This article can be printed on two sides of an A4 sheet from this file (but, please be warned, it costs a lot more to print it as colour rather than as black and white).
Dear Prime Minister Scott Morrison,
Dear Prime Minister Scott Morrison,
I write to ask you to act to bring to an end circumstances faced by Julian Assange which certainly have already harmed his health and may well end his life if those circumstances are not rectified soon.
See also: Pamela Anderson Says Trump Should Pardon Julian Assange Next (6/6/18) by Jasmine Sanders |the Cut.More news about Julian Assange on the World Socialist Web Site about Julian Assange:
On 23 June, just prior to the vote on whether Britain should leave the European Union (referred to as 'Brexit'), Paul Craig Roberts (pictured right) put the case for Brexit in a 30 minute interview with Richie Allen (pictured left).
Updates (18/8/15) : 1. "Julian Assange and the Value of WikiLeaks: Subverting Illusions" (17/8/15) | Global Research republished from Roots Action, 2. Manning barred from legal library before solitary confinement hearing (17/8/15) | RT.
This article has been adapted from the original article which was published on RT on 10 Aug 2015. The fate awaiting Julian Assange should he be extradited to the United States is indicated by the treatment of fellow whistleblower Chelsea Manning at the hands of the United States Government. See Chelsea Manning faces indefinite solitary confinement, lawyer says (13/8/15) | RT.
Those rightly outraged at the murder of Tori Johnson and the death of Katrina Dawson on 16 December at the end of the Martin Place siege and at the murder of 11 people on 7 January 2015 in Paris by terrorists (see #appendix1">embedded Syrian Girl video) should also contemplate the fact that, since March 2011, the people of Syria have suffered terrorism on a scale which is vastly greater than these two tragedies. Since March 2011, they have faced an invasion by hordes of foreign terrorists coming from almost every corner of the globe and not just the Arab world. These invaders have been paid for and supplied by the United States, its European allies and its allies amongst the Arab dictatorships including Saudi Arabia and Qatar. So far, over 200,000 Syrians have been killed at the hands of these terrorists. As a consequence, the Syrian government has demanded of the United Nations act against the terrorists' sponsors.
The article below was previous published in SANA (12/4/15).
Comedian Russell Brand condemned Fox News as a "fanatical terrorist propaganda organization" during a heated, 10-minute tirade recorded on video and uploaded to the web this week.
The 39-year-old British stand-up comic-turned-actor is now making headlines for the video footage, which was uploaded to his personal YouTube channel on Tuesday this week under the title: Is Fox News More Dangerous than Isis?
This article was originally published on Russia Today 16 August 2013 with the disclaimer, "The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT." Whilst on-line news services such as Russia Today Press TV are good sources from which to learn the truth, particularly about the conflict in Syria, which is contrary to what we are fed from the mainstream news media (msm), they unfortunately mirror the msm's political correctness in regard to immigrants and claimed asylum seekers. A substantial number of articles from such news services have reported on the plight of prospective immigrants attempting to enter countries such as Canada, the United States, Europe and Australia, without regard to the already dire economic circumstance of many native inhabitants of those countries, which can only be made worse by the arrival of more immigrants also seeking shelter in a tight housing market and employment where unemployment is already high. This article by Tony Gosling is a welcome change from Russia Today's usual political correctness on the immigration question. A similar viewpoint was recently put by Australian Labor Party MP Kelvin Thomson at the inaugural meeting of Victoria First on 1 December 2013.
Britain's shadow minister for borders and immigration, Labour's Chris Bryant, promised to take on the big corporations this week. But as his embargoed speech was leaked to big business, the nation watched his political resolve melt into nothing.
When I recently re-read my article
When I recently re-read my article
As Australians we pride ourselves with the presumption we live in a democracy, benefiting from the universally accepted principles of 'equality and freedom'.
Source of illustration
The only way the global sustainability and justice predicament can be solved is via something like the inspiring Transition Towns movement. However thought needs to be given to a number of themes or it might fail to achieve significant goals.
Also published on Online Opinion on 21 Apr 09.
As the G20 summit of world leaders tries to resolve the economic crisis, where are we really heading? Many key issues are being ignored in the rush to "restore growth" at any price.
OPT for a sustainable planet
On Thursday, August 21, a spokesperson for the Optimum Population Trust, (OPT), stated that continuing large-scale population growth threatens Britain’s future security.
This story was originally published in the Canadian foreign policy weekly magazine Embassy on 11 Jun 08 as Immigration Debate Needs to Get Serious. It is being reproduced here with the kind permission of the author Michelle Collins.
Days before Bill C-50 was approved, experts warned that Canadians must start taking a realistic look at the country's immigration policies.
By Michelle Collins
MONTREAL—Canadians must wake up to reality and debate on the pros and cons of its immigration system because a serious mistake will be "set in stone for generations to come," a leading migration expert from the UK at conference last week.
Sir Andrew Green, chairman of the UK-based Migrationwatch, was speaking at the second annual international Fraser Institute conference on migration, days before Parliament approved controversial changes to the immigration system.
Speakers at the conference included former diplomats, professors and authors who all had harsh criticisms for the government's handling of immigration over the years, and were adamant that major reforms are needed and fewer immigrants should be admitted.
Throughout the conference, numerous experts urged the government to do more research on migration and charged that Canadians are hiding from debating the issue.
Sir Andrew, whose organization tracks migration flows, said the British government's failure over the years to fully examine and plan for the effects of its rapidly massive immigration rates dramatically changed sectors of society and is one reason 120,000 Britons choose to emigrate from the country each year.
"In Britain, immigration is probably the most important issue of our generation," Sir Andrew said. "I'm not sure if Canada's realized it or not, that it's in a rather similar position."
For years, the debate around immigration has centered on keeping Canada's door for thousands of immigrants wide open—Canada is the only country in the world#main-fn1">1 that aims to bring in almost 300,000 people each year.
But there is a growing movement now to re-frame that debate and reform the immigration system in a way that focuses on what's best for Canada and Canadians, namely identifying who will bring the most benefit to the country, how to expedite their entry and how to ensure newcomers become dedicated, loyal Canadians.
Sir Andrew said it is essential Canada's immigration system be reformed, but that the greatest challenge to doing so is a general reluctance to talk about immigration for fear of being perceived as racist. The same attitude was prevalent in Britain, he said, with negative repercussions.
"People [in Britain] now realize it's a subject that can no longer be avoided, the numbers are vastly greater," Sir Andrew said of the British experience. "Net immigration has tripled in the last 10 years, this has alerted the public and now it's impossible to avoid a debate on what needs to be done."
He said surveys show that the majority of Britons feel their whole society is being changed beyond recognition, that the public has never been consulted about this, and that their government has deceived them over a period of years.
"Eighty per cent of the population do not trust the government to be honest and open about immigration," he said.
Also bringing an international perspective for Canadians to consider was Jean- Paul Gourévitch, an international expert on immigration from the University Paris XII, who said emotional sensitivities must be removed from any policy debate about immigration.
"We tried for years to de-emotionalize the debate as much as we could," Mr. Gourévitch said, speaking in French. "Those with different views could at least come together in debate."
Mr. Gourévitch said society's attitude toward immigrants has improved vastly over the last 10 years. He said Canada's problem is rooted in a lack of information and transparency, and that the government should be collecting information and statistics.
"We went nuts to do this in France," Mr. Gourévitch said. "Try to achieve a maximum transparency in the system…try to approach the question of costs."
To gather the necessary information, he recommended Canada establish local and regional reporting bureaus to collect and monitor data on immigrants who move into their areas.
McGill University professor Stephen Gallagher echoed this and said one of the fundamental problems is the lack of proper research and cost data on immigration, and this works to the advantage of emotional appeals.
To that end, he said, Canada stands alone as a country where mass immigration is accepted as a policy norm and is celebrated as an election promise, something that would be political suicide in many other developed countries.
Former executive director of Canadian immigration services James Bissett called the frank discussion at the conference a major step forward for the "thorny issue of immigration." He said immigration is a subject that receives very little attention from the public and as a policy issue.
He said Toronto and Vancouver are on track to becoming "Asian cities," and that this will have significant impacts and should at the very least be talked about.
The conference last week was highlighted with a keynote address from Immigration Minister Diane Finley, who shared what she called "our vision of a 21st century immigration program that will put an end to the sad cliché of doctors driving taxi cabs."
IRPA Changes Praised
On Monday night, the changes she had proposed to the immigration act, which are contained in the budget implementation act, passed a vote in the House of Commons as Liberals abstained in droves.
"I'm absolutely delighted," Ms. Finley said afterward. Ms. Finley said the government will have to wait for the bill to pass in the Senate before implementation legislation can be introduced.
"This still has to get through the Senate," she said. "Once it gets through the Senate, through Royal Assent, we'll be proceeding on it very rapidly."
During the conference, Fraser Institute co-chair Martin Collacott praised Ms. Finley as the first minister to take an interest in what is best for Canada and declared that she had the institute's full support for the changes.
Also delivering high praise was University of Western professor Salmi Mansur, who said immigration is an issue no one wants to touch for fear of being labelled racist, and encouraged Ms. Finley to bring in even more changes.
"Faster, please," Mr. Mansur said. "We need more reform, we need deeper reform, and someone needs to convey that to [Ms. Finley] and the consensus in Ottawa."
But while there was a consensus for change to the immigration policy, most were at odds with Ms. Finley's assertions that this is the solution to Canada's labour challenges.
William Robson, president and CEO of C.D. Howe Institute said another policy option would be to raise the age of retirement to 75.
"Despite discouraging research findings, many Canadians think immigration can maintain growth potential in the workforce," Mr. Robson said. "If immigration is to be the solution, levels would have to be much higher."
Fraser Institute senior fellow Gordon Gibson said Canada's immigration policy is one of "benign neglect" fuelled by Canadians' guilt for having many advantages over others in the world.
Rather than helping by importing people, Mr. Gibson said Canada should increase it's foreign aid spending, which he said is only a fraction of the net cost of immigration.
"The fact that immigration is necessary for economic prosperity is just not true," he said. "Much worse, the fact that it is held out as the answer to an aging society gives the excuse to politicians of not having to address the problems of an aging society.
"If reform is needed, it must be institutional in nature so that all politicians can hide behind it," he said, suggesting that Canada establish a royal commission and an immigration policy think-tank at arms length from the government to lay out facts and options.
He said Canada should dramatically change its priorities from immigration to aid and that any study of immigration should focus on what is good
mcollins [AT] embassymag.ca
#main-fn1" id="main-fn1">1. #main-fn1-txt">↑ That changed on 14 May 2004 when Australia's Federal immigration minister Chris Evans announced that Australia's already record high immigration quota would be lifted to 300,000.
The (House of Lords Economic Affairs) committee has rebuked the Government for using "irrelevant and misleading" economic statistics to justify the boom in immigration in the past decade.
The committee...includes the former chancellors (Finance Ministers) Lord Lawson and Lord Lamont, former City figures such as Lord Turner and Lord Vallance and leading economists including Lord Skidelsky and Lord Layard. Several ministers are members.
Lord Wakeham said: "The argument put forward by the Government that large-scale net immigration brings significant economic benefits for the UK is unconvincing. (Our 8-month study has) found no evidence to support their position.
There is little or no economic benefit to Britain from the present high level of immigration. The immigrants are not needed to fill labour shortages or help fund the state pension for retiring Britons.
- High levels of immigration threaten to price millions of Britons out of the housing market over the next 20 years.
- Government statistics on immigration are "seriously inadequate" and compromise the ability accurately to set interest rates and allocate £100 billion in public funding.
- Certain groups, including the low-paid, some ethnic minorities and young people seeking to get on the jobs ladder may suffer because of competition from immigrants.
- Immigrants have an "important economic impact" on public services with some schools struggling to cope with the rapidly-rising number of children who do not speak English as a first language.
"House of Lords' immigration report 'forgets environment'" by the UK's Optimum Population Trust which is critical of the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee for understating the environmental impact of immigration. Also published here.
"Migration has brought 'zero' economic benefit" By Philip Johnston and Robert Winnett, 29 March 2008 in the UK's Telegraph newspaper.
"Report says immigration costly" By Hsin-Yin Lee 9 April 2008, in the Washington Times
Optimum Population Trust
News Release- April 1 2008
Peers’ immigration report “forgets environment”
Large-scale immigration poses threats to the environment largely overlooked by the House of Lords economic affairs committee, the Optimum Population Trust said today (Tuesday, April 1).
The committee’s report, which found “little or no” benefit for the resident population from current high levels of immigration, was published today. It echoes many of the arguments put forward in recent years by the OPT - notably on pensions, job vacancies and impact on GDP – but devotes relatively little attention to the environmental impacts of mass immigration, which are potentially just as serious as the economic ones and carry their own economic consequences.
Immigration is responsible for at least 70 per cent of the UK’s projected population increase, which will take the UK from 61 million today to 85 million by 2081, according to the latest principal projection from the Office for National Statistics, published last October. The high-variant projection from the ONS says the population could be as much as 109 million in 2081.
Valerie Stevens, OPT chair, said: “The environmental consequences of such a massive population rise are alarming. They include growing water and energy shortages, problems of food production and food insecurity, increasing greenhouse gas emissions, loss of countryside and green space and all the psychological stresses that come with high population densities, overcrowding and loss of tranquillity. Britain is not only a small and crowded island – it is one already beyond the limits of sustainability.”
“Yet apart from a few paragraphs on what it calls ‘wider welfare issues’ [paragraphs 181-185 of report] the committee lays little emphasis on the environment. Even its section on housing, which points out what we have been saying for a long time – that increased population and immigration levels have contributed to higher house prices – deals largely with prices rather than the impact on green space or productive land.”
OPT analysis of the 36,000-word report shows that water, energy, food production and climate change are not mentioned at all, noise and congestion only once and the countryside only twice. The words “environment” or “environmental” are only used four times and “green” only once.
Valerie Stevens added: “For too long many people with environmental concerns about immigration levels have been afraid to speak out for fear of being labelled racist. If the Lords report succeeds in finally exploding this conspiracy of silence, it will be very welcome.
“Unfortunately, their primarily economic brief has had the effect of seriously underplaying the entire environmental dimension – even though environmental problems usually carry severe economic consequences. The Lords make the point that the Government ‘appears not to have considered these [wider welfare] issues at all’* - but it is time somebody did.
“A recent OPT study found that the UK could support a population of only 17 million if it had to provide for itself from its own resources. We urgently need a serious environmental examination of just how many people these islands can sustain.”
Is there something endemic in state broadcasting in the Anglophone world which makes it taboo to discuss the population question and to air views that are critical of immigration? …