The horrors of war versus the horrors of peace --- and the horrors of peace and bureaucracy.

War Memorial should ditch weapons manufacturers: Anti war organisation

By Sally Whyte

20 May 2018 — 7:29pm

The Australian War Memorial risks making war a source of entertainment instead of being a site of commemoration, the parent organisation of last year's Nobel Peace Prize winners has told a parliamentary committee.

Last year's Nobel Peace prize winners, the International Campaign Against Nuclear Weapons, grew out of the Medical Association for the Prevention of War, which has used the federal inquiry into Canberra's national institutions to take aim at the memorial's sponsorship arrangements with weapons manufacturers.

The Australian War Memorial and its director Brendan Nelson 

have been criticised by an anti-war group.

The association's president, Canberra-based retired GP Dr Sue Wareham, has taken particular issue with the audio visual elements of the memorial's exhibitions. Dr Wareham was one of the founding members of ICAN and is a board member of the Australian arm of the organisation. ---

In particular, Dr Wareham singles out 

1. the lack of peace movement materials on display and 
2. the prospect of recent border patrols to recent asylum seekers reaching Australian shores being recognised at the memorial. 
3. The inquiry will cover the ways in which the capital's galleries, museums and other institutions receive funding from private sponsorship. The association believes that the memorial should have a policy against accepting funding from weapons companies that profit from ongoing conflicts.

"It's particularly blatant when one walks into the theatre at the War Memorial and it's named BAE Systems theatre. BAE Systems is Britain's biggest weapons manufacturer, they're selling a lot of material to Saudi Arabia at the moment," Dr Wareham said.

"There's BAE Systems alongside our people who have fought and died in the defence of freedom and there's BAE Systems sponsoring, helping, assisting the Saudi Arabian government, which is contributing to a humanitarian disaster in Yemen."

Dr Wareham said the memorial shouldn't be expected to raise its own revenue, and that its plans should be scaled back to be more affordable.

"One of the things our organisation would like to see is that the AWM plans are a little less grandiose and actually get back to the basic function of commemoration of our war dead, which doesn't require a huge and grandiose budget."

Dr Sue Wareham OAM, is national president of the Medical Association for the Prevention of War, which believes the War Memorial should not accept funds from weapons companies.

Photo: Rohan Thomson

According to the submission, the audio visual elements now used at the memorial, as well as interactive activities where children can dress up a nurse or pretend to be in a trench "[run] the risk of blurring the distinction between commemoration and understanding on the one hand, and entertainment on the other. Entertainment is not a part of the purpose or mission of the AWM."

The association believes the memorial sanitises the reality of war, and its current direction doesn't do enough to make people think twice about going to war. The submission also took issue with the suggestion that the memorial may include exhibitions relating to Australia's border patrol to deter asylum seekers.

"Proponents who regard the AWM as a suitable place to display Australia’s rejection of boatloads of desperate people have simply lost the plot."

The memorial has defended itself in the wake of the criticism.

"The Australian War Memorial refutes the notion that any parts of its displays are 'entertainment'. Exhibits and displays are developed to engage all visitors and cater to a range of learning styles including those of children," a spokesman said.

There are no plans for a memorial for Operation Sovereign Borders, the spokesman said, clarifying that comments by memorial director Brendan Nelson about all Defence personnel, including border protection, "were made in the context of the proposed extension to the Memorial being considered by Government next year."

The Memorial said it will continue its funding arrangements with weapons companies.

"The overwhelming majority of cultural institutions rely on partnerships and corporate support to supplement revenue and support continued operations. These arrangements commonly and understandably involve acknowledgment or recognition of the supportive individual or organisation," the spokesman said.

"The Memorial highly values the support of its corporate partners which allows investment directly back into the development of the Memorial’s galleries, exhibitions, programs, collection and staffing."

Sally Whyte is a reporter at The Canberra Times

     Source from the Canberra Times: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/politics/federal/war-memorial-should-ditch-weapons-manufacturers-anti-war-organisation-20180517-p4zfvb.html

:::::::::::::

PS: Among the complexities of war and peace, how many fewer people would there be to participate in the Invictus Games if there were no manufacturers of arms and weapons such as Lockheed Martin.

:::::::::::::::

Please  go here for the Immigration & Border Protection website.

The Editor of this blog does not regard her country

as having a compassionate immigration & border protection policy.

However, there are organisations within Australia that do.

The Editor does not have expertise in immigration & refugee matters.

However, there are organisations in Australia who do.

Message this blog with your email details if you wish to be placed 

in touch with these organisations. 

Aborigines Claim for Citizen Rights (1938) proclaimed by Australian actor, Uncle Jack Charles

On the 80th anniversary of the 'Day of Mourning' 

Uncle Jack Charles performs an adaptation of the 

'Aborigines Claim for Citizen Rights!' (1938). 

#AlwaysWillBe

Australian citizenship, Islamophobia, Cronulla, Bigotry, Racism in Multi-Cultural Australia

Cross-posted with Advocacy @ St Paul's

• Anti-Islam 'patriots' set their sights on Cronulla, where it all began

 

Ten years ago the Cronulla riots shocked the nation. As someone who converted to Islam after marrying into a Muslim family and has children growing up Muslim in Australia, I'm more aware of this impending anniversary than most.

Watching news footage of the riots at the time, which included people being seriously assaulted by a drunken flag-waving crowd because they were of Arab or Muslim appearance, prompted my husband and I to seriously consider changing our oldest son's proudly chosen Arab Muslim name. We eventually decided against it, reasoning that we shouldn't capitulate to racism, the event was a one-off, and that by the time he grew up, Islamophobia would have receded.

More than 5500 people gathered at North Cronulla on December 11, 2005.  

Photo: Andrew Meares

Ten years on, and anti-Muslim hate seems to have reached an all-time high; I think twice before saying my son's name out loud in a public place. Tens of thousands of people have liked anti-Muslim social media pages, anti-Muslim rallies are held regularly across the country, and several anti-Muslim political parties plan to contest the next election.

Advertisement

These developments, which would have shocked many even a year ago, now seem a normal part of the Australian political landscape. My youngest son can identify the regular news coverage of anti-Muslim sentiment by looking at the images. If they're of men and Australian flags, it's about "the people who don't like us".

This has prompted me to question why the almost complete appropriation of Australia's national symbol by groups whose agenda is to exclude has been met with silence from those whose job it is to represent our flag and country.

Members of the Reclaim Australia rally in Melton on November 22. 

 Photo: Chris Hopkins

Despite general agreement on the need to unite against the terrorists who want to divide us, the need to unite against the right-wing extremists who want to do the same thing has not been a part of the national conversation. Where is the leadership on condemning increasing extremism targeting the Muslim community?

A failure to do so has fostered an environment in which physical and verbal attacks on people identifiably Muslim, particularly women, have increased to the point where community leader Saara Sabbagh recently told a forum against racism: "You can ask any Muslim woman with a headscarf and she'll tell you a story."

A friend told me recently that her year 4 son had come home from school asking her, "Are we killers, mum?"

Speakers at a Reclaim Australia rally in Canberra on November 22.  

Photo: Alex Ellinghausen

One of the most frightening aspects of rising Islamophobia is that it is a worldwide trend. Anti-Muslim, anti-immigration political parties have made gains in the Netherlands, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Austria, France and Italy. United States presidential candidate Donald Trump recently proposed a national register for Muslims, a move New Jersey Rabbi Joshua Stanton said made him think about "fascist actions taken against Jews during the last century".

Some may argue that it's inappropriate or offensive to talk about Islamophobia when people have been killed in terrorist attacks carried out by criminals who say they are doing so in the name of Islam. Yet Muslims are more likely than others to be killed in terror attacks worldwide, and just as likely to be killed in Western attacks.

There have been Muslim victims in every major western terror attack, including in New York, Madrid, London and Paris.

In addition, each time criminals carry out terrorist attacks, the entire Muslim community faces a backlash increasingly encouraged not just by right-wing extremists, but also by authoritative public figures. Tony Abbott has a lot to answer for here. He has gone, but members of the current government – including Scott Morrison, Josh Frydenberg, Cory Bernardi​ and George Christensen – continue to actively exploit anti-Muslim sentiment for political advantage. More importantly, although every Muslim I have spoken to about this matter feels under siege as never before, the silence of political leaders on growing Islamophobia is profound.

What should politicians be saying? They could take a lead from other public figures and community leaders, such as the musicians who have dissociated themselves from racism by demanding anti-Muslim rally organisers stop playing their music, and the faith leaders who have condemned the rallies as damaging to our society.

It's not that hard, which suggests the failure of politicians to condemn Islamophobia is a matter of political will and a fear of losing the racist vote.

If politicians don't want to denounce anti-Muslim hatred because it's the right thing to do, they might think about doing it because the hate-filled leaders of Islamic State are exploiting attacks on Muslim women in Western countries to recruit Western men.

In an English-language video set to music, IS claims to be "Defending the pride of our sisters who have cried". Political leaders consistently making strong statements opposing anti-Muslim bigotry as it occurs would completely undercut that claim's potential to radicalise.

Politicians could start by condemning the use of the Australian flag at the anti-Muslim rallies that look set to become a permanent feature of Australian political life. They could follow up by pledging to put all anti-Muslim political parties last on their preference cards.

When my children see images of people waving the Australian flag to signify a hatred of Muslims, I'd like to be able to tell them that the people in charge of our country condemn this misuse of a symbol meant to represent us all.

Susie Latham​ is a PhD student at Curtin University and a co-founder of Voices against Bigotry. 

She will be presenting at a Deakin University conference on Citizenship and Racism in Australia in December.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/comment/ten-years-after-cronulla-riots-why-is-our-government-silent-on-antimuslim-prejudice-20151204-glfmv2.html#ixzz3tfAYAuFv
Follow us: @theage on Twitter | theageAustralia on Facebook

The Muslim Question. Citizenship in Australia

14 Dec

This two day conference will address the 'Muslim question' currently circulating in citizenship debates in the West and also reflect upon the decade that has passed since the Cronulla riots.

Day one hopes to address a dearth of research evidence, prompt new conversations and directions for policy through an objective examination of the relationship between Islamic belief, ritual and practice and civic attitudes and expressions of social responsibility toward the western political community. The gap in research contributes to reductionist characterisations of Islam as a persistent threat to western societies, fuelling Islamophobic and "extreme" nationalist responses.

Day two will address just how significant the Cronulla Riots were, then and now, and whether – in a world preoccupied with the War on Terror – the Riots remain a useful reference point for discussions of intercultural relations and multiculturalism in Australia. This discussion is particularly relevant in a world where Islam's compatibility with western liberal values continues to be questioned at global, national and local scales.

Deakin City Centre, Level 3, 550 Bourke Street, Melbourne
More information

Event information

Date

14th December 2015 - 15th December 2015

Time

08:30 am - 06:00 pm

Location

550 Bourke Street, Melbourne

Register your interest