Aussie ditty
Singing too-ral, li-ooral, li-addity
Singing too-ral, li-ooral, li-ay
Singing too-ral, li-ooral, li-addity
And we’re bound for the Botany Bay
When we got there everything was lovely and such a fine and nice day
So we took one look at the black people and we swept them all all away
Singing too-ral, li-ooral, li-addity
Singing too-ral, li-ooral, li-ay
Singing too-ral, li-ooral, li-addity
And we’re bound for the Botany Bay
Then we saw there was so many camels and they was taking up all of the way
So got out our guns and we shot them all all away
Singing too-ral, li-ooral, li-addity
Singing too-ral, li-ooral, li-ay
Singing too-ral, li-ooral, li-addity
And we’re bound for the Botany Bay
Then we noticed all them pesky old horses and they was taking up all all of the way
So got out our guns and we shot them all all away
Singing too-ral, li-ooral, li-addity
Singing too-ral, li-ooral, li-ay
Singing too-ral, li-ooral, li-addity
And we’re bound for the Botany Bay
Now we’ve only ourselves left to shoot at and we’re waitin’ a for you to say
And we’ll get our guns and we’ll shoot them all all away
Singing too-ral, li-ooral, lii-addity
Singing too-ral, li-ooral, li-ay
Singing too-ral, li-ooral, li-addity
And we’re bound for the Botany Bay
Letters
Alternative Voices
The situation of immigrants to this country - the haven of security for those fleeing persecution, torture and abuse in their own countries - is desperate. What form of cruelty can it be when an immigrant has to wait more than eleven years to have their status recognised and to be able to be reunited with their family?
What type of cruelty is it when an immigrant being forced to board a plane to face torture in their own country has his head pushed down on to his thighs and is suffocated to death?
What kind of heartless anti-social behaviour does it appear when a stateless cockle picker in Morecombe Bay, Lancashire loses her life at the hands of bully boy gang leaders?
Now that the prime minister has set up a ‘hostile environment working group’ to make it extremely difficult for asylum seekers and others to obtain their rightful benefits and services, the position of migrants to this country has become intolerable.
Medical Justice, a charity set up to combat the abuses against pregnant asylum seekers, has revealed the dreadful treatment of asylum seekers, which has caused stillbirths, miscarriages and acute mental health problems.
The treatment of gay activists from a number of repressive Middle-East countries, particularly Iran, is worrying, especially from a post-modern, secularist, pro-gay fringe in parliament.
Some seekers of asylum here - where they believed they would be given refuge for their religious, mainly Christian, convictions - have been turned back to face an uncertain future at home.
Others, who have experienced political oppression for the flimsiest of democratic protest in the first country, have been rejected by the second and subsequent countries they have tried to find help from.
I agree with Sarah Teather, the ex - minister for families who has said that she would like to hear ‘’alternative voices’’ on immigration. We need to hear the voices of leftists, democrats, liberals and truth seekers who will oppose the rhetoric around ‘’floods’’ of immigrants and ‘’torrents’’ of asylum seekers to follow the Mail and the Evening Standard.
Immigrants add to the gross domestic output of the UK to the extent of GBP 3 billion per year. The Health Service benefits enormously from immigrants and could not function without its staff of nurses, doctors, administrators and cleaners.
Foreign students bring much needed financial input into the economy and collaborate with fellow students, neighbours and co-workers adding to the social strength of the UK.
Carers contribute a great deal to the social structures of Britain without whom many families would be bereft of hands-on help, support and terminal care.
Educators provide worthwhile careers for learners up and down the land, and hundreds of black, ethnic and immigrant police officers, community officers and other workers in the force ease social tensions and local disputes through their knowledge and empathy.
Some of our finest surgeons, ophthalmologists, anaesthetists, politicians like Michael Howard, Michael Portillo, and big business tycoons like Mohammad al Fayad and Sheikh Makhtoum are not native British but arrived here with their immigrant parents and grandparents. Now it will cost spouses and their families, disproportionately, an average of six months' salary to attempt to join their loved ones.
The situation may not be as despicable as that in the US faced by Spanish Heritage ‘’illegals’’ [I refuse to use the pejorative term Hispanics] , or as that of Moroccan migrants to Spain.
But to seek to deprive those who come here in the hope of finding a charitable, human response to their needs is antipathetic to every British standard of Justice.
The alternative voice that we need to hear is the one calling for humane, caring and equitable treatment of those who need our help, and not the grating, discordant sounds of those, often from immigrant families themselves, calling for repressive checks on entry to the richest country in the world.
Jaffer Clarke
The Muslim Institute
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
O Mankind, you have a lot to answer for in Australia!
The Australian Society for the Promotion of Cruelty to Animals has done little to prevent or even protest against the obscene hippocide that is taking place at Lake Gregory and Billiluna stations by Australiae homo sapiens.
The extinction of the horse population is a real possibility on the planet, and this unwarranted reduction of the equine population at these stations is a blot on the history of the continent.
The spirit of man the rider and horse, the ridden, is shaking in tremullation at this offence to nature’s plan for mammals on this earth.
The perverted reversal of technology versus creature brings to mind the worst excesses of the Mai Lae massacres in Vietnam all those years ago. Taking to helicopters to shoot horses - who could have even dreamt it up?
Oh Australians, Oh descendents of the hulks do not in the name of all that is sanctified continue this misguided activity that began with the camels and will end with your piteous selves.
The work of the horse rescue groups is to be applauded, however much they have prevaricated over this madness.
The obedient horse turns when you want, gallops when you command, without questioning. He is your intelligent friend, rescuer, beast of burden, source of rural transport and ultimately provider of sustenance to some. Man can manage the manege, but can he be allowed to mutilate and leave to rot this most noble of animals, the highest in the chain of evolution. Punishment and retribution will follow, if not from animal lovers, then even by Nature itself, that will bring you disease through the water table you pollute.
When the oil finally runs out, you will look around and see that a horsepower resource that was criminally abused was no longer there for your wants and needs.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Revise the British Muslim Agenda.
Events such as these [the killing of PPP Leader, Benazir Bhutto] bring home to Muslims everywhere that such madness can only result in worse relations between Muslims and the West.
Some signs have recently emerged that British Muslims have begun to realise that extremism in religion can only harm one's own co-religionists. I refer particularly to the recognition by prominent people in the Muslim Council of Britain that the teddy bear incident in Sudan was unadulterated, short-sighted intolerance.
Whilst it is more difficult to go back and find the reaction to Salman Rushdie's offence unsupportable, I now see the way clear to complete forgiveness of his mistakes. Muslims should take this direction now because the outrages against liberality that have gone unchecked have only led us further into difficulties with the host population with whom we live.
At base, Islam is a tolerant religion. Yet events conspire continually to portray modern day Muslims as hate-crazed extremists whose lack of emotional control leads to mayhem.
Continuing to stress Islam's pacific intentions does not bear much weight in a secular British environment -- one in which we must live.
Yet, undeniably the Judeo-Christian tradition is no different from Islam in its moral code of forgiveness and compassion for others.
Christianity has its arenas of intolerance too, in exhortations like "Marching as to war", "tooth for a tooth and eye for an eye", and National Anthems encouraging one to "Scatter her enemies", "rebellious Scots to crush" and so on.
Unless Muslims now rally around the cause of uniting against those who take our religion to its outer limits, we will not prosper. We must, to survive, rein in the madness in our midst. Call a halt to the insane focus on literalistic, interpretive representations of the Koran and return to the spirit of Islam, not the letter. The spirit of Islam -- redemption, compassion and a belief in the ability to reform ourelves.
Jaffer Clarke Deputy Leader Muslim Parliament of Great Britain
http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/layout/set/print/content/view/full/48632
More talk, less 007
Monday 23 April 2007
JAFFER CLARKE
THE government is attempting to conduct an operation to win hearts and minds in order to combat radicalism and fundamentalism in Britain's Muslim community.
Late last year, Communities Secretary Ruth Kelly earmarked cash so that "moderates can establish themselves at the centre of their communities and faith."
"Doing any less," she proclaimed, "would be a dereliction of our duty."
If an operation was needed to combat extremism in Britain, it should have taken place years ago.
Muslims are radicalised because they feel that they have been victimised by the policies of the new Labour government. There is anger over issues such as housing and schooling, marginalisation and repression.
The result is that young men have been channelling their emotions towards acts of violence without stopping to consider the true Islamic implications of their actions.
On a global scale, there is a sense that Muslims are being persecuted. The illegal occupation of Palestine by the Israeli state, the bombing of supposed terrorist factories in Sudan which had been manufacturing aspirin, the annihilation of Chechnya and US intervention in Indonesia and Malaysia have all fuelled hostility towards Western libertarianism. So, too, have intervention in Somalia and the bombing and occupation of Afghanistan to combat an extremist force originally supported by Washington.
That's even before considering Iraq and ongoing threats towards Iran. Once again, Muslim countries are targeted not only for geopolitical reasons but because of commercial and industrial interests.
If British taxpayers' money had been spent on solving foreign policy issues instead of causing them, it would not be in a position of scrambling to make up for its mistakes.
Instead of preparing the way for progress on Palestine, the British government was busy allowing Israel to prepare for an attack on Lebanon using largely US-equipped forces.
Israel's weak position following its defeat in Lebanon could have laid the ground for a harmonious settlement between it and Palestine. This will not, however, be achieved without Israel recognising a genuine desire for peace on the part of Hamas and Fatah and for its right to exist within pre-1967 boundaries being acknowledged in return.
The war and ongoing bloodletting in Iraq has also inflamed Muslims.
At the time of the invasion, there was no link between al-Qaida and Iraq. Now, there appears to be a definite connection.
Whatever the government's claims about the reasons for war, its policies are seen by Shia and Sunni alike as subservience to Washington driven by weakness and inevitably tied to Islamophobic sentiments.
What is required now is not further cash to tackle the symptoms of Muslim frustration, but recognition that the current crisis in Iraq and the issues around Iran's nuclear ambitions have to be solved diplomatically. The Syrian Ba'athist regime could be instrumental in this approach.
The only effective path is to energise people through a measured political response, not by continuing to take part in a US-led maelstrom of gung-ho 007 colonialism.
Jaffer Clarke is the deputy leader of the Muslim Parliament of Great Britain. He was formerly posted at the British embassy in Tehran and a Middle East television producer and presenter. His work Over his Shoulder: Literary Collaborations in Late Victorian Fiction is published by Excalibur.
http://plagiarisma.net/pdf.php
'The Guardian' Comment page
geoffreyclarke1123 Jul 2010, 2:42PM
I was intrigued by Gary's reference to 'British Muslims' because this misnomer arises where people seek an identity that is both secualar and religious. Of course, in Islam there is only one identity - that of a Muslim - one who submits herself / himself to God.
There is a paradox here where individuals are forced into thinking nationalistically whilst their real identity is in a far reaching sister / brotherhood for all people for all time.
Such identities that Gary ascribes to people are totally surface constructs and bear no relation to the reality of life on this planet.
We are all mammals - all of us with an unique binary choice of male and female. Identity can only arise from these last two factors.
Obviously, place of birth constitutes an area where identity arises but, in these days of instant travel and widespread employment and business opportunities, there are only States, as Gary's Mexican example attests, which can provide any legitimacy to the concept of national identity.
Other factors of class, ethnicity and membership of oganisations are red herrings. We belong to a community and a world brother / sisterhood dependent more on mutual cooperation for survival than the esoteric, divisive category of identity that Gary Younge assumes.
Jaffer Clarke
geoffreyclarke1123 Apr 2006, 10:53AM
Not only is this debate about the loss of civil liberties, as referred to by Henry Porter in Sunday's Observer, in areas such as policing, but it is in areas that affect the ordinary citizen like speed cameras and cctv cameras. Police databases held on many innocent citizens and DNA evidence kept for years from previous (innocent?) contact with the police authorities. How do I know that the evidence collected by detectives after a burglary at my home will not be kept and that my fingerprints will not still be resident on a police database for future use against me if my writings about freedom go too far for this present government. see linkhttp://blogs.guardian.co.uk/observer/archives/2006/04/22/is_the_pm_taking_liberties.html#more Jaffer Clarke
Kimberly Page: Australia
Tuesday, January 29th, 2013
Opinion: Geoffrey Clarke on the camel cull
British academic Geoffrey Clarke wants us to rethink the plan to cull feral camels from the air.
“I don’t have experience of Australia, unfortunately, but I do know that there must be a better way of corralling the
Geoffrey Clarke
camels for commercial use,” he said.
“For example, it was suggested by one of your major cattle ranchers that funds earmarked for aboriginal development could be used to improve this scandalous eradication.”
According to his website, Mr Clarke:
-
Holds a masters degree in English literature
-
Is principal of a college of information technology and e-commerce
-
Spent a couple of years as a lecturer and TV presenter in Saudi Arabia.
You can read his statement here:
Humans v. Camels in the Outback
by Geoffrey Clarke
Following a disturbing portrayal on Al Jazeera television of the hunting of camels in the outback, I was somehow moved to approach the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Australia, and received a reasoned reply.
I was informed that these wonderful animals are >feral<.
The use of the term >feral camels< in this debate is abhorrent and displays a lack of humanity in assessing environmental and wildlife habitats.
I was told that they are killed to protect ‘the environment’.
The slaughter of these fine animals is justified by reference only in material terms, but never in ecological or sustainable wildlife terms. The fact that Australia’s partner camels are not original is spurious, since they have been part of her landscape for a couple of hundred years.
It was explained that it was government policy to kill these animals from the air, like innocent civilians in ‘collateral damage’.
The Project to cull camels in the outback might try to explain their commercial operation by reason of >culling< but what gives them – puny humans – the right to decide on the plenitude and rights of creatures on our planet. Look what happened to the bison population in North America and to many other species throughout the world.
I don’t have experience of Australia, unfortunately. but I do know that there must be a better way of corralling the camels for commercial use. For example, it was suggested by one of your major cattle ranchers that funds earmarked for aboriginal development could be used to improve this scandalous eradication.
The commercial exploitation of the animals would be far preferable, in my view, than killing wantonly and indiscriminately. There are camel abattoirs in the outback that could handle more live animals to the benefit of poor people rather than letting their carcasses rot in the desert.
Has a system of more advanced fencing been tried since it partly worked for the obviously smaller rabbit population? Have Qatari businessmen been approached for a commercial/ tourist/ sport approach to the solution of what is so disgustingly called >feral< camels?
I was assured by Elise Meakin of RSPCA Australia that the project gives high priority to the well being of the animals.
Any killing is hateful, but to claim that the programme gets “a very high standard of animal welfare” is crass, laughable and mundane.
Australians need to rethink this project on much larger grounds: please do the honourable thing; encourage camels for sport, racing, tourist attractions, or even for meat and hide. There are wealthy Qatari investors ready to invest in a more sustainable future for wildlife.
Please speak to your cattle ranchers and ask them why tens of thousands of cows and sheep are allowed to live and thrive but the noble, majestic, free ranging (not feral) camel has to be hunted down.
To: RSPCA Australia
Hi Elise Meakin,
Thank you for your email.
There are two weaknesses in your argument.
First you use the term ‘feral’ in a pejorative fashion, as if a species of wildlife can be other than what it is. They were released into the outback by humans in a deliberate course of action. Whether the camel is native to Australia is not relevant since they have existed there for hundreds of years and are entitled to their place on the continent as much as you are.
You go on to say that “it is because of this that action must be taken.” This is the second flaw since there is no relevance in moving from problems to solutions by the route of aerial killing and leaving the animals’ bodies to rot under the Australian sun to the disgust and shame of all animal lovers. The problem needs to be addressed by improved husbandry, better corralling (electric fencing?) and a saner approach to their tenancy on your land.
You state that the “lethal option” results from the size and impact of the current population, yet this is also flawed since, if you follow the examples laid down by Sir David Attenborough, you would allow for sustainable progress of the camel population and their proper maintenance, welfare and development. Possibly through sources of funding for aboriginals.
But I do agree with you, Elise, where you state that “if more farmers could be persuaded of the benefits of managing camels as a resource, then this would have some benefits in terms of their overall impact.” It is also wimpish to suggest that “commercial use is not practical in much of the country” when you are one of the richest countries in the world -- and Bangladesh could well do with the meat and hide you so wantonly destroy. A recent television documentary on the subject by Al Jazeera made it quite clear that there are wealthy Qatari businessmen ready to invest in a sustainable commercial use of these animals that you so decry. What efforts has RSPCA Australia made to encourage such a more humane approach, I would ask? I do recognise that that there are animal welfare issues involved with commercial use, but surely it would be better than stinking dead camels and RSPCA Australia’s name to high heaven.
With Best Wishes
Regards
Geoffrey
Colney Hatch Lane
London
05. 01. 2013
The Australian High Commissioner
London
Dear Sir or Madam,
As an author who has written about nineteenth-century colonialism and its threats to African, Asian and Polypenesian environments, I write to ask you to use your powerful influence to end the insane policy of shooting the camel population in central Australia.
There can be no grounds for a policy that in one of the largest land areas in the world it could be decided that its threatened wildlife needs to be attacked from the sky by helicopters and shot randomly. It is claimed that the number of camels in the desert is too large at the same time that large ranchers of cattle claim that they host thousands of cows on their vast ranges. My simple question to you, Sir or Madam, is why are there too many camels, but not too many cows, sheep or goats?
It will be remembered that the population of bisons in North America was almost eradicated and, in an age where the loss of species is happening at an alarming rate, it cannot be right to risk such an extinction of a species. If only financial considerations are at the heart of this Australian government policy, then surely an alternative fiscal regime can be set up in Australia to harness and ameliorate, possibly through sources of funding for aboriginals, the fate of one of mankind’s most important animal partners. For example, could not a worldwide appeal be made to encourage areas such as the sale and marketing of camels for sport, racing, tourist attractions, or even for meat and hide.
I should be grateful if you would speak to those in authority in your nation to attempt a change of heart in this abysmal tragedy.
Yours faithfully
Geoffrey Clarke MPhil
Dear Quentin,
Without Prejudice
The use of the term >feral camels< is abhorrent and displays a lack of humanity in assessing environmental and wildlife habitats. You justify the slaughter of these fine animals by reference only in material terms, but never in ecological or sustainable wildlife terms. The fact that your partner camels are not original is spurious, since they have been part of your landscape for hundreds of years. You might try to explain your commercial operation by reason of >culling< but what gives you - one puny human - the right to decide on the plenitude and rights of creatures on our planet. Look what happened to the bison population in North America and to many other species throughout the world. Please see attached link.
Your project reminds me of Vietnam, Mi Lai, and the current drone attacks on innocents by coward Americans in their Texas bases attacking Pakistan. Any killing is hateful, but to claim that you get "a very high standard of animal welfare" is crass, laughable and mundane. You are killers!
So you have lost a few fences. Get used to it.
Rethink your project on much larger grounds: do the honourable thing; encourage camels for sport, racing, tourist attractions, or even for meat and hide. There are wealthy Qatari investors ready to invest in a more sustainable future for your wildlife. Speak to your cattle ranchers and ask them why tens of thousands of cows and sheep are allowed to live and thrive but the noble, majestic, free ranging (not feral) camel has to be hunted down by the descendants of the hulks.
Shame on you.
Regards
Geoffrey Clarke MPhil
rom: Quentin Hart
Sent: Thursday, 17 January 2013 11:29 AM
To: 'Geoffrey Clarke'
Subject: RE: Project to eradicate camels.
Hi Geoffrey – the technical definition of the term ‘feral’ is an introduced domestic animal that has gone wild, so camels in Australia definitely meet that theoretical definition. It’s not intended as a pejorative term and we’re not seeking to ‘blame’ the camels for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. However, they are not a native species and their current densities are threatening Australian native species. The bison is native to North America, so the situations are not comparable. Feral camels have only been in the Australian landscape for around a hundred years, and in many parts of the Australian deserts, they are a much more recent arrival than that.
Our project operates according to landholder wishes. Of course you are free to contact Aboriginal landholders and pastoralists directly to discuss with them why they shouldn’t want to reduce the impacts of feral camels on their native plants and animals, cultural sites, grazing lands, fences, waterpoints, buildings, airstrips, vehicles/human safety. As mentioned previously, cattle and sheep are constrained in their movement by fencing, so their impacts can’t be compared to feral camels, which can’t be constrained particularly well with virtually any kind of fencing, including electric.
The statement about high animal welfare standards is entirely relevant. You are assuming that there are no animal welfare implications associated with using animals for sport or transporting them large distances for other purposes. The sport/racing/tourism enterprises that you propose would utilise a few hundred camels per year. It is estimated that Australia has around 750,000 feral camels. We already have contact with business interests as you suggest. However, most ‘investors’ get a reality check once they make even the most cursory investigation about the feral camel situation in Australia and the realities of mustering them out of the desert.
Perhaps you should visit Australia some time and assess the situation for yourself. We always welcome informed debate and we recognise that there are many views on how to manage environmental issues.
Regards
Quentin Hart
National Manager – Australian Feral Camel Management Project
Ninti One Limited: Information-Innovation-Ideas for remote Australia
O Mankind, you have a lot to answer for in Australia! The Australian Society for the Promotion of Cruelty to Animals has done little to prevent or even protest against the obscene hippocide that is taking place at Lake Gregory and Billiluna stations by Australiae homo sapiens. The extinction of the horse population is a real possibility on tthe planet, and this unwarranted reduction of the equine population at these stations is a blot on the history of the continent. The spirit of man the rider and horse, the ridden, is shaking in tremulation at this offence to nature’s plan for mammals on this earth. The pervrted reversal of technology versus creature brings to mind the worst excesses of the Mai Lae massacres in Vietnam all those years ago. Taking to helicopters to shoot horses - who could have even dreamt it up? O Australians, O descendents of the hulks do not in the name of all that is sanctified continue this misguided activity that began with the camels and will end with your piteous selves. The work of the horse rescue groups is to be applauded however much they have prevaricated over this madness.
The obedient horse turns when you want, gallops when you command, without questioning. He is your intelligent friend, rescuer, beast of burden, source of rural transport and ultimately provider of sustenance to some. Man can manage the manege, but can he be allowed to mutilate and leave to rot this most noble of animals, the highest in the chain of evolution. Punishment and retribution will follow, if not from animal lovers, then even by Nature itself, that will bring you disease through the water table you pollute. When the oil finally runs out, you will look around and see that a horsepower resource that was criminally abused was no longer there.