Thursday, January 18, 2018


Kerry B. Collison Asia News: BALI TRAVEL WARNING ISSUED BY AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMEN...: BALI TRAVEL WARNING ISSUED BY AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT We continue to receive information that indicates that terrorists may be planning...



We continue to receive information that indicates that terrorists may be planning attacks in Indonesia. Attacks could occur anywhere, anytime. Be particularly vigilant at places of worship and during significant holiday periods. The level of our advice has not changed. Exercise a high degree of caution in Indonesia, including Bali. Higher levels apply in some parts of the country.

Page Content


·         Exercise a high degree of caution in Indonesia, including in Bali and Jakarta, because of the high threat of terrorist attack. Pay close attention to your personal security at all times. Monitor media for the latest information about safety or security risks.

·         Reconsider your need to travel to Central Sulawesi, Papua and West Papua provinces because of safety and security risks. Example: Attacks have occurred around Freeport Mine in Papua Province. See Safety and security.

·         We continue to receive information that indicates that terrorists may be planning attacks in Indonesia. Attacks could occur anywhere, anytime. Be particularly vigilant at places of worship and during significant holiday periods. See Safety and security

·         Indonesian authorities continue to arrest terrorists in the advanced stages of attack planning. Be aware of the ongoing high threat of a terrorist attack. See Safety and security.

·         Be aware of ongoing demonstrations at U.S. government diplomatic facilities throughout Indonesia in response to the U.S. announcement on Jerusalem. Media has reported that certain groups may agitate protest activities directed towards US interests. Be vigilant and aware of your own security; avoid protests and demonstrations. Monitor local media for the latest information on security. See Safety and security.

·         Avoid protests, demonstrations and rallies, which can turn violent without warning. Be aware of your surroundings. See Safety and security.

·         Mount Agung, an active volcano in Karangasem Regency in East Bali, has been erupting since 21 November 2017, emitting ash, gas and steam. Volcanic activity may escalate with little or no notice; Indonesian vulcanologists are forecasting a larger eruption. Depending on the weather conditions at the time of an eruption, an ash cloud could affect flights and ash fall may impact Denpasar and neighbouring airports in East Java and Lombok, causing widespread disruption to the travelling public. Contact your airline or tour operator directly for up-to-date information. See the Mount Agung Volcano bulletin and Additional information.

·         Indonesia has severe penalties for narcotics offences, including the death penalty. See Laws.

·         Be conscious of your personal security. Be aware of risks, particularly in tourist locations such as Bali and Lombok, relating to violent and petty crime; sexual assault; drink-spiking and consumption of alcohol contaminated with harmful substances such as methanol; scams and credit card/ATM fraud. See Safety and security.

·         Carefully consider risks involved in using motorcycles, including licence and insurance issues. See Local travel.

·         Indonesia can experience natural disasters, including volcanic activity, earthquakes, tsunamis and floods. Pay close attention to emergency procedures. Monitor local warnings and follow local instructions. See Additional information.

·         Indonesia has some health risks, including rabies. Rabies occurs throughout Indonesia, particularly in Bali and Nias. Avoid contact with dogs and other animals, including monkeys. See Health.

·         Smoke haze may affect your health and travel plans. Smoke haze is typical across much of the north-west part of the archipelago

Kerry B. Collison Asia News: Indonesia still struggling to keep its generals co...

Kerry B. Collison Asia News: Indonesia still struggling to keep its generals co...: Indonesia still struggling to keep its generals confined to barracks Indonesia’s democracy still faces the New Order legacy of milita...

Indonesia still struggling to keep its generals confined to barracks

Indonesia still struggling to keep its generals confined to barracks

Indonesia’s democracy still faces the New Order legacy of military ambition within civilian political institutions, even after 19 years of reformation and the retreat from politics of the Indonesian military (known in Indonesian as the Tentara Nasional Indonesia, or TNI). The recent public displays of political aspiration by former general Gatot Nurmantyo provide an illustrative example.

Nurmantyo pursued controversy during his leadership as a TNI commander. He attended a politically motivated mass rally in 2016 and presented a series of lectures at a number of universities and Islamic boarding houses. He also gave speeches at several political party events. These political acts reflect the struggle of Indonesian political institutions to manage the legacy of Suharto-era military-backed authoritarianism.

The TNI is grappling with how to best respond to three key issues: institutional constraints on the political ambitions of its high-ranking officers, the growing concerns of conservative religious identities and military modernisation.

For some analysts, Nurmantyo’s political bravado does not automatically indicate a setback to Indonesian democracy, since it may represent only individual political ambition. As an institution, the TNI has extricated itself from national and local political institutions. The military focusses much of its attention on external threats and focusses comparatively little on internal threats.

But while the TNI has no role in politics, it is involved in activities that are not directly military, such as turning soldiers’ houses into detention centres for corruptors; building and protecting vital infrastructure and engaging in government programs, such as food self-sufficiency.

The result of all this is a complicated picture of the extent to which the TNI can achieve professionalisation, modernisation and regional influence.

Nurmantyo’s ambition to be active in political matters is not unique in recent decades. In their waning days of service, some high-ranking officers run for regional and national elections instead of remaining neutral. This raises the question of how the TNI can control these political aspirations.

Internal military reform began with the abolition of the TNI dual-function in 2000, and was institutionalised under the 2004 TNI Law, but could not generate strong institutional constraints on the political aspirations of senior military officers. The TNI Law requires officers to be neutral and resign from their military positions before running for elections, but it does not specifically address potential abuses of power by officers using their military positions and facilities for their own political gains (particularly to boost their profiles prior to elections).

Since the end of Suharto’s New Order, the TNI has redefined its role in Indonesian democracy and in relation to Islamic identity politics. Islamic political groups and their proponents have grown in power over the past three years, especially in terms of their ability to mobilise supporters. During the early reformation, the military used Muslim groups to underpin its previous dominance. More recently, Indonesia’s consolidated democracy provides an arena for both conservative Islamic groups and the military to express their complementary interests. For conservative Islamic groups, the TNI’s support boosts their bargaining power towards entities that they consider an ‘enemy of Islam’ — including the current administration. Likewise, the military manipulates Islamic voices to underpin its role outside of its defence-related duties.

As a result, civilian oversight of the TNI’s primary functions remains weak. Conservative Islamic groups and the TNI have both received greater public attention due partly to their exploitation of one of Indonesian President Joko Widodo’s political weaknesses: his lack of a stronghold in either the Islamic grassroots or the military.

In line with this weak oversight, Nurmantyo’s reign as TNI commander did little to further the President’s ambitious Global Maritime Fulcrum, and the military’s full response to this plan is still unclear. Nurmantyo displayed limited interest in charting a course for the TNI to help Indonesia become a global maritime fulcrum for Asia.

The Indonesian Navy is transforming its brown-water navy (a navy that can operate only in fluvial and immediate coastal regions) into a green-water navy (a navy that can operate further out in a country’s territorial waters). This is intended to boost Indonesia’s naval projection power at the regional level. Accordingly, the Navy Blueprint 2013 calls for Indonesia to have a 274-ship force structure, 12 submarines and three independent fleets operating across the country by 2024.

This plan is insufficient to cover strategic shipping routes, such as the Strait of Malacca and the Strait of Lombok — both of which are critical for Indonesia to be a ‘global maritime fulcrum’. In addition, the Navy’s capability and credibility to act as a guardian in protecting sea lanes and international navigation channels that pass through Indonesian waters is questionable. Given that the Indonesian Navy has long suffered from a defence budget that is insufficient to upgrade its military vessels, developing a green-water navy capability by 2024 may be too ambitious.

The Navy also struggles to manage shipping and the quality of its seaports — the baseline of the Indonesian maritime fulcrum. To further complicate the story, the Indonesian maritime policy lacks strong coordination among the 13 maritime security agencies. Interagency clashes are not uncommon and the Navy lacks the authority to act as a central command. A strategic plan and a complicated maritime regime were absent during Nurmantyo’s leadership.

Given these many complications, Nurmantyo’s profile as a TNI commander should elicit concern about how the Indonesian government deals with the legacy of the authoritarian regime, particularly with regard to controlling the political aspirations of officers. Managing these ambitions will have a profound effect not only on the democratic system but also on military modernisation.

Hipolitus Yolisandry Ringgi Wangge is a Researcher at the Marthinus Academy in Jakarta.


Tuesday, January 16, 2018

Kerry B. Collison Asia News: The 7th of December 2017 - the Day Australia Lost ...

Kerry B. Collison Asia News: The 7th of December 2017 - the Day Australia Lost ...: The 7th of December 2017 - the Day Australia Lost its Soul …is marriage equality really about equality? In the eyes and minds of many...

The 7th of December 2017 - the Day Australia Lost its Soul…is marriage equality really about equality?

The 7th of December 2017 - the Day Australia Lost its Soul…is marriage equality really about equality?

In the eyes and minds of many Australians, the 7th of December 2017 should become known as the day Australia lost an essential part of its unique character and perspective on life - its fair go and egalitarian attitude towards all. It is also the day from which many Australians will recognise that politicians have no regard for the majority of hard working people living and working and paying taxes in this country. 

After watching the unashamed display put on by politicians in parliament house on that day, there is little doubt that apart from the YES lobby and their misguided supporters, many Australians witnessed blatant arrogance and insensitive exuberance displayed towards the rest of the country. Only 4 out of 150 politicians (2.6%) revealed the courage and the deference to support the 40% of voters who voted NO.

[Thought: With so many local councils wanting to remove Australia day from the 26th of January, it might be appropriate to start referring to the 7th of December as unAustralia day?]

Once the so-called debate on SSM / equality was over and Australia's charlatan politicians jubilantly amended the marriage laws, many YES devotees celebrated their ‘win’ in the belief that waves of euphoric love would spread across the country transforming it into a paradise kingdom of joy and harmony and unbridled enlightenment.

Unfortunately and sadly, there were YES supporters who secretly would have preferred to be NO supporters and either assumed the outcome would be an inevitable YES or did not want to face the pressures of the political correction brigade. Either way, they voted YES so they could be seen to support the ideals of equal rights and get back to their lives without further unwanted interruption.

The remaining YES supporters believed they were endorsing the progressive ideal of establishing the same rights for all Australians. Mantras of equality for all; equal marriage; same sex marriage were mindlessly repeated in blissful ignorance of having been used in a classic Machiavellian move. Such high ideals appealed to many voters and were so effective in their influence that the outcome of the postal survey was decided in the first week, well before the debate commenced. At the very least, the majority of the 60% who selected YES naively believed that equity and fairness were the prime motivations for giving their support.

Regardless of the reasons 60% chose YES, their wishful thinking will not last long as more and more Australians realise that the opposite is not only to be the new reality, but the reality that was intended all along. In place of a kingdom of glorious love and equality for all, the citizens of Australia will gradually recognise the need to defend themselves against a deluge of coercive moves and underhanded tactics driven by a single goal - to impose acquiescence to the eventual collapse of western culture as we have known it. 

The mantras were simply a euphoric distraction and it is now the time to punish the regressive 40%.

Behind the scenes sat an unforeseen coalition of groups that were not prominent during the survey and silently allowed the popular notion of ‘equality for all’ to spearhead the preordained result. All the while these groups harboured another, far more malicious, destructive, and longstanding agenda in readiness for an expected clear-cut YES result.

There are many labels and actions that apply to such groups. Some include: leftists, socialists, marxists, communists, Labor, Greens, Fabians, liberalists, anti-facists / anti-racists / anti-bullies, safe schools, feminists, and political correction / thought police. The list goes on. Together they constitute a broad coalition of left-leaning groups and individuals known as the Left Unity. All are founded on communist ideals and actively promote the acceptance of socialism for Australia.

Officially, such groups include: Australian Greens; Australian Labor Party; Communist Party of Australia (Marxist–Leninist - also established and financed the Search Foundation); Getup (supports and promotes Labor and Greens' agenda); Socialist Alliance (the university student network); Socialist Alternative; Socialist Equality Party; Socialist Party; Solidarity; and Workers' Liberty Australia. Again the list goes on. The Communist Party maintains a "Roadmap to the Left" that lists political parties, organisations, and media outlets committed to developing a "comprehensive alternative to neo-liberal capitalism". Regardless of their labels, or who the individuals are, or the groups they are affiliated with, all share a common mindset: socialism or more accurately, a neo-Marxist / cultural Marxist doctrine.

Tracing back through the history of leftist thinking to determine the roots of cultural Marxism is not a simple task. Even learned experts do not agree on what gave rise to the ideals and agendas of the current doctrine. In reading through the mountain of articles available online, the only consistent pattern that emerges is the backgrounds and biases of the authors. That is, their position on the political spectrum determines whether cultural Marxism is accepted as valid (a right wing claim) or a fabrication / right wing conspiracy (a left wing claim). The left denies the existence of cultural Marxism, the right see it as the root of all evils in the Western world.

Several names and organisations stand out over the course of the decades since the Communist Revolution: Marx of course, Antonio Gramsci (Italian Marxist – The Prison Notebooks and Cultural hegemony), Georg Luk√°cs (cultural terrorism), Felix Weil (funded a new Marxist Institute for Social Research, which later became the Frankfurt School), Columbia University (published works on Critical Theory), Theodor Adorno (Frankfurt School - redefined views on gender roles and sexual mores as prejudice), Max Horkheimer (Frankfurt School - essay titled Traditional and Critical Theory: Critical Theory), Herbert Marcuse (Frankfurt School - Eros and Civilization), and Rudi Dutschke (the long march through the institutions).

The above names and their key works are briefly listed in case anyone wants to look into each in more detail. The complete list is far longer. The point made here is that a long line of Marxist related thinking culminated in the 1960’s and has continued to influence our lives and events to this day.

The social / cultural revolution of the 1960s rapidly opened the door to a range of liberations: black power, feminism, gay rights, sexual freedom, and the anti-establishment movement. 

These ideals and actions were consistent with the principles that were articulated by the earlier Marxist proponents. Since the 60s, we have witnessed the disturbing effects of multiculturalism, the family court, racial tensions, anti-discrimination laws, political correctness, an inconsistent legal system, media bias, information control, government propaganda and lies, the rewriting of history, the erosion of basic rights and free speech, gender dysphoria and fluidity, and the effects of postmodernism (relative thinking) and its offshoots, Critical Theory, Cultural Studies, Feminist Theory, and Gender Studies.

In all likelihood, none of the Left Unity groups will agree or admit to the existence of cultural Marxism, or the Frankfurt School, or even the broader Marxist influences that have emerged over the past 100 years. Clearly the influences evolved over a long period of time and as yet have not been consolidated into an agreed field of thought or doctrine. Perhaps they simply do not want to. However, in the absence of an outright acknowledgement, it is difficult to establish the exact nature of the Left Unity’s common roots. What is obvious is that all share the ideals of cultural Marxism regardless of whether or not they exist or are officially acknowledged by the individual groups.                                    

Although many writers claim the Frankfurt School produced a list of 11 recommendations (an 11 step plan of cultural subversion) for the systematic corruption of western culture, it simply is not possible to directly attribute the list to the school or any of its members. A more plausible explanation is that the list could have been compiled from previous Marxist works.

Therefore, rather than get caught up in proving if the Frankfurt school produced this list, it is more productive to read though the recommendations and ask whether or not examples of each can be confirmed. Then, ask why such a list exists at all - where could it have come from given that present day examples abound for each and every recommendation. 

On completing this exercise, it will be difficult to deny the conclusion that the 11 recommendations neatly summarise how to undermine the foundations of our society and bring about the type of dystopia we now see throughout Australia every day:

1.      Establish wide ranging racism offences and hate speech laws.

2.      Generate continual change to cause confusion.

3.      Introduce sexual propaganda in schools and expose children to pornography to encourage acceptance and desire for homosexualisation.

4.      Undermine and remove parental and teachers’ authority.

5.      Use immigration to destroy national identity and provoke racial tension.

6.      Enable excessive use of alcoholic drink and recreational drugs.

7.      Establish sexual deviance as a norm in society.

8.      Create an unreliable legal system with bias against the victims of crime (trauma through injustice).

9.      Induce dependency on state benefits.

10.  Control and dumb down all media. (Six companies now control 96 percent of the world’s media).

11.  Breakdown the family unit.


As mentioned, members of the Frankfurt School did publish works on Critical Theory. The basic principles have now evolved into a field of study known by the same seemingly innocuous title that instructs students on the destructive criticism of Western culture. The education system has become the vehicle to gradually erode Christian values and morality and instil in students a mindset of continual criticism of all aspects of Western culture over time. In essence, Critical Theory is another strategy for undermining and eventually destroying Christianity, capitalism, authority, the family, patriarchy, morality, tradition, sexual restraint, loyalty, patriotism, nationalism, heredity, ethno-centrism, and conservatism. Critical Theory is underscored by a deep seated belief in the pervasiveness of Western evils: racism, sexism, colonialism, nationalism, homophobia, fascism, xenophobia, imperialism, white supremacy, and religious bigotry (applied only to Christianity).

In addition to a decades long presence of the Socialist Alliance network within Australian Universities, many, if not all universities, particularly the G8 group, cannot be viewed as anything other than leftist. Much of the content, the nature of the subjects, their academics, and the students themselves observe a highly progressive left-wing bias. All teach subjects and courses that cover one or more of the critical theory related topics listed beforehand. This is a form of mind programming that is made even more potent due to the overrepresentation of feminist devotees and feminism studies in universities.

Is anyone still wondering why 60% of voters supported the YES position and why the greater proportion of YES voters was aged less than 30 years? This article has only scratched the surface of how far leftist ideology has taken root within Australia. In light of the outcome of the SSM survey, it is also clear that their influence has spread far wider and deeper than most have imagined. 

This leaves us with one more question to ponder. On the 7th of /December 2017, were the politicians celebrating a win for SSM or the triumph of ‘cultural Marxism’ in Australia?

By Stephen Quinton


Stephen Quinton's extensive research in the education sector spans 30 years and he is published globally.

Thursday, January 11, 2018