"It is too dangerous to go out"

was the message relayed to me yesterday.  It had taken fifteen days to reach me - from Iran.

While the rest of the world has been focussed on what is happening in places like Gaza, Syria, Ukraine and Sudan there has been a major uprising in Iran as well. Much has been made of the truly appalling behaviour of the ICE agents in Minnesota, of the weather, of this... and that... and more elsewhere. There has been very little coming out of Iran. 

Oh yes, riots. We have been told there have been some riots. There have been a few short clips on the news. Oooh...some people died. There is the late Shah's son talking about it. People want an end to the rule of the "supreme" leader. They are tired of being told how to dress and how to behave and how to think. Yes, all very sad. It's wrong but...

Really? Is that all? Have you any idea what is really going on there. Do you care? Do you actually care? 

I wrote recently about someone who was there to do something to help. He was able to leave...but only with difficulty.

The other message came from someone who lives there. She is a retired teacher of English who still tutors students on an individual basis.  From time to time G... has helped with communication issues. I have never met her in person but I suspect I would like her if I did. I sense she has an excellent sense of humour. It matters in a country like that. 

Right now though there is little to laugh about. Two of her students have been badly injured. Others live in fear of their lives. The regime may be claiming they are not imposing the death penalty on protestors but the very fact they are learning English is danger enough. The death toll is believed to be far greater than our news services are reporting.

It is curious that our news services are making so little of what is going on there. It is not simply the difficulty of getting news out - when has that ever stopped them making claims?  It is not simply because those involved fear for their lives. There are  people willing to take those risks. 

Are we being cowards? I suspect we are. The person who told me it is too dangerous to go out is relying on others to do her shopping and help her when she needs it. She has such poor eyesight she cannot even see what is going on but she has been listening for years and knows what is going on. We are closing our eyes and our ears. It is easier that way - and it may come back to bite us.  

"Saluting the flag"

was something we did every Friday at school assembly. We recited the lines about who we were, loving our country and so on as we stood there in neat, straight lines. Sometimes we were made to repeat it because it did not sound as if we meant what we were saying. 

I am not sure I ever meant what I was saying. It was just one of those school rituals which had to be endured. It was marginally better than "PE" or "nature studies" but that was about all. I often wonder what other children made of it all. I suspect most of them just accepted it as something that we did.

What new migrants made of it all is an even greater mystery. We had a few in my early years at primary school, even one or two who did not speak English. They soon learned. We taught them out in the school yard.  

There was only one flag back then. It was the same flag for everyone. We were taught how to draw it and how it had come into existence and how it was important. There were "flag monitors" who raised and lowered the flag each day. They knew how to do it "properly" too. It was attached and detached correctly, folded with precision in the correct manner.

We were taught about explorers in this state, of the importance of the wool industry and rust resistant wheat. More than one father was a "wharfie" who loaded the wheat bags on to the ships which queued in the port.

Today is our national holiday. Children no longer "salute the flag". We have two flags, sometimes three. Many children are now told they belong to another ethnic grouping even while they are legally citizens of this country. Some people say it is a day of mourning. They might be an increasing minority but they get a major share of the day's news and a recent $1.48m grant from the government to investigate if the date should be changed.

The wool industry has declined dramatically. Wheat is being genetically modified. The grain there is goes to silos and wheat bags have all but disappeared. The "wharfies" still exist but they drive cranes to load containers on to ships in the outer harbour. Their sons search for employment in other places.

Today is now forecast to be 45'C - up from the previous forecast of 40'C. We will be told this is "climate change".  Yes, things have changed - but are they all for the better?  

So we didn't go to Afghanistan or

Vietnam or anywhere else there was a war on?

I can understand the furious European response to President Trump's suggestion they did not pull their weight in those wars because it is much the same as that of those in Downunder.  We did go to war and we lost service people in them. And yes, it does matter to us and to our European allies. It matters a lot.

My first real confrontation with war was in my teens. The Senior Cat was appointed to sort out the problems in an "area" school which was based in the middle of a "soldier settlement". These soldier settlements were a government project designed to give returned servicemen employment on the land. The problems associated with them were many. 

On the Sunday after school started for the year I happened to answer the house phone. There was a terrified voice at the other end. The words still haunt me. ".... my father is trying to kill my mother".  This child's father was chasing his wife across the paddock (field) with a hot poker. The father thought his wife was the enemy. He had, like so many of the men over there, been so traumatised by the war that he was having yet another episode of mental illness. The Senior Cat had been told about these incidents. He had been told what to do. The farmer was stopped before any physical harm was done and taken to the city for treatment but it was an experience I have never forgotten. Yes, frightening but not nearly as frightening for me as it must have been for that family. They considered themselves among the "lucky" ones - they came back alive.

ANZAC day came not too much later in the year. The school stopped for the day. Everyone went to the service. As Guides and Scouts we wore our uniforms - something city children did not do but there was a special dispensation for us. We were expected to participate. I saw grown men weeping for the first time in my life. It was another salutary experience for us. If they went and played "two up" while getting drunk in the local "club" it was understandable on that day.

In my last year at my last school one of the former students was killed in Vietnam. That one of our own was old enough to go to war and be killed did not seem real.  I did not know the boy as I was new to the school but the others had known him well, mostly as a footballer. It was a long time before the days returned to normal and his name was mentioned as a student rather than a soldier. I was careful not to talk about him at all for fear of being seen as "interfering". 

I went on later to university in  London. I met a young man who was by then working as a civil servant. We developed a relationship and were planning a trip back here for Christmas to tell my parents we hoped to marry. He was going to join me in Singapore after he had completed a task in Vietnam. It never happened because he was knifed on a street corner as he waited for a colleague to buy something. He was still seen as "the enemy" even though the war had finished some years before. My life has been very different because of what happened there but Mr Trump would no doubt simply shrug and say, "Too bad. There are plenty of other men out there." No, there aren't. I have never felt the same way about any other unrelated male. Almost two years ago his mother left me her wedding ring. It is in a bank deposit box in England. She felt I was her last contact with her son.  

A former neighbour served in Afghanistan. He won't talk about it but one day the Last Post was sounding on some program on the radio as we were talking outside a business and he grabbed me so hard that I was bruised. I said nothing because there was nothing I could say that would comfort rather than embarrass him. 

The US President has absolutely no idea about these things. The idea that the rest of the world has simply stood behind American service men and women is wrong. That is in no way intended to denigrate their role. It is in no way intended to suggest that the role they played was not important but to suggest that others held back and let them do all the work is wrong. Perhaps I should not criticise the President of another country, a country which is supposed to be a close ally, but I am conscious of the fact that he avoided the draft - college and something to do with his foot, a spur on the heel or something? I know Americans who went to war and then went to college...and some who never got to college because they went to war.

Someone posted a comment this morning that the late Queen Elizabeth II saw more active service than the whole Trump family combined. That is correct. You need to apologise Mr Trump.  

  

I have re-verified my "details"

and I am not about to do it again...and again.

The bank wants me to "reverify" my details. This is now a "legal requirement" which is more about trying to stop money laundering than it is about the safety of small accounts like mine. I accept it needs to be done but doing it once should be enough. I should not need to do it three times. 

I have my everyday working account. This is the one my debit card is attached to. I have my savings account which, for reasons best known to three government departments and myself is where I get my miniscule allowance. I also have an account which has almost nothing in it but is there for a very specific purpose. The money in it does not belong to me. The bank is fully aware of the purpose of that account.

Now I have had three separate requests to "reverify" my accounts. Simple? No. I fall at the first hurdle. I do not have a driver's licence. My passport is being renewed and I cannot use the old one for this purpose. Medicare card? You are supposed to be able to use that but, for some reason, the system will not accept mine. Birth certificate? How does that help? It does not give them my current address or the address to which my mail is sent? Why cannot I simply say, "I live here. You send my mail here. Now look it up on the electoral roll. I am not a "silent" voter." (Silent voters do not appear on the public electoral roll.) 

Banks probably do not have access to the electoral roll now. Once upon a not too distant time everyone had access to it. There would be a copy in the local library. Now it is "protected" information. You have to have good reason to want to consult it, indeed you will hand the information you have over to someone else to do it for you. Only MPs have that information available for personal use outside the offices of the Electoral Commission. 

The idea that this is somehow about keeping our personal information "safe" is something I find hard to understand. It seems there is a demand for more and more personal information every time we interact with any service at all. Our GP had to provide two different forms of ID this week just so she could sign off on a form for me. It used to be that just her provider number and signature were enough but not any more.

I am not sure where all this information goes or how it is used or even if it is used. It seems unlikely but government departments seem to be in love with it. If they can dream up something new to ask they will. 

I reverified my details once. I provided the old passport number before I sent it off to be renewed. It is out of date but all the other information is up to date. It is all the bank needs - until I get my new passport...or they decide to accept my "proof of age" card. It would be easier to really be a cat.  

Children have a right to read for

pleasure - or do they? 

In an article in this morning's paper there is a claim from a Professor Helen Adam of Edith Cowan University that "white children are getting inflated perspectives of themselves and what is considered normal" because of the books that are available. Apparently children are being "miseducated" and white children are getting a view of their "centrality".

Adam sees children as passive consumers of literature. She claims children do not question, that they simply accept. She is telling us that children need to become "thoughtful" readers and question what is being presented to them and how it is being presented. 

Colleen Harkin from the Institute of Public Affairs has hit back saying it is "radical ideological judgment, not an educational one". I imagine the argument will go on for some time.

But perhaps it is time to remind myself of that long ago incident in the library when the child looked up at me and said,"I'm sick of AIDS and death and divorce. I just want a good adventure story." It was a comment I hope I never forget. 

They were topics in children's literature which were popular at the time. Now we have "diversity" and "inclusion", "transgender" issues and "refugee" issues and more. Publishers are calling for books about those issues.  This is, I am told by the local booksellers, "what children need to read about". Perhaps it is but is it what they want to read about?

I do not doubt there will be more books published on these issues. Some of them may be outstanding but will they be enjoyed the same way that Harry Potter has been enjoyed? Do we want children to develop a reading habit because they enjoy reading or do we try to convince them that reading is there to change their view of the world to the only one that is claimed to be socially acceptable?   

You cannot legislate "anti-hate"

even when you have "anti-hate legislation".  You can make it illegal for people to do certain things publicly but it is not going to change how they privately feel or what they might privately say.

There was a very good example of that yesterday. Middle Cat and I had been to see our GP so I could get the necessary paper work for a "parking permit" signed off. This is the permit which will allow whoever happens to be driving me somewhere to park in a disability spot or for twice the length of time in another spot. I have avoided getting one of these because I was (and still am) of the view that other people need these permits more than I do. When I am out with Middle Cat we use her permit. (Yes, she does need one - some days more than others - but she uses it only when she needs it.) Both of us are very conscious of it being a privilege to have a permit and aware of the need not to abuse it.

Later in the morning I went to the Motor Vehicles Department and passed the paperwork to the very pleasant person on the other side of the counter. I was aware of someone standing at the next booth but took no notice. I paid for the permit and went out to unlock my wheels. There was someone standing there.

"You don't need an f.... permit!" he told me, "It's the same thing all the time. You all expect to get something for nothing when you don't need it." 

Fortunately for me the MVD is just across the road from the shopping centre and someone I know well had just parked their car to go in and renew their licence. He guessed what was going on and intervened politely but firmly causing the other man to stride off muttering angrily.

"I know you are quite capable of fighting your own battles Cat but that riled me. I hope you didn't mind."

No, I didn't mind in the least. I hate confrontation. 

"He will go on thinking the same thing though. Nothing will change him," he said.

I agree. Nothing is going to change that man's view. He possibly has some other prejudices and it is unlikely they will change. It is because of people like him I do not believe the newly passed "anti-hate legislation" will really work. It may make matters worse. It will send views like that off the radar. People will think but not say those things publicly. They will teach their children and their grandchildren to think the very things the legislation is trying to prevent. Trying to teach attitude change in schools will not work either. It has been tried. It might modify some attitudes - or at least appear to but out of that environment it is not going to work as it is intended to work. 

We are trying to do something in this country that simply will not work. We are trying to be all things to all people. We are telling people we are "multicultural" and that they can keep all their beliefs and prejudices associated with a very diverse range of cultures while still living in a cohesive society. It is an approach which sounds very accepting and welcoming and non-divisive but is actually the reverse of that. 

If we were all the same it would be very dull and very boring and no we do not want that but we have gone too far in the other direction. Something needs to change but anti-hate legislation won't help. 

Applying for a new passport

is something I resent having to do. My old one has twelve months to go but you need at least six months before it expires if you are planning on leaving the country.  Even if you are not planning on leaving the country it is wise to get this done...or is it? What if you need it in a hurry?

I will soon find out because I spent half of yesterday attempting to download the relevant form. It should not be that difficult surely to just download the form? But it was...I had to "prove I was human" so many times I almost felt like saying, "No, look really I am a cat... I can just put myself into someone's carry on luggage. Give me a drink of water on the flight and I won't need to be fed. I will curl up and sleep for the entire journey wherever I am going."

But no... I supplied my full name. I supplied my date of birth. I supplied the name of one parent. I supplied my sex (or lack thereof). I supplied my old passport number...and I kept being asked to verify what seemed like all of these things and more... 

I have a mail box at the post office. The reason for that is that it is a great deal more secure than the street letter box. They would not allow me to use the much more secure address for delivery.  No, they want the street address which means the post person has to come and knock on the door. It is just as well I know her. She is really very nice. We always wave to one another when we are out and about.

I eventually filled everything in and was told that all I have to now do is supply my old passport.. and get a new photograph. (You know the sort - the one that makes you look too ill to travel.) I will endeavour to do that at the post office tomorrow...and pay the exorbitant fee. I will then wait...no doubt to be told that I have to supply something else or that they think I really am a cat.