As someone who opposed the war it was my next natural step.   I'd spoken for the peace movement at an anti-war rally movement; I was 57 at the time, my children were grown-up.   I had had a privileged, pleasant life.   My parents were missionaries. I was the first white child seen by 3 aboriginal communities.   My mother was always committed to social justice.

Well yes. I regard myself as very privileged; a member of the baby-boom generation, born in 1946.   My mother was left a widow when her husband died of TB (now a curable disease), yet she brought up 5 children, and instilled them with her values.   I became a typist, then a judges' associate in the Supreme Court.   My mother was a good manager of money, eventually paying off her house while on a pension.   I had violin lessons, my sister had dancing lessons.   In those days the jobs were plentiful.   Later I went to university and obtained a degree in education.   I was a mature student at the time.

I heard it on an ABC news flash in January. "Go straight away to London,100,000 people needed by March 20th." There was no time to renew my passport. Preparations included the necessity to face the fact that there may be no return. We had to be responsible for ourselves, reliable for our own food and safety. Some people left early on London buses, but I was with the second UK group, leaving from Amman, Jordan.   My daughter's initial reaction was that it was too risky to go into a war zone. But, given time to think about it the whole family, though saying we don'twant to lose you, came in and supported me.   I still feel the emotion of that moment of having the support of my family.   But then, surprisingly, the day I was to leave Adelaide my front door was surrounded by the media. On the day I left I was on the front page of the Adelaide newspaper.   The issue of being a human shield, quite apart from opposition to the war, certainly polarizes people and journalists are no exception.   This act is seen as being very confrontational.   People are either with you or against you.

Back to top 

It was really a concept of standing side by side with the Iraqi people. In 2003 opposition to the war was mounting daily, but it seemed that no-one was listening to people who didn't want war. It was felt that many people from the complicit countries did not want war. It was felt that these people needed to be seen, to be given a voice. It was a new and exciting idea to me. The Geneva Convention states that certain areas should not be bombed: food silos, water treatment plants, electricity for civilians. However, during the 1991 Gulf war, food silos had been bombed by the British in disregard of the Geneva Convention. As an Australian, aware of our big wheat exports to Iraq, I decided to go to the wheat silos.

When the human shields arrived they went immediately to the UN Development Fund, who told them where to find the bona fide sites.   (These are NOT military sites, but sites designated as essential humanitarian sites.)   Also a new idea, was "Shock and Awe" that you could drop your first 3,000 bombs on a capital city, Bagdad, made up largely of civilians. Think for a moment about what that means - "shock and awe".

In fact the pressure of world opinion was so strong the US reduced the number of bombings;   so sometimes speaking up does have an effect.

Back to Top

Once I had made the decision it just seemed right for me.   All kind of opportunities opened up for me to have a really powerful voice.   Suddenly all the media, papers, TV studios and radio stations were interested; I realized that I had the power to make a difference. When we got to Amman, Jordan, there was a world press conference with people from all over the world.   Then in Baghdad, Iraq, there were 10 Australians, one of whom was really media savvy which was useful.   People from 52 countries came to be human shields.   I was representing Australians, Australians who didn't wish to support the war. The range of languages was immense. There was a NY woman of 84, nearly blind, a Jewish lawyer who is now facing prosecution in America. She was threatened with 12 years in prison, or a fine of $100,000, if she stayed in Iraq once the war started.   We said that this was too great a price to pay, we urged her to go back.   We found a silo near Taji and we stayed there. The BBC was in constant contact, phoning for an update every day.   I was lucky to have a media contact back in Australia.   Until the bombing started, I emailed her daily and she released details to the media in Australia.  

I wrote an open letter to the Prime Minister and to all Australians, as well as my speech to the anti-war rally, just before I left.