In Australia, we say, ‘Happy New Year’. Yet, it seems that nothing is new. The issue of Racism keeps on raising its ugly head. Here is a chapter that I wrote in ‘How to Lose Friends and Infuriate Your Boss’. The chapter is called, ‘I’m not a racist, but…’. It explores pride and prejudice amongst our peers. If you would like to understand what racism is, and how it can impact you, and what you can do about it, click on the link below to download the PDF.

Jonar_Nader_Boss_Racism_Chapter

I happened to be in Dubai. A friend suggested I watch ‘Mission Impossible’. It’s not a movie I would normally see, except that my friend mentioned that it was partly set in Dubai. So off I went to the tallest tower in the world, and watched the movie which contained too many bad technicalities that kept snapping me out of the suspended reality. So much money was spent on this major movie, yet the most basic of directions were non-existent, at many levels. Simple things that would not have cost the producers anything to have done correctly, just kept giving the game away, and showing how pathetic the technical direction was.

Anyway, the movie was scheduled for 8:00 pm. It started at 8:21 — after the ads and then the previews (not to mention arriving 10 minutes early to find my seat). That’s 31 minutes of sitting there doing nothing. Shocking. Why can’t movies start on time? Just why? Or why can’t they tell us that it is 8:00 for 8:21? Simple. What right do they have to waste so much of our time. And to think I gulped down a delicious cup of real hot chocolate. As for the soufflé, I had one spoonful. I wanted to be punctual. Something about this movie madness is not right. It’s like the time I rushed in the rain and got hot and bothered in order to arrive on time at a Cher concert, only to be kept waiting for 90 minutes while the Village People sang hideous old songs like Y.M.C.A. What a waste of a rush that was. Why could they not say on the ticket when the show really starts, and who the supporting act really is? I had no idea. Why would someone who likes Cher, also like the Village People — and for 90 minutes. Go figure.

By the way, I happened to be in Dubai on business, and thought to visit the world’s tallest building. In Dubai, Sunday is the start of the working week (like our Monday). So when my American friend Scott McKain and I visited Burj Khalifa at 3:00 pm on Sunday, we did not think that we would miss-out on reaching the Observation Deck. Sadly, the Observation Deck was sold-out, days in advance and days ahead, which meant that we could not even purchase tickets for the next day (and we did not bother asking about any time thereafter, because our business trip was a typically short one). So I ask you, why did neither the airline nor the hotel mention to us that the Observation Deck is often booked out, so that we could have reserved a ticket well in advance? (We visited in the winter — being the off-season on a working day, during the afternoon on the equivalent of a Monday, which one would think is not the busiest of periods.) Imagine how much worse it would be during the peak season. Would one have to book weeks or months in advance? And if so, how are we to know this? An Observation Deck is not Moulin Rouge. It’s not usual to book for such things. So we live and learn… the hard way.

A hotel ought to be more than a bed. It ought to be a hub of information and support. How hard would it be for the concierge to slip a note with each check-in to say, ‘Hello, I am your concierge, and I am here to make your stay in Dubai a comfortable and enriching one. By the way, a major attraction here is Burj Khalifa, but please let me know if you are interested in it so that I can assist you to book as soon as possible, because you cannot just go there on the off-chance.’ As a traveller, I find that each city sports its peculiarities which indeed are surprising. Whatever happened to a concierge being more than a bell-hop and a person who whistles for a taxi? Why did my hotel not contact me via email so that I could have booked online, long before I reached Dubai? They did have my email address, because I had called the hotel to triple-check my confusing booking. Everyone seems to record conversations for training and nonsense purposes. However, who listens to them, with a view to finding ways to provide a better service? I would like to see a job-advertisement which reads, ‘Wanted: A phone-recording analyst to listen to all the archived recordings of conversations with clients, and then draft weekly ideas on how we can improve our service.’

Oh and another thing about American movies and Americans (notwithstanding that many of my good friends are Americans) is that they are hopeless and sometimes rude and arrogant when it comes to the pronunciation of names. They just do not bother to stop a second and ask how to pronounce things. Like calling Iraq ‘EYE-Rack’ as if Italy is EYE-talley. So in the film, Mr Tom Cruise is supposed to be fluent in Russian. Anyone who can master Russian should be able to wrap their tongue around other foreign words. Alas, Tom could not even pronounce ‘Burj’. Of the team of 200-odd people working on his film (it was a Tom Cruise Production) it seemed that he did not ask, or no-one knew, how to pronounce the name of the central feature of the movie. The cinema in Dubai was packed. Everyone wanted to see the city featured in the film. How hard would it have been for him and others to have shown a little respect and learn how to pronounce the name of the tallest building? How would he like being called Tam Cloose? Not nice. And most definitely disrespectful. He pronounced it ‘Burge’ to sound like ‘Purge’. That’s plain ignorant and insulting (but typically American, I dare say). Mind you, George W. Bush and others say things that sound like, ‘The You-knighted States’. How can the word ‘United’ be You-knighted? Why must the first letter stand-out on its own? We don’t say Tee-ex-ass? Surely it’s just Texas.

By the way, below is a photo I took of Burj Khalifa using my iPhone. After posting the article above, one of the senior managers of the Dubai World Trade Centre took it upon herself to arrange for me to go to the Armani Hotel’s fabulous bar called Atmosphere which is on the 122nd and 123rd floors of Burj Khalifa. That was a lovely gesture, typical of the hospitality of the people of Dubai. The view from Armani’s Atmosphere was superb. Mind you, the stunning city made me wonder what a Bedouin of old, would have thought of the amazing growth. Only 30 years ago, the vast majority of Dubai was just sand and more sand. To witness the development plays havoc with history. Imagine what the old tribes would make of the spectacular growth and remarkable modernisation.

People speak about the Global Village and the World Wide Web and Social Networking, as if humans are connected as one. Here are indicators, showing how the world still suffers from the THEM & US Syndrome — some could argue that US used to mean USA, but with its powers diminishing, things might change soon enough. First, consider film and television, as well as documentaries. All producers know the importance of international distribution, yet their ignorance is revealed when they naively cater to one type of viewer, and speak only in miles and inches, unaware of the many who simply cannot understand such measures. While watching documentaries, I am agitated by narrators who do not even realise that half their audience would have no idea what 95 degrees Fahrenheit really means. They could easily superimpose the conversions on the screen for us to follow, but no… we don’t exist.

For over twenty years I have wondered when the Americans would stop printing brochures and newsletters which are date-stamped as ‘Fall’ or ‘Summer’. I used to work for American companies, and I could not get it through to anyone at our US head-office that a large part of the world is not in step with the American weather system. It’s just plain rudeness.

In December of 2011, I was logging on to my WordPress account and I noticed that the front-page (see below) had white dots falling down the screen, simulating snow. I wondered how a global company like WordPress could be so ignorant about the Earth and its temperatures. Would WordPress consider simulating that snow when it is very hot at its end of town?

So I engaged a researcher to gather all the temperatures around the globe during December; to work out where in the world it snows, and how many countries celebrate Christmas without snow. (If the argument is going to be about Santa’s birth-place, we would have to argue about whether or not Christmas (Christ’s Mass) is all about Santa or all about Jesus, whose local climate at the time of his birth was unlikely to be snowing.)

Of the 370 countries surveyed, we find that only 74 of them experience snow during December. 111 countries register temperatures that can be considered cold. 73 countries are mild to pleasant. 112 countries were experiencing temperatures above 21 degrees Celsius  (69.8 Fahrenheit).

If we consider the world (say 370 countries) at two ends of the scale, we have snow in 74 countries, and a warm to hot climate in 112 countries. I think 112 beats 74. Can anyone tell me why we project/force unrealistic images of Christmas with complete disregard to the rest of the world? Mind you, this merely counts countries as single entities. Try this exercise based on ‘population’ and ask how many people (in terms of quantity) know Christmas to be a hot time, and you will see some amazing numbers. Maybe soon, when the Social Network becomes a United Nations approved cyber-city with its own Mayor and voting system, we might take the whole thing to a vote, and the majority might well vote to obliterate snow from the Christmas image.

Below was the screen-grab that infuriated me, showing snow falling on my screen while I was sweltering in the Merry Sydney Summer.

The Institute of Hair Regrowth & Beauty (IHRB) was Sanctioned a second time by the Complaints Resolution Panel, due to 12 breaches, including misleading advertising.

The Complaints Resolution Panel released a 16-page Determination after finding IHRB in breach of 12 Sections of the Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code & Act. This is the second such finding. You can download the Determination here.

The Determination calls on IHRB to: withdraw its advertising; withdraw the representations; publish retractions in all its print vehicles; and display a retraction for 180 days on IHRB’s website.

Earlier this year, after a Police raid that gathered evidence for a six-month investigation by the Health Care Complaints Commission, IHRB was served a Permanent Prohibition Order for endangering the health and safety of its clients. In separate action, NSW Fair Trading successfully prosecuted IHRB’s Managing Director, Mr Sam Cohen, for lying to the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal (CTTT).

One of the complainants was Mr Jonar Nader who said, ‘IHRB lures customers to pay thousands of dollars for a hair regrowth treatment that I am convinced is nothing more than a scam. I launched a dedicated website (www.IHRB-Story.com) to expose IHRB and to support other victims who are often too embarrassed to admit to being scammed out of $10,000 and $15,000.

‘IHRB makes wild claims that it cannot verify, while using misleading and deceptive advertising that plays on people’s ignorance about hair-loss treatments. Its Managing Director, Mr Sam Cohen, was given every opportunity by the Complaints Resolution Panel to verify his many statements, yet he was unable to prove a single one. The alleged scam revolves around Mr Cohen’s claims that he uses his own secret formula comprising 13 natural extracts that allegedly have never failed to help every client to regrow their hair. Mr Cohen offers a money-back-guaranty that he cunningly voids before his clients leave his office. His contract is so deceptive that clients find it impossible to receive a refund without taking legal action. In my case, while using the IHRB treatment, I lost more hair than ever before, suffered rashes and bruises, and was refused a refund. The matter went to CTTT, where it took 383 days of legal battles that ended unjustly, due to Mr Cohen fabricating evidence and lying to the Tribunal; as I have witnessed him doing to other victims as well.’

Mr Nader was one of the victims who pursued Mr Cohen for medical malpractice and for misleading and deceptive conduct. Mr Nader added, ‘Sam Cohen’s practices are so diabolical, that I felt it my duty to report him. I spent two years trying to unravel his scheme — for which I received death threats.

‘Mr Cohen is quick to point to some of his clients whose hair did grow back. However, those clients were either illegally sold non-approved and dangerous medications, or were lucky that they responded well to readily-available medications such as Minoxidil and Finasteride. If someone is predisposed to a positive response to these medications, then why go to IHRB and pay thousands of dollars, when Minoxidil retails for $20 per bottle that lasts a month.’

Mr Nader said, ‘The problem is that Mr Cohen’s starting price is $4,900, plus on-going product purchases. For example, one topical solution that Sam Cohen sells at $900, retails elsewhere at $70. When asked how he justifies these exorbitant prices, Mr Cohen says that his solution contains his own secret extracts. These secret extracts do not exist. His own pharmacists have confirmed that the extracts were never used. After my two-year investigation, I am convinced that his unlawful ads simply reflect his unlawful business.

‘In 2008, IHRB was Sanctioned for similar breaches, but Mr Cohen ignored those Sanctions for 18 months. I now wonder how long it will be before he pulls his ads and publishes the retractions.’

On the 15th of September 2011, I hosted a special night to launch Ghassan Nakhoul’s book called ‘Overboard’ which asked the question, ‘What have we learned since the Pacific Solution?’ For a topic that, for the past ten years, has dominated the headlines more intensely than any other event in Australia’s political landscape, it seems that we have not learned a single thing. In view of the recent tragic loss of 70 lives off the coast of Java, I wondered if the 353 victims of SIEV-X had died in vain.

Dr Nour Dados. Senior Research Associate, World Market Society Project.

To explore the recent political machinations surrounding the on-going refugee debate, I invited Dr Nour Dados to shed some light on who’s doing what, to whom. Dr Nour Dados is a Senior Research Associate in the Department of Education & Social Work at The University of Sydney. She is currently working with Professor Raewyn Connell on a project about the restructuring of social life under market regimes in the Global South, and pursuing her own research into the social, political, and economic conditions that have shaped Australia’s refugee policy in the last twenty years. Below is her article.

A WORLD WITHOUT REFUGE

The recent loss of a fishing vessel carrying seventy people off the coast of Java is a sombre reminder of the perils that go with seeking refuge in today’s world. The latest tragedy comes less than two weeks after the tenth anniversary of the sinking of SIEV-X in mysterious circumstances in October 2001. The details of that tragic event which claimed the lives of 353 people, almost half of them children, remain covered in whitewash. Among those who have kept-up the search for answers is SBS journalist Ghassan Nakhoul whose radio report ‘The Five Mysteries of SIEV-X’ won him a Walkley Award in 2002. When Nakhoul revisited those mysteries for a new commemorative documentary, the same questions kept coming back. To these he added another: ‘Ten years on, has Australia learnt anything?’

Former Chief of the Australian Defence Force, Admiral Chris Barrie AC, launched Ghassan Nakhoul's book, 'Overboard'.

In September 2011, Nakhoul’s book ‘Overboard’ (Dar Meera) was launched by former Defence Force Chief, Admiral Chris Barrie AC. At the launch, Admiral Barrie emphasised the international dimension of war and displacement, and the escalating numbers of refugees fleeing persecution globally. By the time stories about refugees reach our television screens, the larger global context would have been obscured by the rhetoric of border-security. The history of suffering to board a boat bound for safety is reduced to a minor event. ‘Overboard’ is an important work of investigative journalism, not least because it reminds us that these stories are far from marginal, and that they in fact reflect the lives of the majority of the world’s population. In the process of recounting these narratives, Nakhoul delves courageously into Australia’s refugee policies and the politics of asylum; refusing to allocate the questions left unanswered for too long to the ‘too hard basket’. It is these questions that serve as an unsettling reminder that the horrific circumstances surrounding SIEV-X are far from resolved. As one of the first journalists to question the Coalition government’s official story following the sinking on 19 October 2001, Nakhoul returns to the glaring inconsistencies in ‘Overboard’: the unsubstantiated stories of maritime misadventures that preceded that fateful day; the passengers ferried at gunpoint onto the waiting ship; the vessel loaded to bursting, only half a meter above water, described by one of the passengers as a ‘carton’; and the unresponsive boats with their search lights that circled the survivors as they awaited help for hours in the water.

Former Australian Prime Minister, Mr John Howard

The sinking of the SIEV-X took place in the context of the Howard government’s refusal to allow the Norwegian MV Tampa to set down its rescued passengers in Australian territory — a move that led to the birth of the so-called ‘Pacific Solution’. Nakhoul asks whether this hitherto unprecedented response to boat arrivals may have come about as a response to a challenge issued on SBS Arabic Radio on 24 July 2001 by Keis Asfoor, later charged and convicted of people smuggling. During the eleven minute interview with Nakhoul, Asfoor insisted (sixteen times) that if the Australian Government sent back just one boat, then the boats would stop coming. The interview attracted the attention of the authorities, and Nakhoul found himself summoned to appear in court. Two years later Mr Phillip Ruddock was still quoting Asfoor in Parliament (‘Overboard’ p.99). Today, turning back boats remains part of the Liberal Party’s preferred response.

Indeed, the issue of boat arrivals, despite the far smaller number of refugees arriving by boat than by plane, continues to dominate the headlines and the polls. Although the current Labor Government has not led in the two-party preferred vote since October 2010 (Nielsen Poll), it seems convinced, if the last twelve months tells us anything, that the only way to get back on top is to echo the Opposition’s populist tune to ‘Stop the boats’. Worse, those who have led the march have claimed to be able to ‘stop the boats’ more efficiently than Mr John Howard’s imperious Pacific Solution. At the height of the Tampa Crisis, Howard’s approval-rating was at seventy-seven percent (Nielsen Poll, 4 September 2001), a number etched into memory by Australian band ‘The Herd’ in their song ‘77%’ that begins by sampling that announcement that aired on talk-back radio.

Prime Minister of Australia, Ms Julia Gillard MP

Ten years later, and despite Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s efforts to keep the boats at a clear distance from the Australian mainland, Labor’s crisis has no end in sight. Despite Labor’s improvement in the latest Newspoll (November 2011), the Coalition is still well ahead. Forty-four percent of respondents surveyed last month (Newspoll, October 2011) said they supported the Coalition’s stance on boat arrivals compared to seventeen percent for Labor. The common sense narrative that equates Howard’s popularity with his stance on the Tampa (and attributes that position to his rising political fortunes) fails to explain why a tougher-than-Howard Gillard is falling behind. Gillard, and indeed the Labor ministers who were peddling the Malaysia solution, went out of their way to present it as efficient and effective in the hope of winning the voters’ approval. Perhaps though, they forgot, that the voters they were trying to woo may not have cared for the language of efficiency so much as the vibrant language of ‘them and us’, and that without throwing that pot of crackle-and-pop into the mix, no ‘solution’ raises an eyebrow. All this reminds us that Howard didn’t sell the ‘Pacific Solution’ by labeling it as ‘efficient’ but by rendering the unwanted as so thoroughly contaminated that no-one would want them near. Only then did efficiency count in their removal.

The Hon Phillip Ruddock MP

Any ‘solution’ that begins by closing the borders in the face of suffering and misery must first convince those whose approval counts, in this case the voters, that those whom they turn away are less than human. If electoral consent for our current refugee policies begins with the dehumanisation of the victims, and ends in their incarceration in mandatory detention, it is hardly surprising that so many of the protests in detention centres — hunger strikes, lip sewing, and detainees burying themselves — have focused on the body. In characterising lip sewing as ‘a practice unknown in our culture’ and one that offended the ‘sensitivities of Australians’, former Immigration Minister Phillip Ruddock emphasised the extent to which such acts of desperation failed to register as such because those who were participating in them had already been dispossessed of their humanity. Their actions could signify only as an offense to ‘us’. What he, and those he spoke for, failed to see, is that the refugees who protested through their bodies had long ago stopped being human in the eyes of those who demanded and justified their incarceration.

Despite the disgrace of the proposed ‘Malaysia Solution’, Gillard’s Labor Government has fallen short on this account and stands to gain little from playing the ‘boat people’ card. Yet in trying to pass bad policy off as a ‘solution’ they only till the soil for more dangerous ‘solutions’ to take hold. Let us not forget that had it not been for the 1992 amendments to the Migration Act that authorised the detention of those seeking asylum on the premise of deterring others, an amendment that came into force under a Labor Government, Howard’s ‘Pacific Solution’ may have been unthinkable. There are clear international obligations, but whether or not these are met today depends almost entirely on the surrounding political climate. In trying to sell bad policies as ‘solutions’, the current Government only undermines the campaign for justice and increases the risk that we will see a future ‘solution’ that is more brutal and more inhumane than the one that set its sights on the Pacific.

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

Imagine if Syria sent a missile to bomb CNN Headquarters. Oh my goodness! World War Three would break out. How dare a foreign government attack an American media organisation! Well, why then is it sweet and dandy for CNN to attack Syria with baseless, false, reports?

Imagine if Syria purchased air-time on CNN and broadcast ads asking every Arab to march on CNN installations and attack CNN reporters and crew? How brutal for a country to target media professionals in this way! Well, why then is it acceptable for CNN to manipulate its viewers by causing mayhem in Syria?

Imagine if Syria set-up a special news network and beamed it across the United Stated and globally via the Web, where well-groomed, well-spoken anchors presented lies about The White House, sufficient to incite hatred towards Americans and to spark riots in Washington DC. The Yanks would lean on every organisation, from the UN, all the way down to the Boot Mender’s Association. Well, why then can CNN be permitted to ignite unrest in Syria?

I never watch television, because most of the productions are useless, repetitive, biased, and myopic. If you come to my home and turn-on my TV set, you will see nothing but white noise on the set, because it is not connected to the outside world. My TV simply does not receive any signal from any media source. While most people see six hours of television per day, I would be lucky to see six hours per year. In fact, closer to one hour per year; and only when there is a major event like the Japanese tsunami, and only when I am in a public place (such as an airport) that has a TV.

All this, to report to you that I was struck-down with a five-day illness in Thailand, after lectures in India, at IIT Guwahati (Assam) — as far east of India as you can go. While in Guwahati, what did the front-page of the local newspaper (outside my hotel room) have on it? Something about Britney Spears. Too absurd for words. That’s why I never read the papers, and why I do not watch TV. However, while bed-ridden in a Bangkok hotel, I did turn on the TV, and there was CNN, speaking about the tenth anniversary of September 11. In terms of journalistic strength, the reports were vacuous, benign, and pathetic. Being a media-man myself, I was transfixed on CNN, trying to analyse its form and structure. I was appalled.

Upon my return to Sydney, I was hosting the book-launch for Ghassan Nakhoul’s book ‘Overboard‘, and during my presentation, I made it clear to the audience (comprising many media outlets) that CNN was a ghastly station with not a shred of brainpower (not because I was attacking CNN, but because I was explaining how, after ten years since September 11, the Tampa Crisis, the sinking of SIEV-X, and the Pacific Solution, the masses were still as confused as ever. It seemed that despite the saturated media coverage about all those topics, people still did not understand the essence of either of those stories — no thanks to mind-numbing television and embarrassing radio. A man came up to me afterwards and said that CNN keeps him informed, and that it was a great source of news in relation to the Middle East. Not wanting to berate CNN unjustly, I conducted additional research into CNN.com’s ‘Middle East’ section. No need to remind everyone that I was born in Lebanon, and that I suffered the horrors of war, and that I was acutely aware of the death and destruction that takes place in that beautiful, yet troubled part of the world. (More accurately I should say that it is a beautiful yet MANIPULATED part of the world!)

After reviewing CNN’s coverage of the Middle East, what was my verdict? The same as before. In my opinion, CNN is inciting riots in Syria. It is spinning lies about Syria. It is defaming the country and its leaders. In other words, CNN is breaking every journalistic Code and it has blood on its hands.

Last week I attended a media launch held by the Australian Attorney-General wherein I spoke with the Attorney and mentioned to him (and other dignitaries present) that if we fear violent extremism, we must educate those who can sway the gullible and/or impressionable masses. I do not think that we should silence the media. I do believe in free speech. But goodness gracious, what are we to do with CNN’s coverage about Syria which shows that CNN has an agenda, or it is utterly stupid, or it is nothing more than a voice-box for some other manipulative power, or it knows-not what it is doing, while abusing its privilege as an international broadcaster that is sadly devoid of any scruples, ethics, or intellectual capacity to understand that a media organisation must provide news that is factual; not news that is 99% fiction and 1% drama, amidst an insatiable appetite for ratings and money.

CNN’s International desk boasts over 4,000 news professionals. Yet, with 4,000 reporters around the world, CNN does not have a clue about what is going on in Syria; so it makes it all up, it agitates the populous, and it sparks ugly demonstrations after uploading images from on-lookers-with-an-agenda. What does CNN say before-and-after every broadcast? It says, ‘We cannot confirm these reports’. Well then, dear CNN, as they say in Australia, ‘shut the hell up’! Don’t go around broadcasting unconfirmed reports. What’s your agenda?

In Syria, as a country, I am sure we can find a million things that Syria has done wrong over the years. But I am equally certain that we can find a million bad things that the USA has done. I am not defending any bad thing that the Syrian governments over the decades might have done. I am saying that Syria is a country with cities that are 15,000 years old. How old is Uncle Sam? Syria has a deep and rich history of amazing intellectual prowess, whose people are just like all peoples from all nations — people of peace, love, joy, talent, and a heart filled with hope for a peaceful world. Indeed, there are evil people in Syria, as there are evil people in the USA. Yes, there are criminals and murderers and rapists and con-artists in Syria, just as there are such depraved beasts in each and every country. So I am not defending Syria. I am simply saying that CNN is broadcasting reports that are wrong, false, hateful, and irresponsible because they are biased, filled with lies, and down-right unethical and immoral — not to mention reprehensible. And that’s not me saying so. Do you know who says this about CNN? I shall tell you. It is CNN saying this about CNN. By admitting that ‘This report could not be verified’, CNN is virtually saying, ‘We are about to broadcast a heap of lies and putridity, so please suck it all up, because we want to destabilise a country and its sovereign government, but we do not have a shred of evidence, and not a single reliable source, but that does not matter because we don’t care.’

Syria has been an inclusive country, allowing people of all faiths to live together in harmony, just like Australia allows people to live together in harmony. I am a Christian, yet I know Muslim Syrians in whose hands I would trust my life. The Christians and Muslims have co-existed in Syria perfectly. Indeed, the country needs reforms. By all means, there is room for improvement — as can be said about any country. So what’s CNN on about?

The fact that thugs and idiots smuggle arms and bombs, and start to kill people, seems to have escaped the notice of CNN who has sided with these terrorists. My goodness. Is CNN pro- or anti- terrorism? CNN’s seasoned reporters interview Syrian officials, and they proceed to bombard the officials with inscrutable questions designed to turn a fact-finding interview into a three-minute televised kangaroo court, just to embarrass the official who is never given any scope to respond to any question. And any question that is answered, is dismissed out-of-hand, rendering the poor official aghast as to what he could possibly say within a three-second-grab (to get it through the thick head of the interviewer) because the questions are absurd and the accusations are baseless. How is an official to respond to CNN, when CNN hasn’t a bone of fairness in its infrastructure to really delve into any topic, in search of the truth?

CNN will say that it is not allowed to enter Syria. CNN was permitted to enter, but it was not permitted to interview the terrorists. If that does not sit well with anyone, let’s see if any American Department would allow Syrian or Australian news crews to interview whomever they like at any of their establishments or prisons or government departments. At first, I did think that maybe, as a step forward, Syria ought to let CNN in, just to shut them up. However, after reading and viewing the diatribe that CNN dishes out about Syria, I dare say that I would also ban them from entering the country. Who needs such baby-grade journalism that does not abide by the parent-company’s (Time-Warner’s) mission statement, which promises: ‘journalistic integrity; freedom of expression; responsible content; diversity of viewpoints; and access to information.’ CNN’s own governance calls for these values, yet it is breaking them and ignoring them, either because it has no scruples, or it has no brains, or it has a political agenda, or it has no clue. Either way, CNN’s reports about Syria are an abysmal failure and an embarrassment that strikes at the heart of Syria, which is an independent country that is not at war with anyone. So why attack it and spin lies about it? Another hideous practice of CNN’s anchors is to make smarmy remarks about Syrian officials after they conclude the interview. CNN terminates the interview and then debunks everything the official had said. That is below-the-belt reporting — a gutless way to pretend to give someone an opportunity to put forward the facts, then discrediting the interviewee by casting aspersions about them via a pepper-spary of insults in their absence. That is low and cowardly.

If CNN would really like to get to the bottom of the story, it can assign some of its 4,000 reporters to delve deeply into the questions, and interview as many people as is necessary, and bring to the public an unbiassed assessment of the situation on the ground, where people ARE being killed! There is trouble in Syria, but it just might be that there are terrorist groups trying to destabilise the country by killing anything that moves. Could that be the story?

Just how would The White House respond if a bunch of renegades marched on Wall Street and set the place alight, while killing 1,500 of New York’s finest police officers, ambulance personnel, and fire crews? And while all this commotion was taking place, how would the American people feel about a popular Middle Eastern news network filing reports day and night saying, ‘We can’t confirm this but the President of the USA is killing innocent people in the street, by ordering the American security forces to shoot and kill American citizens. The UN needs to step in, and the US President must step down.’

Farcical indeed. And that, my dear reader, is what CNN and its ignorant reporters are touting. It’s hogwash.

How do I know all this? I have sources and horses who speak to me.

On Friday 7 October 2011 I attended the launch of the website that aims to build stronger communities by challenging extremist ideologies in Australia. The Attorney-General, Mr Robert McClelland, launched the site as part of the Government’s $9.7 million Countering Violent Extremism program.

Attorney-General The Hon Robert McClelland MP at the launch of the Resilient Communities website at the Museum of Sydney. Incidentally, the Museum was the site of the first Government House.

During question-time, I suggested to the Attorney that extremists are hard to shift. Once they subscribe to an ideology, it’s almost impossible to change their mind. I said that the people who deserve our attention are those who are impressionable, and therefore, we would do well to consider who in our community are influencing the masses. I pointed out that some radio announcers and journalists need educating. We live in a free society, and by no means was I suggesting that we ever tell journalists what to think or believe. However, it seemed to me, from my experience, that many people in influential positions, simply do not understand the issues. I said, ‘If doctors and similar professionals are required to undergo annual training programs, then why not radio jocks? I do not want to tell radio announcers what to say, but I think that they would not say half the things they do, if they really understood the issues.’

If doctors are found guilty of malpractice, they can be suspended or struck off. Yet, radio personalties are part of a product. Their product is radio. Their station is privileged to be granted a radio licence. Why then, when a court finds that the manufacturer of the product (the station and its staff) had breached the law, can no-one suspend the offenders? At best, they pay a small fine. I do not want to hit them over the head. I just need them to learn more about the issues, because they can easily inflame a situation. Radio is a product, much like shampoo is a product. If a company manufactures a shampoo that causes people to suffer rashes, the product is recalled. Why is it that when a radio station sells a product that is harmful to society, no recourse is available? Once again, I am not so keen on the recourse, but more eager to ensure that it is mandatory that those who hold a licence and their staff who deliver a product that could easily ignite racism and conflict, be expected to stay abreast of the issues; just like doctors, pharmacists, accountants, and lawyers must undergo annual professional development.

OVERBOARD

This matter became clearer to me while I was working with author Ghassan Nakhoul who launched his book ‘Overboard‘ on the tenth anniversary of the sinking of SIEV-X. Ghassan’s book tells the true accounts of boat-people, while pointing out that they are humans who have suffered greatly. Ghassan says that such humans have feelings. They are not statistics.

What struck me was that when I mentioned this book to a broad range of people, they slipped into the discussion about boat-people having no consideration for the due process. Many said that asylum seekers and refugees ought to join the queue, and that Australians do not like queue-jumpers. I was amazed that, even after ten years, the complainants remained naive and unenlightened.

Yet, at the launch of ‘Overboard’, where the keynote speaker was Admiral Chris Barrie AC (the former Chief of the Australian Defence Force who was embroiled in the Children-Overboard Affair) we heard about the real pain and suffering of those who were fleeing war and persecution. At the launch, I told the story relayed to me by a doctor from Iraq who had 12 hours to flee Iraq after Saddam Hussein ordered the doctor to mutilate soldiers who had disappointed the dictator. The doctor arrived in Australia on a boat (as Captain Cook himself did) and was held in detention for five months before any official asked him if he had any papers. Indeed, he had all his papers and all his credentials. If that doctor had not fled, he would have been mutilated and killed. So pray tell, which queue was he expected to join? Now, the doctor works in Sydney and is a world-leading surgeon who is making headlines for his discoveries and innovations. He could not join us at the ‘Overboard’ book launch because he was in the UK, representing Australia while launching the world’s first robotic knee. Yet, while his boat was approaching Australia, the headlines and the radio-jocks would have had us believe that the doctor was a queue-jumper, and possibility a terrorist. Since his release from detention, he has helped countless Australians by giving them knee and hip replacements?

COUNTERING VIOLENT EXTREMISM

The Attorney’s initiative dovetails with the Government’s efforts to reduce the risk of home-grown terrorism by, ‘strengthening Australia’s resilience to radicalisation and assisting individuals to disengage from violent extremist influences and beliefs.’

No country is immune form the scourge of docile leaders (religious or otherwise). I have a feeling that a good place to start is at schools, by really helping children to embrace their studies and to engage in their communities. Wayward students who are not given hope and support tend to drift. While wandering aimlessly, they soon hanker after a community to which they could belong. Sadly, shows like ‘Underbelly’ and gangster movies tend to spark a passion for belonging to a gang. Young hopeless youth find strength in a sense of belonging. What they can’t attain through good works, they can achieve via bad deeds. Belonging to a gang, gives them everything they need: a sense of belonging; purpose; mission; excitement; and mate-ship (along with an income through ill-gotten gains). Unfortunately, growing-up on the wrong side of the tracks, propels a slippery ride where a brick wall awaits them at the journey’s end. The other sad thing is that the handiwork of these depleted souls affects everyone. We must catch them young, inspire them, and set them on a path that provides a rewarding journey. To do this, we need role models. While to me ‘education’ means home, school, and street, I dare say that it’s a tough call to attend to all three. Indeed, governments can do something about schools. From what I have seen, schools generally do not cater to those on the fringe.

By the way, if you would like to read a chapter I wrote about terrorism in my book, ‘How to Lose Friends and Infuriate People’ (4th edition), you can click here. The chapter is called, ‘Infuriating Terrorists: Why tolerant people must not tolerate intolerant people.’

In the war-on-terror, what I fear most, is not a man with an atomic bomb, but ‘corruption’. So, too, within corporations. Corporate-corruption tops the list. It not only includes cash under the table, but also corruption of the soul, corruption of the servant, and corruption of the systems. These lead to corruption of society. My dear ANZ Bank has shown me that the bank is suffering from corruption.

For many years, I had received my credit-card statements to my PO Box address. Then one day, they stopped coming. I did not notice until it was too late, and I had missed a payment. That was six months ago. So I called the bank’s help desk, and someone assured me that it would be fixed. That was six months ago. Nothing was fixed. A month later, someone assured me that it would be fixed. That was a waste of time, because nothing was done.

Another month later, I logged into my on-line account and sent several secure emails, and was assured that it would be fixed. Nothing was fixed, and I never received the statements.

Before going to South Africa, I called the bank to make sure that the system does not presume that I owe any money. Long story. Still no statement.

I sent another email, and someone said that I should log-in and check my address on-line. I did this and made the corrections, and still, no statement.

Before travelling to China and India, I made random large-sum deposits into my account so that the computer does not flag me to be a recalcitrant client. I dreaded being cut-off while overseas.

The proof of corruption came a few days ago when a ‘Robert’ called me to say that I was $24 in arrears, and when would I be paying it? So I spent 30 minutes with him, asking him to escalate this matter. Thirty minutes down the drain. I had concluded the call by telling him that for six months, I had not seen a statement, and that I would not be making any payment until this matter is fixed. I knew that if I had paid, he would have moved-on to the next call without attending to my request.

That was on a Wednesday. Thirty minutes of futile explanation, because two days later, a Kamila (or some such sounding name) called me to say that I was $24 in arrears, and when would I be paying it? On the Wednesday I explained it all to Robert, and put it in writing via the secure on-line mail. Two days later, back to square one.

This is corruption. The system is corrupted. The bank’s staff tell me that the phone call is being recorded for some futile purpose. I am so glad that it is recorded, because management can hear my conversation with Robert and Kamila and wonder what the jolly buggery bullocks is going on. Why and how can a Robert call me and waste my time on a Wednesday, and then erase his existence so as to wash his hands of any hard work. This is corruption. The system is allowing staff to disown problems. Sure, he is JUST a call-centre guy. But I said to him, ‘Robert, you are ANZ. You have power. You need to take this matter to someone and insist that it be rectified, because after six months, it has been ignored, despite the promises.’ He did no such thing. I know this, because Kamila called me with no previous knowledge of the six-month struggle. No idea of what had transpired. Kamila had no idea that I had received a call from her colleague Robert, only two days prior.

The ANZ Bank’s website lists its ‘Code of Conduct and Ethics’. The Code stipulates, ‘No matter what your role is, or which location you work in, you are expected to: a) demonstrate the behaviours of honesty, integrity, quality and trust at all times; b) set an example for others and recognise those around you who also demonstrate these behaviours; and c) speak out when you feel that these behaviours are threatened or compromised.’

In my books, it was dishonest of Robert and every other staff member who handled my case and ignored it or did not follow it up. I asked Kamila to escalate the matter, and said, ‘I know that this call is being recorded, so I shall tell you on the record for your managers to hear that this matter has gone on for six months, so the time has come for me to blog this on my site.’ And I gave her the URL. I now wonder if she did escalate it. I doubt it, because no-one has called me.

Dear reader, this is not a complaint. This is an example of how corporations and nations fall to bits. There is a leak in the ANZ boat. Somehow it allows its staff to disown problems. A staff member can just ignore any issue that requires a modicum of hard work.

What am I asking for? Nothing. My statements used to delivered to me. They stopped. I am simply asking that they be sent to my PO Box address like they had always been. How hard is that request? The fact that the system just stopped sending me statements ought to point to some strange loophole. I am alerting the bank to an issue. Instead of getting the matter fixed, it takes six months of nonsense. This points to a rusted interior.

The secure emails are always answered by someone new. Never the same person. No-one takes ownership. This is the hideous system that the bank employs. It does not work. It wastes time, not to mention the aggravation and the interest that they expect me to pay. After a fuss a few months ago, they reversed the interest charge. And now we have another interest charge that Robert said he is not authorised to retract.

Corporations desire productivity. None shall be afforded to any organisation that can allow its staff to distance themselves from real issues. That is not the fault of the staff, but of the management team. Don’t blame Gen Y and Gen Z for this stupidity. The responsibility falls squarely on the managers who allow these loopholes to exist.

Indeed, computers can be blamed for all sorts of things. And maybe this was a software glitch. If that were the case, of the thousands of clients, was I the only one who suffered a software glitch? And despite the reason, why does it take six months of non-action despite the promises and assurances? If that does not concern the managers, then we can wonder how long it will be before the rust eats away at the whole organisation. ANZ Bank says, ‘We are committed to providing you with banking that is simple to understand and delivered in a responsible manner by our people, in accordance with the highest standards of integrity.’ Who is the ‘we’ in ‘we are committed’?

THE SOLUTION

I can already hear all the excuses under the sun. We need a solution, not an apology. So here is a free solution to ANZ Bank: when any staff member is on the phone to any client, the phone network needs to allow the client to press ‘zero’ to be connected to the supervisor. And if the client is not satisfied with the supervisor, pressing ‘zero’ would escalate the matter to the manager, and so on, until we reach the CEO. Otherwise, please erase the rubbish from the website that says things like, ‘Our brand promise is that “We Live in Your World”, and this means continuing to listen to the needs and expectations of our customers in developing new products and services, and in shaping the future direction of our business.’

I did not ask for the bank to move its buildings six centimetres to the left. I asked that my statements be delivered to me, as they had been for years. No, I never opted for them to arrive electronically, and even if I had, they never did arrive electronically. I do not care what or how. I know this much: six months of assurances, and being contacted twice within two days, proves to me that the system is corrupted because the staff can hit-and-run, leaving my case hanging in mid-air for some other poor staff member to call me afresh… it’s like sending sheep to the wolves. I was calm with Kamila, but I told her that I was microseconds away from detonating. I imagine she terminated the call and felt relived that she did not have to deal with me. ‘I’m signing off now,’ I said. ‘Is there anything else you need to tell me?’ I asked. She had nothing to say. She was too junior.

This blog is being printed and posted to the senior. I wonder if it’s any different at the other end of the seniority scale.

TOO MANY COOKS

This saga has been going on for six months. I did not keep a record of all the cooks who put their finger in my pudding. However, in just the past 30 days, here are some of the ANZ Bank staff who were on the case, assuring me that it would be fixed:

Silvia
Robert
Kamila
Antigone
Jovita
Lauren
Manjula
Shazia
Daniel
Geetha
Lilly, and
Theresa.

I imagine the list would go on and on if I had kept a record of the earlier conversations.

Talk about passing the buck!

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password: