Thanks for bring this to our attention. This only gets a few lines in most media - even though NZ troops are involved.

Do we really want our soldiers involved when the people of that country don't want them there?!And helping to keep an undemocratically elected government in power.

I do agree with you. I think the writer is biased towards the Alkatiri's government. I am an East Timorese who felt the incapability of the Fretelin's government in running the Country.In fact, what happened was that Horta and Gusmao are seen as the fathers of the nation.

So you agree with the aforementioned comment that we shouldn't have New Zealand soldiers "helping to keep an undemocratically elected government in power"?

You don't exactly sound like you agree.

Another reason to shut down the US-NZ Partnership Forum in September....

Cheers for the article Scott.
omar

Deja vecu - Vietnam?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A9j%C3%A0_vu

Govt moves to stop Lobato leaving E Timor
By Anne Barker

Posted 7 hours 41 minutes ago

East Timor's new government has faced its first crisis, overruling a court decision and stopping a convicted former minister from leaving the country.

There were new protests last night at Dili airport by pro-Fretilin supporters angry at moves to stop Rogerio Lobato from leaving the country.

The former Fretilin minister is serving a seven-year jail term for his role in inciting last year's crisis.

But Dili's District Court recently gave him permission to fly to Malaysia for heart surgery.

He and his family were about to take off in a privately chartered plane when the new Government intervened to take him back to custody.

Late last night the Lobato family left the plane but Lobato was too ill to leave.

A prison van is expected to take him this morning.

Protesters lined the airport fence rallying to his support and demanding Fretilin be returned to government.
www.asianewswire.net/page.php

The World Socialist Website has a report on the continuing disturbances:
www.wsws.org/articles/2007/aug2007/etim-a10.shtml
Quote:
The Australian media predictably responded to the new government and the outbreak of rioting with praise for Ramos-Horta and Gusmao as “democrats” and “beloved freedom fighters”, combined with denunciations of Fretilin and Alkitiri.

Greg Sheridan, foreign policy editor of Murdoch’s Australian newspaper, issued an ultimatum to Fretilin, declaring that it had to decide whether it was “an armed militia or a respectable political party”. This required the organisation to accept the new government and discipline its angry supporters, he wrote.

Likewise, an editorial in the Sydney Morning Herald, bluntly accused Fretilin of being the “greatest source of instability” in the country. “We must try to ensure that East Timor does not turn into another Solomon Islands, or Papua New Guinea. Australia does not need another failing state for a near neighbour.”

Related news....

Solomon Islands attorney-general rebuts Australian government child sex allegations
By Patrick O’Connor
14 August 2007

www.wsws.org

International constitutional lawyer and attorney-general of the Solomon Islands, Julian Moti, has provided a comprehensive and damning rebuttal of the statutory rape allegations levelled against him by the Australian government. An examination of Moti’s thoroughly documented reply to the accusations leaves no doubt that he has been the victim of an extraordinary witchhunt orchestrated by the Howard government.

The campaign—characterised by innuendo, lies and slander, together with a blatant disregard for basic precepts of international and national law—has served as an object lesson in the Howard government’s criminality and recklessness. Moti has been vilified as a paedophile and has had his career threatened with ruin because his political activities cut across Canberra’s strategic and economic interests in the South Pacific.

In 2003 the Howard government dispatched more than a thousand troops and police to the Solomon Islands after declaring the country a “failed state” and a security threat to Australia. Australian police and soldiers continue to occupy the country, while additional officials have taken effective control of the state apparatus, including the prisons, courts, prosecuting authorities, finance department, and public service. The neo-colonial takeover, labelled the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI), was driven by Canberra’s concern to maintain control in the South Pacific amid mounting great power rivalry throughout the region.

[more--www.wsws.org/articles/2007/aug2007/moti-a14.shtml]

Question: How do you tell the difference between a New Zealand Police Officer, An Australian Police Officer and an American Police Officer?

Answer:

Pose the following question:

"You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, a dangerous looking man with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, raises the knife, and charges. You are carrying a Glock .40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family. What do you do?"

NZ POLICE OFFICER'S answer:

Well, that's not enough information to answer the question!

Does the man look poor or oppressed?

Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack?

Could we run away?

What does my wife think?

What about the kids?

Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his
hand?

What does the law say about this situation?

Does the Glock have appropriate safety built into it, am I using it in an
OSH approved fashion?

Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this
send to society and to my children?

Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me?

Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound
me?

If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he
was stabbing me?

Should I call 1-1-1, would they just send me a taxi?

Why is this street so deserted? We need to raise taxes, have a paint and weed day and make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage
such behaviour

If I raise my gun and he turns and runs away, Do I get blamed when he falls over running away, knocks his head and kills himself?

Will the NZ taxpayer foot the bill for his ACC claim if I injure him?

If I shoot him, and lose the court case, does he have the opportunity to sue me, cost me my job, my credibility and I will lose my family home?

Am I being culturally sensitive to the attacker if I shoot him, will I be offending his mana if I wound or kill him?

Will I have to defend myself in court as a racist if I shoot him?


AUSTRALIAN POLICE OFFICER'S answer:

BANG!


AMERICAN OFFICER'S answer:

BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!
BANG! BANG!

Click....(sounds of reloading)

BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!
BANG! BANG!

Click.

Daughter: "Nice grouping, Dad! Were those the Winchester Silver Tips?"

Your point being....

Related news....

Solomon Islands attorney-general rebuts Australian government child sex allegations
By Patrick O’Connor
14 August 2007

www.wsws.org

International constitutional lawyer and attorney-general of the Solomon Islands, Julian Moti, has provided a comprehensive and damning rebuttal of the statutory rape allegations levelled against him by the Australian government. An examination of Moti’s thoroughly documented reply to the accusations leaves no doubt that he has been the victim of an extraordinary witchhunt orchestrated by the Howard government.

The campaign—characterised by innuendo, lies and slander, together with a blatant disregard for basic precepts of international and national law—has served as an object lesson in the Howard government’s criminality and recklessness. Moti has been vilified as a paedophile and has had his career threatened with ruin because his political activities cut across Canberra’s strategic and economic interests in the South Pacific.

In 2003 the Howard government dispatched more than a thousand troops and police to the Solomon Islands after declaring the country a “failed state” and a security threat to Australia. Australian police and soldiers continue to occupy the country, while additional officials have taken effective control of the state apparatus, including the prisons, courts, prosecuting authorities, finance department, and public service. The neo-colonial takeover, labelled the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI), was driven by Canberra’s concern to maintain control in the South Pacific amid mounting great power rivalry throughout the region.

[more--www.wsws.org/articles/2007/aug2007/moti-a14.shtml]

The Gusmao-Horta government HAS been demoratically elected. Get your facts right. [Horta was elected 100% democratically, and Gusmao was also ELECTED democratically, while the formation of the RULING government was imposed by the DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT, therefore one may say it was democratic] A small section of the greatly disjointed East Timorease population is opposed to the government and a.) doesn't fully understand or respect the election process, b.) are mostly under the legal voting age so couldn't vote anyway, and c.) the media is focusing on the people committing acts of violence (very few) and not the people who support the new government. I don't doubt that Australia's interest in East Timor is oil, however to accuse Australia of 'setting up' the violence and riots in 2006 is over the top- especially with out proof. You're not only making you're own credibility doubtable but you're also bringing down the credibility of this whole website (for publishing your story). Do us (the media consuming public) a favour and stick to reporting the facts, not absurd theories and personal opinion. If you are going to publish your theories and opinions, you have the responsibility to inform the readers that that is what they are, instead of presenting them as facts. DOES THIS SOCIETY NOT UNDERSTAND ETHICS???

The result of the legislative election of 30 of June disclosed a deep dispersion of the vote of the Timorese with no party winning a parliamentary representation large enough to be able to govern alone.
The Constitution gives to the President of the Republic the exclusive ability to nominate and install the Prime-Minister from the party or alliance of the parties with parliamentary majority among the political parties represented in the National Parliament.
In accordance with the Constitution, the President of the Republic nominates the Government but this only governs if the members of the house of representatives agree to approve the program presented in the National Parliament. This means that, to form government, the parties must show their capacity to conduct negotiation to assure enough of a majority in the National Parliament, to guarantee governmental stability.
FRETILIN won 29% of the total vote, and had 21 members elected to the house of representatives. However, an alliance formed by four other parties had 37 members elected to the house of representatives, that is, the majority of voters voted for one of the four parties in this alliance in preference to FRETILIN. FRETILIN was not able to form an alliance that would give it a majority in Parliament, and would be unable to govern effectively without a parliamentary majority.
Im the election of the president of the republic, Jose Ramos Horta won comfortably against the FRETILIN candidate, and in the election of the president of the National Parliament, Ferdinand d'Arajao, the common candidate of the alliance of four parties, obtained a comfortable majority of 41 votes, against the candidate of FRETILIN, indicating that both in Parliament and in the Timorese population in general the majority do not support FRETILIN. And comments from local people suggest that the recent spate of burning schools, agricultural offices and houses in Bacau, Viqueque and Lautem has done nothing to increase FRETILIN support.

the president does NOT impose his own party on the parliment if there party does not get a mjority in parliment, there are checks and balances on goverment. If neither Fretilin nor the National Congress for the Reconstruction of East Timor got a clear majority then they need to agree on a colaition goverment. Either way Fretilin still got more votes then the NCRET. If it is indeed part of the Timorese Constitution that the president can do that if he wants to parliment than that is undemocratic and needs to be changed,the timorese constitution has
only been around for a few years. Anyway that is for the people of East Timor to decide


There are also Catholic Fundemantalists in East Timor that want to impose a Theocracy on the country. So there is probably a lot of anger at the Church by certian groups of people. I read a BBC article one time that said certian politcal parties want make the Bible the law of the land in East Timor.

1.) You oppenly admit that Australian Government is after oil but you don't see anything wrong with this?

2.) Just because Horta was a democrticly elected President does not mean Gusmao is. Evan if a president is democraticlly elected does not give him/her the right to dissolve parlament or congress and inpose thier own party on the legislate branch if they did not win a majority in the Parlament/Congress.That would be like President Bush in the US dissolving Congress and making the congress republican to spite the fact the fact they did not win a mojority in congress ,then saying it was democratic because (he) was democraticlly elected.It doesn't work like that.

3.) I can not speak to how many timorese are rioting but evan if you are right and only a small portion are rioting it does not mean the the Majority of Timorese don't oppose the goverment or think Horta and Gusmao are Austrlian puppets. Especially since they DID elect Fretilin in the parelament,most people ususally do not riot.From what I have read Horta was elected because of his role in geting Timorese Independence that does not mean they like his party or that they have now changed there mind about him.

4.) It migh not have been Austrailan govemenr who tried to whip up anti-moslem and anti-communist prejidices to further thir own politcal games "which didn't work" but it was Horta and Gusmao's party who did and the Govement's of the ANZAC's came in on thir side.Do you see anything wrong with this?

5.) Austrila has no right to intefire with timorese politics espesially considering thier government's role in suporting General Shuharto and the Indonseian invasion/occupation of the country and the genocide they inflicted on the tiomrese population.

6.)So the people that are rioting are underaged Youth,ooooowww skape goat on the youth the international past time. Just because the youth are the ones rioting deos not mean that older people don't suport them.

Big developments today:
readingthemaps.blogspot.com/2007/08/aussies-had-better-go-home-alkatiri-ups_20.html

Fuck these people. ANZACS liberated them from the Indonesian rule and what do they do; start rioting. Why don't they just get it together stop stop this shit and they could be like japan or germany one day. Instead it's just the same old bullshit. This money could be better invested in some country where they give a shit about their future.

Yes "ANZACS liberated them", Fuck you, you actually assert that these people don't give a shit about their future. This is the kind of fucked up mentality that causes most of the problems we see facing our world today. Go and read a book you piece of shit.

If they care so much then why are they rioting in the streets burning their own country down dumbass.
Maybe we should withdraw and let Indonesia 'administor' timor again. I'm sure Indonesia would welcome them back.

Actually Austrialia and the USA suported the Indonesian occupation and General Shuharto.They supported Shuharto's coup in Indonesia and the Indonesian Invasion of East Timor in the 70's.

If you live in Dunedin, you should have come along to the film screening Solidarity did the other day, a John Pilger doco on East Timor. The Australian, NZ, US, British, and just about every other govt in the world gave Suharto financial, diplomatic and even military support during his reign, at the very same time as he was oppressing ET and in the full knowledge that any weapons they sold him would be used to murder the Timorese people.

FRETELIN guerrillas, without any outside help or support, fought against the Indonesian occupation for the entire time, using captured weapons and ammunition, and propped up only by the support of the Timorese people and the knowledge that they were fighting for a just cause.

Eventually, in the late 90s, Suharto was overthrown, and in the ensuing disorder FRETELIN forces turned the tide and began to push back the occupying forces.

Australia was alarmed by this. It had done well from Suharto's occupation of East Timor, for example the signing of a treaty with Suharto's government that gave it the right to exploit the massive oil and natural gas reserves off the coast of East Timor. Needless to say, the Timorese people were not consulted over the theft of their natural resources.

It obviously didn't like the idea of a leftist, militant national liberation group which had condemned it for supporting the occupation and stealing the Timorese people's resources taking power.

So, by this time it's obvious that independence is coming, whether Australia and it's fellow imperialist buddies like it or not. So now they have the choice between independence on the Timorese people's terms, with a transitional revolutionary FRETELIN government in charge, and in all likelihood nationalisation of the Timorese people's resources, or they have the choice of independence on THEIR terms. Take a guess which option they chose...

An Australian led and UN backed military force then invaded East Timor. It was obvious that FRETELIN had the Indonesian army and the pro-Indonesia paramilitaries on the back foot by now, but hey, obviously the rich white man knows what's best. Their first actions were to DISARM FRETELIN FORCES, and intern them unarmed in concentration camps. They did NOT disarm the pro-Indonesia paramilitaries, they didn't even TRY to do so, and the paras were left free to go on a murderous rampage throughout East Timor for the next wee while.

It's very similar, actually, to what the US did to Cuba in the Spanish-American War, where the Cuban people had been fighting Spain for about 20 years and had almost won, when the US suddenly invaded and made sure that Cuban independence was on THEIR terms.

This was no "liberation". The Timorese people could have and would have won that for themselves, and if we really wanted to help them do so we would have supported them in it. Instead, imperialism invaded and made sure that the newly independent state would not get too uppity, and that all their business investments would be kept secure. Who cares about the needs of the Timorese people so long as Australian and New ZEaland capitalists are kept happy? Today East Timor is one of the poorest nations in the world, despite it's huge natural wealth, which is instead ruthlessly exploited by foreign capitalists.

Alastair Reith.

Could they have really? What parallal universe are you living. Care to substantiate that comment with actual evidence or are we simply going to regress into more marxist hyperbole.
PS people regress into personal insults when they have no argument

Every word I said there can be verified. Go and do some actual research on the subject yourself, rather than just acting like the arrogant colonialist you appear to be. FRETELIN was WINNING when we invaded, and they would have won if we hadn't. That's why we invaded, not to liberate the Timorese from Indonesia, but to prevent FRETELIN from being the ones who liberated them.

lets see
East Timor population (2005) = 947,000
Indonesia population 2007 = 234,693,997

Your assertion = joke

エロセックス出会い

セックスセフレアダルト

エロSEX風俗

オナニー出会いエロ

セックスセフレ不倫

エッチアダルト出会い

出会いセックス素人

エッチ巨乳熟女

童貞セフレナンパ