Strange happenings
This post contains many thoughts, so I've used an LJ-Cut
1. Teaching: Yesterday, I had the sudden realisation that I had, indeed, had an affect on the MRC- which was a very welcome feeling after spending the first half of this year constantly fighting with the BOM, and in particular the asshole of a Chairman at the time.
Yesterday, one of my students came in and told me he'd written a short story and he wanted me to read it.
"Is it for school?"
"No, just because."
So I opened the disk and read it. Now this boy, who is only 15/16 has been through some of the worst experiences imaginable- he was in Kabul when the American bombardment of the city began, and had to run with his friends from the missile attacks. Eventually, his family decided to escape, and they were in one of the groups of asylum seekers that eventually found their way to Nauru. Having said that, on the way over, their boat sank with a huge loss of life- he was eleven at the time, and he watched as friends died, and a woman, who had lost her baby while trying to escape with him from the sinking ship, die herself only a few moments later. The baby's name was Omid, which means 'hope'. Anyway, suffice to say, it was a very moving story of escape, and fear, and hope as well, which he had obviously put a lot of thought and work into. It hasn't been accepted by any writing comps yet, but I'm going to try to pull a few strings and see if it can be published in the Green mag. Not because of politics, but because I think it would do him a world of good to feel that he had been chosen for something. His writing is good, wonderful even- if you know his background and how much he must have struggled with it, and agonised over the words to use.
What really struck me, though, was that I remembered then that I had told him over a year ago that he should write it down, because people in Australia need to know the story behind these things. He's a wonderful boy, very intelligent, and has been here two years. ONe day, I can tell, he'll be something great either here or in Afghanistan. Currently he's on a TPV (Temporary Protection Visa)- these last 3 years. He, and his lovely mother, as well as father and sister, have no idea whether they will then find themselves deported yet again. I know that I'm going to cry my eyes out if I find out that this has happened. There is no way, after he's struggled so hard, after he's seen everything taken away from him, and after he's been here so long, that he should be forced to go 'home'. That's what the UN call it, and the Howard Government, when someone is sent back- last year the whole focus was on 'Bringing them Home' because that way, if you make it look like all the refugees want to go back and live 'normal' lives, you don't have to deal with people wondering whether it will be good for them, or whether they will be better off etc.
2. Torture: Yesterday I received an interesting email, which, after some panegyrics about the Left, continued to ask Bob Brown about whether or not, if the torture of a terrorist suspect would prevent the death of someone he loved, he would not consider it a worthy moral sacrifice. This really set me to thinking. Firstly, I do not see the need for torture, nor do I sanction its use- and also, the state runs the risk of 'I'll tell you anything, just stop' syndrome- which is potentially damaging for more people than simply the suspect themselves- of course, this has long been a problem commented on in Soviet Russia, China during the Cultural Revolution (I single this time period out, simply from reading a lot of history from around that time), and many other governments who have included torture as a part of policing (ie. most countries). Except Canada ;). Anyway- but at the same time, I thought about it, and I thought 'okay, if I could say that, without a doubt, the torture of a suspect would lead to the death of someone I cared about being averted, then I would probably agree to it. If I'm being honest with myself, which obviously I was trying to be. I could not put that person's life ahead of Damien, or my mother, or my friends. However, of course, this raises more ethical dilemmas because, by implication, I could not give a flying fuck about anyone else- because, if I did not know it would avert that persons death, I would not care and would hold to the moral and ethical high ground (as defined by our society).
What I see as the key problem though, is that this arguments is actually false in the face of terrorism. Terrorism is a hydra- chop off the head, there are plenty more to keep attacking you. So you stop one cell, there are 5 more in existence- the person being tortured does not necessarily know this, and probably does not know their names/locations etc if they have half a grain of sense. I think we need to realise that, like it or not, by our decision to go to war in Iraq, in particular, we have gone to war. It may not be a conventional war, but it's a war none the less- of ideology, which is even more dangerous than a war for territory, as you are fighting against the ethical, moral and religous judgements of others. Whereas, in traditional warfare, the torture of a suspect might reveal complicated future plans, including those of other units, this is less likely in terrorism, and for that reason, I still maintain that torture is unjustified, if only for a technicality and not an ethical standpoint. Being human is far too complicated.
3. Death penalties: The Greens are holding a silent vigil for Van Nguyen on Friday. I am, again, morally and ethically confused. I do not believe in the death penalty, however, he has been convicted of a crime and, unlike Schapelle Corby, there aren't any mitigating circumstances that make you question whether he is, in fact, guilty or not. I think about the fact that the death penalty is still common in many countries, and that the only reason we weep and mourn for Nguyen is because, like Corby, he is a) Australian and b) young and handsome. If he were an old and gnarled junkie, would we care? Probably not. And I don't remember the Greens trying to get involved in the case of Amina Luwaal, who was almost stoned to death in Nigeria. The article I just had to put out says 'this is not a political even'. Yes it is, because it was arranged by a political party, in advance of an Amnesty International vigil. Why didn't we just advertise theirs? I disagree with all this. I think he should be lobbied for, because he is a citizen and has the right to expect that- but at the same time he broke the law, of another country, and has admitted to that. He made a decision, and I'm sorry for his family, I think it's a waste of a young life, but still, putting sanctions on Singapore (which only ever harm people and not the government) adn the like are just ridiculous. They are a sovereign country, with the right not only to create, but to maintain and administer their own laws. You don't see us putting sanctions on or speaking out against America (who carries out death penalties on minors and the mentally ill), or on Iran which has had girls stoned to death for the crime of being raped (the man got about 25 lashes, from memory), or any of the other countries that administer such laws. Pleas for clemency are one thing, but sanctions and bullying are quite another.
4. Small pleasures: This morning I went to Bardelis and had a coffee after gym. Mary, the cute little waitress was happy to see me and very cheerful- she always remembers what I roder, because I am now famous as the person who sits at THAT table and writes. Con gave me a wink and a smile. He had to chase a magpie out, when it walked (yes, walked, not flew- it's as arrogant as a human) through the front door. "Bloody thing does that 10 times a day" Con says, as I started laughing. I'm also reading a magazine called 'Cosmos' which had an article on the science of superheros, and a thing on the teaching of Intelligent Design (from the POV of a Uniting Church Reverand).
1. Teaching: Yesterday, I had the sudden realisation that I had, indeed, had an affect on the MRC- which was a very welcome feeling after spending the first half of this year constantly fighting with the BOM, and in particular the asshole of a Chairman at the time.
Yesterday, one of my students came in and told me he'd written a short story and he wanted me to read it.
"Is it for school?"
"No, just because."
So I opened the disk and read it. Now this boy, who is only 15/16 has been through some of the worst experiences imaginable- he was in Kabul when the American bombardment of the city began, and had to run with his friends from the missile attacks. Eventually, his family decided to escape, and they were in one of the groups of asylum seekers that eventually found their way to Nauru. Having said that, on the way over, their boat sank with a huge loss of life- he was eleven at the time, and he watched as friends died, and a woman, who had lost her baby while trying to escape with him from the sinking ship, die herself only a few moments later. The baby's name was Omid, which means 'hope'. Anyway, suffice to say, it was a very moving story of escape, and fear, and hope as well, which he had obviously put a lot of thought and work into. It hasn't been accepted by any writing comps yet, but I'm going to try to pull a few strings and see if it can be published in the Green mag. Not because of politics, but because I think it would do him a world of good to feel that he had been chosen for something. His writing is good, wonderful even- if you know his background and how much he must have struggled with it, and agonised over the words to use.
What really struck me, though, was that I remembered then that I had told him over a year ago that he should write it down, because people in Australia need to know the story behind these things. He's a wonderful boy, very intelligent, and has been here two years. ONe day, I can tell, he'll be something great either here or in Afghanistan. Currently he's on a TPV (Temporary Protection Visa)- these last 3 years. He, and his lovely mother, as well as father and sister, have no idea whether they will then find themselves deported yet again. I know that I'm going to cry my eyes out if I find out that this has happened. There is no way, after he's struggled so hard, after he's seen everything taken away from him, and after he's been here so long, that he should be forced to go 'home'. That's what the UN call it, and the Howard Government, when someone is sent back- last year the whole focus was on 'Bringing them Home' because that way, if you make it look like all the refugees want to go back and live 'normal' lives, you don't have to deal with people wondering whether it will be good for them, or whether they will be better off etc.
2. Torture: Yesterday I received an interesting email, which, after some panegyrics about the Left, continued to ask Bob Brown about whether or not, if the torture of a terrorist suspect would prevent the death of someone he loved, he would not consider it a worthy moral sacrifice. This really set me to thinking. Firstly, I do not see the need for torture, nor do I sanction its use- and also, the state runs the risk of 'I'll tell you anything, just stop' syndrome- which is potentially damaging for more people than simply the suspect themselves- of course, this has long been a problem commented on in Soviet Russia, China during the Cultural Revolution (I single this time period out, simply from reading a lot of history from around that time), and many other governments who have included torture as a part of policing (ie. most countries). Except Canada ;). Anyway- but at the same time, I thought about it, and I thought 'okay, if I could say that, without a doubt, the torture of a suspect would lead to the death of someone I cared about being averted, then I would probably agree to it. If I'm being honest with myself, which obviously I was trying to be. I could not put that person's life ahead of Damien, or my mother, or my friends. However, of course, this raises more ethical dilemmas because, by implication, I could not give a flying fuck about anyone else- because, if I did not know it would avert that persons death, I would not care and would hold to the moral and ethical high ground (as defined by our society).
What I see as the key problem though, is that this arguments is actually false in the face of terrorism. Terrorism is a hydra- chop off the head, there are plenty more to keep attacking you. So you stop one cell, there are 5 more in existence- the person being tortured does not necessarily know this, and probably does not know their names/locations etc if they have half a grain of sense. I think we need to realise that, like it or not, by our decision to go to war in Iraq, in particular, we have gone to war. It may not be a conventional war, but it's a war none the less- of ideology, which is even more dangerous than a war for territory, as you are fighting against the ethical, moral and religous judgements of others. Whereas, in traditional warfare, the torture of a suspect might reveal complicated future plans, including those of other units, this is less likely in terrorism, and for that reason, I still maintain that torture is unjustified, if only for a technicality and not an ethical standpoint. Being human is far too complicated.
3. Death penalties: The Greens are holding a silent vigil for Van Nguyen on Friday. I am, again, morally and ethically confused. I do not believe in the death penalty, however, he has been convicted of a crime and, unlike Schapelle Corby, there aren't any mitigating circumstances that make you question whether he is, in fact, guilty or not. I think about the fact that the death penalty is still common in many countries, and that the only reason we weep and mourn for Nguyen is because, like Corby, he is a) Australian and b) young and handsome. If he were an old and gnarled junkie, would we care? Probably not. And I don't remember the Greens trying to get involved in the case of Amina Luwaal, who was almost stoned to death in Nigeria. The article I just had to put out says 'this is not a political even'. Yes it is, because it was arranged by a political party, in advance of an Amnesty International vigil. Why didn't we just advertise theirs? I disagree with all this. I think he should be lobbied for, because he is a citizen and has the right to expect that- but at the same time he broke the law, of another country, and has admitted to that. He made a decision, and I'm sorry for his family, I think it's a waste of a young life, but still, putting sanctions on Singapore (which only ever harm people and not the government) adn the like are just ridiculous. They are a sovereign country, with the right not only to create, but to maintain and administer their own laws. You don't see us putting sanctions on or speaking out against America (who carries out death penalties on minors and the mentally ill), or on Iran which has had girls stoned to death for the crime of being raped (the man got about 25 lashes, from memory), or any of the other countries that administer such laws. Pleas for clemency are one thing, but sanctions and bullying are quite another.
4. Small pleasures: This morning I went to Bardelis and had a coffee after gym. Mary, the cute little waitress was happy to see me and very cheerful- she always remembers what I roder, because I am now famous as the person who sits at THAT table and writes. Con gave me a wink and a smile. He had to chase a magpie out, when it walked (yes, walked, not flew- it's as arrogant as a human) through the front door. "Bloody thing does that 10 times a day" Con says, as I started laughing. I'm also reading a magazine called 'Cosmos' which had an article on the science of superheros, and a thing on the teaching of Intelligent Design (from the POV of a Uniting Church Reverand).