The parents of British service men and women killed or injured as a result of the war in Iraq have won a legal inquiry launched to assess its legitimacy. It found that the Prime Minister of Great Britain at that time, Tony Blair, was persuaded by the President of the United States, George W Bush, at least a month before the war started that it was the right thing to do. This was based on the premise that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and was a threat to the West.

In Australia there was general unrest and the public made it clear that such a war was not in our interests but the dye was cast. Bush had already talked up the need for an invasion with our Prime Minister, John Howard, along the same lines. It caused outrage in some quarters and people put lit candles in their windows in protest.

Generally, it was seen as another Vietnam in which there could be no winners, but a consensus of opinion was that an awful lot of innocent people would die. The country was not a threat to Australia and we have a lot of Iraqi born people in the country who came as migrants. The flood of opinion against it was overridden by a government determined to stand with the USA on yet another hopeless battle-ground.

After 9/11 it was inexcusable that Bush turned on Iraq which had nothing to do with the destruction of the Twin Towers or the other damage sustained by the terrorist hijackers. While he nominated Osama Bin Laden as the instigator and planner of the attack, and his whereabouts was Afghanistan, he pointed his guns at Iraq and few could understand why?

The hell that descended on the people of Iraq lives on in the memory of all who witnessed it on the media. Thousands of bombs exploded over homes and businesses as people died or were maimed. Although the forces claimed otherwise the civilian death toll mounted as men, women, and children were slaughtered.

The case was made out against Sadam Hussein, the President of Iraq, and he paid the ultimate price of being hanged for his so-called terrorism. Tanks rolled into the streets of Baghdad and other cities as services were cut, the infrastructure was destroyed, and businesses ceased to exist. Statues of Hussein were cut down as if they were to blame for what happened to the USA.

Out of the mess grew Isil, which is now a severe threat to the world. What the leaders who set up the invasion never contemplated was an Iraq afterwards. Certainly American troops hung around and tried to patch things up but they could never bring back the dead.

The Americans, Australians, and British men and women of combat who died during this exercise of horror gave their lives on a whim. The Inquiry found that the diplomacy that could have resolved the issue without bombs was not given a chance to work. Now many families will be seeking compensation and justice and the country they destroyed in their haste for war deserves it as well.

Norma Holt writes on many interesting topics.

Most Australians were appalled and shocked by a television exposure of the treatment dealt out to a few aboriginal children in detention in the Northern Territory. It resembled scenes from Guantanamo Bay when a boy of 16 or so was shown shackled hands, neck and feet in a chair with a hood over his head for some 2 hours. Other boys were locked into small dark cells without water for up to 24 hours or more. They ranged in age from 14 to 17.

One boy managed to escape his cell and was in the fully enclosed but small exercise yard of cement. He begged to be let out and started smashing the barred windows and crashing the door with a large piece of metal. That is when the guards released tear gas into the enclosure which also entered the other cells. The boys were so traumatised they defecated.

At that time, they were dragged out and a garden hose was used to wash them after they were stripped naked. Other atrocities were equally as bad. This simply was unexpected behaviour on the part of guards within a system that is charged with the welfare and care of these children.

If it is happening in one place then it is happening in others and, likewise, in other countries. The deliberate shooting of black children and adults by police in the United States along with other atrocities come to mind. This is racism within the justice system and governments are to blame. The Prime Minister of Australia, Malcolm Turnbull, is setting up a tribunal to examine the events shown.

Norma Holt writes on many topics of interest and current affairs and she welcomes feedback and commen

An aquifer is a natural low containment of water, specifically, it is permeable rock below the surface of the land where water will settle in a pool. Many places in the world, including most states in the USA, have aquifers beneath them. They are there thanks to the Earth’s physical structure or geology. The water in most of them is quite pure because it has filtered through layers of rock, which has cleansed impurity. Many aquifers contain the melted water of glaciers that receded at the end of the last ice age.

Aquifers have mostly been tapped as “available and free” water. In the eastern USA, where water is more plentiful, isolated homeowners have tended to sink a well into them to tap them as a fresh water source. In urban areas, entire neighborhoods of homeowners have tapped into them to get water for their lawns, a cost savings over using taxable city water. Aquifer water has been an essential source of water for agriculture and livestock in the parched western states of the USA. The death of groundwater means that in the USA and all over the world, these underground reservoirs are being drained faster than they can be naturally replenished. What does that mean?

It means that the water was really not free and it means that its unavailability will compel the user to find another source, or they must abandon the area where they live, farm, or raise livestock. People who live near freshwater lakes and rivers who are so threatened will likely not change their water use tactics. They will combine politically to make a move on the nearest freshwater lakes and on nearby rivers. Those folks who live near oceans and seas may turn to desalination to remove minerals from seawater (which is a costly undertaking). But, what about those landlocked western states? Well, they are in trouble – and so is everyone else all over the world. That area in question is also known as the “breadbasket of the world.” During the 1930’s, that area was also known as “The Dust Bowl.” Read the Steinbeck novel or view the film called “The Grapes of Wrath” to see how American society was affected when farms failed there.

If this depletion of aquifer-contained groundwater is not slowed and eventually checked, all of us will learn to view corn, wheat, and beef cattle as if they were made of gold. The price of those commodities that can be grown elsewhere will skyrocket. This phenomenon has been considered to be like a slow motion crash, and it is not on our government’s to do list to resolve because governments tend to wait until crises happen before they plan resolutions. Yet, the world population continues to grow and warming climates require all life to use more water, not less. Human food and water needs will continue to grow at a phenomenal rate.

Who is supposed to act on this undeniable problem? All of us are supposed to do that. We are supposed to self-reflect and determine if our selfish interests in unrestricted water use outweigh the pending death of groundwater. If we don’t act, we will all be compelled to react to its loss. Act means organize to influence your elected officials to put this problem on their agenda. Only organized governments can reverse the death of groundwater.

The beginning of a new alien language rule in China was marked by the document that was introduced authorizing all the students to begin learning English as a required subject while at a third-grade level. Earlier before, English was introduced to some students in their seventh grade. Several factors contributed to the introduction of the policy in China. First, their requirements for English in China were continuously on a rise. The country was undergoing more openings to the outside world as well as globalization that was growing at a faster rate that made teaching English the priority in primary schools. Also, there was increased international communication and collaboration in the country that called for the need to be able to use foreign language that would help in communicative reasons. Second reason is the fundamental improvement of education. To improve the education English plays an important part. The primary English program stress on the assimilation of technology into teaching, focus on students, build up the ability of the students to speak, listen, read and play with the assistance and track of their instructors.

The Third reason was a former English policy for primary education. It was stated that over the years both primary and secondary education for English has been increasing at a fast rate in connection with the growing requirement for English. It was evident that those regions who had introduced English at primary level were continually expanding. The ministry had given out a planned curriculum for both elementary and secondary schools for which English could either be initiated in 3rd grade or first year in secondary education.

Later, the ministry of education demanded that English should not be taught at English level unless the necessary situations were achieved. In 1984, school syllabus was released with no foreign language. However, a few years later some primary schools introduced English syllabus on their own. The Fourth reason is that it is beneficial when children begin learning English while at younger stage than when older, and that’s why English was to be introduced at primary level. Further, the vice president made a significant contribution in speeding up the creating of the policy through his speeches. The public demands, on the other hand, demanded that English be introduced at primary level. The main reason for the establishment of the policy was to react to the increased demand for English by China. Conversely, there were a reduced number of English teachers which was a major concern.

It was suggested that the present English teachers should offer direction and play a significant function in the teaching of English. Another worry was the lack of adequate learning materials in support of the new necessities for teaching English in primary schools. There are some problems associated with the policy which includes lack of thorough analysis, formulation of policy from superior to subordinates without relating members from other regions of the Chinese community. Also, the suppositions concerning profits of begging early, inadequate arrangements as well as differences in execution of the policy and irony of teaching defies. The teaching of a foreign language should not only be based on factors such as age at which students start learning but also matters that are regular in the educational program including competence and fairness.

In the United States, above all things, the legal system should be fair, but instead, it is big business.

Additionally, engaging the legal system should not be a major financial decision, but for millions of people in America, it is. Yet, it is also difficult to imagine that this grim reality was one of the original goals defined by those apt gentlemen who created and signed the Declaration of Independence as they chased the dream of a country that could consistently provide the opportunities of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in equal doses to all.

Unfortunately, the legal system that has evolved in the United States, does guarantee equal protection, representation or opportunity to each and every citizen. Perhaps, upon being founded, the legal system should have been foregone and instead replaced by the notions of a justice system. In a justice system, the fair assumption would be that justice as determined by reasonable peers, would prevail. In stark contrast to a justice system, the modern legal system permits those individuals with the most money to prevail. And this, quite simply does not often lend itself to any form of justice, regardless of how remote that form may long to be.

If a person Googles, “average cost per hour for an attorney”, that person will learn that an attorney in rural areas may earn between $100 and $200 per hour, while the slicker, big city attorneys are in the average range of $400 to $600 per hour. Extrapolating this information over a 40 hour work week for one year, the lowest paid full-time lawyers on the attorney totem pole are earning over $200,000 a year ($100 per hour x 40 hours per week x 52 weeks per year = $208,000). When considering this dim reality, it quickly becomes obvious that the average citizen does not possess the means to pay even the cheapest attorney for any significant length of time.

Upon further examination of the facts, we must consider salaries and wages. The minimum wage varies from state to state. As per the 2016 National Conference of State Legislatures, two states have now passed laws to raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour. California was the first state to pass such laws. This state has now formally required employers to pay $15 per hour by January 1, 2022. New York quickly followed suit, passing legislation requiring employers to pay $15 per hour by July 1, 2020. This means that once the minimum wage is actually increased, earners in each of these states, will be able to afford an inexpensive rural attorney for 39 days by spending an entire year of wages earned ($15 per hour x 40 hours per week x 52 weeks per year = $31,200 annually / $100 per hour for an attorney = 312 total hours / 8 hours per work day = 39 days). However, if someone in a big city needs to hire an attorney and is making $15 per hour, that person can afford an attorney for less than 10 days by spending an entire year of wages earned ($15 per hour x 40 hours per week x 52 weeks per year = $31,200 annually / $400 per hour for an attorney = 78 total hours / 8 hours per work day = 9.75 days). Clearly the minimum wage earner will not have fair or adequate representation, for any real length of time in the current legal (not justice) system, against any sizable entity whose coffers may be ever so scantily lined with rotting cash.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the real (inflation adjusted) median household income in the United States was $51,939 (or $24.97 per hour) in 2013. The United States Consumer Law Attorney Fee Survey Report for 2013-2014, published statistics on attorney’s fees by geographical region. It also separated small firms and large firms into different categories. The lowest average hourly rate available from any law firm in the United States, is $253 (available in the Pacific States of AK, HI and WA), which is billed by small firms. Whereas, the biggest average hourly rate required by law firms in the United States is $546, billed by large firms in North East (CT, MA, MD, ME, NH, RI and VT). This means that the average American income, at the cheapest average hourly rate in the United States, would be able to afford legal representation for less than 26 days ($51,939 annually / $253 per hour for an attorney = 205.29 total hours / 8 hours per work day = 25.66 days), while the lowly, average, full time attorney billing $253 per hour earns $526,240 per year ($253 per hour x 40 hours per week x 52 weeks per year).

And, if a person happens to be in need of legal representation or was falsely accused of a crime and is in need of a defense, that person faces a painful reality. But, don’t forget that this pendulum swings both ways, just ask O.J. Simpson, who perhaps bought his way out of a murder conviction by spending an exorbitant amount of money on attorney fees.

Also, please be aware that this disparity does not stop with these details. Moving away from the low and average range for attorney’s fees, forces our attention only in the upward direction. A large group of attorneys easily make over $1,000 per hour and many of those proponents of a fair legal system claim to bill at double that amount. For example, the notorious bankruptcy attorney Theodore Olsen (although I bet all of his friends just call him Teddy the Bankruptcy Bear) is on record for billing $1,800 per hour, according to court filings in the LightSquared Inc., wireless network bankruptcy case filed in 2012. But the thick, brown, gravy train doesn’t stop to even glance at that billable fee as it trucks on down golden plated tracks. Berge Setrakian and Ralph Ferrara were both reported to make approximately $12.5 million in 2011. Again, simple math tells us that a person earning $12.5 million, who works 40 hours a week for 52 weeks per year, is earning $6,009.62 per hour, which makes a teacher’s salary pale in humble comparison.

Additional figures that do not bode well for most Americans in need of legal representation are the following supplementary facts. As per the U.S. Embassy.gov website, the average time for a jury trial is 4 days for civil cases and 5 days for criminal cases (at least, in 2009). However, cases do not start in trial and they often take a substantial amount of time to get there. To help illustrate this point, a person must first be arraigned. After arraignment, the preliminary hearing phase usually takes 5 to 6 days. In the case of misdemeanor charges, the next step in the legal system is the motions and hearing phase. This typically takes 3 months, but may also exceed 2 years, during which time an attorney is billing the client to file court documents and respond to documents filed by the opposition’s legal team. Based on this reality, the average American may run completely out of cash long before the case ever makes it to trial, in which case, justice is not part of the destination and possibly never even made it onto the legal landscape map.

For business, this dynamic is even worse, because numerous states permit an individual to file “pro per” on behalf of a business. This means an individual or owner chooses to represent him/herself, even though state laws might clearly require a business to be represented by an attorney in a court of law. In systems such as these, the individual may file the case on behalf of a company and begin paying court fees only to learn at a later date that an attorney is required to move the case forward. These legal systems actually cause financial harm and damage to the suffering individual in addition to the actual damages that motivated the case to be filed in the first place. With a minimal amount of expectations, one should be able to assume that engaging the legal system, unto itself, should not inflict a greater financial wound on the already injured party, but it does.

That said, it isn’t just the structure of the laws that make a mockery of the legal system, it is also the system itself. Fortunately, in an effort to dive deeper into the vastness of this overwhelming problem, we may also turn to the US Federal Government for more insight. Twice each year, it publishes statistics on the Federal Court System. Please note however, that these statistics do not include any of the non-federal courts, such as the state and municipal courts.

First, understand that there are 9 different Federal Court Systems:
1. U.S. Courts of Appeals
2. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
3. U.S. District Courts – Civil
4. U.S. District Courts – Criminal
5. Federal Probation System Courts
6. U.S. Bankruptcy Courts
7. Federal Pre-Trial Service Courts
8. U.S. District Courts – Grand and Petit Jurors
9. the U.S. Federal Courts.

And, let’s not forget that the first court on that lists, consists of thirteen different courts:
1. U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
2. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
3. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
4. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
5. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
6. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
7. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
8. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
9. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
10. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
11. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
12. U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
13. Supreme Court of the United States (Court of Last Resort)

After a quick glance, it becomes quite apparent that an individual not only needs an attorney to understand the laws and the intention of those laws, a person may also need the assistance of an attorney to grasp the purpose of each of these courts and the appropriate place to begin seeking “justice” by filing a case in the proper court, since there are soooooo many to choose from.

Truly, it is unfortunate that a person literally has no individual rights unless that person knows the law and most Americans can’t afford to pay an attorney to know the law. So then, how free is the land of the free and the home of the brave when freedom and fair legal representation require money to attain?