Women In Combat

The main role of the military is to legally and morally kill the enemy.

ADF Logo

The Federal Government (Gillard Government) in early April 2011 announced that they will push for women to take on front line combat roles in the Australian Army.

The first women permitted into the Army were the Army Nursing Service in 1899.  In 1979 Army women were awarded the equal pay of their male counterparts.  Yet, 77% positions remained out of bounds. Today, women make up 13.5% of the Australian Defence Force.  Further, Australia was the second nation in the world to allow women to serve in submarines. 

Australian Female Soldier

The most ‘forward deployed’ woman in the Australian military is Corporal Rachel Ingram (40 years old).  She is at a military base in Tarin Kowt, patrolling the green zone of Afghanistan (Mirabad Valley).  She is an army photographer.

Photos by Corporal Rachel Ingram

What is the current law?

Women are allowed to serve on the front line.  In fact, there are women serving on the front line in Afghanistan today.

The current law states that women are allowed in all military roles, including close combat.  However, there are the following exclusions:

·    

• Where it requires women to ‘commit or participate directly in the commission of an act of violence against an armed adversary’; or
• Expose them ‘to a high probability of direct physical contact with an armed adversary’.

This basically means that women are not allowed to serve in ‘combat manoeuvre units’.  The sole purpose of these units is to ‘seek out and close with the enemy to kill or capture, to seize and hold ground and repel attack’.  It is believed that such operations require physical strength and power, and load carrying stamina and endurance.  That is, soldiers must:

• Lift and carry a 155m Howitzer shell, weighing 43kg, where the rate of fire is fundamental,
• Carry 50kg packs across distances up to 50kms.

155m Howitzer

It has being argued that women are physically incapable of undertaking these tasks.  And there is no denying that most men are physically stronger than most women.  Figures show that women have 50% less upper body strength, 30% less aerobic fitness, and 40% less muscle mass.

Defence Culture

Recently the ADF’s culture has hit the media following the accusations made by a female cadet that she was streamed on Skype having sex with a fellow male cadet, whilst other male cadets watched in another room. 

Daniel McDonald - the accused in the ADF Skype case.

Perhaps allowing women to partake in all Army roles is an opportunity to fix the ‘old boys club’?

With this aside, the ‘chivalry problem’ has also being floated around the debate.  The chivalry problem means that having women in close combat units invites extra danger.  This is because men will feel compelled to rescue and protect them.

Other Armies

The USA prevents women from serving in the infantry, artillery and armoured units.

The UK allows women to serve in all specialisations, except those where the primary duty is ‘to close with and kill the enemy’.

Finally, Israel, probably the most advanced country in allowing women into the military.  In 2000, women began serving as combat soldiers along the Egyptian and Jordanian borders in order to protect the country from drug smugglers and terrorist infiltrators.  The Israeli Defence Force also decided to deploy women in the artillery corps, followed by infantry units, armoured divisions and elite combat units.  The following is a clip of women in Israeli military.

Discussion Questions:

• Is the right to kill and be killed something women should celebrate?
• As long as the physical requirements can be met, should women be allowed to serve in close combat?
• Maybe this isn’t an issue of gender, but rather the robustness and capability of the Army?

Heel Prick Test

Please watch this first:

Did you know that the blood sample taken from a newborn’s heel prick test is used for research?

Did you know that in Victoria the blood sample from a newborn’s heel prick test is stored indefinitely?

Did you know that that same blood sample has being subpoenaed by courts as evidence?

What is the heel prick test?

The heel prick test is undertaken on a baby when it is between 48 and 72 hours old.  A doctor, or midwife, must seek a parent’s consent before the test is done.  This test has been undertaken since 1970 in Australia. 

The procedure requires a few drops of blood being collected from the baby’s heel on special filter paper.  The filter paper is left to dry then sent to a screening laboratory where the sample is tested for different conditions.

This card that contains the baby’s information is called the Guthrie card.

Guthrie Card

Why do the heel prick test?

The heel prick test is done to detect rare genetic disorders.  In Australia, the test screens newborn babies for disorders such as cystic fibrosis.  It is also sometimes used to detect more than 30 extremely rare disorders related to how the body breaks down protein and fat.

When the test results show that the baby has a birth defect, early diagnosis and treatment can make the difference between lifelong disabilities and healthy development.

A young girl with cystic fibrosis

However, this test has faced several legal challenges.

Legal Challenge #1

The American Flag

Texas, like every other state in America, pricks the heels of newborn children for a blood sample.  Over time, these cards began to accumulate and the Texas State Department of Health Services began to share them and use them for research in order to benefit public health.  It is important to note that the Guthrie cards were de-identified.

As a result of these actions, the department was sued because it failed to obtain consent from each parent for the release of their (nameless) child’s blood spot.

The case promptly settled.  The state agreed to destroy millions of cards and to give parents clearer procedures to opt out of the storage of the cards.

Unfortunately, this was not where the case finally stayed.  The state had also concealed its involvement in a law enforcement project.  The Texan doctors had also handed over hundreds of Guthrie cards to the federal government to help build a vast DNA database – a forensic tool designed to identify missing persons and crack cold cases.  This database would be shared worldwide with one common theme – homeland security and anti-terrorism. 

DNA

The way that this works is that everyone in the same maternal line shares the same DNA sequence.  However, a match from a crime scene sample to a profile from a Guthrie card would have little impact.  This is because the cards are nameless.  But there is no doubt that the federal government wanted to build such a database in order to improve the interpretation of such data for evidence and other sources.   

Outcome: this legal challenge led to the destruction of 5.2 million Guthrie cards due to the lack of parental consent.

Legal Challenge #2

The Australian Flag

In 1997 in Western Australia police wanted to gain access to DNA to prove a man was the father to his own grandchildren.  No one in the family would consent to this request because they lived in fear of the man.  The police were therefore able to obtain DNA samples from the Guthrie cards and successfully prosecute the father with incest.

Outcome: this challenge led to Western Australian hospitals upholding a policy of keeping the cards for only two years before destroying them.

Legal Challenge #3

The New Zealand Flag

In New Zealand in 1999 there was an action for a paternity test.  A man asked the High Court to have his child’s blood sample released for DNA analysis after the baby’s death.  The mother claimed that releasing the sample would be unlawful since it would be used for a purpose other than its original purpose.  She also claimed that she had not been informed that a blood sample for Guthrie test analysis had been taken from her child and that she had never consented for this sample to be obtained.

Outcome: the High Court granted the man access to the card and it was ultimately proven that he was the biological father of the baby.

Discussion

The heel prick test and the use of the information stored on this card raise some very important questions.  

Here is a selection of questions open for discussion:

1.              Should parents decide who has access to their baby’s DNA?

2.              Do the Guthrie cards provide a valuable public health service?

3.              Should consent to this procedure be taken during pregnancy?

4.              Do we need a consistent national law to regulate this procedure?

5.              Or, could changes lead to parents not consenting to the Guthrie card procedure?

Government Vs Non-Government

The opportunity for children and teenagers to reach their full potential is often determined by their education.

The Film:

‘Waiting for Superman’ (4½ stars), released on 24^th March 2011 at selected cinemas, follows five American students who try to win a spot through the drop of a number in an alternative school.  Such alternative schools are called ‘charter schools’ – publicly funded schools whereby it is free for students to attend, but operates independently of the public system.  The film’s title – and the charter schools – was inspired by Geoffrey Canada. 

Geoffrey Canada

As a boy, Canada cried when he was told that Superman didn’t exist because this meant that there was no one left to save him.  Here is the official trailer to this film:

This film focuses on the divide between government and non-government education, in particular how government schools are letting students down.  Yet, the most damning focus is on the incompetent teachers that remain in the system because the union works to protect them.  As a result, this film caused a furore in America.

Ironically, the director Davis Guggenheim (also the director of ‘Inconvenient Truth’) in the opening scenes drives passed three public schools in Los Angeles to drop off his own children at a non-government school.  This is because he is enabled with ‘choice’.  Many other families do not have the same choice.  Choice leads to opportunity.  

Davis Guggenheim

Australia’s Education System:

The basic foundation of education:

Australia has ratified the international Convention on the Rights of the Child (CROC).  This means that Australia has signed this international treaty and implemented it into our legal system.  It becomes part of our laws.  A section of the CROC recognises that every child has the right to an education, even if the parent/s cannot afford it.  Hence, fees at government schools are not compulsory. 

The funding of education:

It is the taxpayer who pays for education.  The federal government then passes this pool of money onto the state governments, who in turn decide how to allocate this money throughout the government and non-government schools.

Currently, government schools on average receive $11 061 per student, whilst non-government schools receive $6 089 per student.  The non-government schools have their income further topped up by parents paying fees.

The pressing question here is: should non-government schools continue to receive government funding (no matter how much it is) when parents are already paying substantial fees and have chosen to send their child to that school? 

For example, Geelong Grammar is the most expensive non-government school in Australia.  The school’s Year 12 fees are greater than $20 000 and the government further subsidises the school with approximately another $3 500 per student.  Should they still receive this government funding?  

Geelong Grammar

Whereas, at your local government school, fees are voluntary – and not all parents pay them.  Whilst the school does receive government funding, is it enough?

(Figures taken from ‘The Age’ - ‘Can We Afford to Continue Funding Private Schools?’ 18/2/2011)

Government School

Teachers:

Are most teachers mediocre? – whether it be because they are: tired of unruly children/teenagers; inadequate at conveying the lesson goals; terribly disorganised; feel unsupported in their workplace; are underpaid; disconnected from their students; struggle with classroom management; suffer low morale due to poor facilities; run ragged with endless paperwork, reports, emails, telephone calls, meetings, extra-curricular activities, camps, or corrections; or, because they are simply not made of ‘teacher stuff’.

Or, are most teachers mediocre because they do not have the energy to be anything else because of all of/some of the above?

What do you remember of your teachers?  What made the good ones great?

Or, are most teachers mediocre because there is a decline in the academic standard of teaching recruits?  Last year in Victoria, the average university entry score for a teaching degree was the lowest in more than a decade, sitting at 68.45 (highest achievable VCE ENTER is 99.95). 

Or, are most teachers mediocre because the average wage of a Victorian teacher is $46 498 - $66 514?  The worst shortages of teachers recorded by the Education Department this year were in Mathematics, Science and Technology.  Not only this, 40% of government schools have reported having to place teachers in subjects they were unqualified to teach.

This following clip may give you some further insight:

Whatever your answer to the above questions, is it the adults that are to blame?  Be it from teachers, principals, parents, to politicians.

Do you think Australia also has inequalities of opportunity between its public and private schools?

The Italian Prime Minister: Silvio Berlusconi

The Italian Prime Minister - Silvio Berlusconi - Age 74

Silvio – The Charge:

On April 6^th 2011, Italian Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, 74, will be facing a court case regarding a charge (among many others) that he paid for sex with an underage prostitute (she was 17 at the time).  The Moroccan dancer/prostitute in question is called, ‘Ruby the Heart Stealer’ – she is also claiming to be the ousted Egyptian president, Hosni Mubarak’s niece.  Berlusconi claims to have had her released from police custody in order to maintain a healthy diplomatic relationship with Egypt.  This is clearly an abuse of his power.

Ruby the Heart Stealer

Silvio – The Person:

The Italian culture is renowned for romanticism, curvaceous women and notions of fulfilling sex, but Berlusconi is seen by many to have debased this culture.  In fact, he has pioneered for the last twenty years what many deem as ‘sexist television’, and even owns three prime television stations.  Following is a clip from one such television station, which was featured during prime time viewing: 

There is no doubting that Berlusconi is obsessed with attractive women. 

He has continuously made political appointments of beauty queens.  One such appointment was of the Equal Opportunities Minister, Mara Carfagna, who was also once a showgirl on one of the Berlusconi-owned channels. 

Mara Carfunga - The Politician and the Showgirl

Berlusconi is also renowned for his ‘bunga bunga’ parties.  The name of these parties refers to crude sex games whereby women were known to wear nurses’ outfits and police uniforms.  At one such party it was claimed that there were 33 women, all involved in an orgy.

He has openly made comments about unattractive women in interviews claiming that they are only intelligent because they have no beauty.  Beauty is a quality he upholds higher than any other one.  Even in his political advertising campaigns, attractive women are the key to his success. 

In a public display, Berlusconi’s second wife, Veronica Lario, demanded a divorce in 2009 claiming Berlusconi ‘cavorts with minors’ and was ‘a dragon to whom young virgins offer themselves’.

Veronica Lario - Silvio Berlusconi's ex-wife

Silvio – The Politician:

All this chauvinism and playboy image aside, what has Berlusconi done for Italy?  What are his political policies?  And, how does he measure up to the people of Italy?

Berlusconi, nicknamed ‘The Knight’, due to an Order he received, is Italy’s second longest serving Prime Minister.  After completing his Law degree he began what became a thriving property business.  In 1993 he entered politics and a year later became Italy’s Prime Minister.  Since, he has been in and out of the Prime Ministership, and has also faced other corruption charges.

He is now the richest man in Italy, and the owner of several media enterprises and the nation’s top football team.  As for his government’s policies they have included:

·      Stronger ties with America, including supporting the invasion of Iraq.

·      Promoting a greater friendship with Israel and Turkey.

·      Moving away from pro-Arab countries.

·      Improving relationships with Russia.

·      Reforming the Italian Constitution.

·      Budget cuts to education due to the financial global crisis.

·      Reducing the powers of the Magistrates in the courts.

Some Italians claim that Berlusconi has operated as a shrewd businessman and saved a great deal of money for Italy.  They also uphold that he has forced politicians to actually do some work and not just sit in their ivory towers.  However, the current polls show that nearly half the people in Italy want Berlusconi not to finish his current term in office. 

An important note: the three judges in this current Berlusconi case were selected by a computer at random – and ALL are female.  Watch closely for the outcome of this case.

Discussion Questions

•     Should a politician’s personal life be taken into consideration?
•   To what extent can we accept conflicts of interest in a person’s occupation?
•    Do you think the current legal claims against the Italian Prime Minister only amount to ‘scandal politics’?

Julian Assange: The Man, WikiLeaks and Sweden

Who is he?

Julian Assange - Age 39

There is no need to deliver information about his childhood, relationships, or education.  Rather, it’s important to note how he went from being virtually unknown to the world in April 2010 to one of the most famous people of our time by December 2010.  He was even voted ‘Time’ magazine’s ‘Person of the Year (2010)’.  

Assange’s view on politics, and the workings of government and corporations, was shaped by his own experiences in the justice system.  In 1988 Assange joined the Melbourne subculture of hacking under the name, Mendax.  In 1993 he helped the Victorian Police break a large paedophile ring on the internet. 

However, by July 1994 other charges were laid against Assange for computer hacking.  The case was finally settled in December 1996, whereby he received a $5000 good behaviour bond and a $2100 compensation order.

But the damage was already done.  The arrest and trial had shaped his views on politics, governments and wealthy corporations.   

   

What does he represent?

Assange believes in transparent and honest governments and corporations.  At present, he sees all power in western society as belonging to the political and economic elites, whom only offer ordinary people a fake form of democracy. 

He also believes in an open form of communication.  That is, where information across the globe is freely shared and where all humans enjoy the right to communicate without interventionist governments or corporations.  

These two beliefs also seem to form the foundation of WikiLeaks.  That is, through the use of free communication, governments and corporations are held accountable to the ordinary person.

What is Wikileaks?

WikiLeaks was actualised in July 2006.  Its aim, as stated on its home web page, is: ‘We provide an innovative, secure and anonymous way for independent sources around the world to leak information to our journalists.  We publish material of ethical, political and historical significance while keeping the identity of our sources anonymous, thus providing a universal way for the revealing of suppressed and censored injustices.’

WikiLeaks Logo

The WikiLeaks’ symbol itself is a reflection of this aim.  The illustration shows drops of water leaking from the earth to form a new earth as a representation of information leaking from the unknown masses to a different source.  This movement undergoes a colour transition from top to bottom – the darker blue representing ignorance of confidential information, and the lighter blue showing an awareness, an enlightenment, of the people through the information released via WikiLeaks.  Finally, the hour glass is a symbol of WikiLeaks’ constancy and aim to always be remembered in history.  

To this date, WikiLeaks has never being successfully sued.

How did WikiLeaks become famous?

In 2009 WikiLeaks released documents regarding many internal communications across the globe, including: Guantanamo Bay operational manuals; Sarah Palin’s emails; corruption in Kenya; a nuclear mishap in Iran; and footage of dissent of China in Tibet – just to name a few.  At all times, none of the whistleblowers of these documents had been uncovered.  WikiLeaks even won an award from Amnesty International as a result.

However, the world did not seem to pay attention to WikiLeaks until it released 78, 000 items concerning America and its war in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Private Bradley Manning (below) – a junior American intelligence analyst and not known to Assange – was the source of these leaks.  At the time, Manning was having deep concerns about America’s involvement in Iraq and is evidenced to have said, ‘I’m actively involved in something I [am] totally against’.  Currently, Manning is in solitary confinement in Kuwait for breaching US government security and faces life in prison for his disclosures to WikiLeaks.

Private Bradley Manning - Age 23

One of the items Manning sent to WikiLeaks was of US footage of an American Apache helicopter and its soldiers gunning down 15 unarmed men in Baghdad.  Assange entitled this clip, ‘Collateral Murder’.  Following is this very clip – only 6.53 minutes of your time.  Take note of the soldiers’ comments and two of the slain men who were Reuters news staff carrying cameras.  This clip demands to be watched before you continue reading this blog post.  (Note: it includes sensitive and disturbing images.)

After Assange launched this clip in Washington at the National Press Club on 5^th April 2010 the Americans started to listen to WikiLeaks, and so too, did the rest of the world.  Assange had achieved his aim … embarrassing officials through open and honest communication turning the tables on conspiracy, corruption, exploitation and oppression in the current world.

Assange now faces extradition to the US where a secret grand jury will determine whether or not there is enough evidence to prove that he has committed crimes outlined in the 1917 Espionage Act or broken some other law.

What of the sexual assault claims?

Assange also faces another legal threat – extradition to Sweden to be interviewed for sexual assault claims.  This is totally separate to his part in WikiLeaks.

Anna Ardin

On 21^st August 2010 Assange found himself under investigation for sexual assault in Sweden.  He had had sex with two different women (WikiLeaks volunteers) within a three day period (one of these women pictured above).  Since then, these charges have being upgraded to rape, then downgraded to molestation, changed to rape by surprise, to rape because the condom broke, and finally, rape because his body weight held the victim down.  It is also an interesting point to note that the Swedish laws for sexual assaults consider consensual sex without a condom as a ‘sex crime’, not matter how much you enjoyed yourself at the time.

In February 2011 a British court ruled that Assange must be extradited to Sweden to face the sex crime allegations.  Assange’s lawyers are appealing the decision, which could take months before the case is finally completed.  In the meantime, Assange is on bail and under house arrest in Britain.   

Questions to consider and for discussion:

1. What are your thoughts on Julian Assange?

2. Does WikiLeaks fail to protect human rights activists?

3. Do we need information sources, like WikiLeaks, to keep governments and corporations honest?

4. Does political correctness turn us into a nation of sheep?


The Word
It is vital that the state maintain strict confidentiality with regards to certain powers they uphold.  Once such power would be the defence of the country.  However, it is also vital that in other powers they remain transparent and honest.  For example, powers such as taxation, health, human rights, international relations and immigration.  How often are the citizens of a country fooled, or uninformed, of the workings of the government?  Therefore, I think it is essential to have the likes of Julian Assange, and WikiLeaks, in order to give the common people a voice.  I also believe that Julian Assange did not know Bradley Manning - the informant of 'Collateral Murder' - hence, did not breach any privacy laws.  Without the courage of these people, how are we to ever know the truth?  Or, the closest to the truth we can come?  - The Word.