Sunday, February 22, 2015

Good of Team Peta to admit that NSA Shearer has failed, but this "National Counter Terrorism Coordinator." stunt can only work in Wycheproof

From the Co-PMs Peta Credlin and  Tony Abbott this morning:



“The government will appoint a national counter-terrorism coordinator to bring the same drive, focus and results to our counter-terrorism efforts that worked so well to stop the boats in Operation Sovereign Borders,” Mr Abbott will say. It has been suggested such a role could be filled by ASIO chief Duncan Lewis, who has experience as a major-general in the army, as a special forces commander and as ambassador to NATO.


Informed readers can be forgiven for thinking that the above has a strangely familiar ring to it.  Kevin Rudd 7 YEARS AGO appointed a National Security Adviser , none other than the same Duncan Lewis, whose job  was described in these words::

The Government will appoint a National Security Adviser, Mr Duncan Lewis AO, to provide a new level of leadership, direction and coordination to the national security agencies.
In addition to the appointment of a National Security Adviser, the national security structure will be improved by the creation of a strategic policy framework, a National Intelligence and Coordination Committee and enhancing our national crisis management arrangements.  The National Intelligence Coordination Committee will have responsibility for foreign, defence, security and law enforcement intelligence.

Which brings us then to the current National Security Adviser, Andrew Shearer.Obviously , incapable if not unwilling to do his job, he should be sacked.Why else appoint someone else to do exactly the same if not a very similar job,albeit under a different name?
Instead, his position and office remain, even as its functions are taken-over by the new office of National Counter Terrorism Coordinator. However, this being the Peta-Abbott Government , Shearer will remain, his office continue to exist (regardless of the need for spending cuts). All of which makes one wonder if this is all a mere stunt ,meant to disguise the fact  that the Lindt Cafe seige was really  a failure of intelligence and analysis at the PMO, caused in part by Shearer's inability.
This type of schoolgirl stunt might have achieved its objective in Wycheproof , but out here in the big bad world........
END 
PS: Readers are reminded that in addition to the National Security Advisor, there is also a within DFAT an Ambassador for Counter-Terrorism:
On 18 May 2014, Mr Miles Armitage was appointed as Australia's Ambassador for Counter-Terrorism. The Ambassador is responsible for developing and implementing Australia's international counter-terrorism efforts and plays a key role in coordinating policy cooperation, capacity building and operational collaboration between Australian agencies and international counter-terrorism partners.

Thursday, February 19, 2015

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has been leading what officials describe as a “massive” private and public diplomacy campaign in Indonesia......

Beginilah Menlu Australia Gambarkan Hubungan dengan Indonesia lewat "Emoji"

Selasa, 17 Februari 2015 | 14:05 WIB

BuzzfeedJawaban Julie Bishop soal hubungan Australia dengan Indonesia.

T

KOMPAS.com — Sebuah situs membuat wawancara pertama bersama politisi dunia yang jawabannya hanya boleh menggunakan emoji. Julie Bishop berbagi :) dan :( saat ditanya beberapa hal, termasuk soal hubungannya dengan Indonesia.

BuzzFeed, situs yang sering menampilkan berita-berita hiburan dan apa yang sedang ramai dibicarakan di jejaring sosial, melakukan wawancara yang cukup unik dengan Julie Bishop, Menteri Luar Negeri Australia.

Dalam wawancara yang dimuat hari Senin (16/2/2015), Menlu Julie Bishop diminta untuk hanya menjawab pertanyaan-pertanyaan yang dilakukan dengan menggunakan emoji.

Emoji adalah istilah untuk karakter gambar yang sering digunakan dalam pesan elektronik atau juga dikenal dengan istilah emoticon.

Wawancara tersebut diklaim oleh BuzzFeed sebagai wawancara pertama dengan politisi menggunakan emoji.

Tanya jawab berisi mulai dari pendapatnya soal politik di Australia, hubungan dengan negara-negara tetangga, hingga kegemaran pribadi.

Dalam wawancara tersebut, diketahui jika Bishop adalah orang yang lebih menyukai kucing daripada anjing.

Saat diajukan pertanyaan-pertanyaan seputar hubungan diplomatis, Bishop memberikan jawaban yang beragam.








And it does seem as if emoji  is Ms Bishop's preferred language :

Putin emoji-fronted? Aussie FM uses angry red face to portray Russian president

Published time: February 16, 2015 11:11
Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop.(AFP Photo / Mark Graham)
Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop.(AFP Photo / Mark Graham)
Australia’s foreign minister has given what’s believed to be the first-ever political interview with emoji-only answers. The image that Julie Bishop picked to depict the Russian president was not at all ‘smiley’.
The interview - an exchange of text messages, with Bishop required to stick to images instead of verbal answers - was done by the online news resource, Buzzfeed.
The minister was apparently approached with an offer to try the unconventional type of interview as she is herself an avid user of emoticons on her Twitter account.

Sometimes, as in her Christmas message, she uses them and nothing else.
The foreign minister accepted the challenge [of an emoji interview] in the spirit in which it was offered to her," her spokeswoman said, according to AFP.

Foreign policy questions can be answered pictorially, the interview shows.

Relations with the US and China were described by Julie Bishop with happy smileys and thumbs up.

Australia’s top diplomat was however hardly diplomatic when asked to describe President Vladimir Putin with one emoji. The reply was a red angry face.

Bishop was kinder to her prime minister, Tony Abbott, portraying him as a running man, referencing his addiction to fitness. Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull, according to Bishop, could best be illustrated with a picture of a mobile phone.
An expressionless smiley with a straight line for a mouth was the minister’s answer to the question of whether she wanted the post of prime minister.

She was also asked some non-political questions, which revealed her guilty pleasures are high-heeled shoes and donuts, she keeps herself fit by running and her favorite emoji is a winking smiling one blowing a kiss.

Thursday, January 29, 2015

Babe 3-The touching story of the Dodo that thought he was a diplomat.......Greg Sheridan is no S.Rajaratnam

The same Greg Sheridan who could not see the Asian Crisis of 97/98 coming? And called Paul Krugman (and others) dodos for spelling out their weaknesses?


And the same Greg Sheridan who time and time again misreads even South East Asia?

Singapore would be insulted by the very thought that any country, even more so Australia ,would consider that some journalist would suffice as its high commissioner to their country.
Greg Sheridan is not S.Rajaratnam, and it is shocking that Tony Abbott, one time journalist cannot see the difference,and the insult this would have caused,not only to Singapore, but also to ASEAN.


Tony Abbott considered appointing The Australian's Greg Sheridan to plum posting

James Massola


January 30, 2015 - 1:44PM 

Prime Minister Tony Abbott considered his close personal friend, The Australiannewspaper's Greg Sheridan, for the plum posting of High Commissioner to Singapore after the 2013 election.

The possibility of the appointment was tightly held within the highest ranks of the Abbott government, though some senior Department of Foreign Affairs officials became aware of it.

Fairfax Media has been told that Mr Abbott and Sheridan discussed the position before the election and that it was formally considered by government after the 2013 poll.

But the newspaper's long-serving foreign editor, who has described Mr Abbott as his "best friend" during university days, turned down the job after discussing it with the newspaper's editor-in-chief, Chris Mitchell.

Mitchell confirmed to Fairfax Media on Friday that the offer had been made and "that's all there is to it. I talked him out of going and that his future is in journalism".

"Obviously Greg and I are personal friends, as are Greg and Tony, so I guess the offer was probably quite attractive but he has a pretty good job at the Oz too."

"I'm relaxed about it all. People get offered jobs by government all the time."

Contacted by Fairfax Media on Friday, Sheridan did not deny the appointment had been in prospect.

"There is nothing for me to say about it mate. I'm not interested in talking to you," he said.

News that the appointment was considered soon after the 2013 election may raise eyebrows in Coalition ranks and comes just days after Mr Abbott's disastrous decision to knight Prince Philip, which has prompted many Coalition MPs to question  the Prime Minister's judgment.

Sheridan and Mr Abbott were allies during their university days, with the pair on the same side during internal battles within the Australian Union of Students.

In 2012, Sheridan wrote that Mr Abbott was "my best friend at that time. We talked over everything. The meaning of life, the purpose of politics, who'd win the rugby league grand final, what girls we planned to ask out, petty squabbles we might have had with our parents".

Despite the pair being close, earlier this week Sheridan joined a chorus of criticism of the Prime Minister's "dismaying" decision to knight Prince Philip.

"It is wrong in principle, strategically mistaken and tactically disastrous," he wrote.

The current high commissioner is Philip Green, who unlike Sheridan is a career diplomat. Mr Green was a former chief of staff to Kevin Rudd during his days as foreign minister. He took up the posting in  November 2012.

Department of Foreign Affairs postings usually last for three years but they can run to as long as five years. Alternatively, postings can be cut short on the whim of the government of the day.

The process for appointing ambassadors and high commissioners involves the foreign minister making a recommendation to the prime minister, but it is up to the prime minister of the day to approve the appointment or make an alternative suggestion.

The Prime Minister's office has been contacted for comment.


Saturday, January 17, 2015

UK Government expected to move against the Muslim Brotherhood, while Australia actively protects,promotes its interest-Why?

To be read together with :
http://realpolitikasia.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/australia-can-secure-journalist-peter.html

Downing Street set to crack down on the Muslim Brotherhood

An unpublished report commisisoned by David Cameron into the Muslim Brotherhood will link it to up to 60 charities, groups and even television channels operating in the UK

upporters of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood take part in a rally to protest against the death penalties for the members of the radical group in Egypt, outside the Egyptian embassy in Ankara Photo: ADEM ALTAN/AFP
Downing Street is to order a crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood and a network of Islamist groups accused of fuelling extremism in Britain and across the Arab world.
David Cameron launched an inquiry into the Brotherhood earlier this year, prompted by concerns it was stoking an Islamist ideology that had encouraged British jihadists to fight in Syria and Iraq.
Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of MI6, who is an adviser to the review, is reported to have described it as “at heart a terrorist organisation”. The Brotherhood insists it is non-violent and seeks to impose Islamic rule only through democratic change. It has condemned Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isil) and al-Qaeda.
A senior source close to the inquiry said its report – compiled but not yet published – had identified “an incredibly complex web” of up to 60 organisations in Britain, including charities, think tanks and even television channels, with links to the Muslim Brotherhood, which will all now come under scrutiny.
The inquiry, aided by the security services, has also investigated its network abroad. One expert said that the Brotherhood was now operating from three major bases – London, Istanbul and Doha, the capital of Qatar.
Qatar, the wealthiest country in the world per head of population, has for 30 years been home to Yusuf al-Qaradawi, an Egyptian cleric in exile, often described as the Brotherhood’s spiritual leader. Qaradawi, who was banned from entering Britain in 2008, is accused of anti-Semitism, supporting Palestinian suicide bombers, condoning wife- beating and punishing homosexuals.
Qatar has found itself isolated from its Gulf neighbours – Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates – over its support of the Brotherhood during the Arab Spring. Qatar also funds Hamas, which was originally established as a Palestinian branch of the Egyptian Brotherhood and whose military wing is banned as a terrorist organisation by Britain, among others.
Dr Lorenzo Vidino, who is understood to have worked on the Cabinet Office report, presided over by Sir John Jenkins, Britain’s ambassador to Saudi Arabia, said: “It is clear that the Brotherhood has many dark spots, ranging from its ambiguous relationship with violence to its questionable impact on social cohesion in Britain.”
The Government crackdown will stop short of outlawing the Muslim Brotherhood but action is expected to include:
Þ Investigations into charities that are effectively “fronts” for the Brotherhood;
Þ Inquiries into funding of the organisation and links to jihadi groups abroad;
Þ Banning clerics linked to the group from countries such as Qatar and Turkey from coming to Britain for rallies and conferences.
The source said: “We cannot ban the organisation, but that was never the intention of the review. We can go after single individuals, not for terrorist-related activity, but through the Al Capone method of law-enforcement. We cannot get them for terrorism but I bet you they don’t pay their taxes.
“One of the big things is piling pressure on the charitable missions. Until now it has been very hard to monitor all the groups linked to the Muslim Brotherhood.”
It is understood the Government will also use powers already available to Theresa May, the Home Secretary, to bar radicals linked to the Brotherhood. Visiting clerics from Turkey and Qatar are of special interest.
A Cabinet Office source said of the review: “The Home Secretary has the power to exclude a non-British citizen from the UK where she considers that the individual’s presence in the UK would not be conducive to the public good. The Home Secretary will use these powers when justified and based on all available evidence.
“Given the concerns now being expressed about the group and its alleged links to extremism and violence, it’s absolutely right and prudent that we have a more thorough understanding of the group and its impact on both on our national security and on our interest in stability and prosperity in the Middle East.”
Dr Vidino, an academic who has written a book about the Muslim Brotherhood in the West, has identified a number of groups linked to the organisation, including the Muslim Association of Britain and the Cordoba Foundation, both of which had their bank accounts closed down by HSBC in the summer. Mr Cameron, while in opposition, accused the Cordoba Foundation, run by Anas Altikriti, of being a front for the Muslim Brotherhood.
A number of individuals – including Mr Altikriti and other supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood in the UK, as well as their families – also had their HSBC accounts shut down. The bank said it was “applying a programme of strategic assessments to all of its businesses” after a £1.2 billion fine in 2012 over poor money-laundering controls, but offered no further explanation for its actions.
The origin of funding of the Brotherhood-linked groups in the UK will come under scrutiny in the Cabinet Office report. Qatar has been the Brotherhood’s major funder, bankrolling the party in Egypt, where it gained power in democratic elections before a bloody military coup.
Qatar has also bankrolled Hamas, as well as the Brotherhood in Libya, where it has been accused of joining forces with jihadist militias intent on overthrowing the secular, elected government in Tripoli. Qatar has also funded high- profile events in Britain, apparently linked to the Brotherhood.
A spokesman for the Muslim Association of Britain, which has about 1,000 members, said it had co-operated with the government review. It said it was a separate entity but added: “MAB wishes to reiterate that we share the main principles with the Muslim Brotherhood, including its commitment to uphold democracy, freedom of the individual, social justice and the creation of a civil society.
“MAB confirms that we believe the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood is neither extreme nor has it ever endorsed the use of violence. MAB rejects calls for the organisation to be proscribed.”
Mr Altikriti accused Mr Cameron of making false claims about the Cordoba Foundation under the protection of parliamentary privilege. He said his foundation was an independent think tank, and that HSBC had offered no explanation for why his bank account had been shut down.
Mr Altikriti was given security clearance as recently as February to meet President Barack Obama in the White House as part of an Iraqi delegation.
Toby Cadman, his lawyer, said the review was flawed from the beginning. He said there was a perception of bias because as ambassador to Saudi Arabia, which has outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood and which has fallen out with Qatar over the Islamist organisation, Sir John was not the right choice to oversee it.
Mr Cadman said Sir Richard Dearlove’s statement that the Muslim Brotherhood was “at heart a terrorist organisation” gave a clear implication of preconceived ideas. “There is absolutely no suggestion that Sir Richard would act improperly, but the appearance of impropriety is what matters,” he said.
Sir John’s review was completed in July but has not yet been published. It has been claimed that it was delayed because it stopped short of recommending the Brotherhood be outlawed.
The Government denies this but the failure to proscribe it is said to have angered Saudi Arabia.

Monday, January 12, 2015

Muslim scholar Chandra Muzaffar says Charlie Hebdo is an issue that affects all Muslims,,and it is for the West to start making amends,and to accommodate the Muslim worldview

Paris: A Dastardly Act Of Terror
By Chandra Muzaffar
09 January, 2015
Countercurrents.org
It is not surprising that Muslim governments, organizations and individuals right across the globe have condemned the heinous murder of 12 persons --- 10 journalists and two police --- at the headquarters of the satirical weekly, Charlie Hebdo, in Paris in the late morning of the 7th of January 2015. This dastardly act of terror, allegedly carried out by three Muslims, violates every norm in the Islamic faith.
If it is true that the killers were trying to avenge the sanctified memory of the Prophet Muhammad who has been the subject of continuous ridicule and contempt in the weekly, murdering its cartoonists and editors is clearly an abomination. One should respond to satirical cartoons with cartoons and other works of art that expose the prejudice and bigotry of the cartoonists and editors of Charlie Hebdo. One should use the Charlie Hebdo cartoons as a platform to educate and raise the awareness of the French public about what the Quran actually teaches and who the Prophet really was and the sort of noble values that distinguished his life and struggle. To assassinate those who mock the Prophet in such a barbaric manner shows that the terrorists have no understanding at all of how the Prophet himself responded to those who poured their venom and hatred upon him when he was conveying the message of justice and compassion that is the kernel of Islam to the people of Mecca and Medina in the early 7th century.
Of course, provoking the six million Muslims in France and the larger 1.8 billion Muslims worldwide through constant insults and indignities directed at the Prophet and the religion --- albeit through the medium of cartoons --- isnot only utterly reprehensible but also an affront to inter-religious harmony and social stability. It is an example of the reckless abuse of the freedom of expression which brings much grief to everyone. Freedom of expression is not the freedom to denigrate and desecrate a Prophet who is so deeply cherished by millions and millions of Muslims. If the advocates of human rights regard the freedom of a handful of cartoonists as crucial for human civilization, they should also show some appreciation of the honor and dignity of an entire people. Surely, the right to protect one’s dignity --- the dignity of a collectivity --- is also a fundamental human right.
The Charlie Hebdo episode has underscored yet again the importance of exercising freedom with a deep sense of responsibility. Restraints are part and parcel of rights. It is by balancing rights with restraints that one ensures the well-being of the whole.
This balance is especially critical at a time like this in Europe. Negative feelings towards non-European migrants are getting stronger in various parts of the continent. Islamophobia is part of this though as a phenomenon it is centuries old. If attitudes towards Muslims and migrants in general have hardened in recent years, it is partly because of rising unemployment and stagnating economies. As it often happens in such situations, the “outsider” becomes the scapegoat.
If in the midst of all this, elements from the majority, established community in Europe continue to provoke a minority which by and large views religion from a different perspective than the majority, and if some individuals from that minority react to the provocations through mindless violence, tension and conflict will become the order of the day. This is why both sides should be responsible and restrained.
Indeed, both the majority and the minority should realize that acts of terror can also be manipulated to serve the agenda of some political actor or other. In the context of Charlie Hebdo, shouldn’t we ask if the killing spree on the 7th of January was also a message of sorts to the French ruling elite? Was some group sending a warning to the elite that it should not have supported Palestine’s recent failed bid in the UN Security Council to obtain endorsement for its goal of establishing an independent, sovereign state within a short time frame?Was that group the master-mind behind 7th January?
Questions of this sort strengthen the case for an independent investigation preferably under the aegis of the UN Secretary-General into the Paris massacre. The truth behind the massacre may tell us a great deal about terrorism itself in our time.
Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is President of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST).
Malaysia.
9 January 2015.

Friday, January 9, 2015

Sydney Morning Herald-A Third World mentality hiding behind a First World facade

This confirms what I realized a long time ago,when I arrived in Australia.That for all their First World pretensions,Australian newspaper editors, particularly those at Fairfax, the ABC and SBS; are often no more, if not  less sophisticated than their East and South East Asian counterparts. This admission for Judith Whelan:
The Sydney Morning Herald's news director, Judith Whelan, said she had decided not to run any of the cartoons depicting the Prophet, not for fear for the safety of staff but because it would offend a segment of the paper's readership. "I defend Charlie Hebdo's right to publish the cartoons, that does not mean we have to," she said. 
Is clearly at odds with the declarations of press freedom  made in  this editorial:
A comparison with South Asian editors would be unfair.There ,Australian editors cannot even claim superiority in the use of the  English language. 
END 

Search smh:

Search in:

Charlie Hebdo cartoons: media around the world chart different courses

Reading the latest issue of the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo in Paris.
Reading the latest issue of the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo in Paris. Photo: AFP
Washington: As Charlie Hebdo's journalists and the police who tried to protect them lay dead in Paris, editors around the world were suddenly confronted with a grave decision.
Should they mark their solidarity with their colleagues – and their fidelity to freedom of expression – by publishing the cartoons the assailants claim had provoked them? Should they instead consider the concern of offending their own readers and even the safety of their staff?
Different outlets charted different courses.
Some, such as the UK's Telegraph and the New York Post, published photos of Charlie Hebdo's editor Stephane Charbonnier holding one of the offending front-page cartoons, but either cropped the photo or blurred part of the image.
Advertisement
The Associated Press distributed no images that included the cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad, in keeping with its longstanding policy on offensive images.
"We've taken the view that we don't want to publish hate speech or spectacles that offend, provoke or intimidate, or anything that desecrates religious symbols or angers people along religious or ethnic lines", said Santiago Lyon, a vice president of the AP and its director of photography, the Washington Post reported. "We don't feel that's useful."
He said it was not a capitulation to terrorist threats, but a policy covering all creeds and situations.
Later in the day it appeared the AP had also removed from distribution images of the controversial Andres Serrano artwork Piss Christ, after the conservative newspaper The Washington Examiner questioned the apparent double standard.
The Washington Post quoted its own executive editor, Martin Baron, as saying the Post avoids publication of material "that is pointedly, deliberately, or needlessly offensive to members of religious groups" and would continue to apply those principles in the wake of the Paris atrocity.
But the Post's editorial page, which operates with independent editorial management, decided to publish one of the cartoons in Thursday's editions.
It has selected the front page published before Charlie Hebdowas firebombed in 2011, which declared the following week's edition would be guest-edited by the Prophet Muhammad, who was depicted, with the slogan "100 Lashes If You Don't Die Laughing".
"I think seeing the cover will help readers understand what this is all about", said Fred Hiatt, The Post's editorial editor.
The Sydney Morning Herald's news director, Judith Whelan, said she had decided not to run any of the cartoons depicting the Prophet, not for fear for the safety of staff but because it would offend a segment of the paper's readership.
"I defend Charlie Hebdo's right to publish the cartoons, that does not mean we have to," she said. 
On Fox News commentators appeared throughout the day criticising censorship and self-censorship, though Fox aired none of the images.
In fact none of the major American networks or cable channels were showing images of the cartoons in their coverage through the day after the shootings.
An NBC News spokesperson told Buzzfeed,  "Our NBC News Group Standards team has sent guidance to NBC News, MSNBC, and CNBC not to show headlines or cartoons that could be viewed as insensitive or offensive".
A CNN memo obtained by Politico said,  "Although we are not at this time showing the Charlie Hebdo cartoons of the Prophet considered offensive by many Muslims, platforms are encouraged to verbally describe the cartoons in detail". It stated that photos of the cartoons held by demonstrators during protesters are "OK, if shot wide".
On social media many people shared the images as an act of defiance.
Buzzfeed and the Huffington Post published some of the offending cartoons, with the latter headlining its compilation of seven caricatures of  Muhammad, "These Are the Charlie Hebdo Cartoons That Terrorists Thought Were Worth Killing Over". 
In the last of them  Muhammad is depicted kneeling in the sand before a masked terrorist about to behead him with a knife under the heading "If the Prophet was resurrected".
Muhammad is saying to the terrorist, "I am the Prophet, fool!". He replies, "Shut up, infidel".