Australian navy pays for breast enlargements

Australian navy pays for breast enlargements

By Nick Squires in Sydney
Last Updated: 2:31am BST 18/09/2007
The Royal Australian Navy is under pressure to explain why it has spent tens of thousands of pounds paying for female sailors to have breast enlargements.
The opposition Labour Party will this week grill the government over revelations that the operations were granted to women whose small breasts had caused them crises of self-confidence.
“On the face of it, taxpayer-funded breast enhancement is a questionable practice,” said Labour’s defence spokesman, Joel Fitzgibbon.
“I have to say it smacks of a government [that is] out of touch. The navy defended the practice, saying the procedure was only allowed for psychological rather than cosmetic reasons.
“Under defence policy, we do consider the broader needs of our people, both physical and psychological,” said Brigadier Andrew Nikolic, a defence department spokesman.
advertisement
“But that is a long way from saying that if someone doesn’t like their appearance, defence will fund things like breast augmentation as a matter of routine – that is just not correct.”
The navy has not disclosed how many women have undergone the taxpayer-funded operation.
But a Sydney plastic surgeon revealed that in the last two years he had carried out breast enlargements on two sailors, aged 25 and 32, at a cost of £4,200 each.
Other women had gone to a plastic surgeon retained by the navy, he said.
“I don’t know why [the navy] pay for it,” said surgeon Kourosh Tavakoli.
“There’s no breast augmentation, that I know of, for medical purposes.”
Neil James, the head of military lobby group the Defence Association, defended the policy, saying female sailors were only given breast enhancements if there were compelling “psychiatric or psychological reasons”.
“Just as there are in civilian life, there are some females who feel their breasts are too small and if their breasts were bigger, they might be more of a ‘normal’ woman,” Mr James said.
“If they were lacking in self-confidence, this might provide the measure of self-confidence that would help them tackle their wider job.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml%3Bjsessionid%3DJHTCH30KPGGZFQFIQMGSFFOAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2007/09/17/wsailor117.xml

China ‘hacked Australian government computers

China ‘hacked Australian government computers’
By Patrick Walters
September 12, 2007 07:15am
Computer networks were classified
Federal Government will not comment
New Zealand confirms foreign hacking
CHINA has allegedly tried to hack into highly classified government computer networks in Australia and New Zealand as part of a broader international operation to glean military secrets from Western nations.
The Howard Government yesterday would neither confirm nor deny that its agencies, including the Defence Department, had been subject to cyber attack from China, but government sources acknowledge that thwarting such assaults is a continuous challenge.
“It’s a serious problem, it’s ongoing and it’s real,” one senior government source said.
Western intelligence experts say that China has also targeted the US, Canada, Germany and Japan as part of its global intelligence-gathering effort.
New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark yesterday confirmed that foreign intelligence agencies had tried to hack into government computer networks, but said they had not compromised top-secret data banks.
“The assurance I’ve been given by intelligence agencies is that no classified information has been at risk at all,” Miss Clark said.
“We have very smart people to provide protection every time an attack is tried. Obviously we learn from that.
“What I can stress is that absolutely no classified information has ever been penetrated by these attacks.”
While Miss Clark knew which countries were involved, she would not name them, saying her Government had not spoken to the nations concerned about the problem.
“That’s not the way intelligence matters are handled,” she said.
The Financial Times reported last week that Beijing had hacked into the Pentagon’s computer network earlier this year – a claim strenuously denied by Beijing. The alleged cyber attack on the Pentagon came only days after China’s intelligence services were accused of hacking into German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s office and three other German government ministries. Miss Clark acknowledged on Monday that several governments had recently experienced attacks on their computer networks. “It’s not something unique to us, it’s something that every country is experiencing,” she said. Earlier, Warren Tucker, head of the New Zealand intelligence agency, the Security Intelligence Service, confirmed that foreign governments had hacked into New Zealand government computer systems. The Dominion Post newspaper quoted Dr Tucker as saying government departments’ websites had been attacked, information stolen and hard-to-detect software had been installed which could be used to take control of computer systems. There was evidence foreign governments were responsible for the attacks, he said, but did not name the countries concerned. Australian Attorney-General Philip Ruddock is sufficiently concerned about cyber attacks to be spending more than $70 million to improve the e-security of government and private computer networks.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0%2C23599%2C22403224-2%2C00.html

Australia Sets Values Test for Immigrants

Australia Sets Values Test for Immigrants
Monday, August 27, 2007 9:42 AM
Written by Patrick Goodenough, CNSNews.com International Editor
Asserting that Australia has been built on values based on “Judeo-Christian ethics,” Prime Minister John Howard’s government has introduced a new test for would-be citizens.
The move comes amid concerns about extremist views among some Australian Muslims, and at a time when some small political parties are pushing for immigration — and Muslim immigration in particular — to be on the agenda ahead of elections due later this year.
Immigrants who have lived in the country as legal residents for four years and want to become citizens will be expected to score at least 60 percent in a test of 20 questions taken randomly from a pool of 200 questions, covering issues ranging from “Australian values” to history, sport and political institutions. The test also gauges whether applicants have a basic grasp of English.
“Before becoming a citizen it is reasonable to expect that a person will understand the core values that have helped to create a society that is stable yet dynamic, cohesive yet diverse,” Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews said in a statement.
Andrews at the weekend released a booklet from which the questions will be drawn, outlining values which he said during a press conference were “relatively uncontroversial.”
“They are, for example, respect for the equal worth, dignity and freedom of the individual, freedom of speech, freedom of religion and secular government, freedom of association, support for parliamentary democracy and the rule of law, equality under the law, equality of men and women, equality of opportunity, peacefulness, tolerance, mutual respect and compassion for those in need,” Andrews said.
The booklet says these values are based on “Judeo-Christian ethics, a British political heritage and the spirit of the European Enlightenment” along with “distinct Irish and non-conformist attitudes.”
Andrews said that while some may regard the values as universal, “there are some cultures, for example, where men and women are not treated equally. There are some cultures in which freedom of religion is not practiced the same way as it is in Australia.
“So it’s a matter of saying to people who wish to become citizens of Australia that these are the things which we think are important for all Australians.”
A section on religion refers to freedom to practice any religion or none. It also stresses that issues such as divorce and property settlement are handled according to laws enacted by parliament. Many Muslim activists, including some clerics in Australia, say Muslims in Western societies should be allowed to deal with such issues under Islamic law, or shari’a.
Andrews said the booklet would be freely and widely available, and a sample test would be available on a government website. Special provision would be made for those with low levels of literacy, and anyone who failed could retake the test.
Nonetheless, the proposal has drawn flak from various quarters.
Voula Messimeri, chairwoman of the Federation of Ethnic Communities’ Councils of Australia, said the proposals were “potentially discriminatory” and could lead to “the creation of a permanent underclass of non-citizens.”
The Australian Muslim Civil Rights Advocacy Network said in a discussion paper that “values” are often subjective.
AMCRAN co-convener Waleed Kadous said one could subjectively argue that the current Australian government was not upholding “respect for the freedom and dignity of the individual” with anti-terrorism legislation that allows a suspect to be held without charge for up to 14 days. One could also question its commitment to “equality of men and women,” given that women comprise less than 20 percent of the ruling coalition’s bloc of lawmakers, he said.
“Values testing brings with it subjective measures that are difficult to evaluate and do not help to make Australia more secure nor benefit Australia in any tangible way,” he said.
“In addition, introducing such measures is likely to send the wrong message from the government to the community in terms of creating a wedge between migrants and ‘natives.’”
According to 2006 census figures, only about 1.7 percent of Australia’s 21 million people are Muslims, but as in other Western countries with growing Muslim populations the community has assumed a disproportionately high profile since 9/11.
The radical rhetoric of some clerics in Australia, and Islamist terror attacks in Bali (2002), which cost 88 Australian lives; and in London (2005), where the perpetrators were Muslim Britons rather than foreigners, added to the concerns voiced by many Australians.
With an election approaching, the small Christian Democratic Party has called for a 10-year moratorium on Muslim immigrants, saying this will give Muslim leaders time to assess their positions on integration and related issues, including their stance on shari’a.
Pauline Hanson, a populist politician with a history of controversial anti-immigrant positions, has also re-emerged on the national political scene, declaring her intention to run for the federal Senate on a platform of calling for a halt to Muslim immigration to Australia.
Left-wing politicians have dismissed such calls as “bigoted.”
Although such positions are unlikely to win formal support from Howard’s coalition, a number of senior government representatives have spoken out in recent years against Muslim newcomers espousing radical views.
Last year federal Treasurer Peter Costello, often viewed as a possible successor to Howard, told foreign-born Muslims that if they could not accept Australian values or wanted to live under shari’a, they should leave.

http://newsmax.com/inside_cover/australia_values_test/2007/08/27/27645.html