Gajalakshmi Paramasivam
29
August 2020
Playing
Politics with King Corona
Mr John Howard as Prime Minister failed to
discipline Pauline Hanson whose attack on Indigenous Australians and Migrants
were received by me as if they were directed towards me. That was when I
resigned from my substantive position at the University of NSW (UNSW) where my
contributions – starting with democratic accounting for Medical Research Funding
were treated as enemy contribution. I resigned on 11 August 1998, after hearing Pauline Hanson on ABC’s 4 Corners
program on 10th night. Like the Corona victims, I had pre-conditions
that Corona Hanson aggravated. I stayed
on to help Sports Medicine unit and when I was punished by Central
Administrators in relation to that work also – I self-isolated and worked from
home. Now I feel that that pain of isolation went straight to the nucleus and
stayed there to Oppose the very negative Energy to dispel which we, the new minds were allegedly recruited
for. When Dr David Garlick – the director of Sports Medicine passed away, came the Bruce Hall scandal – from within the
medical faculty and was named ‘scientific fraud’. Pauline Hanson was the last
straw that broke my migrant back and Professor Hall was the last straw that broke the migrant academic
back of UNSW Medical Faculty. I ended up
suing Mr John Howard who to my mind was ultimately responsible for the
negligence of government – straw by straw negligence with migrant issues which
have exponential outcomes with a first generation migrant who feels Australia
is her/his home. Mere Thinking does not confirm feeling. Deep sacrifice
confirms ownership in short period.
Later when Mr Kevin Andrews who is now Father of the Australian House of Representatives, cancelled the visa
of Indian Dr Muhamed Haneef who was accused of Terrorism in 2007, Mr Howard
remained silent despite Mr Peter Beattie, then the Queensland Premier, urging
the PM to discipline Mr Kevin Andrews. Five months later Mr Howard lost his
seat – as per the People’s verdict. Mine was one of the straws that were beyond
the reasonable limit. I returned the Hanson return with compound interest.
Recently, The Age reported as follows about Mr Kevin
Andrews – under the heading ‘Senior Liberal MP denounces 'totalitarian' Chinese
rule on secret tape’.
[Liberal Party elder and former defence
minister Kevin Andrews has launched a savage attack on the Chinese government
in a private party forum, saying President Xi Jinping was running "the
most complete totalitarian regime that we've seen probably on the face of this
earth".
In what
are among the most unguarded comments yet about China by an Australian
government MP, Mr Andrews, who chairs the human rights sub-committee of
Australia's joint standing committee on
foreign affairs, defence and trade, accused the "regime of Xi
Jinping" of "trampling on human dignity, on human rights in
China"…..
Asked by one participant on the call if Victorian Premier
Daniel Andrews had committed "high treason" with his Belt and Road
Initiative agreement with China, Kevin Andrews said: "If we don't stand up
to it now, it's going to do a lot more damage to the people of China and to the
rest of the world."]
This negates the steps taken by current Prime Minister’s move to discipline current
Labor Government regarding the BRI. To
my mind, playing Politics with BRI is playing Politics with King Corona. One
needs belief to criticize as a politician. Mr Kevin Andrews is effectively in
breach of the spirit of Section 44(i) of
the Australian Constitution which bans someone with the following to be
ineligible to be member of Australian Parliament:
[Is under any
acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or
is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject
or citizen of a foreign power]
The right to criticize a Chinese Politician is that
of a Chinese. By entitling himself to that right – the Father of Australian
Parliamentarians – acted in breach of the above law. No Belief – No Right. This
breach dilutes our investment in Sovereignty confirmed through Australian laws.
As per the above report:
[In his comments to the Christian-aligned
audience, Mr Andrews hit a number of hot-button issues, saying: "We've
seen aggression in the China Sea, both the South China Sea and the East China
Sea. We've seen more oppression in China. We've seen this bellicose nationalism
from President Xi Jinping."Uighur people in Xinjiang
province were "being transported to other parts of China to work
effectively as slave labour", he said, and religious freedoms were being
"trodden on" by the Chinese Communist Party.
He
also accused China of "a complete trampling" of the agreement with
Britain to allow Hong Kongers to enjoy more freedom than their fellow citizens
on mainland China. "And we've seen people now being arrested in China,
simply for proclaiming some sort of democratic rights and being told that
they're being treasonous to China."
On
the Belt and Road Initiative, China's plan to establish global trade links,
aid, infrastructure and communications, Mr Andrews said it was
"essentially about China projecting its place in the world, into every
other part of the world" with the intention of making nations
"essentially indebted to China".]
Unless Mr Kevin Andrews represented the victims in
each of the above cases – he has no right to express on their behalf. When we
do so – we see ourselves through them as their other side. Interestingly Wikipedia
reports :
[Andrews has been
associated with or given speeches to many organisations over the years. His
most significant non-Parliamentary speeches are published in the volume 'One
People One Destiny'.]
In Sri Lanka – the President recently delivered the parallel ‘officially’
as - ‘One Country – One Law’ for all
People which essentially promises the repeal of Article 9 which affords
Buddhism the foremost place. We are waiting for the miracle to happen!
Interesting to note that Mr Kevin Andrews is known to be a Conservative and a
Catholic. The Sri Lankan parallel of that is Military Officer and a Buddhist. Both
confirm attachment to the past achievements including by others. Neither
confirms heritage of the religious leader in whose name the religion has survived
the challenges of Time & Place displacements.
No comments:
Post a Comment