The Guardian 10 August, 2005
TAKING ISSUE — Marcus Browning
Has Flak Jacket Johnnie
got you jumping at shadows?
There was a brilliantly observed moment in a photo earlier this month on the front page of
The Age newspaper of Aboriginal Australian Rules footballers "Polly" Farmer and
Michael Long at the naming of the Indigenous team of the century. In between them, smiling
and looking at the camera was John Howard: Howard the interloper, stealing some of the
reflected glory emanating from the two proud and dignified Indigenous men.
The photo's value was not only in reminding us that the Prime Minister is a small man in other than
just the physical sense. Seen in a different context — his government's rejection of the reconciliation
process and dumping of Indigenous rights in general — Howard's smile becomes a smug smirk of
satisfaction.
It was a reminder also that his government's racial profiling applies not only to people from the
Middle East: Indigenous Australians have been a target from day one in office.
Of course, the government denies it its actions against Muslims amount to racial profiling in pursuit
of suspected terrorists. It may not be official policy, but in practice that's exactly what it is. So it was
that last week Howard called for a meeting between the government and Australia's Muslim
leaders. Are the leaders of the Christian churches going to be invited, for example?
Of course the Muslim leaders will come to the table, but they will do so fully aware that the
government has used them and their religion to instil fear in the general public. Its scare campaign
has made them the target of racial and religious hatred and bigotry.
In 2002, when the government announced it intended passing legislation based on the British
Terrorism Act and Anti-Crime and Security Act, the Islamic Council of Victoria warned in a
statement: "In the light of the experience of the Muslim community in the United States, where
some 6000 individuals were caught up in the post-September 11 'security net', many Australian
Muslims fear they will bear the brunt of this legislation."
It continued, "To give ASIO such powers as are envisaged in forthcoming legislation, which
includes the power to detain people not suspected of committing a crime for 48 hours, without
access to their family or a lawyer, constitutes a real threat to the liberties of the Australian
people."
Indeed, six men were arrested and interrogated last month by ASIO. We know about those six
because ASIO decided to tell the mass media. Nothing more is known about them, or how many
others there are.
There is also a push now, here and in the US and Britain, to legalise torture. Should we hesitate to
call this fascism?
The Federal Police say they are monitoring 60 terrorist suspects in Australia. That number will
increase significantly over time as even more laws restricting democratic rights and freedoms of
speech and action are introduced.
Criticism of the government and active opposition to its policies will be made unlawful. Already the
use of certain words and phrases are being censored, as are such things as the taking of
photographs in public places, a reflection of how the combination of governments' scare tactics and
their actual involvement in the war in Iraq will be used to gag people.
Goverment strategies
The NSW government is planning strategies to evacuate Sydney and intends to put detectives on
the streets to walk the beat in fluorescent vests, in response to bombings on the other side of the
world in London. That is the clearest admission that if there is any threat to Australia it is because
of our involvement in the Iraq war.
In fact, Howard would be the one to benefit from an attack: Tony Blair's popularity rose after the
London attacks. The question is — has Flak Jacket Johnnie got you jumping at shadows? If he has,
he's winning.
The main objective in all this is not the prevention of terrorist acts. Britain and the US had
introduced draconian laws under cover of anti-terrorism long before the attack on the US in 2001.
In Australia such laws were implemented before the Sydney Olympics in 2000.
They didn't prevent terrorist attacks, and won't in the future — terrorism by definition is random acts
of violence, a political tactic.
In a piece in The Age on August 2, Raimond Gaita, Pprofessor of Philosophy at the
Australian Catholic University and a Professor of Moral Philosophy at the University of London,
presented, in part, the essence of these developments.
On the Iraq war he noted, "Some of Australia's most influential political pundits now say that robust
realism persuaded many 'ordinary Australians' that we must sometimes be prepared to kill
thousands of civilians in order to secure America's protection in as yet unforeseen
circumstances.
"That, the pundits say, is why Prime Minister Howard escaped serious criticism, even though no
weapons of mass destruction were found and though no one believes we invaded Iraq to liberate
Iraqis from Saddam's tyranny.
"We must hope the pundits are wrong. If they are not, it will be very hard for Muslim leaders to
convince young radicals in their community that 'ordinary Australians' do not hold Iraqi lives cheap
– so cheap that we don't even bother to count how many we kill."