1) Australia: now you see it, now you won’t 2) the oz mark 3) Readers’ letters (tea ceremony, Trooping the Colour, cannibalism). Still no Stonehenge here – sorry!, Not this time because Australia has jumped the queue but because we have run into a litle spat with an organisation claiming control over all new Stonehenge Theories; we aim to straighten them out and report without delay. Next distribution pencilled for 20-11-2012
Opinion piece (by Josephine Uitrijder, Athens, Greece)
Australia scores rather better than some other countries in its policy towards the unfortunates of the human race. It proposes to admit on humanitarian grounds, in principle and the future (i.e. a government promise), 20,000 people a year, e.g. accredited refugees in camps in other countries. However that is not the whole story.
Australia is a wonderful country, certainly. It takes pride in its people being tough, energetic, prepared to stick at a job and get it done. Still has a triple A rating with the agencies, so you can see they’re not running the sort of society that discourages people who can make money. Takes pride in the bravery of the soldiers who have fought for their country (and at the government’s suggestion, in other people’s wars, too) right from that trouble with the Boers onward.
So what happens when some foreigner works three jobs for a year to earn $5,000 – or even double that – to pay for a three-month journey in wretched conditions where her or his life will repeatedly be at risk in order to reach Australia and ask for refugee status without waiting for accredited status? To put together even $5,000 in a country where the average wage – if you can get work – is between $1 and $2 a day shows talent well above the world average. To risk and endure the journey shows courage and determination in bucketfuls. So when these travellers arrive they are met at the quayside or down on the beach by a welcoming party including at least one government minister and half a dozen employers who knock up the sort of magnificent meal you can get in Oz, hand out congratulations and tell them they are the sort of people Australia welcomes with both arms and offers of employment? No. They don’t actually make land at all. They are intercepted at sea, and under present rules (resulting from another Gillard boomerang-promise travelling at 180° back from its original trajectory) get towed without the option another couple of thousand sea-miles to morale-busting hutments on Nauru or Manas where current information suggests they may be kept for five years or more while their case is considered. Sounds to me pretty much like imprisonment as a punishment for what can’t be a crime if they haven’t even reached Oz, and into the bargain it sounds as though the Australian government is asking its navy to do something which in other waters might be called piracy. (On top of that the proposed treatment probably breaks the UN convention on the treatment of refugees.) True, it may be a bit better than the life they have escaped from – did I mention a high proportion of them are making the trip not just for a bit of extra cash but because they want to escape brutal, insanitary imprisonment, torture, realistic death threats and the experience of having family members murdered in the places they want to leave behind them. To be fair, I’m sure the Oz government look with a kindly eye on the desire to set off on their journey; they just don’t want these tough, resourceful battlers to slot in Australia as the destination.
An odd thing is that you’d expect the government to be glad of a few incomers to fill up some of that vast loneliness in the centre and north. Population density 2.6 inabitants per km². Indonesia, sprawling above them like a planetary octopus, has 450 million people, many of them looking for opportunities. Java (1,064 per km²) four times as densely packed as Britain (and see how they feel about immigrants). That must be why America has 250 Marines stationed at Darwin. The story about putting 250 Marines there to check emerging superpower China’s presumed territorial ambitions makes as much sense as, say, dropping bombs on the cities of Iraq because one of your cities has been attacked from Afghanistan. (Hongkong on the southern underbelly of China is more than 4,000 kilometres from Darwin on the northern tip of Oz; and China heavily outnumbers 250 Marines.) Can’t we please at least have some honesty about our realpolitik?
Of course, no country can cope easily with absolute floods of immigrants. Maybe 12,000 or 13,000 irregular arrivals this year is quite a lot, or would be if by year’s end they were all going to be let in, which they aren’t. Let’s see what the Oz population is; about 22.5 million. So, goodness! that would mean as many as two of these immigrants for every 3,600 of the population already there. No wonder the latter are disturbed! And they do know a lot about the problems of immigration; after all, nearly all of them are descended from parents, grandparents or ancestors who immigrated within the last 150 years.
From Luddites Gazette
footnote: Congratulations, Australia, on getting that seat UN Security Council seat, though really it would have saved an awful lot of money if the Security Council had just given the US an extra vote.
New punctuation mark. A structural survey of the United Nations building, ordered after hurricane Sandy flooded New York, has revealed that three subordinate organisations of the UN have been working in the basement for several years, their existence entirely forgotten by all officials working (or at least with an office place) in the levels above ground, although this apparently has not interfered with their ability to draw funds as needed from previously established UN accounts. The largest of the three is PEURP (the Project to Establish a Universal Register of Punctuation) with a total staff of 1,198. PEURP has issued a defiant statement claiming that throughout it has been vigorously pursuing important programmes to enhance the efficiency of channels of communication both internationally and for individual emergent nations where the concept of punctuation is often largely unknown. As evidence it cited a proposal about to be published for a new punctuation mark. In addition to the existing full stop or period, the exclamation mark, to indicate heightened interest, the question mark, to show that the preceding phrase or sentence was a request for information, and the semicolon (for advanced or exhibitionist writers) there should also be an oz mark with this full form for use on scrolls, public buildings, etc.
which for convenience can be represented in ordinary writing by the schematic form III̥ obviously carrying the same meaning.
This signals that the writer is aware that his ¹ preceding sentence is confused or unreliable, as e.g. when an Australian Treasurer announces that
…the government is still on track to deliver a budget surplus in 2013 III̥
or a Federal Agriculture Minister speaking of a report on the brutal slaughtering of much-loved Australian sheep exported for sale abroad declares he is
looking forward to seeing that report III̥
The oz mark is proposed of course for worldwide use in all ordinary human languages, by those reporting as well as original writers; thus, to take a random example, it could be used if a Greek government minister were to claim
Greece has come to a satisfactory arrangement with her creditors III̥
¹ we are sure that on this occasion feminists will accept the use of the male pronoun to cover both sexes (and now that we see how that expression has turned out we hope they will tolerate the latter phrase too).
the Deputy Editor writes: Charming as she is, Isabelita sometimes leads the editors to wonder who is actually running this outfit. Nevertheless we have agreed to allow some space to readers’ letters. She spoke of the ‘great success’ of the effort by Jeremy and Simon back in September (an outrageous piece of post-adolescent impudence in my opinion). We at first thought we would call the section ‘Blatter’ which as younger readers who have undergone a modern education will not know is a word meaning ‘prate’ or ‘emit more verbiage than sense’. However, this would coincide with a name which we strongly feel should pursue its own distinctive path through the media untangled with our reputation, so instead we chose ‘Words in my Wind’ as an appropriate heading [urgent note; before publication correct typo. Should be ‘Mind’, not ‘Wind’] Given the flatulent verbiage which has sometimes clogged the letter box and poisoned the dog (it’ll eat anything when it’s hungry) we obviously must impose a limit. Nothing so crude as an arithmetical limit, 140 words or some nonsense like that. The allowance will be one properly constructed sentence (and no fooling about with parataxis). Editors’ decision final. Plenty of scope for the properly literate to set forth a reasoned argument, while those who have problems achieving verbal coherence will find their contributions satisfactorily pruned or altogether excluded. So here we put our first two toes in the water:
(1) (a thoughtful contribution from our old friend Sayid Nebsamin over in Weymouth):
As the great behemoths of alimentary commerce pursue their researches into fresh ways of making profit and in particular develop the plan to ensure that in future meat sold in supermarkets will come from huge vats where cells based on various more or less delicious parts of animals that once existed but have long passed away are made to proliferate in their trillions before being processed into adequate simulacra of the joints and cuts that are familiar today, those who anticipate a new and just possibly cheaper range of gustatory delights should reflect that sooner or later some brash entrepreneur will doubtless load the initial line of one of his vats with cells from a human being, thus not only taking another step on the downward path from civilisation to a society with degraded and barbarous standards but also putting those who purchase and consume the product at risk of being charged with cannibalism.
(2) (from Maisie Kowalski in Chichester. As Maisie has followed the normally correct rules of English grammar we have allowed this sentence. However, most readers will of course remember that the correct name of the British observance is in fact ‘The Trooping the Colour’.)
The Trooping of the Colour is Britain’s answer to the Japanese tea ceremony.
Very profound, Maisie. You mean both are quintessentially embedded in the soul of their nation so that foreigners have no hope of understanding them? Or they are both extraordinarily complicated ways of doing something quite simple which probably does not need to be done at all? Or each is a good measure of the cultural level of the country’s leaders perhaps?
honor hominesque honesti floreant