "hotspots" fonctionnent : trois en Italie et seulement un en Grèce. Le ministre de l'intérieur grec rejette la faute sur ses partenaires européens. Il n'a pas tort. Sept pays n’ont dépêché aucun agent pour faire fonctionner les "hotspots". D’autres états se sont contentés d’envoyer des renforts qui se comptent sur les doigts d’une main : 4 pour la Belgique et seulement 2 pour la Finlande. La France, elle en a dépêché 59. Soit presque autant de réfugiés qui ont été accueillis.

Il y a 10 jours, Jean-Claude Juncker a rappelé à l’ordre les Pays européens. Chaque semaine, 12 000 migrants supplémentaires arrivent en Grèce. Il y a urgence à ce que démarre le plan d’urgence. Car en attendant, ce sont les filières clandestines qui prospèrent.

NOTES

[1] http://www.rts.ch/info/monde/7303341-la-slovaquie-depose-un-recours-en-justice-contre-les-quotas-de-migrants.html "Request that the EU decision be annuled. 'The decision was adopted via a majority of voices, despite the opposition of some member countries,' explained Robert Fico. 'We are asking the ocurt to annule the decision, to declare it invalid, and to oblige the Council to pay the court costs,' he continued. 'We consider also that this case represents an attack on the rights of national parliaments and on the European Parliament,' he added.

[2] [France does not have a Ministry for Immigration; immigrants are usually processed regionally via local Prefectures- Candobetter.net Editor.]

January 26 2016: A parasite which kills thousands of people each year in sub-Saharan Africa arose comparatively recently, and its unusual sex life may lead to its own extinction, scientists have found. Researchers from the University of Glasgow’s Wellcome Trust Centre for Molecular Parasitology in the Institute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine have discovered that Trypanosoma brucei gambiense (T.b. gambiense), the main parasite that causes African Sleeping Sickness, has existed for thousands of years without reproducing sexually.

In a study, published today in the journal eLife, the researchers describe how sequencing the genomes of a large collection of T.b. gambiense has revealed that the parasite population today is made up entirely of asexual clones descended from a single ancestor.

Originally an animal parasite, T.b. gambiense ‘jumped’ into the human population within the last 10,000 years, at a time when livestock farming was developing in West Africa. The parasite is transmitted to humans by the bite of tsetse flies. Once in the bloodstream, T.b. gambiense can lie dormant for months or years without causing symptoms. Infected people suffer increasing damage to their nervous system, until they eventually lapse into a coma—the symptom which gives sleeping sickness its name.

The study’s lead author, Dr Willie Weir, said: “We’ve discovered that the parasite causing African Sleeping Sickness has existed for thousands of years without having sex and is now suffering the consequences of this strategy.

“An organism’s genetic blueprint is encoded in DNA packaged within structures called chromosomes. Most organisms have two copies of each chromosome and, through sexual reproduction, the DNA within the chromosomes can recombine randomly, in effect shuffling the deck of DNA cards.

“This process generates genetic diversity and, through natural selection, undesirable combinations and mutations are eliminated from the population, promoting long-term survival of the species.

“However, some organisms appear not to have sex at all. Evolutionary theory predicts that they should face extinction in the long-term and that a lack of sexual recombination should leave a characteristic genetic ‘signature’ in their DNA. While being theoretically predicted for almost 20 years, evidence for this signature has been elusive.”

The team’s research has shown that T.b. gambiense arose from a single individual parasite within the last ten millennia and, over time, mutations have accumulated on each chromosome copy.

Dr Annette MacLeod, senior author on the paper, added: “Because of a lack of sexual recombination, each copy has evolved independently of the other—a phenomenon called the ‘Meselson effect’. We have detected the first conclusive evidence of this effect in any organism at the genome-wide level.

“Essentially, the parasite compensates for its lack of sex by overwriting mutations through ‘copying and pasting’ DNA from one chromosome to another. However, our study suggests that this can only go some way to compensating for a lack of sex. Theoretically, this parasite species cannot survive indefinitely without sex and the predicted consequence of this is that it will become extinct in the long-term.

“In the near to medium term, though, identifying this weakness in the parasite could help researchers find ways to develop new forms of treatment for sleeping sickness which build on our findings. For example, the inability of individuals to share genetic information with each other could hamper the ability of the organism to develop resistance to multiple drugs.”

The paper, titled ‘Population genomics reveals the origin and asexual evolution of human infective trypanosomes’, is published in eLife and is available from http://elifesciences.org. The research was funded by the Wellcome Trust.

Back in 1788 on 26th January, the First Fleet of British Ships arrived at Port Jackson, New South Wales, having landed a few days earlier at Botany Bay. The British flag was raised right there at Port Jackson by Governor Arthur Phillip and the previous inhabitants were summarily and officially dispossessed. The First Fleet comprised six convict ships lead by two Royal Navy escort ships. There are varying accounts of the number of convicts who arrived in the First Fleet but I conclude after looking at a number of relevant sites that over 700 convicts arrived of whom about a quarter were female.

Whose celebration?

There are two aspects of "Australia Day" that inhibit me from feeling euphoric about this date and what it commemorates. In a way, it’s a story of defeat for many people involved. It was a transfer of ownership and the beginning of the colonisation of a whole continent This defeat included my own ancestors, who arrived mainly from Ireland, Scotland and Wales in the first half of the nineteenth century, forced out by inadequate opportunities in their lands of origin and aided by their own adventurousness.

Australian ecology trashed despite its attraction for brilliant natural scientists

For the incumbent population of the continent, of course this beginning was and remains an unmitigated disaster, for which the term genocide can be used without reservation. The day also marks the beginning of environmental interference and degradation on a massive scale and the extinction of unique species. This environmental ruination occurred despite the fact that naturalists, including Joseph Banks and Charles Darwin, had valued Australia’s fauna and flora so highly that they travelled to the ends of the Earth to study it.

Environmental destruction is an ongoing and accelerating disaster for the continent. In the last 200 years woodlands, grasslands and forests on a massive scale have been destroyed, or modified for human use http://jpe.oxfordjournals.org/content/5/1/109.full. Precious rivers on the driest inhabited content have been dammed (Snowy Mountain Scheme) and siphoned off for irrigation (Murray Darling river system) all for human use - agriculture, energy and mining. There is even talk of turning the north of Australia into “the food bowl of Asia.” Imagine the wreckage to natural systems that this will entail!

Public misinformed on priorities

As an academic paper states (see above reference), information on the decline of Australia’s environment is documented in piecemeal fashion in local state of the environment reports. It should be news which is broadcast to us as an emergency but instead we must go searching for it. This does not make it any the less true or any the less dire for the people who live here now and who will live here in the future. It is equally as or more important for the public to know about as the road toll or the latest murder.

Australia’s beginning as a modern nation was sad or devastating for many, exciting for some, and for others a mixture of both. Should not the celebration of an “Australia Day” be postponed to such a time as when Australia actually becomes a place that takes care of all on board? We are a long way from this simple but essential notion. It would seem that the original inhabitants were far more advanced in this direction, living close to nature and although having their own impact, taking far better care than those who literally took over.

We cannot reverse what has already happened, but can only affect things from today onwards and hopefully in the right direction.

Postpone Australia Day until we really have something to celebrate

Let’s postpone the national day of celebration to one when a future Australian government makes some important decisions. I suggest the following: to salvage a sustainable future from the jaws of environmental destruction, to give the Aboriginal people the means for self determination, to eradicate homelessness, to put in place an environmentally sustainable population policy as a matter of priority and to make science the most important decision adviser in national and local decision making.

Then will have a day that all of us can celebrate.

Videos inside: These films are dated 21 January 2016. They show successful attempts by the Syrian government to make Syria safe again. The government has been able to reconcile with 'rebel groups' that recognise that war is tearing their country apart. Refugee activists please take note. Nearly the biggest problem that Syrians continue to face is the refusal by US-NATO and its allies, such as Australia, to recognise that we must all work with the Syrian Government to make Syria safe. Because of these evil US-NATO policies, it is most unlikely that these positive developments will be promoted in the Australian media, if they are transmitted at all. So, please send these films round to everyone you know, to help end this war and place pressure on western governments to stop intervening.

Getting back to a normal life in Al-Hussinieh

Getting back to a normal life in Al-Hussinieh

Al-Hussinieh was the first quarter in Damascus and its countryside to witness a reconciliation which allowed its residents to return and live there.

The reconciliation process took 3 months to be achieved, and it followed a bloody three-year war in the village which led locals to evacuate it, because of the clashes between the Syrian army and armed groups, but now, after the reconciliation, life is gradually getting back to normal.

100s of displaced families return home in southern Damascus

Hundreds of displaced Syrians have been able to return to their homes in a district in southern Damascus. This comes as part of a reconciliation deal between the Syrian government and foreign-backed militants. Press TV’s Mohamad Ali has more on the story from the Syrian capital. [1]

US-NATO policies in Middle East threaten whole populations and societies

As mentioned in the first paragraph, nearly the biggest problem that Syrians continue to face is the refusal by US-NATO and its allies, such as Australia, to recognise that we must all work with the Syrian Government to make Syria safe.

Unfortunately there are many signs that US-NATO actually wants to completely destroy Syria in crimes that would, without exaggeration, dwarf Hitler's 'final solution'. Despite US-NATO's irreversible destruction of Iraqi and Libyan society, the Australian Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, has recently agreed with the criminally destructive US-NATO desire to subdivide secular Syria into many different religious and ethnic models.

To her credit, shadow foreign affairs minister, Tania Plibersek has said what a bad idea this is, that:

"The prospect of of partitioning Syria or Iraq, or redrawing its boundaries to reflect the sectarian divisions already consuming the country, was easier said than done and would likely result in fresh fighting.[...] “There are generations of ­people who have grown up with an identity as a Syrian or an Iraqi,’’ Ms Plibersek said. “Recent polls confirm many people feel a sense of national identity and feel the conflict is soluble.’’ For that reason, Ms Plibersek said, talk of redrawing borders was unhelpful at this stage of the conflict. “While the borders are reasonably modern constructs, opening the possibility of redrawing borders is not likely to reduce conflict,’’ she said. “New conflicts would emerge about where these borders were drawn.’’ Source:"Tanya Plibersek rejects Bob Carr’s Syria plan."

NOTES, SOURCES, LINKS FOR LIVE REPORTS ETC

[2]
Read More http://me-channel.com/

Join Telegram Channel: https://telegram.me/MEClive

The assault and robbery of scores of women in Cologne on New Year's Eve, allegedly perpetrated by groups of migrants, has fanned the flames of the refugee crisis in Europe. And while European leaders introduce stricter measures to deal with offending asylum seekers, many are questioning the wisdom of the policies that brought them there. What's behind the seemingly increasing wave of violence by migrants and is the predominantly male migration skewing the European demographic profile, thereby predisposing its societies to even more crime? Oksana is joined by Valerie Hudson, a Professor of Political Science at Texas A&M University, to explore these issues.

This article, including the embedded video, was originally published on RT/Worlds Apart as Cologne-ising Europe? Ft. Valerie Hudson, Professor of Political Science, Texas A&M University (21/1/16). This republication includes additional text.

Among some other fascinating observations, the interview asks, "How could Sweden, how could Germany, do this to its women?" It is well-known that sex-ratio imbalance has multiple negative consequences. It is often a consequence of wars and invasions, but rarely do you have an influx as in Germany, where the sex ratio has been altered so radically so quickly, with such a sudden mostly male wave of immigrants.

Sunday 14 Feb 2016 at 12-12.30pm: Mark Allen of Population Permaculture and Planning asks: Is it possible to accommodate a growing population without unacceptably high density living and urban sprawl? If so, what rate of population growth should we be looking at and what types of community should we be creating? This workshop discusses the merits of village style living in combination with permaculture principles and asks the question, where do we go from here?

Sunday 14 Feb 2016 at 12.30-1pm: Mark O’Connor, co-author of Overloading Australia, will look at why environmentalism is almost meaningless when there is no plan to limit growth of population, why this issue is often ignored, and what a better form of environmentalism could and should do. What are humane and practical ways to limit Australia’s and the world’s population? (Sustainable Population Australia - Victorian Branch (SPA Victoria) organised this event.)
http://www.slf.org.au/event/population-permaculture/Sustainable Population Australia presents 

POPULATION, PERMACULTURE AND PLANNING

Permaculture based sustainable planning

AD Good morning listeners, time to think about getting up. (I already have). Just a few news items before we move into the program and here’s GH with the traffic report.

GH Traffic has built up already on the Monash freeway, it's at a crawl along Flemington road due to a pile -up near the Royal Children's Hospital and to cap it all off the morning traffic and commute nightmare, trains on the Sandringham line are suspended due to a derailment at Gardenvale and a signalling failure has caused the boom gates to be locked down on Grange Road Carnegie. Traffic is banked up about 1 km. Apart from these hitches things are running normally in the metropolitan area. Well I suppose this IS normal! ( Laughs ruefully).
AD Thanks GH and now to the weather from CB.

CB It’s warming up now currently 28 degrees with a maximum of 39 expected with, a north wind towards 4.00pm but no cool change on the horizon today. Please don’t leave your children or dogs in the car even for a minute!

AD Thanks CB and now to some environmental warnings, over to the EPA What’s happening?

EPA Well, AD most of the Bayside beaches are closed due to high e-coli measures. If you can, we recommend cooling down at an ocean beach such as Portsea or Torquay and if you have a backyard ( what a quaint expression) swimming pool, then lucky you (few)! For the rest of us, well a cold face washer and a fan is the best I can suggest.

AD Thanks EPA, Well listeners - a scorcher today and very few options for most of us to cool down. I hope people don’t run out of fuel caught in traffic. Well we want to hear from you 1414141 is the number. Today ‘we’re talking about school fees which will now set parents back half a million dollars for one child at a private non Catholic school. How important is it to you to give your kids private school education? How will you be able to afford it? Alternatively please ring in to let us know your "keeping cool" ideas. Now we’ll go to a music break; here is a real oldie from the late Nat King Cole “Roll out those lazy, hazy, crazy days of summer.” Anyone remember those days?

The song is played … and AD returns

AD Very nostalgic ….so much so that few of us will even remember when it was current, but those 60s live on, don’t they?

AD Maddison has rung from Carnegie, Hi Maddison, you’re still waiting to get through the boom gate in Grange Rd. How long have you been stuck?

Maddison Hi AD. It’s been 35 minutes now and I can’t even make a U turn to try a different route traffic is banked up bumper to bumper in both directions.

AD That’s very frustrating to say the least. Have you turned the engine off or are you poised ready to go?

Maddison I’ve turned the engine off, but I’m still poised ready to go. I’m a speech pathologist and my first client is due in 5 minutes. Even without traffic I’m still 10 minutes from my place of work. I’m very stressed as I will lose money, if my client goes or I will run late all day if she waits!

AD Thanks for ringing in Maddison. let’s hope you can get through that barrier soon! Now Robert is calling from Frighton regarding school fees. What are you going to do Robert, opt for the local high school? I believe it was once used in a TV series so it has a certain prestige!

Robert Hi AD. My family is really wealthy so if my father sold the bathing box on Dendy street beach we’d be laughing and my son could attend Frighton Grammar from kindergarten to stumps and then my daughter could attend the exclusive Burbank Girls School on the income from my father’s rental properties. But I can see it is a problem for most people to find this kind of money. What I say is that if you have to consider Frighton Secondary then you can’t afford to live in Frighton! Ha ha!

AD Glad things are so easy for you Robert By the way what business is your father in?

Robert Well as you may be able to guess, he is in the property industry. He is a developer and real estate agent. Things have been going very well for us since PM John Howard stuck his foot on the immigration pedal. Of course many of the beautiful homes in the area have been demolished and redeveloped with high density, but at least we still have the family home and I have one just as good. I’ll be splashing around in the pool this afternoon that’s for sure!.
AD Thanks Robert, it’s more than we can take. After the next call we have the Lord Mayor of Melbourne, another Robert - Lord Mayor , Robert Boyle. He's going to talk about where to get a good cup of coffee.

The Lord mayor is regularly invited to 774. He is up- beat about Melbourne's future as a populous international 24 hour city growing fast and furiously. The Lord Mayor likes the city to buzz and he intends to do his bit for the all important ingredient in a city worth of the name, "vibrancy".He is there to give Melbourne its medicine to counteract, with his official status, the influence of citizens' spontaneous expressions of disgust with growth. Welcome as usual, Lord Mayor !

Geoff Dowsett writes that he received a pathetic response from the Greens re the letter he sent to the Australian Minister for Immigration. He invited people to comment on the Greens response. Inside find some apt responses from Jane 0`Sullivan, of Sustainable Population Queensland. The responses are inserted in a different colour, email style.

Hi All. A pathetic response from Greens Senator Sarah
Hanson Young  to my Dutton letter. Your ideas for a
response are very welcome.   Geoff Dowsett.

Dear
Geoff,

Thank
you for contacting the Australian Greens and providing us the letter you sent
to Mr Peter Dutton MP, in relation to the government’s migration programme and
its impact on Australia. As the Greens spokesperson for Immigration &
Citizenship, Senator Sarah Hanson-Young has asked me to respond to you on
behalf of the Australian Greens.

The
Greens believe that environmental impact is not determined by population
numbers alone, but by the way people live. According to the Greens
policy on sustainable populations “The current level of population,
population growth and the way we consume are outstripping environmental
capacity. Australia must contribute to achieving a globally sustainable
population and encourage and support other nations to do the
same.”

JANE O'SULLIVAN: The
Greens address "the way people live" in most of their other policy areas. Why
does the Population policy not say "Environmental impact is not determined only
by the way people live, but also by population numbers"? They didn't even bother
to include the word "also" in the current version - it is entirely dismissive of
the number of people. Nor is there any recommendation under that policy which
would stabilise Australia's population. Nor is there any acknowledgement under
any other policy, such as energy or transport, of the impact of population
growth. This policy statement has one purpose only - to bury the population
issue.

The Greens do not accept that population growth is a problem in or
for Australia. It is only recognised as a Global problem. I asked a Greens
Senator if she thought Australia had a right remain less overpopulated than
anywhere else on earth (i.e. to limit immigration from any more crowded place)
and she said "No." Despite us having no say over how other people breed, she
said we have to put their resource needs ahead of our environmental
custodianship.

That's the crux of it - if Australia can't contain its own
population independently of the rest of the world, then it also can't preserve
its unique biodiversity and ecosystems. How green are the Greens
really?

Is it even possible for a nation to encourage others to "achieve
a globally sustainable population", while supporting rampant growth in that
nation? How could that work?

The
issues that you raise in your letter are not issues that can be tackled
individually, and are not as simple as dramatically reducing Australia’s
migration programme to subsequently reduce our population. Australia has a
wonderful tradition of integrating cultures into our community, and this was
especially important to our recovery post-World War II. Immigration is still
important today, and is designed to meet Australia’s economic and social
needs.

JANE O'SULLIVAN: Actually, there is nothing
simpler than the Federal govt adjusting immigration quotas. They doubled them,
without so much as a statement in Parliament or a press release. They could
halve them just as easily. We already turn away far more prospective immigrants
than we accept, so nothing would change on that front, except the criteria would
tighten.
There is not one iota of evidence that immigration today meets
Australia's economic and social needs (let alone that it is designed to do so).
There is abundant evidence that it has negative economic and social
impacts.
The touchy-feely argument that multiculturalism has made a major
contribution to Australia's wellbeing is at best an ambit claim, that says
nothing about the required levels of future migration. There are plenty of
countries which made spectacular post-World War II recoveries without
immigration. To say that we are better and happier for multiculturalism is to
devalue the largely more homogenious societies from which our migrants come.
Cultural tolerance is important for the harmoneous integration of a lot of
diverse immigrants, so it is a very good thing that Australia has nurtured
cultural tolerance. But it says nothing whatever about whether that immigration
benefited the incumbent population.

The
Greens are the only voice in parliament providing a real alternative to the
current status quo. The problems you have outlined for the current government
are issues that the Greens wish to tackle as part of their broader values as a
party.  Australian Greens members of parliament are campaigning and
advocating for these alternatives on a daily basis, and were elected to
parliament for these very values. Our ability to explain the entirety of that
platform in the media is somewhat limited, but you will see that these values
are integral to Greens’ policy responses on day to day
issues.

JANE O'SULLIVAN: What
a lot of hubristic nonsense. If the Greens were going to tackle these issues as
part of their broader values, they would have been doing it already. They've
been doing the opposite - vilifying people who raise concern about high
immigration, and turning every discussion on immigration into a discussion about
refugees - deliberately generating misconceptions in the public to support
massive immigration.

You
are welcome to read more about the Greens policies on population here, although I note that as you are a member of
the NSW Greens Population & Sustainability Working Group, you would
already be aware of them and are able to put forward your views on these
matters to shape this policy directly. We hope that you continue to do
so.

Yes,
well, we've read them, we've criticised them, and nothing changes.

Furthermore,
the Department of Immigration has a link on their website where they seek
submissions and papers on policy initiatives. You can access the site here.

Thank
you for your contribution to this important conversation, and thank you once
again for forwarding this to the Greens Members of Parliament and
Senators.

Kind
regards,

HAYLEY
PEARSE  EXECUTIVE
ASSISTANT & OFFICE MANAGER

OFFICE
OF SENATOR SARAH HANSON-YOUNG

AUSTRALIAN
GREENS SENATOR FOR SOUTH AUSTRALIA

Level
7 / 147 Pirie St, Adelaide, SA 5000

TEL  ADL
+61 8 8227 0425  PARL +61 2  6277 3430
|  FAX  +61 8 8227 0426 

A business blog, calling itself, The Advisor, is advertising its 'Better Business Summit' with an article quoting the well-known population growth spruiker, Bernard Salt, who they describe as 'One of the nation’s leading demographers'. This would hardly be news for candobetter.net, except that Mr Salt, who does a line in growth 'demography', has suddenly changed his well-known tune. Previously a household word in pushing the aging population bogey, Salt has suddenly begun describing Australia as 'young and vibrant'.

Apparently decrying rumours of a property crash which he perceives to be rampant in the mass media, 'Mr Salt said Australians need to take a “bigger picture view” and argues that we are a young, vibrant country with strong levels of population growth, very aspirational, and we’re rich in terms of income per capita.' (http://www.theadviser.com.au/breaking-news/33760-salt-slams-negative-property-outlook)

Hilarious

An observer says, "I find it delightful that he's now saying "we are a young and vibrant country". He's a surprise a minute. :-) He must have decided to drop his alarmism about demographic ageing." The observer supplies some recent quotes:

Recent quotes from Bernard Salt on Australia's 'aging' population

We can’t afford older people:

“The science is settled; there's not enough workers to fund the likely number of retirees” B. Salt, ‘Grim reality of when the boom goes bust’, (The Australian, March 12 2015, p. 26, 28.)

He wishes they’d drop dead:

“workers and governments of the day are more than happy to support others in old age … just so long as there are not too many of them, that they're not too demanding of services such as health and welfare, and that they promise to drop dead within a reasonable timeframe from the point of retirement.” B. Salt, ‘Older workers unite, you have nothing to lose but your privileges’, (The Australian, April 19 2014, p. 12.)

Monsters from the black lagoon?

“All of sudden this cohort [of ageing baby boomers] will be visible -- rising like a monster from an otherwise indistinguishable retirement swamp…” (B. Salt, ‘The inexorable rise of the opinionated boomer retiree’, The Australian, May 24 2012, p. 29.)

So, we cannot help wondering, if Australia's population has suddenly reversed its moribund status in Salt's eyes, why is he still talking up population growth?

Bearing in mind the recent Crib Point tragedy - a suspected arson attack, with wildlife loss yet to be detailed, one home destroyed and one home damaged plus several sheds destroyed, we have to be more vigilant about how and whether we develop our bushland neighbourhoods more densely. Planning laws allow property owners to remove large amounts of vegetation without permission from their land citing their reason as 'fire protection'. After the vegetation is removed, those property owners may apply to the council for permission to intensify development on the land. Council usually does not deny permission for individual cases. But such individual cases mount up and create a danger which councils and planners may not have seen. The risk is that the granting of denser housing development in a bushland area means that, if there is a fire in the remaining bushland, there will be an increased number of residents needing to evacuate. Increasing population density means that more roads are needed to cope with a fire emergency evacuation. However, densification is being allowed to happen in an ad hoc, case by case fashion, without the building of roads in advance of significant development. No-one is overseeing the total impact.

Vegetation clearing on days of total fire bans

477 Waterfall Gully Rd Rosebud 3939 Victoria.

Clearing took place on Friday 15/1/16, Monday 18/1/16 and Tuesday 19/1/16 thus far.

To date up to 45 trees and shrubs have been removed, including 4 manna gums. One which was a hollow bearing tree and one on a neighbouring property. Most of the other vegetation removed was coast tea-tree.

I called the Mornington Peninsula shire council's planning department, on the 18th and 19th of January about the clearing of vegetation. The officers I spoke to on both days confirmed that there are no permits for either vegetation clearance or an application permit for a building extension/residential development. The planning department said that the vegetation clearance was legal without a permit. As the vegetation in question was within 10 meters to the residence or 4 meters within the property boundary.

As the primary reason that fire regulations allows for the vegetation clearance. I have raised the following concerns;

No 477 Waterfall Gully residence has been unoccupied since November, when it was sold. That the first action of the owner is to remove all trees and shrubs from site would suggest it is being cleared for a development - an opinion shared by the professionals clearing the vegetation and by the surrounding neighbours.

Two of the three days the vegetation being cleared were days of total fire ban. The 18th and 19th of January were days of total fire bans. The use of multiple heavy industrial petrol operated equipment on days of total fire ban, I believe, makes a mockery of fire prevention laws.

The planning department understand my concerns and have been as helpful as they can. However there is nothing they can do to address this issue due to current regulations. So I ask your assistance in addressing flaws in the fire regulations that allow developers to exploit them. These flaws are:

To ban activities such as clearing vegetation or activities that could cause fires on days of total fire bans,
Close loop holes that developers use to clear vegetation under false pretences, which cost the Shire revenue.

Further considerations on this matter

Neighbourhood character

The character of a neighbourhood defines the people and families that live in an area. Many of these people who live in community make real value contributions to the neighbourhood character by volunteering their time. It is of great disappointment that potential developers ( who more often than not, do not live in the neighbourhood) use inequities in planning laws to change a neighbourhood character for financial gain.

Health and Wellbeing

Waterfall Gully Rd/ South Rosebud is a bushy area and as such creates a certain atmosphere to the suburb. Residing in a beautiful neighbourhood therefore contributes to a mentally healthy state of its residents. The removal of trees for more dwellings creates a heat island. As our population ages heat stress related illnesses is becoming a more of an issue. Noise pollution from vegetation clearance and building is another factor of having a major impact on health and well being.

Overdevelopment and emergencies

Planning laws allow property owners to remove large amounts of vegetation without permission from their land citing their reason as 'fire protection'. After the vegetation is removed, those property owners may apply to the council for permission to intensify development on the land. Council usually does not deny permission for individual cases. But such individual cases mount up and create a danger which councils and planners may not have seen. The risk is that the granting of denser housing development in a bushland area means that, if there is a fire in the remaining bushland, there will be an increased number of residents needing to evacuate. Increasing population density means that more roads are needed to cope with a fire emergency evacuation. However, densification is being allowed to happen in an ad hoc, case by case fashion, without the building of roads in advance of significant development. No-one is overseeing the total impact. Most people who choose to live in bushland area would not approve of significant intensification of development. They would need to be alerted to any plans to build new roads for a planned increase in population and would probably object to significantly increased population plans. They are not being alerted, the roads are not being built, but the densification is happening in an unplanned fashion. This is dangerous. If a fire emergency was to threaten South Rosebud, Jetty Rd is the main route to escape!

Wildlife

Even though wildlife are protected, there never seems to be any enforcement to protect them. Up to 45 trees and shrubs were cleared at 477 Waterfall Gully Rd. What happens to those animals who have now lost their home?

Dear Minister Dutton.
Australians are sick of your government's excessive and irresponsible immigration rate and 457 Visa intake levels. This is clear by studying recent polls, Mark O'Connor's book Overloading Australia, and monitoring social media. Of particular concern is the dreadful impact that the your resulting unsustainable and damaging population growth rate is having on our local urban and natural environments.
(This letter has been sent today, 17 Jan 2016, to the Hon Peter Dutton MP. Minister for Immigration and Border Protection. The author encourages others to copy and forward to other Lieberal MPs. The author, Geoff Dowsett, is a member of the Hornsby Kuringai Greens and a member of the NSW Greens Population/Sustainability Working Group. Headings have been inserted by the editor of candobetter.net and some minor typos have been corrected.)

Australia has among the world's highest population growth rates, due to mass immigration

Australia, now under your government has one of the world`s highest population growth rates which is destroying our capital cities and Australia`s delicate ancient eco systems and over stressing infrastructure and public services at an alarming rate. When are you going to recognize this and reduce Australia`s damaging, irresponsible and unsustainable immigration rate and 457 Visa intake ? When will you wake up to the fact that Australian`s are aware of your obvious hypocrisy in your treatment of desperate refugees while at the same time you import 260,000 pa net well off -middle class - aspirational economic migrants a year to flood our labour force to drive down wages and working conditions to third world levels. All for no better reason than to create consumers for Frank Lowy`s vile shopping centres, consumers for Harry Trigabuff`s battery hen appartments, while Melbourne and Sydney real estate prices sky-rocket out of reach of ordinary Australians? Our urban environment, quality of life, standard of living and heritage are now seriously compromised. I believe that your government is indulging in a giant Ponzi scheme which is rapidly leading to Australia`s and your government`s demise.

The 'skill shortage' is a furphy

The skills shortage is a complete furphy. It`s corporate and Liberal Party propaganda. A billion dollar industry all designed to mislead and deceive the Australian public. The reality is that it is corporations demanding high population growth for the purpose of lowering wages and working conditions and to create more consumers to boost their already obscene profits while your corporate masters laugh at the idea of any responsibility to employ Australians or pay taxes in return for the damage they do. This is pushing Australian living standards and over-stretched infrastructure down to third world levels. Your Governments propaganda is that there is a skills shortage. There isn't. The Baird Government in NSW is closing down and cutting funding to TAFE, public schools, and universities, when it should be training young Australians free—no fees. This tactic of reducing Government spending on needed infrastructure is all designed to keep big business happy. They are the big donors to the Liberal Party. He who pays the piper calls the tune. The non sense that we need more population to pay welfare costs is in reality more lies from your government`s propa ganda machine and the corporate media who finance your party.

Wealth distribution

The biggest welfare recipients are the big corporations who pay no tax and the very rich who avoid tax. Why should low income earners foot the welfare bill ? Australia`s growing problem is your government`s out dated irresponsible Social Darwinist economic policies which are widening the gap between rich and poor. Your government is one of robbing from the poor to pay the rich. An intelligent, socially and environmentally responsible tax system would tax BADS: gambling, alcoho, 4x4 gas guzzlers, McMansions, conspicuous consumption, and re distribute revenue into public infrastructure, free medical, free education, particularly to give women the freedom to choose to have smaller families, and free public transport. All of these civilized measures are the case in advanced intelligent countries such as Norway, Sweden, France,Italy and Cuba where population growth has been reduced down to responsible levels.

Most immigrants aspire to increase their consumer lifestyle

The bulk of your 260,000 pa well off middle class: aspirational, materialistic, high carbon and high eco-footprint immigrants are from the well off countries such as the UK and NZ. A smaller number of the well off so called “business” elites from India and China is increasing. They are not desperate refugees escaping death: war, flood, famine. If they are "skilled" then they are a brain-draining their home country. They come here to get rich: to indulge in high consumption lifestyles, just as the Liberal Party`s corporate donors want. More consumers = more consumption = more obscene profits and the wealth only trickles down to the masses, since your government has been instructed by your corporate masters to allow them to destroy Australia TAX FREE. This is nothing less than corporate welfare on a massive scale--unprecedented in our history. This is the foundation of the uncontrolled capitalist system we and the planet are suffering and which you are promoting. You have no mandate for this destruction of Australia. Your immigration policy and high birth rate policy is causing for more environmental problems increasing IMPACT on Sydney and other capital cities and the Brisbane Gold Coast growth corridor, increasing demand for high density housing, and increasing impact on Australia`s fragile ancient ecology.

Australia has the second highest carbon and eco-footprint per capita on the planet

Immigrants come here to get rich and to indulge in high consumption at the planet`s and Australia`s expense.
Baking a bigger cake in a finite world through increasing GDP Growth isn’t the solution. We must progress to a Steady State Economy and end our imprisonment by the Growth addicted capitalist behemoth and it`s addiction to constant increases in economic growth which demands constant population increase.

The Hon Kelvin Thomson MP, member for Wills is the only MP in Australia it appears who is prepared to criticise your Govt`s horrendous immigration rate and 457 Visa rort which fuels developers` destruction of Australian cities and fragile ecology and heritage. The population explosion is pay back for corporate bribes/donations to the Liberal Party. We are being SHANGHAI`D ( Dick Smith`s term ) by big business sociopaths – environmental criminals who care nothing for Sydney`s heritage, quality of life, infrastructure meltdown or sky-rocketing house prices out of reach of working families. Youth suicide and unemployment can also be attributed to the import of so called skilled workers and 457 Visa workers who work for third world standard conditions and wages.

Non-stop immigrant invasion

Your insidious immigration program deliberately favours middle class, aspirational, materialistic, right wing "business"/so called "skilled' immigrants who are not threatened with death, disaster, war or starvation, but who are brought into Australia to feed the insane capitalist, debt ridden, profit and growth-addicted destructive economy, while our standard of living, quality of life, urban heritage, infrastructure, fragile ecology hotspots and precious wildlife habitat, is bulldozed for more high rise and high density housing to house the non-stop immigrant invasion of Sydney and Melbourne.

I recommend you go to #10;<p>I suggest you acquaint yourself with the global movement for transition to the Steady State Eco responsible Economy. Your type of government is now irrelevant to the needs of Australia, which is facing terrible environmental challenges and social upheaval in the 21st century.</p>&#10;<p>It’s time to move away from the policies of the 1950s and try to find a way this country can live so as to preserve high standards of clean air, water, soil and biodiversity, whilst maintaining some semblance of community, rather than chasing the likes of Beijing and New Delhi into a nightmare of pollution and social polarisation.</p>&#10;<p>I don`t believe you understand your responsibilities in terms of inter-generational and intra-generational equity. Future generations will view your government actions as a vicious attack on Australia, its natural capital and social fabric.</p>&#10;<p>Geoff Dowsett. BA Dip Ed. Pennant Hills.</p>&#10;</body></html>">

Fraser Island provides the last opportunity to secure the protection of purebred Dingoes. It is therefore our obligation to look after them as we look after elephants, tigers, lions, rhinos,monkeys etc.
(dingo searching for food on Fraser Island- Jennifer Parkhurst photographer)
While we spend millions of dollars on these exotic species we not only neglect our own iconic dingoes, we actually demonize them and especially so on Fraser Island.

(image: Fraser Island hungry dingo looking for food from a fisherman- Jennifer Parkhurst photographer)
These dingoes need to be looked after and as well fed as all the exotic animals in zoos and wildlife sanctuaries are.

Well fed dingoes will not need to beg for food from tourists and will leave them alone. All the so-called trouble by dingoes is only caused because of their plight of malnutrition and the constant persecution by public staff.

(image: very skinny dingo Jennifer Parkhurst photographer)

Therefore, the protection of the Fraser Island dingoes must be the ultimate top priority, long before any other activities, while tourism should be the absolute, bottom last. If there is any better controlling needed on the island it must be the tourists and definitely not the dingo.

I was honoured to have met the Syrian Foreign Minister Mr Walid Mouallem yesterday in New Delhi. Also present was the Syrian Ambassador Mr Riad Abbas and a host of other Indian and foreign dignitaries and veteran journalists. Mani Shanker Aiyar, the veteran Parliamentarian is also seated to the right, at the table in the photogram.

A high powered Syrian delegation has been present in Delhi, where the Govt of India has supported the Syrian-Russian position, that the Syrian crisis must be resolved by Syrians alone through a process of dialogue, constitutional reforms and elections. The Syrian delegation met the Indian PM Narendra Modi, the Foreign Minister Ms Sushma Swaraj and the National Security Advisor Ajit Doval.

The two governments share a common political position and have decided to exchange Intelligence on ISIS and other terrorist organizations. On the economic front many agreements have been reached and Syria sees India as a major contributor to the growth of the Syrian economy, even in the current crisis, but especially in the post-war reconstruction phase, in the sectors of Energy, Agriculture, Food Grains, Infrastructure, Pharmaceuticals and other sectors.

The Syrian delegation was earlier in Moscow and Beijing before they arrived in New Delhi, as part of the international diplomacy prior to the Geneva Talks scheduled for the 25th of January 2016.

The term 'diversity' is being used as a euphemism for chaos and social disenfranchisement in mass people movements which are politically packaged as both positive and inevitable, much as slavery was in the 18th and 19th century. UN Deputy Secretary General Jan Eliasson has said that 'the refugee crisis in Europe has created fear and hatred among local residents, which should be combated by bringing to light the positive contributions of migrants to creating a diverse society'.[1]

See also: The phoney « refugee crisis » (7/9/15) by Thierry Meyssan | VoltaireNet and other articles about the European refugee crisis.

The Numbers

"The number of international migrants reached 244 million in 2015, an increase of 41 per cent compared with 2000, the United Nations says in a report. The report published on Tuesday, the latest biennial revision of migration trends, found that the number of people who had moved to another country - voluntarily for economic reasons or because of conflicts - had risen by 71 million since 2000."[1]

The influx into Germany and which is overflowing to the rest of Europe amounts to an invasion because permission was not sought from the ordinary people who bear the impact on jobs, housing, social and natural environment of these colossal numbers of people. At the same time the immigration flows are the result of wars that European leaders and global commerce are inflicting on the sending countries.

Imposed mass immigration compromises self-determination and democracy

Talk of 'diversity' as if different ethnicity/religion is the only feature of the problem of mass immigration to Europe is to ignore the sheer numbers of people seeking work and housing. Such huge changes in demand form the greater part of economic and social impact and the resultant hardship and inconvenience is an affront to citizens who were not consulted.

Talk of 'diversity' in the face of this huge and largely irrevocable change to numbers and composition of society has the effect of further reducing the scope of citizen input into self-government (which is a kind of cooperative population management). Self-government involves cooperative apportioning of work and housing as well as supporting infrastructure within a society defined by its membership (citizens). It is usually managed through long established civil legal and institutional processes only available to citizens or visaed immigrants.

How a population evolves is a traditional and anthropological prerogative of its members, not commercial 'stakeholders' or global political players. A sudden redefinition of membership without consultation is a fundamental problem.

War and mass migration: Criminal role of the press and governments

When external forces produce massive population changes, this is usually referred to as war. Whilst we do know that US-NATO members have a long history of and a current responsibility for the wars in the Middle East that are producing much of these mass migrations, it is difficult to pinpoint what organisations and people are really behind the manipulation of numbers in Europe through open-door policy. This is because they hide behind rhetoricians like the UN Deputy Secretary, national leaders such as Merkel, and a pro 'diversity' corporatised and syndicated global media that obviously has interests in labour market, weapons manufacture, international trade and the transmission of power through chaos. In fact, apart perhaps from Putin's Russia, most of us do not know who is in charge of nations anymore; policies seem to be influenced from many transient global hats.

The mainstream press have had a criminal role along with EU and European governments in suppressing discussion of the numbers involved and manufacturing an apparent consent to them against real citizen feelings. In tandem these actors have consistently talked up US-NATO roles in wars that have caused these population disruptions in the Middle East. These arrogant attitudes and manipulations of perception have caused chaos, suffering and death.

Diversity doesn't nail it

'Diversity' is a non-sequiteur in the face of western warmongering overseas and manipulation of European population numbers and institutions to reduce wages, inflate housing prices, and generally place pressure on established social gains and citizens rights.

Unfortunately many commercial ventures use the UN as a respectable umbrella for advancing their own selfish interests. Any organisation may register as a UN member on a variety of bases and the UN attracts government, property and banking lawyers, ideological entities with strong links to business and government, such as the Australian Multicultural Foundation, and a variety of businesses in various guises looking for opportunities. (See http://www.unaavictoria.org.au/our-partners/. Associated projects are often described as 'development' initiatives but they are about taking over land and resources, changing local laws, exploiting and disorganising workforces in the sending and receiving countries.

The people behind some of these trends are so craven that they do not seem to think twice about provoking and stoking protracted wars and genocides, except to justify them with flimsy excuses.

Left-right conflicts growing

Another aspect of these problems is a growing division between 'left' and 'right' in population politics as reported, endorsed and incited by the mass media. In a strange way it is reminiscent of the setting for the rise of fascism in Germany. In those days the right (the Nazis and the Italian fascists) were encouraged by big business and the mass media as a means of combating the 'left' or the rise of communism. The communists were for the uniting of workers against exploitation and war but the fascists were for exploitation and pro-war. Today we have a situation where groups identified by the mainstream press as 'left' and 'anti-fascist' are coming into conflict with groups identified as 'right-wing'. Counter-intuitively the left-wing, as presented by the mainstream press, seems to think it is okay to have disorganised mass immigration and has almost nothing to say against the wars producing these population movements. The right-wing seems to be the only voice criticising US-NATO involvement in wars in the Middle East, and they are definitely against uncontrolled mass immigration. At the same time, the center left and center right that control most governments and are aligned with the mass media encourage mass migration and encourage war. That leaves unrepresented people of a center left or center right disposition who are neither in favour of war or mass migration. This is a glaring omission and one senses that it is deliberate on the part of the mass media that claims to represent public opinion globally.

NOTES

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/world/nthamerica/2016/01/13/244-million-international-migrants-in-2015.html#sthash.xwREuHUA.dpuf

#otherArticles" id="otherArticles">Appendix: Other Articles about the European Refugee crisis

Why Illegal Migrants are Good for Turkish Business? (21/12/15) | New Eastern Outlook, Refugees as "Weapons" in a Propaganda War (21/11/15) by Eric Draitser | Global Research, The Flood of Refugees into Europe: "The New Slave Trade" (8/11/15) by Peter Koenig | Global Research, Merkel Overwhelmed: Chancellor Plunges Germany Into Chaos (4/11/15) | sputnik News, The phoney « refugee crisis » (7/9/15) by Thierry Meyssan | VoltaireNet, Refugees as Weapon – and Germany shifting Alliances? (17/7/15) | Global Research.

On 10 January 2016 SBS (Australian multicultural television) screened Martin Smith's Inside Assad’s Syria. Australia is blatantly aligned with US-NATO forces that seek to remove the Syrian Government and Australian media propaganda means that we don't usually hear from the other side. Surprisingly Smith interviewed many supporters of the Assad Government and the Syrian Arab Army. But it was as if, to get this other view onto SBS the [almost theatrically grim-faced, suspicious and disapproving] journalist had to use some standard anti-Assad techniques:

Standard anti-Syrian government techniques

These were:

Continuous use of the word 'regime' instead of government, although Bashar al Assad was legally reelected in June 2014 by an overwhelming majority, despite opposition alternatives. See /taxonomy/term/6173

Early mention of the 'notorious barrel bombs' (showed footage of bombs dropping from aircraft). No views or analysis countering these dubious claims were given. The President's own exhaustive responses to these explanations were not referred to. The video below is of an interview by Sixty Minutes with Bashar al Assad on accusations about the use of barrel bombs and of chlorine as a poisonous gas (although I don't think Martin Smith's doco mentioned chlorine.)

Although Smith interviewed people who had lost relatives to the 'rebels', the use of bloody footage seemed confined to illustrating the effects of bombing designated as carried out by the Government. There was no equivalent criticism of the 'rebels' techniques and casualties. Smith's allocated Syrian journalist, however, was killed by rebels a couple of days into the doco, which also meant that the journo was unable to complete his original itinerary. There was no sensible reflection on the killing of his journo by so-called 'rebels', although Smith did describe himself as shaken by the death.

The handling of an invitation by the government to a cultural event in Syria, a performance by the Syrian Symphony Orchestra, seemed insensitive and manipulative. Rather than appreciating that the people of Damascus are heroically maintaining cultural and state institutions, there seemed to be an implication that something else might be going on.

Visit to the famous coastal resort of Latakia, in Syria

Smith's film characterised this resort more or less as a rich Alawite stronghold. This is in line with the mainstream propaganda that Alawites in Syria are oppressing a Sunni majority. As Assad says himself, if this were true, then surely the armed forces would have got rid of him long ago, since they are 60 - 65% Sunni, and Sunnis form the majority of the population. Many Syrians will tell you, however, that they are not Sunnis or Alawites or Christians; they are Syrians. In this they are emphasising the non-sectarian nature of Syria. Smith did disclose that more than a million refugees are now living in Latakia resort.

This effect of presenting the resort as the exclusive preserve of Alawite hippocrites works to create cognitive dissonance against the information about the refugees that contradicts that first impression. A friend who is well informed on Syria told me that an acquaintance of hers seemed to derive from the Latakia part of this documentary that the Syrian wealthy, despite the war, were living high on the hog whilst the poor suffered, and entirely overlooked the part of the report that noted the presence of the refugees who now live in this 'exclusive' Alawite resort.

Sophie Shepnardze interview: Assad asks how, if most of Syria is against him, they have not got rid of him.

Despite Smith's biasing presentation, nonetheless, we did hear almost exclusively the pro-government side. We also heard the story of someone who defected from the Syrian Arab Army to the rebels then back again, although somehow the punchline escaped me. The journo's comment seemed gratuitous, that he suspected that the government had wanted him to hear about this.

Does SBS accept non-propaganda items?

Conclusion. Is it actually possible to get the other side onto SBS (or the ABC)? If you wanted to, would you have to present it within those trophes of barrel bombs and 'regime' and wear an exaggeratedly sceptical expression when interviewing pro syrian government people? In other words, should we give this journo, Martin Smith, credit for getting the other side onto SBS? Or might we assume, unfortunately, that many people would respond to Smith's propaganda techniques and his stagey suspicion by assuming that the many Syrians who openly prefer Assad leading Syria to the prospect of the country being divided up among a bunch of religious gangs, are poor brainwashed idiots in need of western intervention.This was a PBS funded documentary and they are leaders in western propaganda.

To paraphrase that old Pete Seeger song, "Where have all the ISIS gone? Gone to Turkey -- every one." (Except of course for the ones who tried to return to Saudi Arabia, foolishly thinking that just because the House of Saud paid their salaries, they would be welcomed back home.) "When will they ever learn?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KLNwPppKTM

American neo-colonialists has supposedly been bombing ISIS positions in Syria and Iraq for over a year now -- and during all that time ISIS has, coincidentally, been getting stronger and stronger. However, Russia bombs ISIS for only three months and suddenly ISIS is gone! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LZ2R2zW2Yc

But where did ISIS go to?

According to journalist Finian Cunningham, "Also missing or downplayed in the Western media coverage of the truces across Syria is the question of where the surrendering mercenaries are being evacuated to. They are not being bussed to other places inside Syria. That shows that there is no popular support for these insurgents. Despite copious Western media coverage contriving that the Syrian conflict is some kind of 'civil war' between a despotic regime and a popular pro-democracy uprising, the fact that surrendering militants have nowhere to go inside Syria patently shows that these insurgents have no popular base....

"So where are the terrorist remnants being shipped to? According to several reports, the extremists are being given safe passage into Turkey, where they will receive repair and sanctuary from the President Recep Tayyip Erdogan – and no doubt subsidized by the European Union with its $3.5 billion in aid to Ankara to 'take care of refugees'". http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article43837.htm

I mean seriously, President Erdogan, do the people of Turkey really want to have thousands of ISIS foreign fighters descending on them in mass -- men who have been raping, pillaging and beheading at will for the past four years? Once a brigand, always a brigand? Turkish citizens, sucks to be you. http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/34373-focus-the-misinformation-mess

But several of the rumors I've been hearing lately suggest that many of these foreign fighters are also being shipped off to Afghanistan to join the Taliban as well. Which brings up my next point. After Russia destroyed the weapons supply lines to ISIS in Syria, ISIS was dead in the water within just three months. So why are the Taliban still fighting on (and on) in Afghanistan after 14 long years? Who is running weapons supply lines to them? http://www.globalresearch.ca/isis-air-force-us-airstrike-takes-out-battalion-of-iraqi-troops-who-were-battling-isis/5496826

The Taliban aren't exactly manufacturing weapons back in the caves of Tora Bora, now are they? Hardly. But those weapons have to come from somewhere. My guess is that the same weapons-manufacturers who have been supplying ISIS for the past four years have also been supplying the Taliban for the past 14 years. Now who could that be? It's definitely not Russia or Iran. http://jpstillwater.blogspot.com/2015/11/yemen-syria-palestine-paris-gun-sales.html

And why has it taken 14 years to cut off weapons supplies to the Taliban when Russia was able to cut off weapons supplies to ISIS in just three months? Who the freak knows? Certainly not me. But if it were up to me, I would follow the money. And I would start by asking myself just two questions. "Which country is the largest manufacturer of weapons in the world today?" and "Why have heroin sales in Afghanistan increased forty-fold since America invaded it -- and what is that money being spent on?" http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/US-to-Blame-for-Spike-in-Opium-Production-in-Afghanistan-20150416-0028.html

Article originally published on Jane Stillwater's blogspot on January 10, 2016.

North Korea has apparently just tested an H-bomb - a shocking development, even though some doubt it actually was a hydrogen bomb. Already, Washington lawmakers are grabbing the moment to push through reinforcement of America’s presence in the Asia Pacific, already catalyzed by the “pivot to Asia” plan aimed against China. As Europe lines up to strike lucrative deals with Beijing, Washington is growing increasingly worried, even counter-attacking with the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement. The world is already an uneasy place, with Jihad rampant and now we have potentially deadly armament at the hands of unpredictable Pyongyang. Will the US and China be able to co-operate? Why is the West is so afraid of Beijing? This program dives deep into the world of Asia Pacific political games with the president of the Shanghai Institute of International studies, Dongxiao Chen, on Sophie&co. This interview was first published at https://www.rt.com/shows/sophieco/328252-us-china-sea-war/ on 8 Jan, 2016 09:53

Follow @SophieCo_RT

Sophie Shevarnadze:  Dongxiao Chen, president of the Shanghai Institute of International studies, it’s great to have you on our show today, welcome.

Dongxiao Chen: Thank you.

SS: So London has given President Xi a royal welcome recently, and that’s after UK criticizing China on a number of issues for years and years. What’s going on? Is UK after some lucrative deals or is it something else right now?

CD: Well, you see that nowadays we are living in an economically globalized world, and I think that the leaders, if they are really concerned of national interests, they should be more concerned about those practical and benefit of their economic interests. This should be always on  their high agenda, and I think that to compare with the complementarity of both sides of the economic development and as well as this huge potential of this cooperation, not only on the economic side but on the other side - I think that that’s the main reason driving London more closer to Beijing.

SS: Lucrative deals, right?

CD: Yeah, to some extent.

SS: You know, this cozying up of UK and China towards each other has drawn criticism from Washington. Why is that two sovereign countries can’t have a relationship without irritating America?

CD: I think that some Washington people - I am not quite sure whether the President Obama or those officials publicly would criticize those economic relations between London and Beijing…

SS: But you know they’re annoyed, right? If I know, you should know…

CD: Yeah, of course, but there are some people, in Washington, they could not understand why: London used to be the closest ally and now seems to have shifted away from Washington and more closer to Beijing. I think that they could not adapt themselves to a more multi-polarized world in which China has much more important role, particularly in economic aspect, and that London, if it is to continue to maintain its status of financial center, then they should do something to strengthen its ties with Beijing, if they are going to try to maintain their status of financial center.

SS: You have also said that there’s need to rethink the regional security order in the Asia-Pacific region. That would actually mean challenging the existing American alliance system that is already in place. But would it still mean that it has to include the U.S. in the new order?

CD: Of course. I think that if we’re going to construct, or build up a regional order, sustainable. It should be an inclusive multilateral process, including those bilateral alliances. But how to make this inclusive multilateral process connected or aligned with those bilateral? Big question. This is not a problem on China’s side. This is the challenge for Washington, for the U.S., because they still believe that this regional architecture, this regional security order should be based upon the bilateral alliance excluding China. So, I think that this is the problem: obstacles that the U.S. should overcome.

SS: We’re going to talk about excluding China from this architecture a bit later, but first, I want to talk about America’s pivot to Asia - and I’m talking about America redeploying its military in the Asia-Pacific region. Is it a real threat to China or this move has little substance, actually?

CD: Well, conceptually speaking, it should not be perceived as an existing threat. Because, based upon our reading of so-called “pivoting” or rebalancing, it is multidimensional. Of course, Washington said that it is going to shift 60% of its military force to Asia-Pacific, but that’s only part of it. In addition to that the U.S. tried to reap the benefit of dynamic economic cooperation in Asia-Pacific. Washington tried to grasp this opportunity. So, that’s both the military dimension, as well as the economic dimension. U.S. said it also tries to be much more engaged with East Asia, Asia-Pacific, as a stabilizing force. So, we just have to look and see to what extent - because deeds speak louder than those words.

SS: Let’s, for now, let’s focus on the military aspect; we will get to the economic aspect and all of that. China has staked claims South China sea, and then its neighbors have turned to America to actually dispute these claims. Do you think claiming this territory is worth this diplomatic row?

CD: The tensions rising over the South China Sea are not by China, rather, because of some other countries, some of the Asian countries included. They have occupied these territories that have been long claimed by China, but for a long period of time China has showed its self-restraint, and we hope that we can shift those differences over those territories’ sovereignty, through this joint exploitation. This is our strategy which we have been carrying on for many-many years. We have never changed that. But nowadays it’s the U.S. who used to say that the U.S. has “no position”, “tries to maintain its neutrality”. Now it seems to me that the U.S. has its position and tries to stir up the tension. That makes problems.

SS: But you now see U.S. and its allies staging naval drills in the waters next to China, and you have the Chinese press that calls for the nation’s military to be ready for provocations. Can a real confrontation glare up here?

CD: So far, I think that we have given quite clear message to Washington that the South China Sea is most important area. If we can keep sealine communications safe, there will be for public good for all countries, including China and the U.S.. So, don’t try to stir up these tensions. Let’s manage these differences. If we can maintain the stability - because the so-called “freedom of navigation”, U.S. is very concerned. It’s not a matter here. So I think, why not we - Washington, Beijing - work together?

SS: Okay, but this was a very scholar-like answer that you just gave me. I’m asking, the way things stay now, with America and its allies staging drills in the waters next to China - do you think there’s a real chance of an actual confrontation or its overexaggerated?

CD: Of course. The possibilities always stay there. If we could not manage those differences, it is quite likely that those incidents may escalate or spin out of control, based upon a miscalculation. Both sides understand the differences there, but they try to avoid those confrontation, because it is in their common interest.

SS: Because, I mean, the confrontation between these two powerhouses would be insane to even really consider, right? To even start to consider, it’s crazy, that America and China could actually confront each other.

CD: Of course.

SS: But you have said that peace between China and America will end once their mutual interests exhaust each other. What exactly does that mean?

CD: I mean that for a sustainable workable big country-relationship, the common interest is important but not enough. Both sides should also cultivate the sense of mutual respect. If both sides could cultivate this sense of mutual respect and can build up this shared common understanding of what will the regional order look like, or what it should be, it is more likely for them to, you know, solve these differences, even if they could not see eye-to-eye on this specific issues, but they, at least, understand that these are specific issues, we shall not have these specific differences of interests to hijack overall relationship. So, this is what I mean that even if these common interests are exhausted, at least there’s common understanding of these important norms of interacting with each other.

SS: So, okay, let’s say common interests are exhausted, but other common issues aren’t worked on - then what comes instead of peace?

CD: If we have a static perspective, if there’s no agreement on the vision of order or what order will be in future, it is very likely that both sides would not try to expand the list of their cooperation. They will just focus on their differences.

SS: Okay, so they just end their cooperation but it doesn’t mean they become adversaries.

CD: If both sides do not see each other as adversaries, if they believe that they can be partners for building a new world order, than they can find, they can expand these cooperative areas. For instance, if both sides could not agree with how to counter terrorism, then the terrorism itself will be an issue diving each other rather uniting each other. But if both sides can share their common understanding of how to counter terrorism ,then the terrorism, the so-called “third party issues” bring them together. So, aside of those existing bilateral common interests, there’s a huge number of potential common interests going beyond their bilateral scope, but that depends upon whether both sides -Washington and China can share some basic norms and visions of the future.

SS: I want to know your honest answer, your subjective opinion in this matter, not a scholar’s opinion - right now, if you put your hand on your heart, would you say America and China are partners or adversaries?

CD: Well, you know, China-U.S. relationship is extremely complicated. The single terms like “partner”, “adversary”, “competitor” is not sufficient enough to generalize. So, I would say that yes, it is a “competitive partnership”.

SS:  So you’ve also said that when it comes to understanding Great Power relations, America has some blind spots. What do you mean?

CD: When I say that there’s a “blind spot”, I mean the U.S. strategic culture, their unique strategic culture, which, I would’ve called it a kind of “superpower autism”.

SS: Superpower autism?

CD: Egoism. You know, U.S., historically, because of its unique geographical location and also its culture of exceptionalism and in the past decades U.S. has enjoyed its superpower position and even a period of a unipolar moment. So, U.S. sometimes is too self-confident and always tries to reduce its own vulnerability to zero at the expense of other countries’ security. But, as a matter of fact, in real life, it’s impossible for a country to try  to reduce its vulnerability to zero, but the U.S. try to pursue such kind of policy, what I call an “absolute security” - that is a kind of a blind spot, because when the U.S., Washington tries to pursue this absolute security, actually, it just puts other countries at a different level of threat, imposed by Washington, because U.S. would always try to enjoy, because of its technology, try to, you know, information superiority, cyber-superiority, military superiority or even try to control some of the outer space. That will impose a lot of challenges and security threats to other countries.

SS: So when President Obama comes out and says that the U.S. will not let China write the rules of the global economy - do you think it’s fair, that China can’t but for some reason America is entitled to it?

CD:  Of course, it’s unfair. I think, we, Chinese, believe that we are living in a multipolar world and every country should have its own say in decision making of roles and norms.. It is impossible for a single country to try to set agenda. It’s not China, but of course, it’s not the U.S. We can compete. So, I think that all those countries should have their own voice. But nowadays there’s developing countries which are underrepresented…

SS: You’ve said that the voices of the developing countries aren’t heard enough - I wouldn’t call China a developing country, but I know that China ranks 6th in IMF voting share, as well as China is the second largest economy in the world. Is it fair that your country isn’t given a louder voice?

CD:  Of course, we don’t believe that nowadays IMF or World Bank, those Bretton Woods systems need to be reformed, unless, I think, it could be a threat for the new balance of power, of the global economy. So far, this kind of reforms was slow. Partially, some of those reform proposals have been blocked by the U.S. within the Congress. It is unfair.

SS: Is that why China is coming up with the China-led Asia Infrastructure and Investment bank?

CD:  It is partially a reason, because we believe that it will help, it will give some pressure on existing multinational institutions, including  IMF and the World Bank to accelerate their reform pace and so I think  it’s very good…

SS: So, it is about countering the Western influence after all?

CD:  There is some competition, but it is also complimentary, because by reforming those reforming those existing multilateral economic institutions, it will also be beneficial in the long term for those developing countries. Because, even those developing  countries, they believe that multilateral institutions - IMF or World Bank - they are too bureaucratic. It’s efficiency is so low, and they need to reform. But the Western interest there is to try and to block, to resist the reform. So we believe, we are rationally speaking, we think  that if we can make this structure, organisation, much more clear, much more efficient - that will be good for all countries, not only for developing countries. So, at least, I’ve heard a lot of scholars and experts from Great Britain, from the U.S., they think that yes, it’s wrong for these kinds of reform proposals to be blocked in Washington DC or by the Congress.

SS: But what about politicians? Why do you think America reacted so actually about China coming up with  the whole Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, especially urging their partners like GB, France, Australia, Germany, not to join their venture - which they did anyways. Why were they so panicky about western countries joining this new institution?

CD: Washington, including President Obama himself have recognized that it’s a mistake. They totally misunderstand the mission and the function of the AIB. They believe that it is kind of counter-Western institution, it is kind of a conspiracy plan, that China, Beijing tried to set up a new kitchen; but actually, as China said, it’s not going to set up a new kitchen, but we are going to try to add up a new facility, make this old kitchen much more efficient. So that’s the way.

SS: Do you think America should join this venture?

CD: Of course, if they are willing to do that. I think that it is quite open. Chinese always keep Washington posted on process of AIB, including, we always even kept Tokyo informed, we always inform them about the status of what is going on and Washington, you know, they are quite clear about the process, it’s not secret, it’s not a “black box” operation.

SS: So, the U.S. has an extensive system of alliance in Asia Pacific. They’re actually coming up with a Trans-Pacific-Partnership deal right now, and they’re not being secretive about it - for them it's all about excluding China from the process. Should China be doing something more to counter that?

CD: China felt the pressure of the TPP on multi-faceted aspects, because TPP, it’s negotiated in secret, we just do not know what it’s really about, particularly it is has a potential of an active impact on China’s interests. So, we always, you know, we were quite clear to Washington colleagues that they should let this process be much more transparent.

SS: So it’s about transparency, not about being included in the process?

CD: This is one thing - I said, multi-faceted aspects. It should be transparent so that we should know what is going on. Secondly, so far, a lot of these articles, particularly in regard to this state-owned enterprises reform, in regard to this information, digital economy, in regard to labor force standard - they are quite new.

SS: The more interesting question is, will they be able to isolate China? Will this bill somehow manage to isolate China?

CD: I think, it is impossible, because China’s trade volume, it’s market, is extremely important, so without China’s involvement into TPP, I think the influence of the TPP, well, would important, of course, but not that important. So, Washington has already said: “we welcome China, it all depends on China’s decision”. We still try to wait and see, because it all depends on China’s own economic reform, whether we are ready. But at the same time,  think, TPP is... sometimes we feel pressure, sometimes we think it will be a kind of leverage to be used pushing forward a reform at home.

SS: Funny you say that, because I was speaking to American Congressman, his name is Brad Sherman, and he’s against TPP, but he actually argues that TPP would be beneficial for China, meaning, you know, all these goods are mostly assembled in China and then they’re sent to the U.S. via TPP members like Vietnam. What do you think, could it actually be beneficial to China?

CD: No, I  think if China won’t join TPP, for a long period of time, based upon a lot of surveys, a lot of research, that this impact will obviously be felt on quite a number of industries in China, particularly given this trade transferring from China to other countries, like Vietnam, Mexico. So, the long-term here is quite clear that the impact is obvious. But in short term, I don't know. The short term is not so obvious.

SS: Dongxiao Chen, president of the Shanghai Institute of International studies, thank you very much for this interesting insight into China-U.S. relations. It’s been great talking to you.  

In a piece in The Australian[1] Dec 24, 2015, entitled "Honey, we shrank the backyard," population growth promoter for the property investment sector, Bernard Salt, observes that the block size of ordinary Australian houses has shrunk due to lifestyle changes such as after school organised sport and other after school activities and women working. The backyard, Salt acknowledges, was a “wondrous place” where children used to play in a relatively unstructured space, unobserved by parents, during an unsophisticated era devoid of today's patios and outdoor eating. The conclusion is that, after all, shrinking backyards come with bigger cities, and and a “leaner, cleaner more efficient way of living”.

Why has Bernard Salt written this article?

One must bear in mind that it is the 1950s brick veneer villa that Bernard Salt targets. It appears to be his job to do this and to "evict" the ordinary Australians who live in these houses. He does not target houses such as the luxurious older style mansion where he lives in the comfortable suburb of Camberwell.

I heard him in person, as an invited speaker at a public meeting in Hawthorn about 4 years ago, derisively referring to widows in these houses "rattling around" and that they should move out, or words to this effect. This latest piece specifically refers to the back yards of brick veneer houses.

A.V. Jennings brick veneers with backyards

Many of the Post WW2 brick veneer houses in Melbourne were built by A.V.Jennings when there was an acute housing shortage. According to Jennings, one of the key design features of them was that children could be observed through the kitchen window playing in the backyard. I know this because a friend of mine was related to Jennings by marriage and she reports this is what he used to say about his creations. (This contrasts with Salt's memory or description of children being unobserved.)

The apparent purpose of the middle paragraphs of Salt's article are to paint an unattractive, unsophisticated rather bogan picture of what is being snatched from us, so that we won't want to try to hang on or to grieve too much. In this, Salt appears to draw heavily on Barry Humphries' work so - easy money for him.

Why do families now need two incomes and still can't afford housing?

Regarding Salt's pronouncement that "Mum's at work" and kids are in after-school activities, I would have thought the first would be the cause of the second. They are not independent of each other. Why is Mum at work? Or should I ask, "Why are both parents working and paying others to look after their children after school?" (After school care is not a free service.) Did people suddenly realise what great fun it was to be at work, so much fun that they would deny themselves the ONLY, chance that they would ever get in their lives to spend time with their offspring in the brief period called childhood? I somehow doubt it.

I would suggest that the design of low maintenance outdoor living areas probably reflects time poverty in households where both parents go to work. The trend to smaller blocks for people raising children is not a reflection of lifestyle choice but of economic imperative as housing prices and rents have risen. Both parents working instead of one amounts to a loss to the home of about 10 hours per day, 5 days per week. That is time lost to such activities as maintaining a garden.

Faux evolutionary approach to normalising land confiscation

Salt makes the loss of the backyard sound like an evolutionary process as we find more enticing pursuits outside the home but he doesn't say what those pursuits are. In rubbishing the old back yard, he singles out the incinerator. The incinerator has recently acquired very unattractive connotations both aesthetically and in terms of air pollution and carbon emissions. People are now very sensitive to these issues and Salt's reference to incinerators provides a great example of a way to turn everyone off the notion of ordinary Australians having a bit of land for themselves. I don't think incinerators then were universal, anyway and now we have paper and cardboard recycling. But is this a fair exchange for losing "the back yard" ? Should we be thus punished for past incinerator follies?

Society's gain is expressed as a "leaner, cleaner more efficient way of living." This is, however, unconvincing, as there is nothing in this description that alludes to quality of life or to any actual purpose for our lives, apart from "work".

Who might this article convince? People who have very limited time for reading, the actual victims who are fast losing space and amenity as the population soars and for whom a no regrets article like this might be somewhat comforting.

NOTES

[1] Note that Murdoch's Australian is one face of Murdoch's property dot com, www.realestate.com.au, so it is not surprising that Mr Salt writes for the Australian and for the Herald Sun.

Zahran Alloush, the leader and founder of Jaish al Islam Alloush, an extremist Salafi group supported by Saudi Arabia, was killed by an airstrike whilst attending a meeting with other armed Syrian groups on Friday. The group's ideology is similar to that of ISIS, and they have planned to overthrow the secular Syrian government and replace it with an Islamic dictatorship. Bizarrely, SBS, an Australian television station has reported on Alloush as if he were a leader of one of the key opposition groups who ‘would negotiate with the Syrian government’ next month.

Following the UN negotiated settlement in Yarmouk yesterday, there was a report on Australia’s SBS World News which presented the whole situation from the opposition’s point of view.

The Australian
coroner makes a
bizarre ruling.
Why?

Amazingly, 17 months have passed since the crash, and the investigators still can't establish who shot down the plane. Our correspondent digs in to the latest developments

The Victorian (Australia) state coroner Iain West has concluded a 60-minute inquest into the deaths of Australians on board Malaysian Airlines MH17 by issuing a statement of findings contradicting the coroner's own statements, as well as the evidence of reports from the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and courtroom testimony from the senior Australian police officer investigating the MH17 crash.

This article was originally published on 16 December on johnhelmer.net (aka 'Dances with Bears'). This article was republished on 17 December on Russian Insider. Other articles concerning the MH17 cover-up include The little Dutch boy, his finger, and the leak in the dyke story – make that the BUK story (22/12/15), Australian police, Dutch prosecutors break with Dutch Safety Board at first coroner's court inquest on MH17 crash (15/12/15), ...

Australian police examining the evidence
they aren't buying the Dutch government's
version of events

In an 11-page judgement issued on Wednesday morning at the Victorian Coroners Court in Melbourne, West ruled "it was not feasible to conduct a complete autopsy of all deceased", and "in the absence of autopsy there is no other evidence to establish individual causes of death. To attempt to do would be speculative and hence not a basis for making finds of fact."

He then proceeded to endorse the conclusion of the Dutch Safety Board (DSB) that the passengers and crew of MH17 had been killed by the detonation of a "9N314M model warhead carried on the 9M38 series of missiles, as installed on the Buk surface-to-air missile system.

Other scenarios that could have led to the disintegration of the aeroplane were considered, analysed and excluded on the available evidence…I accept and adopt the findings of the Dutch Safety Board."

For details of the DSB report of October 13, the evidence presented, and simulations of missile launches, warhead detonations, and shrapnel impact patterns, read this.

West's ruling contradicts testimony given in his court yesterday by Australian Federal Police Detective Superintendent Andrew Donoghoe. Donoghoe told the court that the DSB finding on the Buk missile was uncertain in the ongoing forensic and criminal investigation.

Donoghoe is the lead Australian investigator in the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) working on the MH17 evidence. "In order to obtain conclusive criminal evidence," he said, the Dutch Prosecution Service has made clear "it was also necessary that other scenarios - such as the possibility that MH17 was shot down by another type of missile, or that it was shot down from the air - must be ruled out convincingly."

Donoghoe repeated the point in an interview outside the courtroom, adding this "is a tougher standard than the DSB report." He acknowledged the DSB had used simulations of missile firings, not direct evidence.

According to the transcript of Donoghoe's court testimony, he implied the Australian Federal Police was not in a position to provide the forensic evidence it has gathered to the Victorian coroner because the Ukrainian government has not consented. "Official communication of the conclusions of the results of the MH17 investigation", Donoghoe said in court, "will only be released after agreement between the two JIT [Joint Investigation Team] countries."

The JIT comprises five countries – Australia, The Netherlands, Ukraine, Malaysia, and Belgium. The two to which Donoghoe referred were Australia and the Ukraine. For details of the JIT, and Malaysian government objections to the way it has been run, read this.

West's judgement is entitled "Finding into Death with Inquest – Inquest into the Deaths of the 17 Victorian residents who died on Flight MH17." The text does not refer to Donoghoe's written report to the court, nor to his courtroom testimony. During Donoghoe's appearance in court, West asked him no questions about the forensic evidence.

Dr David Ranson

West's ruling did go into some detail on the post-mortem and autopsy evidence on the victims' bodies reported yesterday by Dr David Ranson (left); West described Ranson as an associate professor of the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine, and the head of a team of anatomical, dental, and other pathology specialists who worked at the Dutch mortuary centre during July and part of August 2014.

Ranson has also delivered two reports of his findings to the Victorian coroner, one in August of 2014, and a second in December 2014.

Ranson said in an interview in the courtroom, before West announced his ruling, that CT scans were done twice over for the Australian victims, once at the Hilversum military base, and then at the Melbourne morgue after the bodies were flown home. "The CT scans were designed to detect metal", Ranson said. He acknowledges none has been found in the scans of the victims.

Without identifying his source, West ruled that "investigators believe that the total number of hits [on the aircraft] of high-energy objects was well over 800."

He also ruled that "perforation and ricochet damage caused by multiple high-energy objects enabled investigators to conclude that the implicated device was a surface-to-air missile carrying a fragmentation warhead…Forensic evidence determined that that the weapon was a 9N314M model warhead.

It was further determined that the Buk surface-to-air missile system is the only weapon system to carry one of the distinctive pre-formed fragments in its warhead and that such a missile system was present in the region at the time of the incident."

West's statement of finding doesn't reveal the "forensic evidence" he thinks is determinative. By the "presence" of the Buk missile, West appears to have been referring to missile batteries operated by Ukrainian government forces recorded by satellite photographs at locations on the ground at the time.

According to Donoghoe's evidence, if a Buk missile had been fired at MH17 it may have come from a Ukrainian government source. "The Buk missile," Donoghoe told West in court, "was of Russian manufacture, but of a type which had previously also been provided to the Ukraine.

The OVV [Dutch acronym for Dutch Safety Board] was not able to confirm the origin of the specific missile."

West did not report Ranson's evidence that no "distinctive pre-formed fragments" were found in any of the victim's bodies.

For analysis of the computer simulations and metal assay tests reported by DSB in October on the "distinctive pre-formed fragments" attributed to the Buk missile warhead, read this.

The Dutch Safety Board (DSB) Shrapnel Photographs

Source: http://www.onderzoeksraad.nl/en/onderzoek/2049/investigation-crash-mh17-17-july-2014   

The DSB report claims these were the only "distinctive pre-formed fragments" it  could find – three in the cockpit area, and one on one of the wings. The DSB conducted no metal analysis, and the Ukrainian government did not allow matching of the fragment metal to Buk missiles in its armed forces inventory. The Australian Federal Police and Ranson investigations found no traces of these "distinctive fragments" in any of the scans or tests reported to Coroner West. He asked no questions in court about the shrapnel evidence, and ignored it in his statement of finding.

Ranson, the coroner concluded, had described the cause of death without reporting munitions, explosive impact, or shrapnel wounds. 

According to West, Ranson's conclusion was that death had been caused by "injury sustained in high-altitude aircraft disruption…I accept the cause of death as stated by Dr Ranson as appropriate in the circumstances surrounding the loss of MH17 and in the absence of individual medical certainty."

Outside the court, after West closed the inquest, reporters who had listened to the proceedings acknowledged surprise that West's reference to unsourced and unnamed "forensic investigators" excluded both Donoghoe's and Ranson's reports.

West also claimed in his judgement that he was leaving to Donoghoe and other members of the forensic investigative team in The Netherlands the decision on what the evidence indicates for "criminal responsibility for the deaths".  

That process will run until "at least mid-2016", according to the coroner.  "The question of who is to blame for the destruction of the aircraft was not considered by the [Dutch Safety] Board as a criminal investigation is being undertaken in order to gather evidence." 

Tjibbe Joustra

The DSB report, and subsequent media statements by its chairman, Tjibbe Joustra (left), explicitly point blame at Russia for allegedly supplying Buk missiles and to Novorussian units fighting the Kiev regime for firing at least one  of them. For details, read this.  

West announced this disclaimer:  "it is not the role of this Court to attribute blame… the criminal responsibility for the deaths does not form part of the scope of this inquest."

In his sole reference to the political geography of the Ukraine conflict West hinted at the same blame for Russia as Joustra. "The location of the crash site," records West's ruling, "was, and remains, an area subjected to ongoing hostile military action between armed groups and Ukrainian forces."   

If West has decided the "armed groups" weren't Ukrainian, his innuendo is that they were Russian.

"How can the Australian coroner have it both ways," commented an international coronial law expert. "If he won't make findings about the detonation, he shouldn't endorse the DSB's claims about the Buk missile.

If he insists the Buk missile was the culprit, West is contradicting what he says are the limitations of his own inquiry,  and also the evidence of the only experts he called to testify."

By excluding the evidence of the Australian Federal Police and of his own pathologist, adds an Australian barrister, "West has taken sides in the politics of the case. If on top of that he is refusing to release the Donoghoe and Ranson reports, he is covering up. West has discredited his own court." 

Apendix: Other articles, continued

Is there a war crime in what Lord Heh-heh, Tjibbe Joustra of the Dutch Safety Board, is broadcasting? (19/10/15), Dutch reports on MH17 have mistaken BUK missile model, warhead type – the footnote which puts the boot to BUK (16/10/15), Is there a war crime in what Lord Heh-heh, Tjibbe Joustra of the Dutch Safety Board, is broadcasting? (19/10/15), Dutch reports on MH17 have mistaken BUK missile model, warhead type – the footnote which puts the boot to BUK (16/10/15), Autopsy of the MH17 crash – Dutch Safety Board reveals 3 possible pieces of BUK shrapnel in the bodies of the cockpit crew, and chemical evidence it cannot substantiate – Australian Federal Police issue public rejection of Australian government allegations (13/12/15).

Once upon a time, there was a terrible tyrant who lived in an ancient castle with his family in the land of Sham. They lived in decadent luxury, feasting it was said on the young and succulent progeny of the land they ruled over. The people living below slaved to scratch a living and keep some food for themselves, suffering constant fear of the tyrant's soldiers and their terrible weapons.

But one day the benevolent rulers of the neighbouring lands got together and agreed to help the poor peasants of the land of Sham fight for their rights, and even overthrow the wretched tyrant. The royal leaders of these lands, who followed a faith of tolerance and peace and love, opened their gold purses for the people of Sham, and bought them gleaming swords to protect themselves from the tyrant's raiders, as well as new tunics of black goat hair and supplies of grain and oil and incense for their homes. But they also gave them wonderful books full of sacred words and prayers that the people could recite, and shout out to curse the wicked tyrant and his dreadful men.

But the people of Sham still struggled, as the tyrant found new ways to steal their food and to terrorise them, so the kings got together again and hatched a plan. They would send some of their own honoured knights and courtiers to the land of Sham and lay siege to the castle, cutting the vital supplies of oil and of fuel and food to the tyrant and his family by kidnapping his men with their cargoes. The oil which came from the land of Sham was very valuable, so the benevolent kings of Krisis - which was the name of their lands, traded the special oil they had captured for tools and weapons for the peasants of Sham. Then the kings sent instructions to their knights and courtiers on how to strike at the castle when the tyrant had been so weakened by the siege that he could no longer resist the swords and curses of the knights of Krisis and the armies of 'Free Sham'...

This is an ancient story, and the ending we can only guess at now, because the land of Sham, which is now known as 'Syria', looks very different. In fact it is almost the mirror image of the old fable, as Syria's ruler is anything but an evil tyrant and lives in a small palace far from his family's home and lands. He doesn't need to protect himself from his people with walls and weapons, because they will protect him, while he keeps them safe from the evils of the world. And those evils are now all around, as the lands of Krisis are now occupied by kings and princes who know nothing of justice and humanity and occupy themselves in counting their gold and polishing their swords and guns, and plotting on how to attack their neighbours to steal their property and drive out their people....

- and thus begins the story of St George and the Dragon of Da'esh...

Santa, counting his orders and sorting them through
Said “ To me for some reason it’s not ringing true !
Some kids are getting extravagant toys
Whilst some gifts are mere tokens for girls and for boys”

"It’s not good enough to let this difference remain
I think it unfair and quite frankly, insane
The kids are all good, they’ve done nothing bad
And some of this stuff is only a fad"

"But I have a plan to sort out this mess
I don’t like unfairness with some getting less
Who are these children with jet skis assigned
Or dolls with real hair, who walk , talk and smile?"

"Why I know the answer, rich kids are the heirs
To fortunes amazing from property and shares
They don’t have to wait for some of it to be theirs
As they open their presents tucked under the stairs."

"I’m a socialist person at heart don’t you see?
But I know that nice presents cannot be free.
What I want is for some of these well catered-for kids
To to give a few boxes without opening lids."

"I see people in houses and others in sheds
Some sleeping in gutters and other in beds
Some countries are war -torn from June until June
with never a moment to look at the Moon."

"I know that the children who get all the nice toys
Would be really happy and not make a noise
Were all the poor children from here and from there
To wake up that morning to a soft teddy bear"

"I know that they want it , I know it for sure
They may not understand but will feel in their core
That all children should open one present, or more
And play with it happily, without fear of war."

"It’s my job I know to make all this transpire ,
I’ll redistribute the presents, that night, I won’t tire ,
The rich children are happy, they know that it’s fair
And their dreams all are peaceful. They’ve done their share."

The Reverend Andrew Ashdown has been visiting Syria since 2005 – several visits before the conflict, and three in the last two years. On this occasion he was a member of a diverse peace delegation which was allowed freedom of movement by the Syrian Government. Ashdown writes: During the visit we met with hundreds of people - local and national political leaders, both government and internal opposition figures; with local and national Muslim and Christian leaders and members of reconciliation committees; with internally displaced refugees; and with numerous people on the streets of towns and cities – Sunni, Shi’a, Christian, Alawite; most of whom feel their voices are unheard, ignored and misrepresented.

Candobetter.net Editor: Emphasis and headings that are not place-names have been inserted by the editor.

Revd Andrew Ashdown is an Anglican Priest in the Diocese of Winchester, England. He has been visiting, leading groups to the Middle East, and engaging with faith leaders in the region for 30 years. He also works in the field of Inter-faith. Andrew visited Syria several times prior to the conflict, and has visited the country three times in the last 20 months. He is currently undertaking a PhD exploring Christian/Muslim relations in Syria in recent years. - Editor.

Delegation to Syria

I was in Syria as part of an international delegation in Syria, led by Mairead Maguire, Nobel Peace laureate; at the invitation of the Greek Melkite Syrian Patriarch Gregorius Laham; and at our own expense. This was my third visit to Syria since April 2014, and I have visited Syria on several occasions prior to the conflict.

Voices of Syrians themselves are largely ignored in polarised narrative

In this report, I seek to convey the key messages from my latest visit to Syria. The context is highly complex. The country has long been a rich mosaic of cultures and faiths. It is a birthplace of civilisations and of the Abrahamic faiths, which have lived predominantly in harmony for hundreds of years. In the context of the war, there are many narratives, and the West’s tends to be skewed, biased and misleading. Of course there are truths in all narratives, but those that pretend that Syria’s problems are ‘black and white’ or a case of ‘good vs evil’ are profoundly misguided. In all of it, the voices of Syrians have been largely ignored. And as I have travelled in the country in the past couple of years, I have found a remarkable consistency to the cries and wishes of the people – cries and wishes that fly in the face of the violent prejudices and narratives of those outside the country.

Government provided delegation with armed guard but did not prevent our freedom of movement

For the visit, the Church arranged with the Government to provide us with armed security for protection for which we are very grateful, as the risk of attack or kidnap anywhere is real, but we had no government representative with us, and were free to move as we wish.

During the visit we met with hundreds of people - local and national political leaders, both government and internal opposition figures; with local and national Muslim and Christian leaders and members of reconciliation committees; with internally displaced refugees; and with numerous people on the streets of towns and cities – Sunni, Shi’a, Christian, Alawite; all of whom feel their voices are unheard, ignored and misrepresented.

Itinerary

We travelled to Damascus, Homs, Maaloula and Tartous, and stayed 3 nights in a 6th Century monastery just 8 km from ‘IS’ lines. Sadly we had to flee Maaloula when we were informed that terrorists in the surrounding area (belonging to a western-backed ‘moderate’ faction) had heard of our visit and intended to try to ambush us.

We had hoped to visit Aleppo, but our safety both on the route and in the city could not be guaranteed. In Lebanon we also met with General Michel Aoun, a leading Christian politician, and with the Vice-president of Hezbollah, Sheikh Naim Qassem.

Damascus

The centre of Damascus – the historic and commercial areas of the city – remains beautiful, despite the ravages of frequent shelling from ‘rebel’ held suburbs. But the presence of numerous army checkpoints throughout the city, and the economic effects of the war – closed hotels and shops – are evident. Yet life goes on. People try to live with a degree of ‘normality’, but the economic situation is increasingly harsh.

Talking to friends and people on the street in Damascus and elsewhere is deeply moving. The economic crisis is biting deep. Vast numbers of people have no or little income and are struggling to survive. One friend told me he knew several friends who had had good jobs before the conflict, who are now reduced to begging on the streets. In some areas of Damascus, formerly a proud, dynamic, prosperous city, there are lines of impromptu stalls selling second hand clothes - not from charities as in Africa - but from ordinary citizens selling clothes and belongings in order to eat, or heat their houses in the winter. Again and again, we have been told this is the primary reason now for many emigrating - not (as Western politicians or media would have us believe) for fear of the government; but simply the need to survive. One person said: "We can survive the war, but we cannot survive without food". This is a heart-rending situation especially for those of us who knew Syria before the conflict. Certainly, I detect a change even since my last visit in April this year - a shift from fear (there is a sense that Russia has helped shift the balance in the war) - to a sense of real sadness and depression. Everyone is affected and exhausted by the war and longs for its end. The actions of the western allies are only prolonging it and deepening the suffering.

It was a joy to spend a few hours with Greek Melkite Patriarch of Syria, His Excellency Gregorius III Laham, and to be invited to lunch with him. It is often forgotten that Christianity in Syria dates from the time of St. Paul, and there have been Christians in the land ever since. Syria remains the only country in the world where Aramaic, the language of Jesus, is still spoken.

The Patriarch’s message? : Syria is the cradle of civilisation and of faiths which have for centuries lived in harmony together. The world should cease arming and supporting people of violence, and bring all parties together in a shared political process. Outsiders have no right to dictate who is or isn't a part of that process. Who leads the country should be chosen by Syrians, not by external powers. For the sake of Christianity, and for Christian-Muslim relations worldwide, the Church should be listening to the people of faith from the lands of their birth. Sadly, that call is ignored.

In Damascus we also met with the Grand Mufti, His Excellency Dr. Ahmad Badr Al Din Hassoun. An impressive figure and a highly respected Muslim theologian in his own right, Dr. Hassoun is passionate about the plurality of Syrian society and the equal place that Muslims, Christians and Jews have always had, and should continue to have, within it. Dr. Hassoun must be one of the most ‘moderate’ and inclusive Muslim leaders in the world , and yet countries in the west, because he is a President’s appointee, refuse to meet him. There are indeed those of an Islamist persuasion in Syria who hate him because he represents an approach to Islam that some Islamist interpretations do not allow. Yet, he represents hope for the continuance of inter-religious respect and sectarian stability in Syrian society, and is certainly someone with whom our leaders should be speaking, but he is refused a visa to visit Britain.

Qara

Our Base for three nights was the remarkable Monastery of St. James the Mutilated, near the Sunni/Christian village of Qara, in the desert 60 miles north of Damascus. Here, we were surrounded by fighters of the so-called 'IS' about 25km to the east, and about 8 km to the west. The village was occupied by them briefly in November 2013, and the monastery was untouched due to the protection of the Muslim residents of the village who smuggled food to them.

The monastery was built in the 6th Century. Its Church was built on both a previous Roman one and a pagan temple before that, a symbol of the ancient rootedness of Christianity in the land of Syria. Its ruins were restored by the amazing indomitable Mother Agnes, who has worked untiringly with local Christian and Muslim leaders to undertake reconciliation processes in village communities; to rehabilitate fighters and negotiate truces. There is an inspiring community of nuns and monks here living out a Christian ministry and witness. Mother Agnes is much loved and respected here and the criticism she has received in the west I believe is grossly unfair. Nights were punctured with the regular sound of not so distant gunfire and shelling. And yet despite the proximity of terrorists, each service is preceded with the ringing of a loud bell that echoes across the valley. A profound symbol of witness, courage and presence.

Qara village is a majority Sunni village with a minority Christian population. The two communities have lived together with mutual respect for centuries. The Mosque is actually an ancient Christian Church, and the Churches in the town were badly vandalised by Daesh when they occupied the town in 2013, including ancient and rare frescos . Muslims and Christians protected each other during the occupation and both communities have helped to restore the local Churches. The mayor and faith leaders spoke with pride of the harmony in the town, but fear of what may be if the 'rebels' are allowed to win.

Homs

Homs is a poignant city. Half of it (that half that was occupied by the extremists) is completely destroyed, whilst the government-controlled side has a degree of normality. In 2014, I had visited the city when shelling and car-bombs from rebel positions in the city were a daily reoccurrence. In the town we spoke to citizens, who are delighted that the city has been liberated from the 'rebels'. A young Christian woman showed me a photograph of her bombed out home. I asked her who had bombed her home. She said that the Government had bombed her home after her family had fled the rebel occupation. Her words?

“If it takes the Government to bomb my house to get rid of the terrorists, I accept that.”

Meeting with the Governor of Homs Province, he told us that plans for the rebuilding of Homs have already been drawn up by wealthy Syrians in the Gulf. Over 1000 citizens who had fled have returned to the city and more are returning each month.

Christian and Muslim leaders in Homs worked together for liberation truce

Local Christian and Muslim leaders in the city had been instrumental in agreeing the reconciliation truce that led to the liberation of the city.

The government had declared an amnesty for fighters who chose to lay down their arms, and several hundred have been reintegrated into the community. Those who didn't were allowed to leave with one weapon – many of these are now fighting in Idlib province.

People in Homs asked why western government support terrorists

There are still tensions however and not everyone supports the government. Indeed, some armed fighters remain in one part of the city. But the city feels like one that is on a path towards healing. One evening, we went walking in the streets of the city. People were coming up spontaneously and welcoming us to Homs. They were all saying how glad they are that the city has been liberated, and asking why western governments are supporting ‘terrorists’ (the rebels). One young man came up to us and said he had been a tourist guide prior to the conflict and was moved to tears to see us as foreigners visiting the city. They urged us to tell our governments to work with the people of Syria to bring peace.

Fr Franz Van den Lugt said that foreign militants started the violence in the Homs uprising

It was deeply moving to visit the Jesuit Centre in Homs where Fr Franz Van den Lugt, a much loved Dutch priest who worked in Homs for 40 years, was shot through the head last year whilst sitting in the garden. The chair on which he was assassinated is still in place. He had declared that the violence in the uprising in Homs had been started by foreign militants, (he was there) but had refused to leave the monastery when militants took over the area. His school is still running and the children, in the heart of this devastated part of the city, are a sign of hope.

One evening was spent in the heart of the Old City of Homs to meet some of the most remarkable people of faith in the world - the Ministry for Reconciliation led by Fr Michel Naaman and the local Sheikh in the city. Throughout the occupation of the city by militants, the faith leaders have worked tirelessly to bring peace and reconciliation between communities, and their work has had some amazing success. They oversaw the evacuation of the rebels from the city, during which the priest told us, the Syrian army were distributing food and cigarettes to the rebels. Those rebels who laid down their arms have been reintegrated into the city. During their work, several of the Reconciliation Committee have been injured or killed by people they were trying to help. Their work continues to bring together the different factions in Homs, and they believe that only peace and love will transform situations of conflict.

Shock at Archbishop of Canterbury support for British bombing campaign

I told Fr Michel that the Archbishop of Canterbury had that day lent his support to the British Government’s desire to bomb 'IS'. Everyone in the room - Christian and Muslim -were visibly shocked. I asked what his message was....it is this:

"Syria was always a diverse people in unity with each other. People should unite to defeat terrorism, but should respect national sovereignty. The West says they want to destroy Daesh but Syrian people will be killed and towns will be destroyed... They really want to defeat Syria. It is likely there will be terrible consequences. Have the West not learnt from the past? Instead, stop fuelling 'IS' with weapons and support to people of violence, and help all Syrians to come together to find a political solution and have a national dialogue. Give the money that will be spent on destruction to Syria to help in reconstruction. And If not, leave us alone and let Syrians choose their own future... "

Internal opposition

In my three visits to Syria since April 2014, I have met most of the internal opposition figures in the country. There are some good people amongst them. Along with many eyewitnesses during the initial demonstrations in 2011, some of them have spoken of the presence of non-Syrian armed militants who helped stoke the flames of violence during those early months. The Opposition leaders speak openly and very critically of the political shortcomings of the regime, especially the issues of political imprisonment, disappearance, and corruption. But they maintain that Assad himself is the only leader capable of holding the sectarian balance. They admit that there are both good and bad people in the government, and that Assad has been held back in his desire for reform from members of the ‘old guard’.

Western ‘peace’ processes bar Syrian internal opposition politicians

We spent a remarkable three hour journey in the company of one of Syria's leading internal opposition leaders, Samir Hawash, an impressive man who has joined recent discussions in Moscow, Kazakhstan and Istanbul, but like all internal Syrian politicians, is refused inclusion in the western 'peace processes'. He was involved in early demonstrations, but early on was informed that militant groups were planning an armed uprising with assistance from outside. He begged the leaders of the militants not to take up weapons.

In 2010 he had been informed “there is going to be a war in Syria. It has all been planned.” He told us that when the demonstrations began, most people had wanted change, but he says now maybe 60-70% of Syrians in the country support Assad as the only person who can hold the country together. He has become a symbol of unity.
This has been the consistent impression from everyone whom we’ve met – Sunni, Shia, Alwaite, Christian.

Samir Hawash says armed militants fired first in demonstration

We asked him if the government had fired first on the demonstrators. He said that he was there. And no, it was armed militants who fired first.

Over 80 soldiers were killed in the early days of the ‘peaceful’ demonstrations – and the names and dates are documented. (I’ve heard the same from people who participated in the demonstrations in Homs, Latakkia, Damascus, and Aleppo.)

He said all militant opposition groups want to see a Muslim State and the division of the country (a position that all the Parliamentary and political meetings I have attended in Britain seem to approve); whilst the unarmed parties who seek a secular, pluralistic State are not given credence or a voice in the international arena.
He said that Turkey will support any opposition as long as regime change is the goal. The only goal on the part of the international community from the very beginning has been regime change, and they have been willing to allow the destruction of a country to achieve it.

Tartous

Our visit to Tartous was to receive a mobile medical centre that has been donated by a Dutch company for use amongst internally-displaced refugees in the coastal area, and also as a distribution centre for aid to refugees. It was deeply moving to meet those who had come to receive aid.

Some of the women told us (the monks who were with us translated for us) how their husbands and sons had been murdered by rebel groups (that the West is supporting and regards as 'moderate'). Notice the picture of Assad and Putin on the side of the distribution centre...everywhere we went, the Russians are regarded as heroes!

It is very hard to describe however the emotion of what we stumbled across by chance when we visited a local hospital. We could not have known that our visit would coincide with the return of the bodies of 22 soldiers killed in a battle in Aleppo, to their families.

Hundreds had gathered, and there was intense emotion as the coffins were loaded off a lorry, to the piercing cries of grieving relatives. We joined the crowds giving condolences to families who seemed to genuinely appreciate our presence.

Suddenly a young boy of about 10 whose fathers body was being returned, and was standing next to his crying mother and a sheikh, stood to attention in front of me, saluted and with tears flowing gave a deeply moving speech.
One of the monks with me told me that in what he said there was not one word of anger, hatred or violence, but that his words were roughly this:

"My father is a blessing to this country. He has given his life so that we may live in peace. But he is not dead. He is a martyr. And I honour him. He will live, and because of him syria will have peace."

I stood to attention looking straight at him with the crowds around looking on and letting him finish. I then saluted him before going to hold him and give e him a blessing. I could not stop the tears. The sheikh hugged me with tears in his eyes too. It is an experience I will remember as long as I Live… It was far too intense a moment to photograph.
The crowds dispersed with sirens and loud gunfire...

Maaloula

We had a fairly dramatic visit to Maaloula, the most famous Christian village in Syria, where the residents say they have lived for 5000 years, and where Aramaic, the language of Jesus is still spoken.

We were due to spend half the day there with the people of the town, but shortly after our arrival the Mayor received a message that terrorists in the surrounding hills had heard about our visit, and were going to attempt to ambush us. So with huge disappointment we had to make a high speed departure to Damascus.

I was therefore very pleased that I had visited Maaloula in April 2015, and visited both the ancient shrines of St. Thecla and of St. Sergius, both of which have been very badly damaged and defaced by the rebels. Most of the precious icons for which Maaloula is famous have also disappeared. The town was occupied by the rebels for three months, during which time there was huge tension between the Muslim and Christian residents of the town, though some of the Muslim residents had sheltered Christians. A number of Christian villagers were murdered by the rebels for refusing to convert to Islam. There is a concerted effort, with Government help, to restore the shrines and rebuild the town, and some of the residents who fled have returned.

Lebanon: Meeting with Sheikh Naim Qassem, Vice-President of Hezbollah.

Essential to finding paths to peace is talking to all parties. So it was interesting to meet with Hezbollah MPs and Sheikh Naim Qassem, Vice-president and a founder of Hezbollah in Lebanon. Hezbollah are a deeply religious Shia group, and one which respects other faiths. (One of the monks in Syria told me he had learned more about the Virgin Mary from a Hezbollah young man, than anyone else!) And my encounters with Hezbollah individuals have been of a primarily dignified and respectful people. I certainly did not agree with everything Sheikh Qassem said, but there was wisdom and truth in much of what he said.

I asked him what he would say to the British Government if they were ever to listen to him. His reply was:

"The issue for the British Government is discernment between Truth and falseness. Who are they really against and what do they really stand for? We don't want you to be our supporters.. We want you to support truth..and you cannot be selective about international law."

(See picture in this article of the author with Sheikh Qassem, another Hezbollah MP (also a local doctor), the Greek Orthodox Bishop of Bekaa.

Lebanon. Bourj Al Burajneh

In Beirut we visited the site of the bombing in Burj Al Burajneh that killed over 40 people and injured over 100 the day before the Paris bombing. We laid flowers and placed candles there.

One young man had prevented further killings by tackling a suicide bomber and covering him with his own body before the vest exploded.

Our visit, in the heart of a Hezbollah district, was clearly appreciated by everyone around. We were then taken to the local hospital to meet some of the wounded. The little lad, aged about 10, pictured in hospital with his mother, was riding past on his father's motorbike. His father was killed. The doctor said he was very close to his father and is deeply psychologically scarred.

The families and victims (Shia Muslim) wanted to receive our prayers and blessings, and one little boy even asked for my cross. I told them at the location: every soul killed and family bereaved in Beirut is equally as important as each soul and bereaved family in Paris, Syria or Russia.

General Michel Aoun

We spent nearly two hours with General Michel Aoun, Chairman of one of Lebanon’s most important Christian parties. He spoke of the recent history of Christianity in the Levant, and suggested to us that with the Christian populations in Iraq and Palestine so severely depleted, Lebanon and Syria are now the most important Christian centres in the Levant. He said we have a responsibility in the West to protect the Christians of the east – in the birthplace of Christianity. He spoke of the danger to Christians in the region now, and that their presence as part of the fabric of society in the region is essential to the stability and p lurality of the fabric of the region as a whole.

Key points from the visit:

Despite enormous suffering and a devastating economic situation, there is enormous resilience. Those who live in or have fled to the comparative safety of the government-controlled areas (perhaps 60% of the population), whether Christian, Sunni, Shi’a, Alawite, Druze, and of different political persuasions, where life goes on with a degree of ‘normality’ amidst great hardship, and there is some small degree of rebuilding and State infrastructure, (the destruction is not total) have a remarkably consistent message:

• Stop supporting armed groups. There are very few so-called ‘moderate’ rebels and those that do exist are divided – they have become channels for weapons to the extremists who are by far the majority and whose sole goal is an Islamic State.

• Work together to defeat Daesh. Bombing is not the answer… civilians will be killed and towns and villages will be destroyed. The consequences of simply bombing Daesh could be disastrous in the long term… the creation of more jihadis and hatred. Cut them off at source – their funding and arms, and support those who fight them on the ground.

• Bring all parties together in a national dialogue. You cannot exclude the government that is managing the State institutions and structures.

People are very suspicious (and probably justifiably) of the motives the Western alliance. They believe they are political pawns in a much bigger political ‘game’.

• You cannot exclude the people of Syria from a political solution.

• Realities in Syria are profoundly misrepresented in the west.

• There are multiple narratives. It is not ‘black’ and ‘white’ (or ‘good’ vs ‘evil’) as appears to be the primary presentation in the media.

• An externally imposed solution is only like to lead to further sectarianism and chaos

• Follow international law in your dealings with Syria.

Listen to the faith communities. Much can be learned and foundations have been laid from the work of the reconciliation committees ‘on the ground’ in towns and cities across the country.

Come and visit Syria. Meet and listen to the people for yourselves.

We were met with enormous kindness and hospitality. The people are exhausted and emotionally traumatised. Christians and Muslims continue to work together to bring peace and reconciliation in local towns and cities with some remarkable successes. Those involved are absolutely opposed to violence. Everyone wants to see the war end.
Our government’s position and ignorance of the realities on the ground and the wishes of the people of Syria is profoundly disturbing.

Revd Andrew Ashdown
3 December 2015