More Police Raids As War On Journalism Escalates Worldwide — Desultory Heroics

By Caitlin Johnstone Source: CaitlinJohnstone.com The Australian Federal Police have conducted two raids on journalists and seized documents in purportedly unrelated incidents in the span of just two days. Yesterday the AFP raided the home of News Corp Australia journalist Annika Smethurst, seeking information related to her investigative report last year which exposed the fact that the […]

via More Police Raids As War On Journalism Escalates Worldwide — Desultory Heroics

THIS is the REAL Australia – no ‘laid-back’ bullshit but deeply authoritarian and deeply servile. The Australian Federal Police are and always were, from their inception, the Australian Political Police.

red-star

Surveillance Capitalism — Desultory Heroics

By John Bucher Source: Adbusters The alarm beside your bed rings, triggered by an event in your calendar. The smart thermostat in your bedroom senses your motion and turns on the hot water, reporting your movements to a central database at the same time. News and social updates ping your phone, with your decision whether […]

via Surveillance Capitalism — Desultory Heroics

red-star

Hawke and Keating – the bosses’ men

eight-hour-banner-pioneers

Eight Hour Banner, Melbourne, 1856

Contradicting the immediate elevation to national sainthood of Bob Hawke (soon to be Australia’s Abe Lincoln?) by the capitalist media and political agents of the bourgeoisie (regarding the Labor Party, note the American spelling of ‘labour’), across the board from ‘left’ to ‘right’, following his death yesterday, the article below points to why the bourgeoisie and their lackeys thought and think so highly of both him and Keating.

***

Luke Faulkner, ‘When did unions become the bad guys?’ ABC News, updated 25.09.07

How things have changed since April 1983 when Bob Hawke’s union credentials were seen as a big plus in his quest to get into the Lodge.

Hawke’s ability to work in partnership with the union movement through the Prices and Incomes Accord was a direct result of his ACTU history.

While a drover’s dog could have won the 1983 election for the Labor Party, it is unlikely that the Accord would have been introduced, let alone remain in operation for the entire period of the Labor Government, had Hawke not had a union history.

The union movement, the Accord and the federal Labor government worked well together during the Hawke years.

The fact that the Labor Party was the political child of the union movement was not only openly confessed to, but proactively touted; especially come election time. And it worked, time and time again.

The wider Australian community which benefited from tax cuts, funding for job creation and training, extra child care places and other benefits negotiated as features of the Accord, was also happy with the role of unions.

This period of widespread union popularity and acceptance under Hawke and the Accord was not unusual but, rather, a reflection of how things had always been in Australia. Unions were an acceptable, indeed a necessary, feature of Australian working life.

So, when did unions become the bad guys? As always, there is more than one explanation.

Poisoned chalice

First there was the Accord itself.

Odd though it may seem, it could well be argued that the period in which unions had most input into the formulation of government policy was also the one which heralded their downhill slide; with one addition – Paul Keating.

Each of the ‘editions’ of the Accord (and there were eight of them) specified how, when and where pay improvements could be secured.

Pay rises were no longer won – they were awarded and any union which tried to step outside the very strict stipulations of the Accord was quickly and severely punished.

The airline pilots’ dispute in 1989 is the most obvious example of the Government response to rogue union action, though there were a number of others.

Unions became complacent. Life was easy.

The fighting spirit that had been honed over previous generations and which had resulted in great benefits being won for working people was weakened by the Accord.

With this loss of spirit came a loss of respect – from friend and foe alike.

Union members noticed the inability to strive for improvements in pay and conditions over those stipulated, and the concurrent (though possibly not related) decline in real wages over the Accord.

They blamed their full-time officials and then questioned the benefits of spending their weekly union dues when most of the same benefits negotiated under the Accord were accessible to the wider, non-union, community. The decline in union popularity started with their own members.

Keating’s EFAs

Paul Keating is another reason for the demise of union popularity. Keating wasn’t Hawke. He believed that unions inhibited organisational flexibility and productivity.

He introduced ‘Enterprise Flexibility Agreements’ (EFAs) – organisation-specific non-union collective bargaining mechanisms.

This was the first in a series of anti-union changes to the industrial legislation laws.

Between 1991-1996 he increasingly divorced himself and his government from being perceived as being political tool of the union movement. The last three editions of the Accord clearly reflect this change.

The Accord became a series of motherhood statements rather than a comprehensive policy document.

We are all aware that anti-union laws have increased over the years. What was forgotten is that Keating started it with the introduction of EFAs. …

eight-hour-day-procession

Eight hour day procession

red-star

Images

How to identify a gaslighter and what to do

Gaslighting

Parents can gaslight their children, Dr Sarkis says

“Gaslighting is ‘a form of domestic violence’ – and children can be victims too”, Anna Kelsey-Sugg, Areej Nur, ABC radio Life Matters, 21.04.19

If reality TV show Married at First Sight taught us anything, it’s what gaslighting can look like.

Even if you don’t know the term, you might have recognised the behaviour.

Take Sam saying to Elizabeth things like, “Why are you so angry?”, “You need to calm down”, and “You’ve lost your mind”, when she wants to know why he’s ignored her calls for a week.

That’s “classic gaslighting”, says Stephanie Sarkis, a US therapist who has authored a book on the topic.

And it can be responsible for more than high-drama television: Dr Sarkis says it’s “emotional abuse” that can develop into physical abuse.

“We do need to take this as seriously as a form of domestic violence,” Dr Sarkis says.

And because gaslighters are “so good at manipulating”, she says anyone can be the victim of one.

Even children.

Dr Sarkis says parents can gaslight too, creating instability and confusion at home.

‘The goal is to make you question your reality’

‘Gaslighting’ describes a series of manipulative behaviours, and takes its name from Patrick Hamilton’s 1938 play Gas Light, later adapted into a film starring Ingrid Bergman. In it, a husband slowly manipulates his wife into thinking she’s becoming insane. The term has seen a surge in popularity over the past few years.

So what is a gaslighter out to achieve?

“The goal is to make you question your reality and become more dependent on the gaslighter for your wellbeing,” Dr Sarkis says.

“The gaslighter wants to make sure that you don’t make any moves without their OK first and that you give all your attention to them.

“It’s all about power and control.”

Dr Sarkis says there are some clear red flags when it comes to gaslighting behaviour.

A gaslighting partner might hide your belongings, for example, then tell you you’re irresponsible for losing them.

They might cheat, then accuse you of cheating, despite no evidence to suggest it.

They can also isolate you from those closest to you, “so they have you all to themselves”, Dr Sarkis says.

“Particularly, they go after people who are near and dear to you,” she says.

“[They might say] ‘other people think you’re crazy’, pitting people against you, saying that a relative said something that they really didn’t say that was derogatory towards you.”

If it’s very difficult to express criticisms or discuss with a partner what’s not working well in a relationship, that’s another red flag, according to Dr Sarkis.

“If you say, ‘I’d really like to talk to you about something’, the person will disappear on you, or they’ll change the subject or they’ll do anything they can to not talk about their own failings,” she says.

“They don’t feel like they have any failings.”

And it’s not just partners who can be gaslighters.

Parents can also target a child with gaslighting behaviour, Dr Sarkis says, which can begin when a child begins to develop an independent spirit or starts to say no to things.

“That’s when the gaslighter starts really letting out their anger,” Dr Sarkis says.

She says gaslighter parents “tend to have a golden child and a scapegoat child, and those roles reverse at will”.

“So you’ll either be the child that can do no wrong or the child that can do no right, and the next day you are the exact opposite,” she says.

“It gets extremely confusing to kids and there’s no stability in that type of parent-child relationship.”

Gaslighting can also manifest in friendships.

A person who is “pathologically envious” of a friend, for example, might “try to sabotage your relationship with your partner or spouse”, Dr Sarkis says.

They may also try to pit your children, neighbours and other friends against you, she says.

‘The best thing you can do is just go’

If you’ve identified a toxic gaslighter in your life, Dr Sarkis says there are some swift measures you should take.

“First, if you’re concerned about your safety, contact your local resources and domestic violence resources just to make sure that your safety is kept to number one,” she says.

“If you’re in a relationship with [a gaslighter] and you don’t have children, the best thing you can do is just go.”

Next? “Make sure that they don’t have access to you,” Dr Sarkis says.

She recommends blocking the person’s phone numbers and emails, and telling your friends and family not to pass on any messages from that gaslighter.

Dr Sarkis says the gaslighter might try a method called “hoovering” — to try to get back their partner “through any means necessary”.

“Because they need this attention and when they don’t have that attention from you, they will seek it out in pathological means,” she says.

If you have children with the gaslighter, it’s more complicated than just blocking them.

Dr Sarkis recommends creating a detailed parenting plan that establishes boundaries, and includes details such as where and when to exchange children, and what will happen if the other person doesn’t show up.

“You need to have that written out very clearly,” Dr Sarkis says.

And in forming new relationships, Dr Sarkis says we shouldn’t need to keep our guards up, but that it’s a good idea to stay alert to red flags.

“I think we really need to listen to our intuition,” she says.

“We all have a different level of when something feels not right, and I think we really need to listen to that.”

Above all, take ‘mental’ notes and trust your intuition.

Source

red-star

As I predicted…with a lot more of this to come

Julian-Assange

Assange makes a statement outside the High Court in London in February 2016, when he had already spent three years holed up in the Ecuadorian Embassy.

Suelette Dreyfus, ‘EU hails Assange while Australia does nothing’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 18.04.19

The European Parliament passed a law this week to protect whistleblowers across 28 countries, with support from 591 MEPs to just 29 against, while some abstained and some were absent. This new EU “directive” may have been inspired in part by WikiLeaks’ reporting, but it will not help its founder, Julian Assange, who is already sitting in a British high-security prison, Belmarsh, under harsh conditions.

Assange faces a UK charge of skipping bail. He always said he skipped bail because the US government wanted to put him in a US prison. He was correct.

Now the US is attempting to extradite Assange to face criminal proceedings. Its single charge against him is about an event that happened nearly a decade ago – and it is a serious threat to media freedom.

This was the view of many in the meeting rooms at the European Parliament in Strasbourg this week. On Monday night the Parliament’s plenary passed a motion to discuss Assange’s plight. A stream of MEPs from different countries told the chamber of their worry for his safety, proposed giving him asylum in Europe, and insisted he not be extradited to the US.

A few journalists have claimed US criminal proceedings are not a threat to press freedom because “Assange isn’t a journalist”. Why? Because he “just dumped” US military documents, the “War Logs”, in an unredacted form. This is inaccurate.

When WikiLeaks published the Afghanistan War Logs, it withheld more than 15,000 records. Its next major publication, the Iraq War Logs, was more heavily redacted – so much so that other media outlets complained.

Assange is both a journalist and a publisher; he has led fearless news reporting over more than a decade. His digital media outlet has worked like a wire service: it publishes straight, fact-based news pieces, supported by data sets of redacted original material. Media around the globe have taken these news pieces and expanded them by enhancing the stories with local content, as they might with an AP news story.

Traditional media outlets have now copied many innovations by Assange. These include installing anonymous digital drop boxes, publishing large redacted data sets in support of investigative news stories, hiring data science journalists, and encouraging reporters to improve their cybersecurity to protect sources.

I previously worked with Assange, writing the book Underground, and other journalism. What I witnessed was an investigative journalist at work. He had a strong news sense, sought to report the facts accurately, was a good writer, and believed in reporting news in the public interest. Since 2007, he has been a member of the journalists’ trade union, the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance.

That the EU Parliament is moving to protect whistleblowers, and many of its members are so concerned about Assange, begs the question: why isn’t the Australian government using its special relationship with Britain to ask for its own citizen to be sent safely home? Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s throw-away lines about Assange’s case raises questions about whether he is a leader who will look after Australians in strife overseas. This is one of the roles of a government.

Labor leader Bill Shorten could easily follow the lead of his British Labour counterpart, Jeremy Corbin, who stated he does not think Assange should be extradited to the US. But he hasn’t yet.

The US criminal charge puts at risk the public interest chain of investigative journalism: the information path of whistleblower from journalist to publisher to the public. This chain depends on technology, particularly for security and anonymity protections. An attack on any part of this chain will weaken this corrective mechanism that exposes corruption in our society.

Whether you agree or disagree with Assange, he has transformed journalism, and turned whistleblowing from a corruption issue into a freedom-of-expression issue. If this extradition goes forward, expect the chill of a coming winter in media freedom.

red-star

Source

Two courageous Australians

Although John Pilger and Julian Assange lack class analysis they are two fine Australians. No aping of the US accent here, no Texan pronunciation of ‘Iraq’ nor beginning every response with ‘So…’.

Principles and no servility, unlike that of their culture and government which can’t wait to abandon Assange to the enraged US capitalist class and their agents (that the ‘Christian’ Prime Minister Morrison said that Assange ‘won’t get any special treatment’ by the Australian government to represent him is an early indicator), just as they did Mamdouh Habib and the token white Taliban David Hicks, even while every other country, including Britain, was demanding the return of their citizens from Guantanamo Bay).

I highly recommend this video.

Watch developments as the Australian government (either Liberal or Labor – note the American spelling – post the upcoming federal election), so big and tough in relation to China (but not too much – as ex-PM Abbott said, ‘fear and greed’ are the drivers in Australia’s myopic relations with China), abandons a fine Australian to his fate.

red-star

 

The Sydney Morning Herald – where journalism outdoes science

M87bh_EHT_960

First Horizon-Scale Image of a Black Hole

Washington; AP, with Liam Mannix, ‘Humanity stares into black hole abyss’, The Sydney Morning Herald  12.04.19

‘…The black hole is about 6 billion times the mass of our sun and is in a galaxy called M87. Its “event horizon” – the precipice, or point of no return where light and matter get sucked inexorably into the hole – is as big as our entire solar system.

Myth says a black hole would rip a person apart, but scientists said that because of the particular forces exerted by an object as big as the one in M87, someone could fall into it and not be torn to pieces. But the person would never be heard from or seen again.’

red-star

Image

“All that comes into being deserves to perish”

200 million suns: M60-UCD1, the densest galaxy in the nearby universe

200 million suns: M60-UCD1, the densest galaxy in the nearby universe

This much is certain: there was a time when the matter of our island universe had transformed into heat such an amount of motion – of what kind we do not yet know – that there could be developed from it the solar systems appertaining to (according to Mädler) at least twenty million stars, the gradual extinction of which is likewise certain. How did this transformation take place? We know just as little as Father Secchi knows whether the future caput mortuum of our solar system will once again be converted into the raw material of new solar systems. But here either we must have recourse to a creator, or we are forced to the conclusion that the incandescent raw material for the solar systems of our universe was produced in a natural way by transformations of motion which are by nature inherent in moving matter, and the conditions for which, therefore, must also be reproduced by matter, even if only after millions and millions of years and more or less by chance, but with the necessity that is also inherent in chance.

Friedrich Engels, Dialectics of Nature, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1976, 37-38

red-star

Image

Drama and scale

horsehead_kpno_960

The Horsehead Nebula

HorseheadFlame_Zauner_960

Wisps surrounding the Horsehead Nebula

red-star

Images: top/bottom

Two letters to the editor: on the servility and racism of a fearful nation

Prime-Minister-Harold-Holt-and-President-Johnson

Prime Minister Harold Holt and President Johnson

Two letters to the editor, The Sydney Morning Herald, 27.03.19

Memorial a sham that glorifies wars fought for other countries

I’m looking for a letter which says “don’t extend the Australian War Memorial, demolish it”.

None of the Australian personnel who served, suffered and died in World War I, and subsequent wars, made their sacrifice for Australia.

It was all for the Mother Country, or to keep sweet with the US.

Everybody remembers Menzies saying: “It is my melancholy duty to inform you officially that, in consequence of the persistence of Germany in her invasion of Poland, Great Britain has declared war upon her, and that, as a result, Australia is also at war”.

Everybody remembers Holt’s “all the way with LBJ”.

Everybody remembers Hasluck pressuring the Americans to request an Australian battalion to join US combat troops in South Vietnam.

I except the 624 regular army and Citizen Military Forces members killed on the Kokoda track while defending Australia against the Japanese.

I also except the tens of thousands of unknown partisans who were hunted and shot down defending their homeland in the bitter guerrilla war fought on Australian soil from 1788 to 1928.

The present war glorification park is a joke.

It is a sham hatched by John Howard and Professor Geoffrey Blainey and about to be brought to fruition by Dr Brendan Nelson.

Kenneth Griffiths, O’Connor

Face up to early conflict

Brendan Nelson (“Indigenous gargoyles to stay at Australian War Memorial”, canberratimes.com.au, June 4, 2015) said the AWM did not have the resources to deal with the armed conflict between Indigenous and white Australians.

However, $350 million was spent on the Anzac Centenary and $485 million allocated for memorial expansion.

There are still no plans to memorialise the Frontier Wars. The director’s argument is surely not sustainable.

The AWM, or the director, have also argued from time to time that war was never declared against Indigenous Australia, nor were the Frontier Wars fought overseas.

Once again these are weak arguments as we never declared war on North Vietnam but we rightly memorialise the conflict.

The AWM seems also to have overlooked that significant armed conflict occurred on Australian soil in Darwin in World War II. This is dealt with appropriately in the galleries.

One can conclude that our past is just too grim and we haven’t matured enough to acknowledge these wars.

But we must.

Germany has been able to face its Nazi past and emerged stronger as it faces the future.

We cannot grow as a nation until we have come to grips with the blood that was spilt in the Frontier Wars; wars that may have taken more Australian lives than World Wars I and II combined, and wars that shaped our nation.

Digby Habel, Cook

***

To illustrate the depth of Australian servility to their latest anglophone bully-boy-on-the-block-master, I add a quotation from the Australian War Memorial website which addresses the ‘award’ as a ‘battle honour’ of an American word to the name for the Track on which approximately 625 Australian soldiers died and on which no American soldiers fought (If you search the War Memorial website for ‘Kokoda Track’ up will come links to ‘Kokoda Trail’. Do you think the Americans would re-name any of their trails ‘track’, let alone one on which so many of their citizens had died fighting for their country?):

From: http://www.awm.gov.au/units/event_291.asp

“Kokoda Trail” and “Kokoda Track” have been used interchangeably since the Second World War and the former was adopted by the Battles Nomenclature Committee as the official British Commonwealth battle honour in October 1957.

red-star

Source