Down Under Today

            Forgotten soldiers of the Australian Army

THERE is no better time than this weekend to reflect the sacrifices of those who gave their lives so that we can be safe, secured and be able to enjoy freedom and happiness that are always threatened by what former  US President George Bush once described “the axle of evils”.

This is the year, impacted by the worst-ever global recession, which causes the greatest job losses for thousands of families when the reflection I refer to is all the more important to declare our strong support for the unity and harmony of all the people who have made Australia their home whatever their ethnicity, cultures, traditions and religious beliefs are.

As Australians, we reflect and pay homage to those who have died in the wars to ensure that we may live in peace and security wherever we are in this country.

And, as we stand in one-minute silence for Anzac Day at dawn today, let us also remember the forgotten soldiers of the Australian Army who volunteered their services to defend the nation with honour and courage and without hesitation and unselfishness.

They are the early – and probably among the first – migrants to come from China to settle down in Australia and fought in the wars in which Australia was involved.

Unfortunately, they have never been given proper recognition or extensively recorded in the war history of Australia and were regarded in some instances as “aliens” in the initial stage of their army service.

Little research has been done to find out how most of them served the nation in time of war, how bravely they stood up to the enemy of Australia and how they have been honoured for their services.

I have made quick research in the war records but not much is readily known about them and their lives in the army, except some details of a few Chinese soldiers like John Joseph Shyling, the son of the first Chinese migrant to Australia in 1818.

A draper by profession, Shyling, 38, was sent to the war in Sudan in 1885 less than a month after he joined the army without proper military training.

Three months later he was sent back to Sydney, but there is hardly any record of what happened to him.  No mention was made whether he was wounded in the war or the reason for his return to Australia.

The records show that the database is incomplete.  Mary Boland and Ian Welch, who were responsible for collecting the details, say: “We believe family research may yield many more names and (we) hope that family members and other researchers will let us know so that the necessary additions can be made.”

But they express the hope that the file they have created would encourage recognition of the depth of Australian multicultural history and the contribution of Australians of Chinese ancestry to the common good.

Be that as it may, the Chinese soldiers were not armed for lack of trust in those early days because of their ethnicity.  They were not given any guns.

But they didn’t complain; they diligently carried out the army orders – loading and unloading military supplies, including armaments, and driving trucks loaded with military equipment.  Their division is oddly named “Australian Army Employment Companies”.

The nearest to combat duties were those chosen to become members of sabotage units of the Z-Force, who were dropped by air force planes into the jungles of Malaya and New Guinea to infiltrate into the Japanese occupation.

The Z-Force served the US Command well and contributed to the Allies victory in World War II with honour for refusing to submit to the Japanese troops when any of them was caught.

But whether their war contribution was appreciated by the military leadership and the Australian Army as a whole was doubtful in those days.

It is sad to note that the Commander-in-Chief General Blamey remarked in November 1943 that the services of the Chinese soldiers in Australia and New Guinea were “most unspectacular”.

Yet Australians of Chinese descent have served in every war in which Australia was involved since 1885 to the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In all I am told that more than 200 Chinese Australians have served in World War I, but I have not been able to get more details.

David Lee, who joined in the Australian armed forces and is still involved with them, reflected on the courage and sacrifices of those who served in the defence of the country.

“The highest calling for an Australian,” he says, “is to wear the military uniform of the country and to be prepared to put yourself in danger in time of war to defend … what we stand for as a nation.”

That is what Caleb Shang, a taxi driver in Brisbane, did when he enlisted in the Australian Imperial Force in 1916 and served in the 47th Battalion.

The eldest of 13 children of cabinet maker Lee Wah Shang and his wife Jane Noon, Shang was sent to France and Belgium with other troops.

He was awarded a rare combination of military decorations – the Distinguished Conduct Medal (DCM) and its Bar (meaning that he had been awarded twice) and the conspicuous gallantry medal at Messines Bridge in Belgium in May 1917.

The medal recognised his constant patrols into enemy territory in which he ran through enemy barrages and fire-swept areas carrying ammunition and water to the front line.

He was attacked and confronted enemy snipers and showed remarkable skill in improvising the sending of messages by signal lamp.

His Bar to the DCM was the result of actions in the Battle of Somme near Dermancourt in France in March-April of 1918. 

The 47th Battalion’s war diary, which perhaps gives the first recognition to Chinese soldier, as released by the Department of Veteran Affairs, records that Shang “repeatedly displayed utter contempt for danger and showed amazing power of endurance and great boldness.

“He volunteered for duty at an observation post in an advanced position at the start of an operation and remained at that post until it was destroyed.

“He then served as a ‘runner’ making many trips, carrying ammunition through intense enemy barrages.

“He successfully covered his company’s withdrawal with a Lewis gun (was it the first Chinese Australian soldier to be armed?).”

Shang’s battalion was dissolved in May 1918 and he was transferred to the 45th Battalion.

However, on 16 August of that year, he was found unfit for further services as a result of shell-fire wounds he received in the Battle of Harbonnieres in France.

He returned to Australia to a hero’s welcome in his hometown of Cairns in northern Queensland on 9 April 1919.

Married to Anna Louise Kassene, who gave birth to a son and two daughters, Shang died of a chronic chest complaint on 6 April 1953.  Shang Street in the Queensland’s suburb of Mooroobool is named after him – a recognition that he deservedly received for defending Australia to which his loyalty was never in doubt.

DANGEROUS GAMBLE ON ‘ADVENTURE IN HELL’

WHO blew up a boatful of asylum seekers, killing three people and injuring 34 others, some seriously?  And why?

These are the vital questions about the mysterious and shocking explosion of a refugee boat with 47 people, all Afghans, and two Indonesian crew members, which was spotted off the west coast of Western Australia on Wednesday and escorted by HMAS Albany to Christmas Island.

As the wooden boat, inspected and found to be seaworthy by a six-man naval team, stopped near Ashmore Reef early next morning there was a sudden explosion, resulting in two people still  missing, presumed drowned. 

The six naval personnel, who were on the boat, were lucky to escape with minor injuries. 

 The asylum seekers were later accused of having doused the boat with petrol just before it exploded, either accidentally or deliberately.

What really happened is being investigated by the border protection command and the federal and state police amid a heated political debate. 

Admittedly, the discussion here is speculative but justifiable in a sense because of public interest on the issue. The topic of conversations in cafes, restaurants and people taking evening walks is understandably their concern of more boat people arriving in Australia at this critical time of its impact from the worst-ever global recession.

But the point of contention is the explosion of the boat. Who is really responsible for it and,If it was deliberate, as it was suggested, is there a sinister motive for such a cowardly act of sabotage? 

Is it the intent of some asylum seekers to get the sympathy of Australians so that they would be allowed to stay in the country?

If that is the motive, they are, indeed, taking a dangerous gamble with the lives of everyone on board, including some teenage boys.

Besides being a criminal act, their entry into Australia is technically illegal.  They have forced their way by the backdoor, as it were, and they should not be given priority consideration than the cases of those refugees who have waited in detention camps in other countries for their turn to be considered for a new start of a better life in Australia.

It is unfair to the refugees who have waited patiently for many years under difficult conditions overseas while increasing numbers of boat people have selfishly jumped the queue via the notorious people-smuggling multi-million-dollar networks.

The loss of three lives – or probably five – has been an unfortunate and sad tragedy since the worst incident in 2001 when 353 asylum seekers were drowned off Western Australia.

Since then, however, the previous Howard government’s tough border security and hardline immigration policies had gradually reduced the frequency of inhumane trafficking of so-called boat people to the northern shores of Australia.     

With the emergence of the Rudd government and the obvious softening of the tough policies, the resumption of what seemingly is a sudden influx of boat people arriving on Australian soil was not unexpected.   It was predictable.

In the past fortnight, four boats, including the tragic voyage of the 47 Afghans, have arrived on Australian shores.  One of them with 45 asylum seekers, in fact, sneaked through the nation’s multi-billion-dollar border radar protection and casually docked at Christmas Island’s jetty before local residents called the police.

The number of boat people who have arrived so far this year is 277 in six boats with 68 others have been arrested in Indonesia, accordig to the latest reports.  There is fears of yet another boat is on the way to Australia. 

Compared with last year’s total of 167, it is clear that there will be a greater headache for the Rudd government if strong action is not taken immediately. 

But deliberately exploding a boat with people in mid-ocean is certainly a despicable act of putting innocent lives in horrendous danger to achieve an objective in what can only be aptly described as an “adventure in hell”.

That is, of course, their alleged desperate act, whether premeditated or executed in a moment of sudden improper opptumistic vision, is proven in the investigations now being conducted.

In such a case, the Rudd government has to act quickly and decisively to send the asylum seekers back to where they came from after they have been cured of severe burns as a deterrent to other like-minded people wanting to seek refuge in this country. 

There appears to be a pattern of sinking their boats when they see an Australian naval ship approaching, judging from some of the asylum seekers being rescued from the sea in some of the past boat arrivals.

And it seems clear that the people-smugglers used the tactic of sinking the boats to ensre the asylum seekers are handed over to the authorities unless it can be proved that some of the boats were unseaworthy and their sinking was just a coincidence.

But exploding the latest boat minutes before the captain of the naval ship received a "high threat", as disclosed by the navy, is the first of the new trickery -- and a dangerous one at that -- to ensure that the asylum seekers are under the care of the Australian authorities.  

One of the conditions of settling in Australia is that potential migrants should not have a criminal record.  The alleged sabotage, if found to be true, constitutes not only a criminal act but a threat of being able to act illegally at any cost to lives if the wishes of these people are not met.

That is unacceptable in a country like Australia, which practises democratic principles and "fair-go" however sympathetic it is to the plight of the boat people.  

The continual arrivals of illegal immigrants -- that is exactly what it is -- is increasingly becoming overwhelemningly the greatest national problem in addition to the billions spent on the orst-ever prevailing recession.

 

 

 HAS JUSTICE BEEN SEEN TO HAVE BEEN DONE?

IF the police allegations are true, then Director of Public Prosecution Robert Cock has much explanation to do in the interest of the public.

Why, for example, are the police “correctly laid” charges against offenders downgraded to a lesser degree of the crime by officers of the DPP’s office?

More importantly, are these alleged interferences on the police charges tantamount to undermining the justice system?

Like all democratic countries -- and Australia is certainly one of them – the principle of the justice system is that justice must not only be done, but must be seen to have been done.

The police allegations, however, imply that this is not so.   The victims were not aware of the changes made to the charges laid by the autonomous police prosecutors. 

In a document to their union, the 80 frustrated police prosecutors, who have been driven to raise their concerns and dissent, highlighted several cases, which have been downgraded in recent months:

·         A serious charge of possessing with intent to sell and supply 200 dexamphetamine tablets, weighing 40g, had been reduced to simple possession;

·         Because the DPP alleged insistence to reduce the value of a stolen luxury boat from $60,000 to $9,999 dinghy – just a dollar below the limit which allows a magistrate court to deal with the case -- the owner of the stolen cabin cruiser could not claim his loss;

·         Two other cases of intent to sell and supply 6.85g and 4.53g of amphetamine respectively have been reduced to charges of simple possession;

·         The DPPs did not think stealing a car and recklessly driving it was a serious charge as previously believed and sent the case to a magistrate court instead of a District Court.

·         Aggravated burglary and stealing charges have been reduced to trespassing and stealing charges.

·         Stealing with violence had been reduced to assault and stealing.

As a result of the downgraded charges, the cases, which were supposed to be heard in the District Courts, were transferred to the magistrate courts where the penalties are lighter.

The document, which was obtained by The Sunday Times, also reveals that one police prosecutor was so “overwhelmingly opposed” to a change that the DPP prosecutor returned to his office and lodged a complaint.

It accuses the DPPs of “not representing the interests of the victims and the community that they are supposed to represent”.

Concerned that they will become overburdened with indictable matters being amended by the DPPs, the police prosecutors believe that the police service as a whole will be put at risk of legal action by victims of crime, who think that they have not been fairly represented.

The question is: why did the DPPs downgrade the charges – if at all they did?  It is hard to believe that the police would make such serious allegations in details if they were not true.

Could it be that this was a subtle move to reduce the number of cases going to the over-pressured District Courts? 

If that is the intention, is it justified to reduce the potential punishment that would otherwise fit the crime?  Doesn’t it show to the victims, especially in the cases of aggravated assaults, that justice has not been seen to have been done?

There are so many questions that need answers to ease the public mind. 

But, first, let’s look at what the DPP’s office has to say about these allegations.  “This office,” says a spokeswoman for Robert Cock, “would not be a party to misleading a magistrate about an offence or the true value of property.  These issues are not as clear or straightforward as they appear. 

“The boat matter had been brought to his (Mr Cock’s) attention and he has asked police prosecutors to provide details.  He has still not received the details. “

Cock, through his spokeswoman, has not answered the questions satisfactorily.  He has just skimmed the issues.  He did not even say when he asked for the details of the boat matter.

Was it after the event or before the case went to the magistrate’s court?

Until these allegations have been thoroughly investigated and resolved, it is not surprising that the community is concerned and disillusioned with the justice system in dealing with criminal offences.

The perception that the justice system has not effectively dealt with criminals, anti-social behaviour and violence in the streets – perpetrators who are getting away with seemingly a rap on their knuckles rather than appropriately punished by law -- still lingers on.

LATEST UPDATE:
 

DPP Robert Cock has now given an assurance to the police prosecutors he would personally look at any dissatisfaction they may have about downgrading criminal charges.

"The last thing I want is a breakdown in relationship between my staff and the police prosecutors," he said.

He did not explain why the charges had been reduced but indicated that there had been some interpretation issues o
 
Violence in Perth increasing

Violence in the streets of Perth CBD has overtaken that of the Northbridge entertainment pricinct  in the six months from September, according to the latest statistics announced by the police.

There were 366 reported assaults in the CBD compared with 292 reported incidents in Northbridge.

Although the size of the two areas is vastly different -- the CBD has a bigger coverage than Northbridge -- the increasing rates of violence in the streets is a big concern for the police and the community.

While violence in Northbridge occurs in the late hours of weekends due to alcohol abuse and drugs, the increasing number of fights and assaults in the CBD is due to growing nightlife with more 24-hour food outlets and problems related with homelessness, mental illness and drug addiction.

The statistics, published in the police website, show that the CBD was the most violent place in Western Australia last year with a total of 729 reported assaults compared with the Northbridge's total of 593 reported incidents.

Police are now seeking more powers to randomly search people for weapons and drugs in violent hot spots across the state.

They believe that such powers would be a valuable tool to combat the state's culture of violence and anti-social behaviour. 
 

Tapping their knuckles is not enough – jailing’s the answer

THE spate of assaults and brawls in the streets of Perth has reached such a critical point that the courts must decide on imposing deterrent sentences on those convicted of anti-social behaviour against ordinary citizens, the elderly and the police.

Not sentencing the thugs to jail for serious and despicable crimes is certainly not dealing appropriately with the rising rate of street violence now prevailing even on broad daylight.

Increasingly, more families are concerned, anxious and fearful of leaving their homes to have a night out in case they happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.  They are afraid to be confronted by these merciless thugs who have no compassion for anyone.

Such attacks have caused considerable trauma, nightmare and the loss of confidence among some of the victims who, sometimes, imagine that they are being followed -- needless fear that only counselling could remove from their mind.

This is understandable because the viciousness of the attacks is clearly seen on the faces of the victims.  Some may be scarred for life; some may even lose their eyesight or their set of teeth.  One of the recent victims, for example, has two metal plates in his eye-sockets and 19 stitches in his head.

There as no attempt of robbery, yelling, screaming or taunting.    All he heard from one of them was “do you want some?”  Then he felt the blow on his face as blood oozed out. He had been attacked with a meat cleaver.

There was no reason for such a brutal and unprovoked attack.  The victim was picked at random as he was walking home to a Burswood unit.

What kind of a person who could do something so abhorrent to another human being?  Does he not think that, if he was in the same shoe as his victim, he would not like the same thing to happen to him?  Isn’t there any remorse in him?  Most unlikely, it would seem.

If this wasn’t bad enough, consider this.  Some 10km south of Perth in Leeming two teenagers were returning home from a party when they were pounced upon by a group of 15 hooligans.

One of the youths suffered a shattered cheekbone and had 12 stitches in his head and eyelid.  He was king-hit and kicked by at least four of the hooligans.

His friend was punched, but lucky for him, a passing car with some passengers in it stopped to help the youths.  The assailants fled with a watch, mobile phone and a cap.

In the port city of Fremantle a day earlier a man had his leg broken when two thugs on bicycles rammed into him, bashed him and stole his wallet.

In Perth city two British backpackers were attacked at about 3am, but the police arrested their alleged assailants.

All these violent incidents took place within two nights of last weekend.  The climax came in Perth’s entertainment precinct of Northbridge where the police arrested 25 people for allegedly disorderly conduct and fighting on the streets.

They were charged with 62 offences and 36 summonses were issued on others.  The police also issued 24 liquor infringements and 43 move-on orders to disperse the ugly scene.  

There is no doubt that this is an eye-opener of how violent the Northbridge nightlife is these days.  The police say it is a typical Friday night event when some people, half of whom are repeat offenders, “ruined the fun for all the law-abiding citizens”.

Families are afraid to take their children to what police union chief Mike Dean describes as a “no-zone for the public”.

And it has reached a stage that Police Commissioner Karl O’Callaghan concedes the police is finding it increasingly difficult to enforce public order in Northbridge.   He believes the problem arises from abuse of alcohol in the nightclubs and public bars which are open till early hours of the morning.

He wants the trading hours to be cut back and licensed premises be forced to close earlier for the sake of public safety.

“The escalation of harm we are seeing in Northbridge requires action,” he declares.  “Without this level of support, police will have no choice but to continue to act as ‘street sweepers’.”  Can anyone blame the police?

But, frankly, the police also need the support of the judiciary to ensure that thuggery and violence in the streets need to be dealt with more appropriately than in the past.  

It is frustrating to the police – and an outrage to the community as a whole – to bring these reckless hooligans and hoodlums who are intent to cause serious harm -- even the possibility of death -- to the courts only to see that they are set free because the judges are too soft to show that such horrible incidents must end now before it is too late.