24 December 2007
Julian Moti is not just a Fijian Born Lawyer with Australian
citizenship. According to Wikipedia,
been Adjunct professor at Bond university since 1992, and has a
rather outstanding international CV in India and Oceania.
The proximate cause of his demonization is the allegation that he
raped a 13 year old girl in Vanuatu circa 1997. This case was dismissed
with substantial damages by a magistrate in Vanuatu at the time. Since
then Moti has continued his legal career as a professor at various
universities, and finally accepted a position as the top legal person
in the Solomon Islands.
In 2006 Moti was arrested in Port Moresby. At the time he stated
pursuit of him was a politically motivated "witch-hunt" and only came
about after he was named for the top legal post.
It is good to see our Federal government in such vigorous pursuit
(after a hiatus of ten years) of a case of statutory rape of a 13 year
old girl when that case occurred in a foreign country after the local
judicial system cleared him of the "alleged" crime, and in fact awarded
him substantial damages. The Australian government denies that there is
any political motive for it's prosecution.
This prosecution is especially noteworthy in light of the recent
case in Australia where nine men raped an eight year old aboriginal
girl, and were all given suspended sentences.
It is also good to see our government is so actively "not
intervening" in regional affairs. It gives me a nice, safe feeling
seeing the efficacious methodology employed. Especially notable is the
way in which the judicial systems of PNG acted in the interest of
Justice against the wishes of PM Somare, and the way public opinion in
the Solomons stopped Moti's appointment.
As a total non sequitur, I bet that in future there won't be
too many appointments made to political positions in the Pacific
Islands without first obtaining Canberra's approval.
13 December 2007
Kevin Rudd has
taken power in Australia. There are some warning signs, and some
One troubling warning sign is the size of
the cabinet. Powerful
prime ministers are usually able to keep the count of ministers small.
Weak prime ministers must build support by creating new ministries to
repay political support. It remains to be seen whether this seemingly
conservative prime minister can restrain the 70% of unionists in
cabinet, and the massive support they must wield at branch level.
One of the reassuring signs is the
blocking of arch greenie Peter
Garret from any executive power over environmental matters. Another is
the restraint shown at Bali by refusal to commit to limiting greenhouse
emissions by 2020. Of course unionists were never particularly
committed to being green, after all, many unionists are employed in a
greenhouse gas emitting industry.
Obadiah of Samson Blinded has explained the NIE
statement that Iran has not been building nuclear
weapons since 2004
is the result of a deal between Iran & the US. That deal was that
if Iran was to stop sponsoring terrorism in Iraq, then the US would
make that (btw, I believe that it is probably true) announcement, which
would have the effect of reducing the ability of the US to gain
political support for an attack on Iran.
That explanation best fits the facts as I
see them, including Bush's
continued rhetoric against Iran. I do find it difficult to otherwise
explain the reduced Shia terrorism in Iraq. Sure, "the surge" has
reduced terror around Baghdad, but that small increase in US forces
does not explain the massive decrease in Iraqui terrorism.
8 December 2007
blog started before Serbia was accused of atrocities in Kosovo. Here
are my reports of alleged Serbian atrocities. Here, where Serbia
alleged KLA fatalities. Here is a blog of conditions
NATO invasion. and further postwar KLA
terror reports, and Milosevic's
capture. And here is the requiem
Milosevic, a very convenient death in World Court custody for
those who invaded Serbia.
To the best of my knowledge (and I have
the news on this subject with interest) there have been no discoveries
of prewar mass graves in Kosovo that were not disclosed prior to the
invasion. Those graves contained bodies that were of alleged KLA drug
criminals killed in police actions, or were Kosovan civilians of ethnic
Serbian & Albanian stock allegedly killed by the KLA. Mass graves
created since the invasion are claimed to be civilians killed by NATO
bombs, and I am unaware of anybody who has seriously questioned that
The trial of Milosevic stopped a few weeks
before the judges brought
out a decision, due to Milosevic's alleged suicide. It is suggested by
the blue press that Milosevic committed suicide because he realized he
was about to be found guilty. Reports of the trial prior to that time
did not seem to indicate that Milosevic was likely to be found guilty,
rather the contrary. I do not buy the argument that Milosevic committed
suicide. I think that "suicide" was a little too convenient for NATO.
Now, according to reports in "The
Australian", the 80% of Serbians
who do not live in Kosovo fear that the UN is planning to give Kosovo
independence. I applaud and support such a courageous UN decision. It
is perfectly clear that the majority (80%) of Kosovans are ethnic
Albanians, and they have indicated 80% support for independence. Their
desire for independence should be granted. Perhaps at the same time the
20% of Serbians living in the NE corner of Kosovo should be given
independence from Kosovo in the same process?
I realize that self determination of
independence within a nation is
no business of the UN. This is clearly stated in it's charter (Article 2.4) which reads: All members shall refrain in their
international relations from the threat or use of force against the
territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any
other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.
However I warmly encourage the UN to alter it's charter to
the desire for self determination by the oppressed minorities of the
world. For further reading on the charter Alexandra has kindly
Any short list of the people who would
take heart from such a
decision would contain all the trouble spots on the planet. The
Tibetans, the Kashmiris, the Basque, the Southern & Western
Sudanese, the Chechens, Aceh & W New Guinea & the Kurds (in
Turkey, Syria, Iran & Iraq).
The Kurds in Iraq are a very special
instance. Like the Kosovan
Albanians they form about 20% of the national population, and within
that nation they form a substantial local majority in a region of that
nation. In both cases the nation is occupied by foreign forces
the power to execute a separation. I would imagine that the
Kurd case for becoming a new nation after a Kosovo separation would be
Muslim Arabs would lose all moral claim to
Israel, because the
majority (Jews) want an independent state which most Arab nations
refuse to recognize. I guarantee that there are other places that would
seek separation. Quite possibly some of the southern USA, almost
certainly Western Australia, possibly even Scotland, maybe Quebec, Hong
Kong and maybe a few African countries.
Somehow, I do not think such a plan
would be approved by the general
assembly, even though it would completely exonerate Clinton and NATO
for the Serbian war.