It's not illegal to seek asylum.

The state of the asylum seeker debate in Australia continues in it's deplorable state. Too many people still languish in detention centers both on the Australian mainland and offshore. Recently a group of Sri Lankan asylum seekers were sent home after facing 'enhanced screening' of their status.

One aspect of the debate that seems to be worsening is the misinformation and outright lies used by the federal opposition to bolster it's pseudo-policy on immigration.

Tony Abbott and members of the federal opposition continue in their use of the term 'illegal' to describe people seeking asylum from Australia. This despite Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) that states:

"Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."

This how we count Tony - That's Better!

Australia is a signatory to the UDHR. Australia is also a party to the United Nations Refugee Convention. This guarantees an individuals rights to seek asylum. Any politicians statements to the contrary are a feeble attempt to manipulate the debate for political point scoring.

It is an irrefutable fact that there is a continued, increasing series of arrivals by boat of people seeking asylum. These people are the victims of the tumultuous global situation. That's a polite way of saying that throughout the world there is war, civil conflicts and the ethnic cleansing of minority groups. People fear these things. They fear the death and far worse they fear the savagery, the rape and the torture that are fast becoming the everyday staple of our evening news.

Our news is their lives.

Australia does not suffer from war. Though we know violence, it is nothing like the scale that other countries experience. If we are the destination of choice for refugees it is not because of any policy a government does or does not enact. It is because we appear safe. 

Abbott continues to proclaim the dangerous policy of turning back asylum seeker boats. This despite his own admission that the process would be dangerous for asylum seekers as well as Australian Defense Force personnel. A former defense force chief has even suggested turning back boats in international waters could constitute an act of piracy.

Does the public allow this rhetoric of 'toughness' because it believes the lie that seeking asylum is somehow illegal?

If so then it is the duty of all Australians to inform themselves on the issue. If you're reading this you've got the information in front of you - now do something with it.

Tell your friends. Call them out when they repeat the lies they've heard in the media. Best of all help correct the political opinion; because politicians only spout this nonsense because they think it's what we want to hear. If they thought there were votes in a more humanitarian refugee policy we'd be building integration centers not detention centers...

__________________

For further information about asylum seekers and their rights please check out the Refugee Council of Australia. You can also contact them on: admin@refugeecouncil.org.au.

If you'd like to take action on the issue of asylum seekers you can write a letter expressing your views. It's important that the government and opposition knows the views of it's constituents and knows that we won't stand for further lies. Contact:

Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

Brendan O'Connor

Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

Scott Morrison

Responses...

Several explosions occurred in the American city of Boston yesterday. Reports indicate three people have died and more than a hundred injured.

After searching more than a dozen news sites from around the world that is all I can say with confidence about the event that is being called the 'Boston Bombing'.

Some sources report two explosions, others speculate a third in a library nearby. Most report three deaths from the explosions, though one reports a dozen killed. All agree there are many people injured but some describe amputated limbs and 'pools of blood'. With so much confusion regarding the basic facts of this terrible event it is unlikely the full truth will be known for many days.

Yet many people are quick, even eager to apportion blame.

The New York Post appears to be leading this trend, identifying a suspect who may not even exist. The ephemeral suspect was identified only by racial and religious traits, do I even need to repeat them? The origins of this report seem to stem from reports that the Boston police are questioning a man being treated for injuries at a local hospital. I would be willing to speculate that Boston police are questioning many people who were at the scene of the explosions.

It is important for law enforcement officials to make inquiries, develop theories and investigate these theories to ultimately apprehend the perpetrator of a crime. This is their job and there are systems in place to ensure it is done fairly and hopefully in an unbiased way. The rest of us engage in speculation and (conspiracy) theorizing out of some sort of macabre need to connect with the tragedy that is unfolding. Often this connection involves pushing a racist, nationalist or sexist agenda not warranted by the facts.

Twitter comes alive during an event of this magnitude. Amidst the stream of citizen reportage their is always an undercurrent of those pushing their own prejudiced agenda.

Policymic writer Elizabeth Plank, tweeting as @feministabulous compiled as list of the top ten most racist tweets to come out of the Boston events: the tweets listed include pejorative statements about muslims, arab peoples, gay people and even Barack Obama. Were it not for the seriousness of the events in Boston these tenuous links would almost be amusing.

Meanwhile filmmaker Michael Moore spruiked his own agenda. Tweets he released after the event imply conservative, right wing involvement including that of the American Tea Party movement.

Seemingly fanning the flames of anti-muslim sentiment the head of an extremist Jordanian Muslim Salafi group is reported by the Washington Post as saying he was happy and drawing the comparison that American blood is no more precious than Muslim blood spilled in conflicts.

To what end these personal attacks that often barely reach beyond local networks?

Certainly they do nothing to enhance the reportage of the actual event. To the contrary they spawn their own cottage industry that I'm going to dub 'crazy shit you're glad someone else said'. Nor do they assist those investigating the events. This may be a little less clear to these arm chair commentators. Perhaps they hope that by digitally screaming 'kill all {insert stereotype here}' from the cyber rooftops they are somehow making the streets safer. All I see is an inflaming of fear and hatred.

I doubt anyone knows the correct response to a tragic event such as that unfolding in Boston. Our American-voyeurism seems to demand some sort of response but why?

@adilray tweeted after the events - "Thoughts with families of 2 dead in bomb blasts in Boston, 8 in Afghanistan, 1 in Pakistan and 31 in Iraq today. Global terror. Sad times."

This is the truth of the matter: explosions kill people throughout the world daily. Today we're paying attention only because it's America. Watch if you want to, mourn, offer condolences but don't speculate. Or if you must, shut up about it...

What was said...

Not a bad week, last week.

Radio 2SM broadcast an interview* between Dr Cathy Kezelman, an expert on adult survivors of child sexual abuse and John Laws. The interview was in response to weeks of activism, yet it felt like it all came together rather quickly.

Briefly...

Back in March Laws hosted an interview with 'Carole' during which he questioned whether she was provocative and possibly to blame for the abuse she suffered between the ages of six and sixteen. Laws glib tone and questioning spoke of the dominant discourse where perpetrators are provoked and victims blamed for the crimes committed against them.

As the furor over the interview threatened to disappear within the twenty-four hour news cycle, online activist groups 'Destroy The Joint' and 'GetUp!' initiated a campaign and petition to demand an apology and education for Laws and his misogynist views. Laws refused to personally accept the petition. He also deferred a request for airtime that would present expert opinion on the issue of sexual abuse.

A slew of incredulous Sydneysiders, your humble blogger included emailed Laws petitioning for the interview. Last Monday I received a reply; his producer assented to scheduling the interview. A flurry of emailing and phone calls between myself, 'Destroy the Joint' and Laws producer saw the interview finally happen.**

So what was said, and what does it all mean?

Really it depends on who you ask: 'GetUp!' emailed victory to it's members citing "John Laws and 2SM have made commendable strides towards ensuring another victim blaming incident won't happen on it's airwaves again". 'Destroy the Joint' offered congratulations to it's members focussing on Laws' humility in acknowledging that "he now knew a lot more about child abuse than he had previously".

Clearly many followers were not pleased with the outcome though. 'Destroy the Joints' Facebook page was divided between celebration and frustration, with one 'Destroyer' maintaining that "he should still lose his job".

And what do I think?

Listening to the interview live I was immediately struck by the way Laws distanced himself from the fallout of the initial interview. Yet when Dr Kezelman was given the chance to speak Laws was polite and engaging. He was receptive to the points made and acknowledged he had something to learn. I felt more could have been discussed but then I'm not typical of Laws audience and nothing is achieved if they start tuning out over the content.

Mine is a very equivocal endorsement of Laws response after the strident opposition I offered to his initial attitude. See I don't believe the world is perfect and that means people need the chance to change.

You win very few supporters by constantly berating the opposition. Laws speaks to a broad audience, though his view is often narrow, that was part of the reason his initial comments were so objectionable. His interview with Dr Kezelman may not have been a call to arms, to combat abuse. However it did reach more people than my writing perhaps ever will. Most importantly it challenged listeners to look at the issue of abuse and victim blaming in a different way. Small changes, but in a large audience these things add up.

So is the campaign over?

Well, no. In the week since the interview I've heard of friends and colleagues making sexist, pejorative comments. I've seen the double standard of male/female expectations play out professionally and socially. The dominant discourse does not shut up so easily.

But I've also talked to people about it. Sometimes they listen, other times not, but I've always left the conversation such that we could take it up another day. Because one thing I know for certain is that you will never change a discourse if you stop talking...

________________________

* You can podcast the show and interview here: http://www.2smsupernetwork.com/podcasts.html just look out for the episode from the 10/4/2013

** Check out the trail of correspondence on my earlier post - 'Opportunities Missed...'

The People That You Meet (a Bluesfest follow up)

Do you have an opinion on Coal Seam Gas? Chances are, unless you've been hiding under a rock, you've developed one over the last week. And even if you have been hiding you might be wondering about the toxic concoction bubbling to the surface under your rock...

A recent episode of '4 Corners' on ABC TV entitled Gas Leak! has created an tide of media scrutiny over the processes and effects of coal seam gas on the environment. The '4 Corners' story, and much of the subsequent media, has focussed on the lack of any truly independent research into the environmental fallout from the coal seam gas industry. This lack of transparency by the industry is exacerbated by claims that environmental impact reports were fast tracked, with approvals being granted before all the information was known.

Meeting the Stop CSG team at Bluesfest

Only a few days before the program screened I was at Bluesfest talking with the volunteers and activists involved with the Lock The Gate Alliance. Lock the Gate are a group involved in protecting Australia's environmental, cultural and agricultural resources and they are particularly interested in the potential harm of coal seam gas extraction.  It was a fascinating conversation, especially considering I spend perhaps too much of my time engaging on the wrong side of this keyboard in front of me.

Prior to meeting the group at Bluesfest I had read a little about Coal Seam Gas and found myself generally confused by the wealth of contradictory information available. When I'm uncertain or feel ill-informed on an issue I tend to shy away from getting involved until I know more.

Getting information is not always easy though. Especially when your average Google search returns hits in the millions (21,800,000 when I searched 'coal seam gas') That's where talking to people who are passionate and involved can really help. Here's a little of the information and perspectives I was offered by Melissa & Elly whom I chatted with:

• Only a small percentage of Australia's land is used for crops - One of the big reasons Lock the Gate are locking their gates is because of concern for the viability of agricultural land. Coal seam gas extraction has the potential to contaminate bore water and significantly decrease the available ground water. This may have devastating effects on the 6.5% of agricultural land used for crops

• The effects are being seen on the ground (literally) - while we talked I heard about farmers in the Northern Rivers region who had seen bubbling in rivers and other previously unknown phenomenon. Now I can't report my personal experience of these events, but as a bystander with a vested interest in food production (we all need to eat!) I believe there is reason to be concerned.

• Alternate energy sources are being explored - the team at Lock the Gate are actively involved with groups researching solar energy production. Put simply, they are not blind to the fact that Australians consume energy. They just believe that coal seam gas and the hydraulic fracturing that assists it's extraction are dangerous, environmentally irresponsible ways to meet our energy needs.

Those three short points I've discussed are in no way the full story of coal seam gas and the Lock the Gate Aliance's work. I would encourage anyone interested to click on the links I've provided and gather information for yourself. When I chatted with the group though these three points of information were the ones that tipped my opinion in their favour and convinced me to sign their petition. 

Now I write often on social justice issues and the need for average people to be involved. Increasingly the most accessible and efficient way for people to engage is via the internet. My experience up at Bluesfest has reignited for me the power and potential face-to-face engagement. The Lock the Gate Alliance are real people working, fighting and winning battles in their communities for the right to a safe, sustainable future.

It's been a few days now since the end of Bluesfest and the good vibes and music are still running high. I'll continue to write and sign petitions online. But I'll also be wandering up to people with clipboards more often and asking them the hard questions. If they answer as eloquently as Melissa and Elly, they'll get my support too...

Everyone deserves music...

I think the first big crowd singalong I ever took part in was at a Crowded House gig. I might be romanticising this but I'm pretty sure it was 'Weather With You'...

"Walking round the room singing stormy weather,

At 57 mount pleasant street..."

And for that beautiful moment the crowd was in perfect voice. Having no confidence in my own singing I still joined in and it was like I was in a choir.

Crowd singing had auto-tuned our voices.

Music is the language of us all...

Now I've been in many a crowd singalong this weekend at Bluesfest. One of my favourites has to have been The Cat Empire. These guys always make me dance, make me laugh and of course make sing. I sing so loud I get hoarse and yet the crowd always sounds in perfect voice. When Harry Angus hits the high notes I drop out but others in the crowd take over, when Felix is singing smooth I kick in a little. We become the best of ourselves.

You see the auto-tune effect everywhere you go at Bluesfest.

Sit down on the grass and listen to music in the afternoon sun. If you're there long enough someone will sit next to you and start chatting. Go for a wander through the markets and while you're checking out some shorts end up chatting with the sales assistant about the difference between Aussie and European men.

Sitting in the festival cafe listening to Trombone Shorty we were joined at the table by Eirin. We chatted music, politics, travel and almost forgot to listen to the music! We made a new friend and when his band 'Gait' comes to Sydney in a few months time, we'll go check them out. Later on that night I got asked for a lighter. I don't smoke but we still ended up talking politics and fashion.

All over the festival this was happening: food halls and bus lines, in the dry or torrential rain. It seemed like nothing was too much trouble and everyone was stoked to be sharing moments with the people around them. Wouldn't it be great if everyday was like this?

The sun also rises...

As the sun sets on another Bluesfest and I'm still wistfully humming along to the music in my head, I'm wondering how to spread this feeling through the year. If only it were as simple as taking everyone in my life to a festival!

Instead I'm going to focus on the diversity, the openness and the tolerance that the festival brings to me. Most of the shit that brings us down in life begins with a simple failure to stop and look at things from another point of view. Music lubricates the gears in that respect; as we dance along the ideas infect us and we see the world a little differently.

So how can I auto-tune the world; do we all just need good music?

That's probably too simple an answer. I mean it's not like we can pitch-correct people's opinions, nor should we. But what if we do consciously what the music does to our unconscious, helping us listen to different ideas? What if we stop ourselves from saying no straight away and ask ourselves what if? We'll never agree with everyone but we'll have a lot less arguments and when we do they'll be more constructive.

"Everyone deserves music". So says another of my Bluesfest favourites, Michael Franti. We deserve it because of all the good things that it brings and we deserve it because we help spread those good things around.