Father and daughter have child

Taken from Sydney Morning Herald, Australia
APP - April 7, 2008

A South Australian woman has given birth to her father's daughter after the couple had sex.



John and Jenny Deaves reunited 30 years after Mr Deaves separated from Jenny's mother.

Jenny was 31 and, just two weeks after meeting, father and daughter had sex.

"John and I are in this relationship as consenting adults," Mrs Deaves told the Nine Network last night.

"We are just asking for a little bit of respect and understanding."

Their 11-month-old daughter Celeste, shown on TV, appears fit and healthy.

Ms Deaves said soon after reuniting with her father she began to see him as a man first and her father second.

"I was looking at him, sort of going, 'Oh, he's not too bad.'

"Like you might look at a man across the bar at a nightclub."

Ms Deaves brought two children, Samantha and Alex, into the relationship after splitting from her former partner.

Mr Deaves admitted that he "initially" thought having sex with his daughter was wrong.

"Emotions take over. As people no doubt realise, there are times during your life where emotions do rule the heart, it rules the head," he said.

"I knew it was illegal. Of course I knew it was illegal but you know, so what."

Ms Deaves said the physical relationship with her father was like "a sexual relationship with any other man".

For Mr Deaves the sexual relationship was "absolutely fantastic".

A South Australian police media spokesman said: "The couple is being monitored."

---------------------------------------------------------


LATEST UPDATE 08.04.08: latest court transcripts have revealed that the father and daughter had another baby seven years ago, who died from a congenital heart defect.

I just hope that the new baby does not have the same defects. This is why it is very wrong to marry family members - firstly it is morally wrong but also there is a big chance that the genes of the two parenst will be too close and the ofspring will have defects/ suffer from mutations.

Another War-monger bites the dust!

With Blair out of office and now Howard gone the count down to Bush's days in office has finally begun....

The article below is taken from Sydney Morning Herald, November 25, 2007
By Jason Koutsoukis

Rudd romps to historic win

As a triumphant Kevin Rudd last night led Labor to an historic landslide victory with a national swing of 5.7% giving him a likely majority of 24 seats, ousted prime minister John Howard suffered an ignominious end to his 33-year political career with the apparent loss of his seat of Bennelong.

Labor's victory means that for the first time in Australian history Labor now holds government in every state, territory and at Commonwealth level.

It also means that for the first time a woman, Julia Gillard, will hold the second-highest public office in the land.

John Howard conceded defeat at 10.35pm, admitting that Labor had won an emphatic victory and congratulated Mr Rudd on assuming the nation's top job.

"I want to say that there is no prouder job that anybody can occupy than the prime minister of this country," Mr Howard said.

"I wish him well in the task that he will undertake and I want to say on behalf of the Coalition that has governed this country for the last 111/2 years that we bequeath to him a nation that is stronger and prouder and more prosperous than it was."

Mr Rudd is only the third Labor leader in 60 years to win government from Opposition, and becomes Australia's 26th prime minister and Labor's 11th.

With a record 53.8% of the two-party preferred vote, Mr Rudd can claim an even greater victory than that of Bob Hawke, who won in 1983 with 53.2%.

He immediately declared his government would address with "great urgency" the pressing challenges of climate change and water, and would focus on creating fairness and flexibility in the workplace.

"We should celebrate and honour the way in which we conduct this great Australian democracy of ours and it's been on display again tonight," Mr Rudd told a cheering crowd in his home town of Brisbane.

He thanked Mr Howard for his immense contribution to public service over his political career.

By late last night it was apparent that Mr Howard had lost his seat of Bennelong to Labor's star recruit, former ABC journalist Maxine McKew, with a swing of almost 5%.

However, both Mr Howard and Ms McKew described the seat as being on a knife-edge.

Mr Howard will suffer the humiliation of becoming only the second sitting prime minister in history to lose his seat if Bennelong falls. But with a large number of postal votes set to favour Mr Howard, strategists on both sides agreed Bennelong remained too close to call.

Mr Howard, who said he took full responsibility for the Liberals' defeat, endorsed former treasurer Peter Costello as the party's next leader.

Taking the stage at Sydney's Wentworth Hotel, where he has celebrated his previous four election wins since 1996, Mr Howard paid tribute to his family, and the Liberal Party.

"I owe more to the Liberal Party than the Liberal Party owes to me," Mr Howard said.

"The Liberal Party has been unbelievably generous and loyal and forgiving and understanding to me over the 33 years that I've been in parliament, the 15 or more years that I've led it and the 111/2 years that I have been prime minister."

The routing leaves the Liberal Party depleted at every level of government across the nation - Brisbane Lord Mayor Campbell Newman now holds the Liberals' highest public office.

But Peter Costello, the man tipped to be charged with rebuilding the shattered party, declined to speculate on his future last night. Mr Costello, who comfortably retained the safe Melbourne seat of Higgins, said the party would "be very very proud of what it has achieved in government".

Late last night Labor looked to have won 82 seats, the Liberals 58, eight seats were in doubt and two went to other parties.

The battle between the Coalition and the Greens for the balance of power in the Senate was too close to call last night.

Another security firm involved in Iraq shooting

Taken from The Sydney Morning Herald, Australia, 10 October 2007
Reuters/AFP/AAP

A foreign security company staffed mainly by Australian guards said one of its security teams was involved in Tuesday's fatal shooting in central Baghdad.

The Iraqi government said two women were shot dead by foreign security guards.

The scene of the incident was near a base of Unity Resources Group (URG), which is staffed mainly by Australian guards.

The Australian head of the security company, Michael Priddin, confirmed the company had been involved in the shooting incident.

"We deeply regret this incident and we will continue to pass on further information when the facts have been verified and the necessary people and authorities have been notified," Mr Priddin told ABC Radio this morning.

Mr Priddin said the exact circumstances of the incident were still to be determined and the company was working with Iraqi authorities to do so.

"In essence, what we know is that one of our security teams was involved in a shooting incident on Tuesday at approximately 1.40 in the afternoon in the Karrada area of Baghdad," he said.

"One of our security teams which was mobile was approached at speed by a vehicle which had failed to stop despite an escalation of warnings which included hand signals and signal flares.

Finally shots were fired at the vehicle and the vehicle itself stopped."

Security organisations in Iraq are under intense scrutiny after guards from the US security firm Blackwater allegedly opened fire without provocation in Baghdad last month and killed 17 people while escorting a convoy of US diplomats.

Several witnesses said the convoy had headed in the direction of the URG base - a hotel complex sealed off behind high concrete walls and sand bags.

-------------------------------------------------------
Well you couldn't make it up... The fact is that over the years while British and American soldiers have faced courts martial over alleged crimes carried out in Iraq, not one security contractor has been prosecuted at home or in Iraq despite a significant number of allegations of abuse. The media have only recently been tuning into these stories.

Sole Survivor Sitting On A $5b Fortune

It's not often you get to read an excellent story - so make the most of this...

Taken from The Sydney Morning Herald, July 14, 2007
By Lindsay Murdoch

JEFFREY LEE is not interested in the soaring price of uranium, which could make him one of the world's richest men.

"This is my country. Look, it's beautiful and I fear somebody will disturb it," he says, waving his arm across a view of rocky land surrounded by Kakadu National Park, where the French energy giant Areva wants to extract 14,000 tonnes of uranium worth more than $5 billion.

Mr Lee, the shy 36-year-old sole member of the Djok clan and the senior custodian of the Koongarra uranium deposit, has decided never to allow the ecologically sensitive land to be mined.




Custodian … Jeffrey Lee at an outcrop sacred to his clan. "I can go fishing and hunting. That's all that matters to me."Photo: Glenn Campbell

"There are sacred sites, there are burial sites and there are other special places out there which are my responsibility to look after," Mr Lee told the Herald.

"I'm not interested in white people offering me this or that … it doesn't mean a thing.

"I'm not interested in money. I've got a job; I can buy tucker; I can go fishing and hunting. That's all that matters to me."

Mr Lee said he thought long and hard about speaking publicly for the first time about why he wants to see the land incorporated into the World Heritage-listed national park, where, he said, "it will be protected and safe forever".

The Koongarra deposit is only three kilometres from Nourlangie Rock, one of the most visited attractions in Kakadu.

"There's been a lot of pressure on me, and for a very long time I didn't want to talk or think about Koongarra," Mr Lee said.

"But now I want to talk about what I have decided to do because I fear for my country.

"I was taken all through here on the shoulder of my grandmother … I heard all the stories and learnt everything about this land, and I want to pass it all on to my kids."

This week Mr Lee took the Herald to a rocky outcrop overlooking the Koongarra deposit, a sacred place where, according to his clan's beliefs, a giant blue-tongue lizard still lurks and should not be disturbed.

Here it is, painted on a rock hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of years ago, its jaw apparently bitten off in a mystical fight.

This is what Mr Lee calls a djang, or place of spiritual essence, which he has closed to the 230,000 tourists who visit Kakadu each year.

"My father and grandfather said they would agree to opening the land to mining, but I have learnt as I have grown up that there's poison in the ground," he said.

"My father and grandfather were offered cars, houses and many other things, but nobody told them about uranium and what it can do.

"It's my belief that if you disturb that land bad things will happen … there will be a big flood, there will be an earthquake and people will have a big accident."

Mr Lee said there were places on his land where the rainbow serpent had entered the ground that were so sacred, "I can't even go to them or talk about them.

"I can't allow people to go around disturbing everything."

Areva wants to extract the uranium on its 12.5 square kilometre mineral lease at Koongarra, as the price of the ore has soared as world demand has grown.

Mr Lee's declaration that he will never allow the mine to go ahead will put pressure on the Federal Government to formally incorporate the land into Kakadu National Park.

In August 2005 the Federal Government took control of uranium mining from the Northern Territory, declaring the territory open for new mines.

Ranger, a mine with a history of environmental leaks owned by Energy Resources of Australia, has been extracting uranium in Kakadu since 1981.

The Howard Government has always maintained that no new mine would be approved in the territory without the approval of the traditional owners.

The Government has told the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, the body under which Kakadu is listed as a heritage site, that it would agree "in principle" for Koongarra to be incorporated into the park if the traditional owners requested it.

Mr Lee, who works as a ranger in Kakadu, said incorporating Koongarra into the park would allow him to see that the land was protected.

"Being part of the park will ensure that the traditional laws, customs, sites, bush tucker, trees, plants and water stay the same as when they were passed on to me by my father and great-grandfather," he said.

As the sole surviving member of the Djok clan Mr Lee does not have any children to pass the land on to.

"I'll have to see what I can do about that," he said.

Australia 'Has Iraq Oil Interest'

Taken from Thursday, 5 July 2007

Australian Defence Minister Brendan Nelson has admitted that securing oil supplies is a key factor behind the presence of Australian troops in Iraq.



BBC Video - Windows Media Player: Australia's defence minister on why the troops are in Iraq

He said maintaining "resource security" in the Middle East was a priority.

But PM John Howard has played down the comments, saying it was "stretching it a bit" to conclude that Australia's Iraq involvement was motivated by oil.

The remarks are causing heated debate as the US-led Iraq coalition has avoided linking the war and oil.

Oil concerns
Australia was involved in the invasion of Iraq in 2003, and has about 1,500 military personnel still deployed in the region.

There are no immediate plans to bring them home.

In comments to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Mr Nelson admitted that the supply of oil had influenced Australia's strategic planning in the region.

"Obviously the Middle East itself, not only Iraq but the entire region, is an important supplier of energy, oil in particular, to the rest of the world," he said.

"Australians and all of us need to think what would happen if there were a premature withdrawal from Iraq.

"It's in our interests, our security interests, to make sure that we leave the Middle East, and leave Iraq in particular, in a position of sustainable security."

This is thought to be the first time the Australian government has admitted any link between troop deployment in Iraq and securing energy resources.

But Prime Minister John Howard was quick to play down the significance of his defence minister's comments.

"We didn't go there because of oil and we don't remain there because of oil," he told a local radio station.

"A lot of oil comes from the Middle East - we all know that - but the reason we remain there is that we want to give the people of Iraq a possibility of embracing democracy," he added.

Opposition criticism
Opposition politicians, though, have chastised Mr Howard's government over the comments.

"This government simply makes it up as it goes along on Iraq," Labor leader Kevin Rudd told reporters.

Anti-war protesters say the government's admission proves that the US-led invasion was more of a grab for oil rather than a genuine attempt to uncover weapons of mass destruction.

But ministers in Canberra have brushed aside the criticism, saying they remain committed to helping the US stabilise Iraq and combat terrorism.

They have also stressed that there will be no "premature withdrawal" of Australian forces from the region.

--------------------------------------------------------
Well, at least the truth is coming out. This man shoud be give the congressional medal of honour for telling the truth (even if he is Australian!). The fact of the matter is if countries like Iraq refused to sell oil or provided limited supplies via OPEC then other countries should pay the Market prices for the oil. It is about Supply & Demand and laws of Capitalism. By invading a country for nor proper reason just to capture the oil for its own purpose is nothing new - during the oil crisis in the 1070's the USA seriously considered invading Saudia Arabia to secure it's oil - That did not materialise but the Iraqi one did.

Sex Slave Victim Wins Abuse Claim

Taken from The Age, Australia, May 29, 2007
Natalie Craig

A FORMER child sex slave has become the first person in Australia to be compensated as a victim of sex trafficking.

Thai woman Jetsadophorn Chaladone, known as "Ning", yesterday told The Age of the success of her compensation claim for the sexual abuse she suffered at a Sydney brothel in 1995, aged 13. Ning, now 25, said she hoped her story would raise awareness about sex slavery.

She was trafficked to Australia with the consent of her father, expecting to work as a nanny. She was instead put to work in a brothel. She said she was told she owed a "debt" to her traffickers of about $35,000, which she would pay off by having sex with 650 men.

She was not allowed to leave the "safe house" where she and other prostitutes slept, and had no money and no contacts in Australia.

Ning said she had sex with as many as 100 men in 10 days, before immigration officials found her during a routine compliance raid.

She also made mention in her compensation claim of a "beating room" where unco-operative workers were taken.

The owners of this Surry Hills brothel and their trafficking accomplices were never investigated for their crimes against Ning. This was despite pressure on NSW police by Sydney immigration officials, as shown through records of correspondence in 1995, obtained through freedom of information.

"It still hurts to talk about it," Ning said through a translator of her experience. "I have been depressed … sometimes I feel like I don't have any reason to go on."

The compensation was awarded last month but Ning is only making her case public now as she previously felt too uncomfortable to discuss the details.

Her psychological scars have been heavy and enduring. The NSW Victims Compensation Tribunal stated in its reason for award that Ning "suffered from chronic post-traumatic stress disorder and moderate to severe depressive disorder" as a consequence of the abuse in Sydney.

Melbourne filmmaker Luigi Acquisto helped Ning lodge her claim by arranging a psychiatric examination in Thailand, engaging the help of Melbourne human rights lawyer Fiona McLeod, SC, and arranging for her to travel to Australia.

He said he first heard about Ning's case back in 1995 when he was researching a documentary about sex trafficking, and was appalled that nothing had been done.

"If the brothel had been prosecuted, the Attorney-General of NSW could now claim the money paid to Ning back from them," Mr Acquisto said.

"But this compensation is vitally important. Relevant compensation can pull victims out the cycle of poverty … give them some status within their community so they can lead a normal life."

Ning has not disclosed the sum she was awarded, although it is modest in Australian terms. She said she would use the money to educate herself and her five-year-old son, to renovate her two-bedroom house and set up a business in her home in Kalasin province in north-east Thailand.

Ms McLeod, who helped Ning to lodge a claim, said she was heartened by the precedent the case had set. "I am hopeful that the success of the compensation claim will at least educate other trafficking victims about the possibility of making claims," she said.

There has been no statistical research on the number of sex slaves in Australia. Federal Government figures suggest that the number of women trafficked to Australia each year is well below 100, while Project Respect, a sex industry lobby, has conducted surveys to suggest the number is at least 300.

There have been only two successful prosecutions for sex slavery since the introduction of anti-slavery laws in 1999.

Brunswick brothel owner Wei Tang was sentenced to a minimum of six years' jail last June for keeping five Thai women as sex slaves.

Last July, Sydney brothel owners Somsri Yotchomchin and Johan Sieders were each found
guilty of engaging in sexual servitude.

Ms McLeod said the failure of several other prosecutions related to the Australian visa system for sex slaves and a lack of education about the nuances of the crime.

She said it was important to emphasise that the issue was one of slavery, in which women, men and children suffer.

"The fact that Ning was a child when this happened makes it more devastating, but there are many adults who don't have a like choice because of poverty … whether you're a child or an adult you don't have a voice," she said.

"And it's up to the rest of us to protect them."

Ms McLeod met Ning for the first time last week, when Ning visited her city chambers to thank her for her work.

"I'd like to thank you for everything you have done for me," Ning said.

Ms McLeod responded tearfully: "This case has already given me tremendous satisfaction … I would not want my daughter to go through what you went through."

Useful Links
http://antislavery.org.au
http://projectrespect.org.au
http://goodshepherd.com.au/justice

Aussie Software Pirate Extradited

Proof that American Laws (particulary corporate laws) are greater than the domestic laws of any other country as well as international laws...

Taken from The Sydney Morning Herald, May 7, 2007
Kenneth Nguyen

BEFORE he was extradited to the United States, Hew Griffiths, from Berkeley Vale in NSW, had never even set foot in America. But he had pirated software produced by American companies.

Now, having been given up to the US by former justice minister Chris Ellison, Griffiths, 44, is in a Virginia cell, facing up to 10 years in an American prison after a guilty plea late last month.



Griffiths' case - involving one of the first extraditions for intellectual property crime - has been a triumph for US authorities, demonstrating their ability to enforce US laws protecting US companies against Australians in Australia, with the co-operation of the Australian Government.

"Our agents and prosecutors are working tirelessly to nab intellectual property thieves, even where their crimes transcend international borders," US Attorney Chuck Rosenberg said.

In some corners of the Australian legal community, however, there is concern about Griffiths' case. In a recent article for the Australian Law Journal, NSW Chief Judge in Equity, Peter Young, wrote: "International copyright violations are a great problem. However, there is also the consideration that a country must protect its nationals from being removed from their homeland to a foreign country merely because the commercial interests of that foreign country are claimed to have been affected by the person's behaviour in Australia and the foreign country can exercise influence over Australia."

Griffiths, a Briton, has lived in Australia since the age of seven. From his home base on the central coast of NSW, he served as the leader of a group named Drink Or Die, which "cracked" copy-protected software and media products and distributed them free of cost. Often seen with long hair and bare feet, Griffiths did not make money from his activities, and lived with his father in a modest house.

But Drink or Die's activities did cost American companies money — an estimated $US50 million ($A60 million), if legal sales were substituted for illegal downloads undertaken through Drink or Die. It also raised the ire of US authorities.

In 2003, the US Department of Justice charged Griffiths with violating the copyright laws of the US, and requested his extradition from Australia. Senator Ellison signed a notice for Griffiths' arrest and Australian Federal Police arrested him at his home.

Griffiths fought the prospect of extradition through the courts for three years, in which time he was denied bail and detained in prison. He indicated that he would be willing to plead guilty to a breach of Australian copyright law, which meant he could serve time in Australia.

Last year, Griffiths ran out of avenues for appeal in Australia. His fate lay in the hands of Senator Ellison, who had the power to refuse Griffiths' extradition. But in December, Senator Ellison issued a warrant for extradition — a decision welcomed by the US Government. Griffiths' extradition in February is believed to be the first out of Australia for a breach of intellectual property law.

"This extradition represents the (US) Department of Justice's commitment to protect intellectual property rights from those who violate our laws from the other side of the globe," US Assistant Attorney-General Alice Fisher said.

But Justice Young described as "bizarre" the fact that "people are being extradited to the US to face criminal charges when they have never been to the US and the alleged act occurred wholly outside the US".

Griffiths appears to have been singled out by US authorities. British-based members of Drink or Die were reportedly tried in Britain. Last month, in news that slipped the local media's radar, Hew Griffiths pleaded guilty in a US District Court in Alexandria, Virginia, to criminal copyright infringement offences. According to US authorities, Griffiths admitted to overseeing all the illegal operations of the now-disbanded Drink Or Die.

On top of a possible 10-year jail term, Griffiths could be fined $US500,000. (By way of comparison, the average sentence for rape in Victoria is six years and 10 months.)

Any Australian who has pirated software worth more than $US1000 could be subject to the same extradition process as Griffiths was. "Should not the Commonwealth Parliament do more to protect Australians from this procedure?" Justice Young asked in his article. Others, however, argue that extradition is necessary to prevent internet crimes that transcend borders.
Griffiths will be sentenced on June 22.

Australia And US To Swap Refugees

Taken from The BBC, Wednesday, 18 April 2007

Australia and the United States have announced a plan to swap up to 200 asylum seekers every year.

Migrants held by the US in Guantanamo Bay will be resettled in Australia, while Canberra will send people held in its offshore detention camps to the US.

The move is aimed at deterring would-be refugees by preventing them from reaching their destination of choice.

But critics say the plan could backfire on Canberra, as many refugees around the world are hoping to get to America.

Atlantic exchange
The first asylum seekers to be exchanged are likely to be 83 Sri Lankans and eight Burmese who are being held in Australia's off-shore detention centre on the tiny Pacific island of Nauru.
If they qualify as genuine refugees, they could soon be resettled somewhere in the US.

In return, the Americans will be allowed to send Cuban and Haitian detainees held at Guantanamo Bay (the naval base housing asylum seekers, rather than the prison) to Australia.

Both Canberra and Washington insist the move will deter illegal migrants.

The hope is that potential refugees might think again about trying to get to the US if there was a chance they could end up in a faraway place like Australia, and vice versa.

Australian Prime Minister John Howard insisted the plan would also deter people smugglers.

"The thing that discourages people from people smuggling is the fact that we make it very plain that people will not be allowed to reach the Australian mainland," Mr Howard told local media.

But critics believe that the plan could backfire on the Australians, by encouraging asylum seekers from Asia and the Middle East who want to build a new life in the US.

An immigration spokesman for the Australian opposition Labor Party, Tony Burke, said the new policy would therefore mean even more boat people arriving on the shores of Australia.

"If you are in one of the refugee camps around the world, there is no more attractive destination than to think you can get a ticket to the USA," Mr Burke said.

"What John Howard is doing is saying to the people around the world: if you want to get to the US, the way to it is to hop on a boat and go to [Australia's] Christmas Island."

Australia has often been criticised by human rights groups for the uncompromising stance it takes on asylum seekers.

Under a policy introduced in 2001, would-be migrants are now intercepted at sea, and are routinely sent to off-shore processing camps in the South Pacific where their refugee applications are assessed.

The tactic is designed to ensure they never set foot on the Australian mainland.

Even if they are deemed genuine refugees, efforts are made to find a third country willing to accept them, although in practice this often fails and they are eventually accepted into Australia.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

This is probably one of the dumbest idea's that has come out of australia and US relations. How bizarre! Maybe this will be used as a way of transfering terrorist suspects that are found to be innocents to start a new life in a different country?

Further reading:
Sydney Morning Herald, 19. 04.07 Costs cited to justify refugee swap with US

Australia: War Crimes Accused Set For Croatia

Taken from The Sydney Morning Herald., 13.04.2007
By Leonie Lamont

AN AUSTRALIAN accused of war crimes during the Balkans war is likely to be handed over to Croatian authorities, after a Sydney court agreed to his extradition yesterday.

Dragan Vasiljkovic, 51, has been in custody since January last year, when Croatia sought his extradition for alleged offences including torture and the murder of civilians and prisoners of war between 1991 and 1993.

Vasiljkovic was known as "Captain Dragan" during the war when he commanded Serbian paramilitary units, and Central Local Court heard during the extradition hearing that Serbs regarded him as a hero.

The Croatian Government has alleged he did nothing to stop his unit maltreating captured Croatian soldiers, and that he kicked a POW in the head. It alleges that in 1993 he commanded subordinates to interrogate and "liquidate" two POWs, and that he ordered a tank to fire on a village, causing the death of two civilians and serious injury to others.

Vasiljkovic - who has changed his name to Daniel Snedden and was referred to as such by the deputy chief magistrate, Paul Cloran, yesterday - migrated to Australia in 1967 but returned to the Balkans during the war.

Outside court, Father Rade Radan, of the Serbian Orthodox Church, said Vasiljkovic would not get a fair trial. Vasiljkovic told the court the extradition request was political payback for the 2005 arrest of a Croatian "war hero", Ante Gotovina.

His barrister indicated that a Federal Court appeal was likely.

Terrorism bringing Us Closer To God: Pell

Taken from The Sydney Morning Herald, Australia, 06.04.2007
BY Linda Morris

ISLAMIC terrorism has prompted Australians to re-examine their religious beliefs and has perhaps given God a higher media profile, the Catholic Archbishop, Cardinal George Pell, has said

In a traditional Easter message likely to provoke church moderates and Islamic leaders, Australia's most senior Catholic cleric also took aim at the growing Christian green movement, saying Jesus had nothing to say on global warming.

Cardinal Pell is regarded as a hawk in the Vatican for his repeated public challenges to Islam on terrorism and religious freedom.

The god of the Koran or the gods of Eastern religions were "radically different" from the "one true God" proclaimed by Christianity's holy festival, he said.

"God often struggles for press coverage in Australia but He has been doing better lately - perhaps because the violence of a small number of Islamic terrorists has prompted us to rethink our religious beliefs, or absence of belief."

Acknowledging uneasiness over the climate, Cardinal Pell said Jesus was not an "insurance broker" meant to protect the world from trouble.

"We are told El Nino has disappeared but the drought is not over in most parts. And we have the threat of global warming. It is to be hoped the one true God will accept all those carbon credits.

"Neither did Jesus say anything on global warming, although he said much on the struggle between good and evil, meaning and fear, love and hate."

He called on Australians not to judge: "Jesus calls us to address the challenges in our own hearts, families and communities before we moralise about distant worlds, where we are usually powerless."

Taking a different tack on climate change, the Anglican Primate, Phillip Aspinall, said the drought reminded Australians about the fragility of life, and dry waterways, parched farming land and even the withering of gardens were "ready and immediate symbols of death".

But Easter brought the promise of life in the face of death. It was possible that the water crisis contained the seeds of future life and managing the waterways more effectively, the archbishop of Brisbane said.

"The God of the Bible acts in unexpected and surprising ways to create life and new beginnings where all looks dead and lost."

The Anglican Archbishop of Sydney, Dr Peter Jensen, singled out the modern-day slave trade, human trafficking, as evidence of human sinfulness and the need for reconciliation with God.

Jesus's death freed humans from slavery to sin, when they failed to live up to God's standards for life and relationships, Dr Jensen said.

"Human trafficking of men, women and children to be economic slaves or sex slaves or child soldiers exists today. People are still treated as objects and possessions to be bought and sold. This is also a scar on humanity. We must support those who fight against it," he said.

The president of the Baptist Union of Australia, Dr Ross Clifford, also invoked the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the British slave trade. He called on consumers to black-list goods produced by slave labour.

People were also slaves to "legalism, consumerism, unjust employment regimes and practices that accelerate climate change", Reverend Clifford said.

"When Jesus frees us from our spiritual bonds, he empowers us to share the good news of freedom with others."

The president of the Uniting Church of Australia, Gregor Henderson, said this Easter he was praying for the peace of Jerusalem and that Israeli and Palestinian leaders learn from those of Northern Ireland.

"Easter is the most fitting time for peace to shine through. Christians believe the life, death and resurrection of Jesus brings us peace with God and, through commitment to the peaceful vulnerable courageous ways of Jesus, gives us the opportunity of peace with each other, across all our human divisions."

Brian Houston, the national president of Assemblies of God in Australia, said the message of Christ's resurrection was pivotal to Christianity. He criticised resurrection sceptics.

"For close to two millennia people have tried to discredit the truth, most recently in a documentary that claims to have found Jesus' sarcophagus, Mr Houston said.

"Jesus died and rose from the grave for all humanity. Spectacular? Yes. But more importantly, it was supernatural."

Hicks Faces About A Year In Australian Jail

Taken from The Sydney Morning Herald, March 29, 2007
By Tom Allard

DAVID HICKS will be behind bars in Australia until after this year's election, but his stint in an Adelaide prison will be relatively short, under a plea bargain being hammered out between prosecutors and his defence counsel.



Government sources confirmed yesterday that Hicks's prospective sentence would take into account his five years and two months in Guantanamo Bay but would also include a short period to be served in Australia. That period is "not close" to the five years being mooted in some reports, one government official said. The Herald understands that additional time to be served in Australia is about a year.

The outcome, still to be approved by a panel of US military commission officials and its Convening Authority, is a bonus for the Federal Government, as Hicks will be unable to conduct potentially embarrassing interviews before this year's election.

Terry Hicks, who heard of his son's guilty plea on an airport tarmac as he prepared to leave Guantanamo Bay for Australia, yesterday blamed the Federal Government for influencing the court hearing and forcing the guilty plea. "They demonised him, they prejudged him for five years," he said. "I suppose Mr Howard would be throwing his hands up with glee at the moment, but ... this was a way out for David regardless of whether he was guilty or innocent."

Mr Howard said he was not into "glee and vindication". "I understand how Mr Hicks feels. It is his son," he said. "I respect that, but let me deal with the facts. His son has pleaded guilty to a charge that he knowingly gave assistance to a known terrorist organisation, namely al-Qaeda."

But there is no doubt the Government is delighted. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Alexander Downer, said yesterday the Government had unashamedly "been tough on the Hicks case".

However, it remains unclear how long it will take for Hicks to return. First he and his lawyers have to agree on which of 24 specific allegations that underpinned the charge of providing material support to terrorists he will admit to.

Hicks will also be grilled by a military commission judge over the authenticity of his guilty plea. His sentence will then be completed, probably within a week.

Hicks, along with the US and Australian governments, will then have to agree on the conditions surrounding his transfer to Australia.

The Attorney-General, Philip Ruddock, said the process meant that Hicks had no grounds to appeal against his sentence when he returned home, despite suggestions from the South Australian Premier, Mike Rann, to the contrary.

Mr Ruddock also said international prisoner exchange treaties prevented the Government receiving the prisoner from altering his sentence. This has implications for any attempt by a Rudd Labor government, or the South Australian Government, which will run his prison, to commute his sentence or offer a pardon.

"The principle is very clear: if a country were to unilaterally vary a sentence imposed on an individual in another jurisdiction, no country would deliver anybody up," Mr Ruddock said.

He also said Hicks would be banned from selling his story, which publicists said yesterday would be worth more than $1 million. In a letter to his friend Louise Fletcher, Hicks urged her not to write a book about him "because I would have no chance to make any money when I get home".

The Government spent more than $300,000 assisting Hicks, his lawyers and his father. The journey of Terry Hicks and David's sister Stephanie to Guantanamo Bay was paid by the Department of Foreign Affairs.

--------------------------------------------------------------

A panel of military officers had recommended a term of seven years, but a section of a plea agreement that had been kept secret from the panel capped the sentence at nine months for David Hicks, who has been held at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay for more than five years. Under the agreement, the confessed Taliban-allied gunman will be allowed to serve his sentence in an Australian prison, but must remain silent about any alleged abuse while in custody.

Under his plea deal, Hicks stipulated that he has "never been illegally treated by a person or persons while in the custody of the U.S. government," Kohlmann said. In the statement read by Mori, Hicks thanked U.S. service members for their professionalism during his imprisonment. Furthermore, the judge said, the agreement bars Hicks from suing the U.S. government for alleged abuse, forfeits any right to appeal his conviction and imposes a gag order that prevents him speaking with news media for a year from his sentencing date. Hicks previously reported being beaten and deprived of sleep during his more than five years at the prison erected for terrorism suspects held at this U.S. Navy base.

Of his son's plea of being guilty, Terry Hicks said: "It's a way to get home. He was desperate; he just wanted to get out." Mr Hicks told ABC radio: "He's had five years of absolute hell and I think anyone in that position, if they were offered anything, they would possibly take it." Hicks will have to make a detailed confession of his crime to a military commission before he can be convicted and repatriated.

The plea deal guarantees that Hicks will be transferred to Australian custody within 60 days of sentencing and probably much sooner. Hicks is still designated an enemy combatant and will remain at his cell in the maximum-security Camp 6 until transfer, officials said.

The 35-point charge sheet presented to the commission members was a modification of the original indictment. All references to a connection with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks were omitted, as were mention of Hicks discussing with Al Qaeda members his willingness to commit an act of martyrdom and his reported associations with notorious suspects including so-called American Taliban John Walker Lindh and Briton Richard Reid, the would-be "shoe bomber."

The revised list of accusations suggested Hicks' contacts with Al Qaeda were limited and low-level. An earlier clause accusing Hicks of having "expressed his approval" of the Sept. 11 attacks was changed to state that Hicks had no foreknowledge of the hijackings.

The Bush administration has been under intense pressure from the Australian government, which is holding elections this year, to resolve the case and return Hicks. After 11 years in power, Mr Howard is facing the worst opinion polls of his primeministership. A poll on March 20th gave Labor a 22-point lead over the government. However, a poll in December on the Hicks case itself rocked the government. It showed that about two-thirds of Australians thought Mr Hicks should be returned to Australia, and only one-quarter supported Mr Howard's hands-off approach. Since then Mr Howard has changed his public tune, blaming America for the delays in bringing Mr Hicks to trial. That may not be enough to assuage public anger, which probably runs deep enough to affect elections in a few months' time.

The tribunal process has succeeded in making Hicks, a directionless one-time kangaroo skinner, into something of a local hero. A senator who represents Hicks' state in Australia told the New York Times he would return "as a guilty man who has not had a fair trial. The Australian public will see through this process." A columnist for the influential national daily the Australian wrote that "this case has been about much more than Hicks. The U. S. justice system and the U.S. government's commitment to the rule of law have also been on trial. Although Hicks has pleaded guilty, the jury is still out on U.S. justice."

Limit Muslim Migration, Australia Warned

Taken from The Sydney Morning Herald, Australia, February 16, 2007
Barney Zwartz

LIFE can become untenable when the Muslim population of a non-Muslim country reaches about 10 per cent, as shown by France, a Jewish expert on Islam says.

The Australian Jewish News yesterday quoted Raphael Israeli as saying Australia should cap Muslim immigration or risk being swamped by Indonesians.

Professor Israeli told the Herald that was a misunderstanding. But he said: "When the Muslim population gets to a critical mass you have problems. That is a general rule, so if it applies everywhere it applies in Australia."

Professor Israeli, an expert on Islamic history from Hebrew University in Jerusalem, has been brought to Australia by the Shalom Institute of the University of NSW. The Australia-Israel Jewish Affairs Council is co-hosting many of his activities.

He said Muslim immigrants had a reputation for manipulating the values of Western countries, taking advantage of their hospitality and tolerance.

"Greeks or Italians or Jews don't use violence. There is no Italian or Jewish Hilaly [a reference to the controversial cleric Sheik Taj el-Din al Hilaly of Lakemba mosque]. Why?"

Professor Israeli said that when the Muslim population increased, so did the risk of violence.

"Where there are large Muslim populations who are prepared to use violence you are in trouble.

If there is only 1 or 2 per cent they don't dare to do it - they don't have the backing of big communities. They know they are drowned in the environment of non-Muslims and are better behaved."

In Australia, Muslims account for about 1.5 per cent of the population.

Professor Israeli said that in France, which has the highest proportion of Muslims in Europe at about 10 per cent, it was already too late. There were regions even the police were scared to enter, and militant Muslims were changing the country's political, economic and cultural fabric, and demanding anti-Semitic and anti-Israel policies.

"French people say they are strangers in their own country. This is a point of no return.

"If you are on a collision course, what can you do? You can't put them all in prison, and anyway they are not all violent. You can't send them all back. You are really in trouble. It's irreversible."

Professor Israeli said that in Australia a few imams had preached violence. "You should not let fundamentalist imams come here. Screen them 1000 times before they are admitted, and after they are admitted screen what they say in the mosque."

He said some Muslims wanted to impose sharia (Islamic law) in their adopted countries, and when propaganda did not work they turned to intimidation.

Professor Israeli said his task was to describe, not prescribe. He also said his warning did not include immigrants, including Muslims, who simply wanted to improve their lot. As long as they respected the law and democracy, their numbers — Buddhist, Muslim or Jew — were immaterial. It became material when a group accepted violence.

"The trains in London and Madrid were not blown up by Christians or Buddhists but by Muslims, so it is them we have to beware," he said.

Keysar Trad, of the Islamic Friendship Association of Australia, said "Not only religious clerics need to be screened before entering Ausralia but also academics … this type of academic does nothing but create hatred, suspicion and division … We should review not only what the man has said but also those who have sponsored him, to see if they endorse those comments."

US Officer's Claim Sparks New Call For Hicks Torture Inquiry

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Sunday that prisoner abuse scandals in Iraq and Guantanamo Bay and other mistakes have damaged America's reputation, and work must be done to prove the U.S. is still a force for good in the world. It seems that the case of Prisoner Abuse is still wide open...

Taken from The Sydney Morning Herald, Australia, February 8, 2007
By Penelope Debelle

DAVID Hicks' father, Terry, has called for an independent inquiry into claims his son was sexually tortured, after a witness report in the US described a similar assault by the US millitary at the same site in Afghanistan where Hicks was held.

The US report, released under freedom-of-information laws, was made by a senior military officer and describes an incident in February 2002 in which a prisoner was allegedly anally assaulted by military police at the US joint interrogation facility at Kandahar.

David Hicks told his family when they visited him at Guantanamo Bay in 2004 that he had been anally assaulted during interrogation by the US in Afghanistan while he was hooded and restrained.

"He said he was anally penetrated a number of times," Mr Hicks said yesterday. "They put a bag over his head, he wasn't expecting it and didn't know what it was. It was quite brutal."

Mr Hicks said his son could not see who assaulted him but could hear American voices.

"This report runs along very similar lines to what David has already told us," he said of the military officer's report. "Yet the Government has always said nothing happened to David."

Mr Hicks said his son reported the assault as part of torture allegations made to the Red Cross and the Australian consul, who referred it to the American military, but no evidence of abuse was found.

The Federal Government has said all allegations of physical abuse raised by David Hicks were dealt with, including in an investigation by the US Naval Criminal Investigation Service that found no evidence of abuse.

The sworn witness report by a US officer with "04" status, indicating the rank of major or above, said the incident it referred to happened while eight prisoners were being processed at the Kandahar site where Hicks was also processed.

The officer described seeing a military policeman preparing to undertake an anal probe of a shackled prisoner. "Without warning the (prisoner), and in a cruel way, he pushed both his fingers into the (prisoner's) anus," the officer said.

The prisoner reacted violently, screaming and falling to the ground, he said.

Terry Hicks said yesterday that the military could not investigate itself. "It's got to go to an independent investigation, not the military," he said.

Attorney-General Philip Ruddock said yesterday that Canberra could easily have asked that David Hicks be brought home and, given Australia's close ties with the US, there would be a high probability such a request would be acceded to.

But the Government wants the US to try Hicks because his alleged offences cannot be tried under Australian law, he said.

It has emerged that Hicks' case could face further delays because he may not be the first to be tried. The military prosecutor who last week filed charges against him, Colonel Morris Davis, said two others were also listed for charging. He rejected criticism of the charges' timing, saying notice was given to Hicks' lawyers that charges were pending before they visited Guantanamo Bay recently.

Colonel Davis said a meeting was held in his office in Washington on January 26 with Hicks' US military lawyer, Major Michael Mori, and one of his Australian lawyers, Michael Griffin. He said he told them he intended to charge Hicks by the end of the next week, and Mr Griffin had asked for the charges to be timed for while they were at Guantanamo Bay.

Colonel Davis said he told him prosecutors would do their best but it would probably be the end of the week. "To allege this was a calculated act timed to aggravate (Hicks' lawyer David McLeod) and complicate the Hicks case is absurd," he said.