Comments

Greg (not verified)

Sat, 2011-10-01 13:31

Sheila, I feel, sadly, that your position on this vexed issue of 'equal rights' marriage (equal rights to what exactly?) is far too dispassionate and practically sensible to allow for its perception within the popular spectrum. As with so many of the matters of prominence within popular political contention, the dominant narrative pivots upon fraught notions of sectoral identity and deservedness. Definition and degrees of acceptance of these identities variously enable or limit one's respective potential for advantage and (potentially fatal) dispossession within an enormous and cannibalistic socio-economic hierarchy. This grand social honeycomb has no capacity for humane intimacy or social security. Succeed individually or perish is the silent code embedded at the core of this insane social trajectory, now rapidly passing the zenith of it's 10,000 year ascendent trajectory. Once upon a time social clans evolved to nurture and protect the constituent members. Now a burgeoning social labyrinth exists to feed upon vast lower orders and pass the consumed energy upwards. The symptomatic pain of the myriad victims, expressed in divergently competitive voices, serves to obscure and distract due attention from the core problem. Your exceptional contemplation upon the conceptual and practical essences of the matter are unlikely to gain much traction within its vexed political stage-play. If only this were not so. We could then all deal with the matter swiftly and sensibly and thence free our concerted commitment toward the more genuinely pressing issue of per capita levels of remnant bio-diversity.

Sheila Newman

Sat, 2011-10-01 11:43

I like the poem and it is about marriage. A point one might make about the poem (which I admit I didn't make) is that marriage is many things to different people and that marriage comes in many forms with many purposes and people have very varied expectations of it. The primary impact of marriage is the transmission of property to children or to spouses. In the Roman law system of continental Europe (with exception of Portugal), default is that property is mostly transmitted to children, parents, grandparents first, uncles and cousins before any spouse might get a look in. [Sarkosi unfortunately recently changed this to a part of the inheritance going to the spouse.] In Anglo-law default is that property transmits to most recent spouse often leaving children high and dry. Gays getting married in continental Europe doesn't make much difference, except the gay might get the right to remain in a house before his/her partner's children take it over. In Australia however, previous partners and children would lose out (as they do currently to second and subsequent wives) when a man marries another man. At the moment if a man lives with another man, when one of them dies the surviving parter is guaranteed nothing - to my knowledge. I personally think that Anglo-law should be reformed so that it becomes impossible to disinherit children. Then men and women would come to marriage each with their inheritance, and therefore much less reliant on getting property from a surviving spouse, at the expense of the children. There is a huge systemic problem with the anglo-system in that it causes the aggregation of large amounts of property in a few private hands and leaves a large body of people without property, having nothing but their labour to survive by, and at the mercy of the state and renters. You see, I am not in favour of default where property goes to the spouse, but I can see why a homosexual spouse would want that under our current rotten system. We would all be better off if our parents and the state provided for us rather than relying on our spouses. There would have to be laws requiring parents to leave their property to their children. Many of us might not marry then at all. Would that be so bad? So I am in favour of scrapping our current system and installing roman law with civil codes including prescriptive inheritance ones. My perspective is probably completely unfamiliar to most people in this discussion of homosexual marriage, but I think that we should all be far more aware of how our system starts out by impoverishing most of us and then gets us all fighting for scraps as adults.

nimby

Sat, 2011-10-01 11:17

Dr Emerson said that we shouldn't be afraid of a growing population and of talking about where that population is needed! Our country's environmental sustainability should be the basis of our population size, not economics. On the contrary, we have every reason to be afraid of a growing population. Australia's ability to feed its growing population and the fate of the Murray-Darling are intertwining issues. Food security cannot be guaranteed without environmental sustainability, careful protection of our natural resources and biodiversity. Julia Gillard lied to the public when she said she didn't want to hurtle towards a "big Australia". Her declaration was nothing but political spin. We are heading towards a "big Australia". Dr Emerson is an economist, not an ecologists, agricultural scientist or a demographer. Norman Borlaug, the "father" of the green revolution, in his Nobel Prize acceptance speech said: Most people still fail to comprehend the magnitude and menace of the population monster . His forty-year reprieve is over, global populations are reaching historical levels, and we need to become more preoccupied by the impending collapse of food-securing ecosystems. Central to his proposal is advocacy for increased permanent and temporary immigration directed to areas where it is needed -- including mining states and rural and regional areas that he believes have the potential to boost food production to serve growing Asian markets. Big Australia back on the agenda Dr Emerson was an advisor to former PM Bob Hawke. In an interview with Andrew Denton ENOUGH ROPE (14th July, 2008) he said: Population is exploding. We’ve got to do something about you know getting a sustainable population level and of course this gets back to poverty, it gets back to the education of women and so on. We’ve got the problems of food supply, of global warming, massive increases in the population. Now these are not the figments of Bob Hawke’s imagination. These are facts. Ah you’ve got you know over a billion people in the world of over six million now living in absolute poverty and half the world’s population living in very meagre situations. Bob Hawke as a Prime Minister was a strong advocate of high immigration and set a precedent for multiculturalism. Hindsight is an excessive luxury!

Anonymous (not verified)

Sat, 2011-10-01 11:04

Regarding Poem about marriage posted On September 30th, 2011 by Sheila Newman Yes it is a poem about marriage, Greg Corso’s expression from over 50 years ago. Whoopee! Though I fail to see any particular relevance or what if anything it contributes to the preceding discussion of whether Gay couples should be legally recognised in Australia as ‘married’ if they choose to, etc. The party posting the poem offers no more than simply posting the poem. Are we to assume the poem is wholly an expression of the contributor’s own viewpoint? Or perhaps a particular aspect within the poem the contributor identifies as particularly poignant. The poem’s author is long deceased. If another party wishes to reference it in expressing an opinion that is fine by me but please EXPRESS AN OPINION, any opinion, make A POINT, any point, by providing even a mere snippet of your own opinion to let us know what that may be, please don’t just post someone else’s work online and leave it at that. I don’t see the relevance of this post at all without further information from the contributor. If the contributor reads this please provide YOUR opinion and tie in the poem’s relevance if any, with a supplementary comment. Until then I consider this post a waste of bandwidth. Sincerely Anonymous • as OP of Marriage? Does Equality Need Constitutional Change? Posted 28-09-2011

coalportal (not verified)

Fri, 2011-09-30 20:11

The use of sophisticated software systems for coal mining (thermal coal, steam coal and metallurgical coal) that is mostly burnt for power generation and steel production and adds to the greenhouse effect is valid for western countries who may allocate resources and funds to alternative and more greener sources of power. Some of the alternatives may be "safer" than the traditional mines. Unfortunately, coal reports and coal statistics show developing economies are more likely to increase their use of thermal coal & metallurgical coal in coming years because of its affordability and to meet increasing demands for electricity and steel. Whether they will embrace and utilise sophisticated software systems that no doubt add to the cost of production is yet to be seen. Cherry of www.coalportal.com

Candobetter ED.

"coalportal®.com is a subscription based publication and coal price index service for the international coal market. Subscribers can download publications, reports and key price indicators covering key coal producing regions such as Australia, China, South Africa, Indonesia, North & South America and India."

Recent posts to candobetter from Cherry at coalportal are quite interesting and pose valid cases for assuming that the use of coal in its cleaner and its dirtiest form will prevail unless something else as cheap comes up (which has not happened yet). Candobetter values would say, then we must do everything to rein in production and population growth which cause ever growing need for coal and other forms of fuel that cannot be provided via flow energies.

The problem with our capitalist society is that anything that makes cash will be pursued, even if it kills us and makes us miserable. That goes for population growth, growth itself, and coal.

It would be good to have a thoughtful article about this from Coalportal, if they are able to think beyond investment values there or to translate those trends in to projections on how much coal really is out there and how fast it is disappearing. Or something else related to coal which may not have been canvassed widely yet.

coalportal (not verified)

Fri, 2011-09-30 18:56

The investment into alternative power generating technologies such as nuclear energy may need to be measured against the potential cost when things turn against you as unfortunately happened this year in Japan. The use of thermal coal (steam coal) that is mostly burnt for power generation may be valid for other countries who may not be able to allocate resources and funds to alternative and more greener sources of power. Coal newsletters and coal statistics show developing economies are more likely to increase their investment into & their use of thermal coal & metallurgical coal in coming years because of coal's affordability and ability to quickly meet increasing demands for electricity and steel. www.coalportal.com Candobetter. ED. I think you are probably right, Cherry. All the more argument for diminishing production, redistributing land for self-sufficiency, and discouraging population growth by educating people in the realities of energy depletion, don't you think?

James Sinnamon

Fri, 2011-09-30 14:23

This was first posted to Johnquiggin.com at 9.38am this morning, but is still awaiting approval as the episode of The Book Reading referred to in the comment is being broadcast. , It will be repeated tonight at 11.00PM. JS, 2:19pm, 30 Sep 

Episode 20, the final episode of 1984 is to be read today on ABC Radio National at 2.00PM today (and repeated tonight at 11.00pm). Those who have comprehended the news that the war, which we were told was launched against Libya in March in order to save the lives of Libyans from brutal oppression by Muammar Gaddafi and which has cost the lives of 20,000 Libyans so far, is to be further extended will, no doubt appreciate how well Orwell anticipated the future (if he was out in the date given by 25 years).

I would appreciate it, if a spokesperson for the Ministry of Truth were to be following this discussion, if he/she could substantiate and quantify the claims of Muammar Gaddafi's abuses of the human rights of Libyans which made the war against Libya necessary.

Sheila Newman

Fri, 2011-09-30 08:04

Marriage by Gregory Corso Should I get married? Should I be Good? Astound the girl next door with my velvet suit and faustaus hood? Don't take her to movies but to cemeteries tell all about werewolf bathtubs and forked clarinets then desire her and kiss her and all the preliminaries and she going just so far and I understanding why not getting angry saying You must feel! It's beautiful to feel! Instead take her in my arms lean against an old crooked tombstone and woo her the entire night the constellations in the sky-- When she introduces me to her parents back straightened, hair finally combed, strangled by a tie, should I sit knees together on their 3rd degree sofa and not ask Where's the bathroom? How else to feel other than I am, often thinking Flash Gordon soap-- O how terrible it must be for a young man seated before a family and the family thinking We never saw him before! He wants our Mary Lou! After tea and homemade cookies they ask What do you do for a living? Should I tell them? Would they like me then? Say All right get married, we're losing a daughter but we're gaining a son-- And should I then ask Where's the bathroom? O God, and the wedding! All her family and her friends and only a handful of mine all scroungy and bearded just waiting to get at the drinks and food-- And the priest! He looking at me if I masturbated asking me Do you take this woman for your lawful wedded wife? And I trembling what to say say Pie Glue! I kiss the bride all those corny men slapping me on the back She's all yours, boy! Ha-ha-ha! And in their eyes you could see some obscene honeymoon going on-- then all that absurd rice and clanky cans and shoes Niagara Falls! Hordes of us! Husbands! Wives! Flowers! Chocolates! All streaming into cozy hotels All going to do the same thing tonight The indifferent clerk he knowing what was going to happen The lobby zombies they knowing what The whistling elevator man he knowing The winking bellboy knowing Everybody knowing! I'd be almost inclined not to do anything! Stay up all night! Stare that hotel clerk in the eye! Screaming: I deny honeymoon! I deny honeymoon! running rampant into those almost climatic suites yelling Radio belly! Cat shovel! O I'd live in Niagara forever! in a dark cave beneath the Falls I'd sit there the Mad Honeymooner devising ways to break marriages, a scourge of bigamy a saint of divorce-- But I should get married I should be good How nice it'd be to come home to her and sit by the fireplace and she in the kitchen aproned young and lovely wanting by baby and so happy about me she burns the roast beef and comes crying to me and I get up from my big papa chair saying Christmas teeth! Radiant brains! Apple deaf! God what a husband I'd make! Yes, I should get married! So much to do! like sneaking into Mr Jones' house late at night and cover his golf clubs with 1920 Norwegian books Like hanging a picture of Rimbaud on the lawnmower like pasting Tannu Tuva postage stamps all over the picket fence like when Mrs Kindhead comes to collect for the Community Chest grab her and tell her There are unfavorable omens in the sky! And when the mayor comes to get my vote tell him When are you going to stop people killing whales! And when the milkman comes leave him a note in the bottle Penguin dust, bring me penguin dust, I want penguin dust-- Yet if I should get married and it's Connecticut and snow and she gives birth to a child and I am sleepless, worn, up for nights, head bowed against a quiet window, the past behind me, finding myself in the most common of situations a trembling man knowledged with responsibility not twig-smear not Roman coin soup-- O what would that be like! Surely I'd give it for a nipple a rubber Tacitus For a rattle bag of broken Bach records Tack Della Francesca all over its crib Sew the Greek alphabet on its bib And build for its playpen a roofless Parthenon No, I doubt I'd be that kind of father not rural not snow no quiet window but hot smelly New York City seven flights up, roaches and rats in the walls a fat Reichian wife screeching over potatoes Get a job! And five nose running brats in love with Batman And the neighbors all toothless and dry haired like those hag masses of the 18th century all wanting to come in and watch TV The landlord wants his rent Grocery store Blue Cross Gas & Electric Knights of Columbus Impossible to lie back and dream Telephone snow, ghost parking-- No! I should not get married and I should never get married! But--imagine if I were to marry a beautiful sophisticated woman tall and pale wearing an elegant black dress and long black gloves holding a cigarette holder in one hand and highball in the other and we lived high up a penthouse with a huge window from which we could see all of New York and even farther on clearer days No I can't imagine myself married to that pleasant prison dream-- O but what about love? I forget love not that I am incapable of love it's just that I see love as odd as wearing shoes-- I never wanted to marry a girl who was like my mother And Ingrid Bergman was always impossible And there maybe a girl now but she's already married And I don't like men and-- but there's got to be somebody! Because what if I'm 60 years old and not married, all alone in furnished room with pee stains on my underwear and everybody else is married! All in the universe married but me! Ah, yet well I know that were a woman possible as I am possible then marriage would be possible-- Like SHE in her lonely alien gaud waiting her Egyptian lover so I wait--bereft of 2,000 years and the bath of life.

Anonymous (not verified)

Thu, 2011-09-29 18:08

Australia's population is now 22.5 million. Immigration is boosting our numbers as more people call Australia HOME. In 1900, our population was just under 4 million. By 1923, it was over 5.5 million. By 1923, it was nearly 9 million. By the 2000 Olympic games, we had just over 19 million people. Governments control our population numbers through immigration. It's done for our own good, without any democratic input. At a growth rate of 1.4 % per annum, it sounds like nothing to be concerned about. Humans fail to comprehend the arithmetic of growth. It means a doubling every 50 years. With climate change, our food security is expected to decline and we may have to import more food than we export. Import from where? We are facing population growth when multiple indicators of our "carrying capacity" are declining. We have peak oil, loss of soil quality, limited fertilizers, fisheries collapse, species losses and climate change. Our governments are more worried about skills shortages and the GDP than food shortages and ecological collapse!

Leave Marriage Alone (not verified)

Thu, 2011-09-29 13:25

reply to Protect Marriage September 29th, 2011 I agree almost entirely with everything you have to say and I thank you for expressing it so succinctly. From what I have seen of this debate, gays and their supporters argue that x number of countries already recognise so called ‘Gay Marriage’, ‘Marriage equality’ and like terms. The trite arguments are also frequently put forth that homosexuality has existed for thousands of years, as long as marriage has, was practiced in ancient Greece and many other ancient cultures and I have seen a claim that it was practiced and culturally acceptable in some quarters of indigenous Australian culture before white settlement, though have not researched it’s validity. Frankly as a very proud Australian I care little what occurred in ancient Greece or what other countries have chosen to do currently in regard to this issue. We teach our children “ If Johnny jumped of a cliff, would you do it to?” so why should we Australians as a nation blindly follow trends of other countries. As to longevity and existence in ancient cultures, things such as cannibalism, human sacrifice, witch hunts, genocide and slavery have been omnipresent too but that does not necessarily make such practices right nor acceptable. It is evident that marriage holds different meanings to different people. For some it has deeply seated religious ties to others religion plays no part , but to all genuine participants it is a legally binding contract and expression of commitment and in our Australian culture since Federation and even prior as a British Colony has always been a union of one male and one female. I see no valid reason at all in the arguments I have encountered thus far to change the perception or meaning of “Marriage” in this country to be anything other than what it has been for so long, a union of one man and one woman. Even if an acceptable form of homosexual union was practiced in Australia by some indigenous peoples ( not saying it was or not) prior to white settlement/invasion call it what you will it is not recognised in our current law and has not been so since imposition of British rule. Like it or not our current society has moved substantially in that time from sole indigenous sovereignty and history cannot be rewritten. So long as our Australian nation can continue to repel invasion our current citizens should be afforded the right to choose how our society develops from this time forward. I support a plebiscite on this issue as I feel the matter far too important to leave in the hands of a bunch of politicians. I strongly support retention of “Marriage” of its current legal interpretation of a male/female union. If variations on that definition are to be legally recognised then ‘Unique Names’ should indeed be applied.

admin

Thu, 2011-09-29 10:10

"Cleaner" coal? Something that is a carbon emitting fossil fuel can't inherently be "cleaner"! It doesn't "help the environment" and nor do we want its "longevity". The "green house effect" is what we want to avoid. The energy lobby has lots of interests in extending this industry. Beyond Zero Emissions have a viable plan to to 100% renewable in 10 years, and after that it will be free. However, this is not what is desirable economically. http://beyondzeroemissions.org/ The coal portal has exposed their contradictory position.

Protect Marriage (not verified)

Thu, 2011-09-29 10:02

Marriage by definition is the union between a husband and a wife, and the cornerstone of families. Such an age-old institution should not be meddled with by politicians. Some criticize it as being too exclusive and gay couples want to be included. We need to recognise the legality and rights of gay couples, but "marriage" should be reserved for what it is. Biology means that gay couples are excluded from having children together. While some heterosexual couples need a help from technology to conceive, due to their pathology, gay couples can never produce "their" children - whatever they claim. Allowing gay couples to claim "Marriage" as their legal union will impinge on its traditional meaning and change it forever. Marriage should remain as it is. We could later regret such changes. Gays should have their own legal union, and their own unique name for it. They shouldn't try to emulate traditional Marriage and dilute forever its meaning.

Coal Portal (not verified)

Thu, 2011-09-29 04:32

Coal Statistics shows that there are many companies answers to the call of a cleaner coal to help the environment preserve it's purity and as well as the coal industries longevity. Both must work hand in hand to see the sky rocket success in the coal market news and green house effect. Cherry of www.coalportal.com

Coal Portal (not verified)

Thu, 2011-09-29 04:17

While for some an ideal world would see no reliance on thermal coal (steam coal) to produce electricity, coal statistics would suggest the commodity isn't going anywhere. Coal reports show if we have to live with it, we may as well reduce the impact of coal and CCS seems to be the best solution found to date. Cherry www.coalportal.com

Anonymous (not verified)

Wed, 2011-09-28 22:15

Many same sex couples desire “marriage equality” but what defines a “marriage” in our society? Many people consider the term ‘marriage’, as a legal term in Australia; is reserved for couples consisting of a male and female only. The word marriage appears in our constitution but when it appears there what does it mean? Does it hold the same meaning in general usage? Does our Government even have the power to change the marriage act to recognise same sex couples equally or does the issue firstly require amendment to the constitution to define marriage and consequently a referendum? This question was raised recently in the Bendigo Advertiser (see links below). Should same sex couples be permitted to “marry” or should they be afforded equality of rights with a different terminology? Disregarding the question of constitutional definition or possible need for amendment should these issues be put to the nation as a plebiscite for determination democratically in any case? I am interested to hear what others think. Links http://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/news/opinion/letters/general/marriage-is-founded-on-principles-not-passions/2297026.aspx http://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/news/opinion/letters/general/time-for-one-poll-to-settle-gay-marriage-issue/2303096.aspx Also related http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rn/2001-02/02rn17.htm

nimby (not verified)

Wed, 2011-09-28 13:06

Addressing climate change is something we should do. However, the carbon tax will achieve little to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. It will help us feel good about doing our bit, and our Government will say they put in the policy framework to cut our emissions, but when it doesn't achieve the desired result, they will be able to blame market forces. With an economy based on growth, profits and consumption, unless the fossil fuels are replaced by renewables, then legislation will do little. The "big polluters" will pass on their carbon tax costs to the consumers - already rising due to the costs of infrastructure that growth demands. The carbon tax would be more embraced by the community if is was sincere, and we all were required to share the "pain". However, there are so many glaring anomalies in government direction, it's simply nothing more than window-dressing. The densification of our cities means something like a doubling of our per-capita greenhouse gas emissions, yet this is the direct being hoised onto us through population growth. As MP Kelvin 'Thomson says, while we may be able to reduce our individual carbon footprints, our government keeps adding more feet! Green-house gas emissions from animal farms are a major contributor to global warming. Enormous amounts of water and plant food is required to produce meat. It is estimated that about 100,000 litres of water, 100 kilogram of hay, and 4 kilogram of grain is required to produce just one kilogram of meat. While the "elephant in the room" of livestock industries are exempt from the carbon tax, it's insincerity is exposed. Governments know the power and economic dependencies on livestock and won't touch it, or our meals.

Sheila Newman

Wed, 2011-09-28 10:39

[Apologies for poor expression below, but I lost this post three times on account of stupid keyboard shortcuts on a strange computer.] I personally have little faith in the current approach to climate change, which piggy-backs on this refocus from local to international. In this way we leave the fate of the earth in the claws of corporations, bankers and bland government representatives of greed. By awarding trust to this distant mechanism, we take away from the much greater importance of the efforts of locals to stop far reaching changes at local level. At a local level we could be so much more effective than we can ever be at international level on environmental problems that cause or mitigate climate change. The removal of trees causes loss of transpiration and alters storage in water tables and water output from treetops. This impacts on heat and water exchange between earth and atmosphere. Densification of suburbs increases hard surfaces and run-off and decreases water storage in the earth. Both the removal of trees and the increase in hard surfaces cause the formation of heat islands in built up areas. There can be no denying that these factors increase overall warming of the surface of the earth. The natural, traditional way of government was for people to make local decisions based on their experience of local conditions, notably limiting building permits in line with local water catchment, environmental ammenity, preservation of food production areas and common areas. It is obvious at local level that removal of shade increases local heat. It is obvious to locals that removal of trees causes water to rise upwards, bogs to form, then for the water to evaporate, leaving salts and heavy metals on the surface, to run in every direction at the next rain. Objections on social grounds were also part of the parcel, with the community able to decide whether to admit a person permanently. Permission might be refused, for instance, when that person's business threatened a well-established and well-liked business. If these rights had been preserved in Maleny, Queensland, for instance, Woolworths would never have been built. The loss of these local rights means that we are powerless where it really matters. Wider rights depend on delegation from local areas. The corporates that have overtaken our governments have seen to it that most people have been educated to believe that they are spectators to the doings of greater beings. The 'greater beings' are the oafs that currently sell off our public assets for cash prizes and who authorise suburban development in the place of forests. In a society where people controlled their social and physical environment, most of the major players in our governments would be in prisons and no-one would take them seriously. My experience tells me that the complexities of carbon taxes will only be used as a way of channeling taxpayer money and other charges to corporates, without any true mechanisms for stemming climate-impactful activity. Indeed the real focus of anti-climate change intergovernment strategies seems to be to guarantee growth at any price, the cost to be footed by individuals with the normal rights attached to their citizenship much reduced. The aim of big business is to sell to more people at greater cost per unit. Big business and government are organising to continue and encourage population growth as a guarantee of corporate profit growth. Big business aims to produce more, not less and they are using complex climate-change agreements to formalise this.

Enne K (not verified)

Tue, 2011-09-27 10:17

The whole educational export industry has become a rort. Under the Colombo plan, students were sponsored to study in Australia, and then ultimately had to return home so that they could contribute to their countries' welfare and economic development. "Students" should remain students and not be able to morph into residents. Students should not be able to bring non-student spouses. Students should not be able to use marriage with an Australian resident as a route to PR. With world poverty and numerous threats increasing, Australia will be targeted as an easy country to enter due to our permeable borders. While the "immigration" debate remains on asylums seekers, the other entrants are being safely and conveniently ignored. Universities should not be allowed to entice foreign students with quick visa approvals and the right to two years of work after graduation, as suggested as part of a reform package. Universities are about higher education, and should not be linked and confused with a back-door to residency and citizenship to Australia. Having international students in our universities is a fine as an export industry, and it also helps broaden our ideas and assist in the development of neighbouring countries. It strengthens cultural understandings and diplomatic ties. However, students should be here to study as their main aim, and not lured by the "carrot" of being able to settle here. Universities should be about higher learning, education, research and development, ethics and the promotion of ideas and innovation. Being linked to immigration is about selfishly enticing the best and brightest from developing nations to fill our own, but questionable, "skills shortages". The primary source of our future professionals should be our own domestic students - many of whom are struggling to find suitable jobs and positions.

Greg (not verified)

Sun, 2011-09-25 17:37

I agree with you regarding the problematic condition of losing our useful sense of reality amidst a scale of consideration that is too large for us to comprehend, and certainly too large for us to respond to. However I think this condition has been insinuated upon us rather than it being one that is natural to us or one that we necessarily choose for mental/emotional relief. Local knowledge, connection and autonomy has been significantly stripped away from us and replaced with a largely national and global view of politics, sport, celebrities, etc., delivered via an increasingly corporatised and centralised media and marketing structure. Even the notion of looking after one's backyard has been vilified as selfish and small-minded. Whenever we might cite and pursue outcomes upon local concerns we are likely to have the relative global conditions pushed upon us, either through the lens of a notional 'greater good' that our parochialism is compromising, or in a context of the inherent hopelessness such grand challenge. Thus we are cultivated to perceive events at a scale that overwhelms our senses and disempowers our impulse to respond. Co-incidence. I don't think so. Nonetheless many people certainly do welcome the evasion of accountability and narcotic relief such perception enables. The world is an enormous patchwork of myriad backyards. Global health is the sum of the health of each of these backyards. If enough people commit to the well-being of enough of them, the world at large will become better. The only people who have the power to affect global-scale outcomes have been hopelessly corrupted by their journey to that level of influence. We are all doomed if we rely upon them for salvation. Thanks for the compliment on the writing. You're right that it's too long for most in today's hectic treadmill. Hopefully though there's still some room left in such a busy world for diversity in approach.

Save our koalas (not verified)

Sun, 2011-09-25 08:51

Canberra Times by Rosslyn Beeby Calls for a $36 m for koalas' conservation A Senate inquiry has called for a $36million federal funding boost for koala disease research, and new ''koala friendly'' national guidelines for road upgrades and construction. It wants speed limits in koala habit zones, tougher controls to curb urban dog attacks, and government grants to help people protect koala trees on their property. In its 178-page report, the inquiry urges the Federal Government to take ''a much stronger leadership role'' in koala conservation, saying there appears to be ''little commitment'' at present. However, the driver of such horrific losses to our iconic and endemic animal is rampant human population growth and developer-driven profits from land acquisition and urban planning. People settle in new urban sprawl, meaning that trees and bushland must be bulldozed. They bring their pets, cars and heavy impacts. Koalas are collateral-damage as the result. Humans are doing what all species do - by trying to increase their territories and advance their own herd/group at the expense of others. However, humans just to it better. Koalas are not only slow-evolving animals but they are also slow movers. They don't have an evolutionary chance against the massive technology and rapid changes brought by the aggressive spread of human populations. Australians are not the clever country, or even the Lucky Country any more. We are the country with the highest mammal extinction rate of the modern world, and increasingly being known as the cruel country with an abysmal animal-rights record.

Mary (not verified)

Sat, 2011-09-24 17:54

To imagine that we have governments acting on the behalf of the majority, the voters, is an old-fashioned idea, a relic from the Liberal Hamer government that created these green wedges. All is determined by profits, growth and consumption now. Conveniently, they are supported by political correctness not to mention our boosted population growth. Australia's fertility levels have risen slightly, but most of our population growth is avoidable and decided by adjusting immigration levels. At a net immigration rate of 70,000 per year, we could manage to cap our population to under 30 million by 2050. However, control has been lost. Unless we address the root cause, unsustainable population growth, and have a population policy, we can expect to see increasing environmental losses, lifestyle losses and a greater diversity in asset/wealth/land and home ownership. If our government was sincere about climate change, we might all be willing to share some of the carbon tax pain, but as there are too many anomalies, and an economy based on growth, the carbon tax will achieve nothing. Any reduction of ghg emissions will be negated by population growth. The single most complex and pervading problem for our planet today is population growth, but being largely denied by the media and our political leaders.

Anonymous (not verified)

Sat, 2011-09-24 15:16

Australia First Party Handy Guide On How To Resist The Official Policy On Fake Refugees: The Community Strike! It is possible to take passive resistance against the refugee policy of the government. You can do it as an individual as much as a member of any organized group. You are not alone and you stand undefeated. You have pride in your identity and you wish to stand up for the future of Australians – our youth, working men and women, senior citizens, the unemployed and homeless. Your cause is moral and correct. Australia First Party proposes to you the model of a Community Strike - which means organized passive grassroots resistance: Your aim must be to make the support networks put in place to push the refugee program, increasingly unmanageable, expensive and mis-focused, while at the same time serving your Australian Community and the ordinary Australian. So: there are things NOT TO DO, and things TO DO. Rules Of Engagement: Negatives 1. No Australian should collaborate in any way with any government agency or private organisation which operates refugee services. That means: answer no question, give no information render no assistance of any description. 2. No Australian should accept any employment arising from the intrusion. Sometimes jobs are offered by different outsourced companies or by agencies: reject the offers! Sometimes contracts are advertised. refuse to tender. Blacklist to your friends anyone who breaks the rule. 3. No Australian should let a school-child participate in any refugee-awareness program. Schools now have officially sanctioned propaganda sessions which you can object to. If your school operates any regular so-called education programs, withdraw your services from all school activities. Subtly persuade your friends to do likewise. 4. No Australian should attend at any church or community group that supports the refugee invasion. This means refusing to donate to any charity or program operated by your church or community group You should make your feelings known. In the case of the churches, you should approach members of your congregation to cause difficulties for the misguided faction in whatever way you judge proper. 5. No Australian should communicate with any so-called refugee save in the most extreme of circumstances. 6. No Australian should buy from any company or person who supports the refugee intrusion. 7. No Australian should associate with any Australian or other person who violates these rules. Rules Of Engagement: Positives 1. All Australians should show direct charity and support to any Australian truly in need of assistance or care. 2. All Australians should take and destroy all pro refugee propaganda distributed by your union, community group, church, university etc. 3. All Australians should work to preserve or establish our own community networks and groups such as your family and community groups that underlie your heritage as Australians – your ANZAC commemorations, your local historical societies, clubs and sporting groups. You are no ‘boat person’, but a native of the soil and you must teach that to each other and to your children. 4. All Australians should collect information which exposes any aspect of the refugee program and turn it over to your favoured organisation for political use. 5. All Australians should counsel other Australians as to the real significance of the refugee program – that is part of the cultural and ethnic dispossession of Australians and also, the actual physical deprivation of our People through misspending on refugees. 6. All Australians should take whatever opportunities there are to create dissent: talkback radio, voting out incumbent politicians, talking to fellow Australians, organizing your own letter-writing group (for newspapers), making vexatious complaints. You should advise young people to read the Internet book, The Camp Of The Saints by Jean Raspail, [http://www. jrbooksonline.com/PDFs/Camp_of_the_Saints.pdf], which explains the psychosis that underlies support for refugee admissions. 7. All Australians who can should display National Flags or Southern Cross Flags – houses, clothing, cars etc. IF YOU DON’T FIGHT - YOU LOSE! Australia First Party PO Box 593 Rockdale 2216 PO Box 103 Crows Nest 4355 PO Box 223 Croydon 3136 PO Box 129 Collie 6225 National Contact Line 02 8587 0014 email: [email protected] Voting for other than Australia First is just a waste of time

Matilda (not verified)

Wed, 2011-09-21 19:13

http://manningham-leader.whereilive.com.au/photos/gallery/doncaster-resi... Finally the tide of the "development" tsumami is being over-turned by protests and "nimbys". Unless we stop the flow of people - all of whom ultimately need housing - this basic need will continue to be exploited as a profit-making commodity until Victoria's livability and environment is destroyed. We can't have perpetual population growth, keep up the "green" facade, and reduce greenhouse gases while our economy largely depends on population growth and "developments".

Anonymous (not verified)

Tue, 2011-09-20 18:04

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsKx7kbvkJA I think that talks like this should be transcribed onto pages with images of stills included. That would greatly increase the already wonderful utility of YouTube. Once a video is viewed once there is not a lot to be gained for the extra time that it takes to watch a video for a second time or third time, but if all of this was transcribed into text, and put on a page, that page, in conjunction with the original broadcast would be an enormously valuable resource. As one example, if all of Mahdi Nazemroya's talk was transcribed as text it would be that much more easy to quote content from it in articles and online debates. In fact, we have already done that with another (somewhat smaller) YouTube broadcast, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-fZsJVV8BI , at http://candobetter.net/node/2566. If anyone would like to help in creating a service to transcribe such talks, please leave a comment there.

Bandicoot

Tue, 2011-09-20 08:38

On September 18, around 5,000 people rallied on the steps of Victoria’s Parliament House. Speaker after speaker took to the microphone to condemn puppy mills and factories.

Breeding dogs are kept in cages to churn out puppies for pet shops. The breeding animals live in poor conditions.

Once the thrill of the impulse purchase wears off, many young dogs find themselves at the local pound.

Regulation is poor, as authorities aren’t easily able to keep breeders in check. There's few regulations about bedding, shelter, maximum number of litters and staffing.

The RSPCA encourages Australians to consult the Smart Puppy Buyers Guide on the RSPCA website before purchasing a pooch. The guide outlines how to check whether a breeder is responsible. With shelters over-flowing and "death row" a sad reflection of society's throw-away mentality, it's better to go to a shelter to adopt your next pet.

The “law” is named in honour of Oscar who survived five years as a stud dog, and was rescued twice by Debra Tranter, the driving force behind Oscar’s Law.

The Spring Street steps were full of people, placards and paws calling for the end of inhumane puppy farms, where dogs are bred in often filthy and cramped conditions.

Video of the rally provided by Phil Wollen.

DaveZero (not verified)

Mon, 2011-09-19 19:38

I cant understand the love affair between the left-liberal chattering class, and rich, wheeling-dealing muslim arab boat people. Is admiration for islam cultural cringe mark 3 -- just another way to feel embarassed by our christian anglo-celtic heritage? The big picture is pretty simple -- a plague of homo sapiens -- spreading like slime over every corner of the earth. Of course the rich will wangle their way to richer, emptier, cleaner countries by air or by boat or by foot. I have found a high-speed shark cat ($40K) that is faster than Australia's customs and RAN navy patrol boats. Would anyone finance me to set sail, to meet the boat people before the military does. Then video them, shoot them and sink them?

nimby (not verified)

Mon, 2011-09-19 07:57

"That's what the fourth estate is about! It's about creating profits built on other peoples' suffering. It's about creating ever-increasing profits, irrespective of the human, social and environmental costs".

This sounds like an apt description of what our government's politically-driven population growth agenda is about. The ideology of perpetual population growth, for the benefit of large corporations and economic-groups, means crushing of the public, and imposing economic, environmental and social strain in an effort to pay for and accommodate more people into Australia. We don't need more "diversity" in the population, but in the media.

The "news"papers, instead of imparting dispassionate and impartial news and information, are actually the basis of forming public opinion! They have the power to distort, to bias and present only one side of any political debate. We need diversity in the news and media, and that's why sites like candobetter.net should become increasingly important - for balance, exposure of the truth, and freedom from vested interests.

James Sinnamon

Sun, 2011-09-18 21:07

My previous comment and one other which raised, in passing, the media disinformation about Syria was apparently labelled 'astroturfing' by another contributor when he wrote:

Incredible! Now we have astroturfing about Syria on a message board about a program on astroturfing! It's all around us!

Below is another comment I posted to that forum in response. Further below, in Appendix 1, I include the other post seemingly labelled 'astroturf' which discusses how real astroturfing is being used to mislead word public opinion to justify NATO's planned invasion of Libya.

Two comments out of the eleven prior to yours so far on this forum, which mention Syria and which run counter to the lies peddled the mainstream media and astroturfers elsewhere, constitute 'astroturfing'?

Stop wasting our time!

---

Thanks Susan (18 Sep 2011 11:27:40am) for alerting me to the way real astroturfers are helping prepare world public opinion to accept NATO's planned invasion of Syria after it completes the installation of the TNC regime that will allow Libya's former coloniser, Italy as well as France, the UK and others to plunder Libya's oil wealth.

---

I think one lesson from this is that it is high time we began to evaluate the true worth of web services such as Twitter. Anything which which allows postings without human moderation and which can so easily abused and used to undermine free speech, democracy and peace as Twitter has done should be spurned by decent Internet users.

Nothing is posted to the site I contribute to (candobetter.net) that is not either posted by trusted account holders or moderated by human administrators. I am fairly certainly that very little, if anything, of what has been posted there is astroturf. Furthermore, the administrators have very rarely resorted to censorship. They will only refuse to publish posts which are illegal, personally abusive, obscene, not relevant to the topic at hand or overly verbose. Even then they will normally allow the intending poster to post a link back to the material if he/she has already posted it elsewhere so that any site visitor can form his/her own judgement.

If all web-sites with discussion forums were administered in similar fashions the problem of astroturfing would surely disappear overnight.

Appendix 1: Contribution by Susan

Thanks for a great program. My fear is that astroturfing is being used in the media war against the Syrian government. Tweets from "Syrian activists" are informing at least one ABC journalist and I guess, as a consequence, they are informing reporters and program presenters because it is very rare to hear balanced reporting on Syria, despite the efforts of people in the Syrian community to be heard face-to-face or on paper. I guess it has something to do with our attraction to simplistic narratives, and our wanting to be able to attach ourselves to the "goodies" in a voyeuristic sense. So in regard to Syria it is a battle between 'human rights activists' versus 'regime apologists'. Tweeter is the best possible ground for such a battle. But with the US and NATO fighting the 'regime apologists' it is a very uneven and complex battle for those of us deeply concerned about the future of a country of 23 million people.

James Sinnamon

Sun, 2011-09-18 13:37

ABC Radio National's Background Briefing program of Sunday 18 September Don't trust the web was most interesting and informative. However, it did not cover the reverse side of the coin, that is, censorship, which is hardly less of a threat to free speech and democracy on the Internet.

A Truthseeker's Code of Conduct proposed here, if widely adopted, could make it much harder for web-site adminstrators, who refuse to publish opinions which demolish the views they are trying to uphold, to get away with their suppression of free speech. However, preventing astroturfing may pose a considerably greater technical challenge.

Below is a comment I posted today to the Background Briefing web page. This is, in part, a response to a contribution by TMA1 included below as well as to Megan also included below.

In fact, it seems to me that people's rightful objection to astroturfing and other less automated forms of Internet abuse has been used as pretext to prevent the expression of much truly original and insightful thought on the Internet.

If this is not so, then can someone tell me on what Australian web forum (let alone in the conventional mass media) can anyone find the case against NATO's bombing and invasion of Libya in recent months?

I haven't found any discussion anywhere (except on the site I contribute to) -- and it is not for want of attempts on my part to post material.

Check out for yourself Larvatus Prodeo, or Web Diary or John Quiggin's web site. Let me know on how many forum web-sites on the case against NATO's war against Libya (and soon Syria) has been fairly discussed in Australia.

The censorship, in so many places on the web of informed and insightful views by real people, makes the repetitive posting of the same dishonest ideas attributed to phony contributors by astroturfers doubly criminal.

TMA1 is right. It should be possible to end much of the harm done to free speech and democracy by astroturfers if the vast majority of Internet users with good intentions are sufficiently motivated and vigilant.

Appendix 1: Contribution by Megan

I find it hard to believe that Q & A use software to filter out astroturfing. Seems like what's being filtered out is genuine comment and all the dross is left in.

How else to explain the same talking heads and corporate media shills bobbing up every week on that annoying twitter feed?

Flight of the Conchords is now a much better option on Monday nights!

Appendix 2: Contribution by TMA1

While it is true that the Web is now virtually overrun with opportunists trying to fool, misinform or hoodwink the public in one way or another, there are ways to mitigate the risks. The onus is now on the public to ensure that these charlatans are exposed and removed from what still is the greatest tool for social integration ever devised.

I have been involved with online development and e-business since 1994 (when most people did not know the internet) and I have seen the parasites crawl out of the woodwork from that time on. There is only one approach that works with these types - exposure. I run a website for a special interest group (UAV systems developers) and even in a highly specialised area such as this one I have found opportunists attempting to set themselves up. Caveat Emptor

quark

Sat, 2011-09-17 12:16

The most basic requirement of the dingoes of Fraser Island and any other animal including ourselves is is food. If all acceptable opportunities to obtain food are shut off, the dingoes are not just going to give up on the idea of food and passively do without. It is imperative that they eat. Anything they do to obtain food when in dire need is normal behaviour, surely? It seems to me that the Department involved is acting in bad faith, pretending it can have control by not addressing the plight of the animals and having stupid rules that don't makes sense and do not work at all with the reality of the situation.

Jacinta Free (not verified)

Sat, 2011-09-17 10:15

I strongly relate to the reference to Mary Pipher's observations in the article about girls losing themselves or their personalities after adolescence. I remember a sudden shift in perspective when I changed schools at the age of 13 and a half and finding myself in a class of girls who were extremely sophisticated and seemingly (but not) 3 years older than my previous classmates .The realization came to me in a flash as I took in at a glance the deliberate hair styles and hints of mascara on my new classmates -that now I had to compete on a “looks level” and that I had a lot of catching up to do. This day introduced a new long phase of self consciousness, self doubt and inhibition. The whole game (of life) was now different and very competitive. A lot more energy had to go into how I came across, how much I knew, how I appeared Reading the article makes me wonder if girls are much worse off than they were in those more sedate days when they had to wear crinolines. Theoretically, girls can do so much now. Recent newsletters from my old school show girls rowing, abseiling, skiing, mountain climbing; far more adventurous activities than we did 40 years ago. But is this the whole picture? Do all these activities give girls a chance for time out from the preoccupation with their appeal and physical acceptance or are they an added pressure? Do girls have to look good doing them? There is a paradox that both boys and girls are more attractive when they are unselfconscious but the pressure to be desirable if one succumbs to it makes this impossible. The current rise in popularity of children’s beauty pageants seems a to be development in the wrong direction .Surely it robs girls even of those early years of pure childhood, of just being themselves, playing and interacting with their environment rather than the mirror.

nimby (not verified)

Sat, 2011-09-17 08:03

PLANNING Minister Matthew Guy has been accused of opening the floodgates for development along the Victorian coast with a surprise decision to rezone seaside farmland for housing at Phillip Island. The Age 16th Sept. Mr Guy's rezoning of about 24 hectares of farmland on the outskirts of Ventnor for residential development is not only undemocratic but short-sighted and ill-advised. The Mayor of the Shire says the change is contrary to the council's structure plan developed with the local community, and the recommendations of an independent planning panel. Obviously the only people who would support it are the developer and the real estate agent who sells the land. With public opinion against such an outrageous and undemocratic planning proposal, this rezoning should have been shelved long before reaching the Planning Minister Mr Guy. Not only are these development plans contrary to democratic principles and processes, but it is set to destroy farming land at a time of food security and climate change threats. It's reckless and short-sighted-ness at its worst. There's no infrastructure in the area, and Council ridiculed the idea. Phillip Island has limited job opportunities, public transport and educational infrastructure. The increase in population will mean Council rates will rise, and retirees and holiday houses will be priced out of their area. Only one submission (from the owner) supported rezoning of the property - contrary to all the objections and the logic of it. "Development" has become a euphemism for an environmental disease causing degradation and sterility to sensitive coastal areas, farmland, natural wildlife habitats and the end of coastal recreational/retirement resorts.

Coal Portal (not verified)

Fri, 2011-09-16 04:58

The use of renewables for generating power is to be congratulated. The latest coal market news is that emerging countries are predicting to use large amounts of thermal coal for power generation and metallurgical coal for steel production. Cherry of www.coalportal.com

Anonymous (not verified)

Thu, 2011-09-15 21:38

It seems to me that in Australia at least that we were at some sort of pinnacle of societal equality in the 1950s and 60s when Barry Humphries started rubbishing us with his insular characters, Sandy Stone, and Edna Everidge. Our problem in Australia to him, it seemed was that we didn’t have enough problems! Barry doesn’t rubbish contemporary Australia very much now- perhaps because we are on the downward slide? I think Barry is a bookmark- of our reasonably equal, comfortable but not extravagant, minimal conflict suburbia of the past.

quark

Thu, 2011-09-15 19:37

It is not surprising to see Australia named as one of the countries with poorer wealth distribution as equality seems to be steadily diminishing in Australia. The Australian humorist Barry Humphries satirized the complacency of Melbourne’s suburbs at a time when differences between the classes were more likely to be a matter of aesthetic taste and suburb status than substantial contrasts in degree of comfort or well being. In the 1960s it was very commonplace but not particularly chic to own a contemporary triple fronted cream brick veneer villa on a 1/4 acre block. Now those blocks in ordinary suburbs are disappearing under more intensive development whilst in many of the wealthy suburbs owners create the opposite effect by buying the house next door and demolishing it for greater amenity such as a swimming pool or tennis court! Humphries’ sketches of the 60s derived their humour from ordinary people's lack of angst,utter complacency and the luxury of being able to focus on the minutiae of life within one’s own street. With intense pressure for never ending development, Melbourne’s suburbs are no longer relaxed.Residents now spend their leisure at meetings and protests about their diminishing quality of life. The life that amused Barry Humphries and the people of Melbourne as they saw themselves reflected in Barry’s work has disappeared. The “official message” that the poor of the developed world should put the needs of the poor of the undeveloped world ahead of theirs rather than exert their own rights locally corresponds with the constant attacks on anyone trying to preserve their own local environment in the face of development. Attempts to do this are derided as Not In MY Back Yard (NIMBY). In fact recently a developer lobby group in Melbourne called on the State government to include Anti -NIMBY provision in new planning laws to restrict councils' and residents' rights to block developments. The official message that I receive loud and clear about this is that caring about things close by that directly affect you is not altruistic or perceived as for the greater good, but turning your attention away from anything tangible and local to something with more general benefits as solar panels (while your sun is blocked out by a multi- storey development next door) or saving water (while the number of water consumers are increased by government engineered population growth) are above reproach .

quark

Thu, 2011-09-15 15:19

I think the only way a normally intelligent , reasonably sensitive human can come to terms with or disregard the damage from converting life and diversity into relative monotony and death, beautiful though this creation may be, is to see nature as vast, almost infinite beyond the creation of the dead zone. To distort in our minds the scale of what we do in comparison with what is available to us to convert is a way of avoiding cognitive dissonance or discomfort from our actions. By the way this is a beautifully written article and in some way reminds me of the writing of Jean Paul Sartre. Sartre however lived at a time when he could be more self indulgent than can a writer on current issues.

eco engine (not verified)

Thu, 2011-09-15 12:58

Wow - what great news and such as discovery under our noses in Victoria? What we are trying to stem the tide of disappearing native species, such a find is rare and worthy news. We don't have to travel outside our solar system to find intelligent life forms when we have them in our bays. At least some larger species surviving is evidence that our oceans are still viable and sufficiently healthy to allow these top predators to survive. Being in the oceans maybe makes them safer from human onslaught then terrestrial native animals, unless we over-fish.

Anonymous (not verified)

Wed, 2011-09-14 19:38

"turning anything that has trees and wildlife on it into a concrete block needs to be halted". The Greens want to declare koalas an endangered species. Areas include Queensland's "koala coast", which ironically encompass the bayside portions of the Redland, Brisbane and Logan local government areas. If the koala were listed as a nationally threatened species (under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act), it would be an offence to injure the creature. It also means that any development that is going to have a significant impact on koalas needs to get federal approval. "Development" is a synonym for environmental attack, degradation and desertification of ecosystems into sterile concrete and degradation. These "developments" are a symptom of decline and disease, not constructive additions to the nation's land surface. Humans should be declared as being in plague proportions. The human population growth curve is currently following an exponential curve or a "J-shape". Common sense tells us that such growth cannot continue - otherwise within a few hundred years every square foot of the Earth's surface would be taken up by a human. We are seeing mono cultures of livestock, and wildlife are under attack from eradication by aggressive and successful homo sapiens. ("wise man"?)

nimby (not verified)

Wed, 2011-09-14 08:45

Japan could mothball nuclear energy by 2012. http://www.greenpeace.org/japan/Global/japan/pdf/er_report.pdf This plan assumes a population of 101.7 million by 2050. Also is assumes a lower electricity demand but the same GDP and population development – as a crucial prerequisite for achieving a significant share of renewable energy sources in the overall energy supply system, compensating for the phasing out of nuclear energy and reducing the consumption of fossil fuels. The "Advanced Energy [R]evolution Report for Japan" outlines a plan for the country still reeling from the impact of March’s disastrous tsunami that caused a meltdown at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant, to institute national energy efficiency standards and dramatically ramp up production of wind and solar energy resources. http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article...

nimby

Mon, 2011-09-12 09:12

Dear Mr Burke, Minister for the Environment, The Victorian government plans to drop 1080 poison bait from an aircraft into forests which could result in the extinction of the already critically endangered Spot-tailed quoll. The purpose of this antiquated and vandalistic method is to poison wild dogs. Endangered Spot-tailed quolls in northeast Victoria and east Gippsland are meat eaters, as well as some species of possums, reptiles, bandicoots and birds. They would be all at a serious risk of being poisoned. Further more, most of this bait would be wasted because of the dogs not being able to find them and this is where non-target animals will rather find and eat them. This is a destructive and draconian way of "managing" wild dogs! It's a threat to the animals that are protected, legally. There is a well researched and efficient method for the poisoning of wild dogs and foxes. It is a target specific bait station system which is successfully used throughout Victoria. There are some other non-lethal ways of protecting livestock - such as alpacas, Maremmas and electric fences. Farmer turns to Maremma for ancient stock protection It will be of great benefit to not only the quolls by removing the competition by dogs and foxes of their natural prey species, but also for the survival of Kangaroos, wallabies, bandicoots, possums, echidnas etc. We can't have our native species exterminated and threatened with further extinction threats because of a few demanding, whinging and lazy farmers! Victorian Environment Minister Peter Walsh has promised farmers he will do as they want. Why are they allowed to have such a powerful lobbying influence, over reason and the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act? With the destruction of some of the last remaining Leadbeater's Possum habitat at Toolangi being logged - suspended for the moment - the threats of grazing in Alpine National parks and further un-welcomed tourist "developments" in Victorian national parks, the lack of environmental regard, and callousness towards native species in Victoria, is disturbing. Please, use your Federal powers to impose some law and order on our elected State Baillieu government. Extinction is forever, and our wildlife are struggling against multiple challenges, mostly human-induced. They don't need to be poisoned as well! It's the same ignorance the killed off the last Tasmanian Tiger - and attitudes have changed little. Thank you Vivienne Ortega

Anonymous (not verified)

Sun, 2011-09-11 08:47

The 100th boat to arrive under Ms Gillard's prime ministership showed Labor had lost its way on the asylum seeker issue. The 72 passengers were transferred to Christmas Island, where they will undergo initial checks. Immigration officials have confirmed 14 unaccompanied children and 54 single men were on board the latest asylum seeker boat to arrive on Christmas Island. The cost of sending people to Nauru would be $980 million over four years with more money needed for infrastructure. Immigration Minister Chris Bowen has released financial estimates that revealed it would cost just under $1 billion to process asylum seekers on Nauru over the next four years. This is taxpayers' money at a time of increasing homelessness in Australia. Legislation would be drawn up to allow the government to send asylum seekers to any destination named by the Minister for Immigration, including Malaysia. Nauru and Manus Island together cost $289 million over six months. The Opposition Leader again called for Ms Gillard to continue offshore processing and to use the facilities on Nauru. The Greens are against all off-shore processing. According to Homelessness Australia, 105,000 Australians are homeless on any given night. Latest figures show 14,370 homeless or at-risk people were waiting for public housing across the north west metro region of Melbourne in June. Figures released show that in Geelong the public housing waiting list is 2194, while the State's waiting list grew by 2.2 per cent in the three months to June to 38,244. Violence against homeless people is not unusual and most of the time goes unreported to authorities. The reason we have so many homeless people now is because even average working person can't afford to rent place by themselves. The Government has failed greatly to provide more public housing. While our government spends massive amounts of public money and effort to avoid the diplomatic fall-out of rejecting the UN Refugee Convention, more people in Australia are becoming "refugees" in their own country.

Steven Earl Salmony (not verified)

Sun, 2011-09-11 05:43

The family of humanity appears not to have much more time, perhaps a couple of decades if we are lucky, in which to make necessary changes in our conspicuous overconsumption/hoarding lifestyles, the endless expansion of overproduction by big-business enterprises, and its unbridled overpopulation activities. Humankind may not be able to protect life as we know it or preserve the integrity of Earth, even during the years many of us are alive. If we project the fully anticipated increase of unrestrained per-capita consumption/hoarding, rampant economic globalization and unrestricted propagation of 75 to 80 million newborns per annum for the foreseeable future, will someone please explain how the 'trajectory' of our civilization can be sustained much longer on a planet with the size, composition and ecology of Earth? According to my admittedly simple estimations, if humankind keeps doing just as it is doing now, without beginning to do whatsoever is necessary to modify the business-as-usual course of our gigantic global economy, for example, then the Earth could not sustain life as we know it much longer. It appears that all the chatter in the mass media regarding an already accepted event, a "demographic transition" in the coming four decades, during which time humankind will pursue a path to the future marked by underdeveloped countries not following the path of the overdeveloped countries but instead “leap-frogging” traditional economic growth activities and automatically squeezing through a ‘bottleneck’ to population stabilization around 2050, is nothing more than wishful and magical thinking. Where is the science to support these ideas? Although it has not been sensibly and openly discussed, extant scientific evidence appears to directly contradict demographic transition theory in such a way that I am led to believe that this theory is a product of preternatural thinking and inadequate research. Please note that the demographic transition theory could be supported by unscientific evidence that is widely known to be ideologically based, politically convenient, economically expedient, socially agreeable, religiously tolerable and culturally prescribed. Unfortunately, in the face of all the elective mutism and willful denial of what the human population is doing on our watch, many too many top rank scientists have adopted a code of silence, apparently at the behest of super-rich and powerful greedmongers who rule the world in our time. Scientists have got to find adequate ways of communicating to humanity about what people somehow need to hear, see and understand: the reckless dissipation of Earth’s limited resources, the relentless degradation of Earth’s frangible environment, and the approaching destruction of the Earth as a fit place for human habitation by the human species are primarily the result of the colossal current scale and fully expected growth of human consumption, production and propagation activities worldwide. When taken together, these global overgrowth activities of the human species appear to be occurring synergistically, proceeding at breakneck speed, and moving fast toward the precipitation of a catastrophic ecological wreckage of some unimaginable sort unless, of course, the world’s huge, ever expanding, artificially designed, manmade global political economy continues to rush headlong toward the monolithic ‘Wall’ called UNSUSTAINABILITY, at which point the runaway economy crashes before Earth’s ecology is collapsed. If this representation of the human-driven global predicament is somehow on the right track, then it seems that responsible and humane efforts made by a conscious human community to slow the world-engulfing overgrowth activities of the human population would be a step in the direction of sustainability. Either we will choose to take a "road less traveled by" toward sustainability while there is still time or else become one of many species to be victimized by of our soon to become, somehow patently unsustainable presence on Earth, I suppose.

Steven Earl Salmony (not verified)

Sun, 2011-09-11 05:38

If the family of humanity keeps doing the unsustainable things we are doing now, we could end up ruining the world as a place fit for human habitation. Why would leaders and followers in a single generation choose not to speak out loudly, clearly and often in a time when a paradise is being turned into an inferno? Can malignant narcissism, pathological arrogance, extreme foolishness and outrageous avarice of a tiny dishonest and immoral minority of the human family be at least partially responsible for such an intolerable situation? How else can such a thing as a colossal human-driven extinction event occur so fast, before our eyes, with ‘the brightest and best’, “the smartest guys in the room” leading the way? Are self-proclaimed masters of the universe in possession of critical decision-making authority at the top of the global political economy leading a not-so-great generation down a primrose path, come what may? Are power and greed mongers shouting everywhere “greed is good” and acting on what they have proclaimed to be their ‘inalienable rights’ to perpetrate some unimaginable sort of global ecological wreckage without a word being spoken for 40 years. Perhaps we are witnessing not only the sixth extinction event, the first such event to be precipitated by a species, but also the sight of something unthinkable: silence killing the world. It is never too late to stand up and be counted or to do the right thing, I suppose.

nimby

Fri, 2011-09-09 16:33

The response from “Heritage” Victoria ironically mentioned nothing about the heritage or historic values of Banyule Homestead. The only concession was that the owners, in return for the privilege of being able to profit from this site that should be in public hands, is that he contribute $400,000 to renovations. This is nothing compared to the amount devalued from the integrity of the property, and that this amount is just a token to the real cost of upgrades. Economic values were the only criteria mentioned, and the number of people and the Council against the proposals were ignored. This should mean that Heritage Victoria’s green light is invalid due to inadequate and shallow decision-making at its worst!

Mary (not verified)

Fri, 2011-09-09 11:04

This book should be distributed to mainstream book shops and educational booksellers that go to schools. It would be better than an isolated website purchase. More people in the education sector and book sellers need to be made aware of this informative book.

Bandicoot

Fri, 2011-09-09 08:19

Heritage Vic. decision dated 31/8/11, just handed down their decision about the developments at Banyule Homestead. This is a very disappointing decision although not completely unexpected, given the legislation's emphasis on economic factors and preference to developer profits over public concern and heritage values. Funds from the subdivision are to assist in paying for renovation/repairs to the heritage property, but it is simply token amounts that won't be sufficient to complete the job. There are 10 conditions attached to the Permit which apply largely to the schedule of works to be carried out within four years, a bank guarantee of $400,000 to be lodged as part of the permit process. Considering the potential sale price of the proposed units which will have attractive and sought-after views across Banyule Flats to the Ranges, they are likely to be sold in excess of $1 m each. That it compromises the public walking trail and the view over the wetlands hasn't been taken into account. The decision will set an unfortunate precedent for similar developments elsewhere in Banyule and is of real concern for the future protection of our heritage generally. It obviously has little value, even for "Heritage" Victoria - ironically. They are simply administrators with no real understanding of our history. It should be noted however, that the owners will still need to apply for a planning permit under the Planning & Environment Act, which would still have to be approved by Council. Lobbying of Councilors should commence to ensure that give a firm "NO". The pressure should be kept up, and the proposal not allowed to simply go through without continuing the fight. The matter may eventually end up at VCAT, which was always a possibility. However, with VCAT's strong preference for developers over public concerns, this could be a challenge too. With little industry in Victoria except construction and housing, we continue to build over native bushland, grasslands, heritage properties, and the integrity of Melbourne and Victoria is under threat, and our history is being eroded by ignorance and greed.

Francis (not verified)

Fri, 2011-09-09 08:05

Heritage Victoria have just handed down a decision on the previously reported application for subdivision of the heritage listed Banyule House (c 1845), and for the construction of contemporary town houses in its grounds. It's a sad day for the Heidelberg area, and sets a poor precedent for further inappropriate developments that overlay our history. The Council are yet to approve, but they will come under very heavy pressure from the State government to comply. The "development" frenzy in Victoria is indicative of lack of innovation and ideas from our political leaders. They, under the smoke-screen of Victoria's chronic housing shortage, continue to allow all sorts of building permits and inappropriate developments - contrary to public opinion and submissions. Democratic principles continue to be rough-shod and over-ridden so that developers are assured of success. The housing shortage won't be fixed while we have a Ponzi-economy based on ongoing and perpetual population growth. It just shifts the home-owning potential downwards, while the well-heeled are rewarded. The heritage value of the property will be tarnished forever. Any plans to re-open it for the public, who should have access to it, will be compromised. Joseph Hawdon's home, and his pioneer status, will be lost in history and to future generations in our fragmented society. Heritage matters little to this Baillieu State government. Incredible that "Heritage" Victoria should make the decision to allow this development on a heritage and significant historical property! It's a sad irony.

nimby

Thu, 2011-09-08 10:29

ABS - Measures of Australia's progress. ABS Measures of Australia's progress "The projections are not predictions or forecasts, but are simply illustrations of the growth and change in population which would occur if certain assumptions about future levels of fertility, mortality, internal migration and overseas migration were to prevail over the projection period. The assumptions incorporate recent trends which indicate increasing levels of fertility and net overseas migration for Australia". According to their graph, we are "projected" to have 42.5 million by 2056, and about 63 million people by 2010. With the devastation of Australia's environment, the further threats of climate change, and our extinction rate, surely our "carrying capacity" has already been reached, or overshot? While we have multiple converging threats to our ongoing safely and growth, and multiple challenges in these decades, the problems - and finding solutions - will be magnified and thwarted by a growing number of people. These are more than "projected" population growth numbers, but targets set by our governments in consultation with businesses and lobby groups. Our population growth is driven by immigration levels -decided politically - and the resultant fertility levels. It's all justified economically, in isolation of the other more pertinent questions of morality, of natural resources, of living standards, of national welfare, the nation we pass onto our descendants, of social and economic and environmental conditions in a land already stressed by human demands and irrevocable changed already.

Anonymous (not verified)

Wed, 2011-09-07 16:52

With gas reserves under as much as 46% of the country, even inner-city suburbs are under threat from coal seam gas. Coal seam gas (CSG) mining involves using large machines to bore holes deep into the earth and then inject an assortment of chemicals to crack underground rock and release the trapped methane gas. The impact of CSG mining is too hazardous to health and the environment to be allowed. It should be banned. The mining process includes fracking - a process where industrial chemicals and sand are pumped at high pressure deep into the earth to fracture the rock. Water supplies are often contaminated. Independent MP Tony Windsor will introduce a bill to Parliament to pause the expansion of coal seam gas mining until scientists have time to assess the impacts on health, land and our ancient water aquifers. There is deep and genuine public disquiet over the effect of these developments on the water tables and basins. This is an industry that is making huge investments on the back of poor community management. In today’s world, that is very dangerous. Our government has become a voice, the protagonist, for mining companies and are strangled by their heavy demands and strong lobbying power. Australia will be left devoid of life unless we get some leadership. Australia is not a nation any more, but an economy with a workforce to increase, and a resource to be justified by profits and the GDP. Our nationhood is very fragile.

Bandicoot

Wed, 2011-09-07 15:13

This is the anniversary of the last day in the life of the last Tasmanian Tiger that died in 1936 at Hobart Zoo. Australia's landscapes and species have been severely impacted by over 200 years of habitat loss and fragmentation. Little has changed since the Colonial days, despite modern understandings of ecology and environmental awareness. The devastation continues, with logging in prime threatened species' habitats, land clearing, human population growth, and livestock competition. The World Wildlife Fund says Australia's list of threatened species is growing by the year. Michael Roache, the threatened species program manager with the WWF, says the day should be used to reflect on how vital many of these animals are to our ecosystems. Humans as competitors are just too successful, and animals larger then mice have never before had so much dominance on our planet. Spot-tailed quoll in a battle for survival The spot-tailed quoll, a unique Australian animal, is facing the same sad fate as the Tasmania tiger. Like the thylacine, the endangered spot-tailed quoll is a meat-eating marsupial. Plans to drop bait from planes over vast tracts of land in Victoria to wipe out wild dogs threaten the little creature's existence. The power of a few livestock farmers is such that their interests over-ride all other concerns, and their demands for instant action rather than regulation, control of dog ownership and breeding, and targeting the actual problem animals rather than including endangered species. Agriculture Minister Peter Walsh said baiting would be carried out. However, Victoria's Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act and the Federal government should be able to over-ride this hasty and ill-thought-out decision. There are electric fences, alpacas, and other non-lethal options to avoid wild dog attacks without killing the endangered quolls. With little regard for the value of native species, Australia is going through the process of being generalized as an international repository of resources to be plundered, raped and pillaged instead of having it's uniqueness ensured and guaranteed. Contact Victorian Ag minister Peter Walsh: [email protected]

Tigerquoll

Tue, 2011-09-06 15:16

Sarah Hanson-Young is a naive open border extremist. She emphatically wants no limit on refugees or asylum seekers. Ex Amnesty International, she would have Australia become the recipient for the world's Third World, while in denial over Australia's 'carrying capacity' and having some warped notion of 'sustainable' immigration. They should rename Ashmore Reef as Hanson-Young Reef. Tigerquoll Suggan Buggan Snowy River Region Victoria 3885 Australia

Beatrice (not verified)

Tue, 2011-09-06 15:15

That the big debate and big issue relates to asylum seekers in current day Australia is a suitable smokescreen for the mass immigration we have to Australian shores. What Vivienne mentions is true, regarding Australia and other (yes, there are actually other) countries that are signatories to the UN's Refugee Convention or its equivalent somewhere. The other countries that must/do take in a quota of refugees may not attend to asylum seekers in the same way as we do - Mexico take in numbers, for one, so, why does Australia seem to hold the target shore in sight? Also, we shouldn't be pressured into accepting more refugees. Why? There are other countries to go to, as well as the studies that have been done into refugees that talk of the social issue of integration, unemployment, welfare dependency or lack thereof... Our job, as a developed nation, can be to assist other nations when there are problems, y'know, realising and holding strong to a stance that says that the solution isn't to have people here!!

nimby (not verified)

Tue, 2011-09-06 10:09

According to the Green Senator Sarah Hanson-Young, we should abandon off-shore processing and only process those who arrive here. It is more popular and cheaper. This won't work. It will make more people "jump the queue" and risk lives to come here. It won't be cheaper either as more will come. The "welcome mat" has just got bigger, and they need housing and social welfare for a long time. Already it takes years for the vulnerable in Australia to get public housing. The waiting lists will be even longer. We need to slash our economic immigration numbers that is prohibiting more refugees being accommodated, and withdraw from the UN's dominance and make our own policies. We should only process off-shore entrants only and stop the people smugglers and the opportunists. The UN Refugee Convention is a relic after WW2 when many people were displaced from Europe. Now, the problems are on-going and escalating. Those arriving by plane should be assessed off-shore too. Our shores are part of our sovereignty, something the Greens seem to overlook.

Frustrated (not verified)

Sun, 2011-09-04 10:50

Notably absent from this website is a ‘terms of use’ policy.
The editorial comment above (3-9-2011) makes a good start. Candobetter will not publish material which is considered;
1. illegal content
2. personally abusive
3. defamatory (recognising truth as legitimate defence)
4. spam

... and may not publish:

5. needless verbosity
6. irrelevance

Items 1 - 6 do not address the editorial tampering and suppression of my submissions past.

I still visit Candobetter with some interest but since the episodes of indiscriminate censorship have been reluctant to contribute very often, not willing to waste my time and effort on submissions and much less on post publication arguments ( most probably futile) on editorial decision.

IMO, a published terms of use policy may serve well as a checklist to both contributors & editors alike to better define what is or is not suitable for publication here. Publication of policy could only lead to increased consistency, which I consider can only raise the standard and appeal of the site.

For the record I have no connection at all with the "immigrant arse-licker" slur cited as example. It clearly breaches item 2 above and probably a number of others, I agree with the decision not to publish.

Editorial comment: I am glad to know that you agree with our policy stated in the editorial comment in response to the previous comment. Still, neither Sheila nor I have any recollection of anything else occurring recently that could conceivably be labelled censorship. Please tell us specifically what you tried to post and when you claim it was censored. - Ed.

nimby (not verified)

Sun, 2011-09-04 10:13

The high court found Immigration Minister Chris Bowen could not declare Malaysia to be a country where people could be sent to be processed as refugees. They ruled that no country could receive asylum seekers from Australia unless it was legally bound by international law or its own domestic law to provide access for asylum seekers to protection pending processing of their applications for refugee status. This is because Malaysia is not a signatory of the United Nations refugee convention. Surely the simple solution is to work out with Malaysia directly to solve the problem. The UN are not our neighbours to dictate our foreign and domestic affairs. The ability of Australia to guarantee the human rights of the 800 asylum seekers sent to Malaysia was in doubt. Australia went into war with NATO, and war cannot guarantee any human rights. There are many countries between Afghanistan and Iraq and Australia. The limiting factors in being accepted in other countries is poverty and overpopulation. Papua-New Guinea it is a party to the refugee convention although it does have significant reservations. Nauru is set to sign the convention. Australia will take all the 4000 processed refugees to come from Malaysia, but might reduce the overall humanitarian intake to fit them in. Nothing has been said, or mentioned, about reducing the source of the majority of our immigration numbers - economic immigration! They are assumed to be part of Australia's ongoing and inevitable Colonial "story" - perpetual population growth that is supposed to keep our economy ticking - and our living standards declining. Compared to other countries, refugees are not the same problem. At the end of 2010 Germany counted 594,300 refugees within its borders. The United States took 71,400 refugees that year, the Canadians 12,100. We accepted just 8500. However, Australia has a massive economic immigration program. Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/gillard-solution-turns-to-dissolu... The more people we share Australia with, the less there is for all - including our indigenous species struggling to survive the onslaught of "developments"!

Matthew Ridgeway (not verified)

Sun, 2011-09-04 06:51

Subject was: I just want.... Please make Subject more descriptive in future. - Ed I just want dog barking to be controlled, that is, stopped at the time of offence. I just want killings by dogs to stop, that is, laws for licenses for dog ownership and accountability, compulsory insurances and criminal charges and gaol terms for killer dog owners. (A killer dog is a domesticated dog that has killed a person or animal and that dog is owned by a person.) I would also like the option of living in a community that is totally pet free, that is no guppies, cats, frogs, birds, lizards dogs, not a single animal that is owned or cared for by a person, as these animals are fixed at an address and can be a problem in the community. Wild, native animals as far as I am concerned are free to roam. It is the pet variety of animal that in my experience that creates most antisocial issues in the community. And why all pets you may ask? Well, let one in, and then the flood gates open for all pets of any kind. I know, the only guarantee to the kind of peace in a community that I would like to live in would need to have a total ban on animals of any kind being kept by people in such a community. I know that there are others in the community that feel as I do and ask their support for a small amount of area for a completely pet free residential area. Pet lovers can have all the pets they want, as long as I have a choice to be able to live in a community where pets are not allowed. This is not about pet hate, it is about the love of peace, and I know people love their pets, but I do not want to be forced to "love" their pets too. I would be happier without those pets around me, in peaceful segregation. Thank you.

Geoffrey Taylor

Sat, 2011-09-03 23:10

Thanks, Vivienne for this timely article.

The outcome of the current political climate which the High Court ruling against The Federal Labor Government's "refugee swap" deal with Malaysia could well be the ousting of the current Labor Federal Government in an early election and the coming to power of a Tony Abbott Government. In some ways it seems like a repeat of events which led to the defeat of the odious Keating 'Labor' Government in 1996 and the election of the even more odious Government of John Howard.

Whilst we rightly have good reason to object to Gillard's Government (and not because of her Government's attempt to find a workable solution to the people smuggling problem), judging by the record of the previous Howard Government in which Abbott was a Minister, an Abbott Government would be far nastier.

John Howard got this country into two immoral wars: Afghanistan and Iraq. These have massively added to the number of refugees in the world and those seeking refugee status in Australia. In large part, Howard owes much of his political survival from 2001 until 2007 to "Refugee Rights" activism. Almost certainly Howard would have been booted out in 2001 for, amongst other things, his attempt to break the Maritime Workers Union in 1998 with mercenary strikebreakers, but the confusion caused by the "Tampa crisis" in addition to the 9/11 false flag terrorist attack saved Howard's political hide.

One of the consequences of Howard's re-election was Australia's participation in 2003 in the illegal invasion of Iraq which had catastrophic consequences on the citizens of Iraq, causing many hundreds of thousands of dead -- over one million according to on estimate.

The massive protest movement of 2003 in Australia against the threatened invasion of Iraq was allowed to fold after the invasion commenced by essentially the same people who lead "refugee rights" groups. Largely as a consequence, Howard was re-elected in 2004 with an absolute Senate majority, even after the WMD pretext for the invasion of Iraq had been shown to be a lie. Australia's participation in the "Coalition of the Willing" against Iraq continued unhindered at least until after Howard was ousted in 2007.

Domestically, Howard introduced his reviled "Work Choices" legislation which even further deprived Australian workers of their collective bargaining rights than they previously had been. Whilst being seen to be tough on boat people he ramped up immigration to record levels further adding to the shortage of domestic housing and causing housing prices to rocket. He also privatise Telstra against the wishes of 66% of the electorate and against commitments given by most elected politicians, Labor and Coalition (e.g. Barnaby Joyce), to their electors.

In 2011 as Foreign Minister Rudd and Julia Gillard were doing their best to support NATO's criminal invasion of Libya, the Australian public's attention was taken away from their immoral conduct by more headlines about people smuggling and the controversy over the "Malaysian solution" discussed above and in this article whilst the refugee rights groups and the far left parties which largely run them were almost completely silent about Libya.

Anonymous (not verified)

Sat, 2011-09-03 15:11

Megalomania is a psycho-pathological condition characterized by delusional fantasies of wealth, power, or omnipotence. 'Megalomania is characterized by an inflated sense of self-esteem and overestimation by persons of their powers and beliefs'. It is also called Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). Grandiose plans etc could also indicate manic depression. Though it is considered healthy to care about your own well-being and have a healthy self-esteem, when someone loves himself to the exclusion of all else and others become objectified to be used only to serve the self, this is no longer considered healthy or normal. NPD is characterized by extremely low self-esteem, which is compensated for by delusions of grandeur and megalomania, a narcissistic neuroses. With our paradigm of free market capitalism, we must have an ever increasing, youthful workforce to replace and support the generation expecting to leave it with decades of life left to enjoy. This is exactly the problem that is being swept under the rug unfortunately. Immigration is seen as the "fix" for an ageing population. If we could avoid the issues of finite resources and limited space along with global climate change, increase disease due to larger population densities we could have higher populations and longer lives. Call it a collective delusion of grandeur if you will. It all keeps coming back to the adage of Einstein that you cannot fix anything with the same thinking that caused the problem in the first place. The collective narcissism of the human race means people want big populations, big power, massive growth and wealth, long lives and expect Nature and finite ecosystems and natural resources to adapt and increase according to demand. It's human megalomania and collective delusion of grandeur and power - but flawed and fatalistic.

Frustrated (not verified)

Sat, 2011-09-03 12:33

Subject was: Media Bias.

James I have read your comments above (September 2nd, 2011) claiming Ben Fordham’s bias in giving persons of particular viewpoint the short shift. I make no judgement on that as I did not listen to the program and thusly am not qualified to do so.

Candobetter.net is often critical of mainstream media bias, being but one of the many reasons I initially took interest in your site.

Though after years of making contributions to this site I have noted a marked inconsistency in editorial standard after butting heads with your co editor Sheila Newman a number of occasions. I now remain convinced Candobetter.net is in reality no better at upholding free speech and fairness of expression than those they often accuse, despite oft claims to the contrary. It is my opinion that Editor Newman has on numerous occasions cited reasons for censorship of my comments I have submitted in good faith to this site, though in perusal of this site it is clearly evident that the same standards are not adhered to by her when it comes to publishing comments of others which are strongly aligned with her own personal viewpoint. Consequently I no longer afford any credibility to Candobetter.net to upholding the aforementioned standards this site purportedly represents. Perhaps your own glass house could do with some maintenance before you continue throwing stones toward others.

Your criticism of Ben Fordham whether perception, or factually based invokes no sympathy from me but I remain in a position of empathy. It is certainly discouraging when you take the time and effort to put forth an opinion you value but are denied opportunity due to opportunist advantage taken by others in control of the forum.

Surely we can all do better.

Editorial comment: The only recent incident that Sheila recalls that could possibly be construed as censorship is when she objected to someone standing for election to public office being labeled, in a submitted article, an "immigrant arse-licker" and asked for that wording to be changed before the article was published. The intending contributor refused and so it was not published.

Only on rare occasions have our editors ever prevented any comment or article from being published.

We would not publish material that has illegal content or material or which is personally abusive.

To protect ourselves, we cannot publish material for which candobeter could be sued under Australia's defamation laws. As well as lowering the tone of candobetter, the description "immigrant arse-licker" could well be in breach of Australia's defamation laws. More than likely candobetter would lose a defamation suit for the use of that term even under Australia's newer laws, which allow truth as a defence.

Other than that, one example and possibly one or two others (as well as spam that we have to constantly remove) candobetter prides itself on never having refused to publish any comment. The reason that we never have felt the need to refuse publication (unlike a good many other supposedly alternative web sites) is that we are completely confident that all of the claims made on candobetter can be shown to be true by evidence and logic and so we have nothing to fear from fair and open debate on these pages. That so few of those of whom candobetter is critical ever even attempt to argue their case on these pages is further confirmation to us of the strength of the evidence and logic behind the claims made here.

This is not to say that we would always allow anyone to publish anything he/she wishes to on this site. Good reasons to refuse publication on this site would include needless verbosity and irrelevance.

However, as Sheila has put to me, if we were to ever refuse publication on those grounds, we would still allow the intending contributor to link with a URL from any relevant page on this site of his/her choosing back to his/her own article together with some descriptive text. (This conforms to a proposed Truthseeker's Code of Conduct as described here.)

For example, if the person who wrote that article were to have published that article, referred to above, elsewhere on the web, he could have posted a comment on this site with a link to that article. (Of course we would also reserve the right to post our own comments next to the link.)

Paris N (not verified)

Sat, 2011-09-03 00:15

After the USA and France, Germany has the most millionaires. Four of them have said they want to pay more tax to help Germany through the debt crisis. (Source: French News 1 September 2011)

admin

Fri, 2011-09-02 17:57

Update 4.15 PM: I managed to talk on Ben Fordham's program, but was given a hearing barely fairer than that given by ABC Local Melbourne Radio's John Faine to Kevin Bracken of the Maritime Union of Australia on 23 Oct 2010.

I have just sent the following e-mail to Ben Fordam (ben [AT] 2gb.com.au):

Dear Ben Fordham,

Of course, I apologise for getting your name wrong and calling you Glen, but I would have thought that that mistake would be understandable on the part of someone who lived inter-state in Melbourne.

I don't see how that honest mistake on my part could have justified my being cut off just as I was about to tell your listeners where to find my public submission made to the National Human Rights Commission in 2009 [here][1] so that they could read it for themselves and form their own judgement. I don't see how the listeners to that program would thank you for having withheld that information from them.

Contrary to your claim that you "treated both sides in the debate equally", you did not.

Those who wanted to put sound arguments based on evidence against the Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory were talked over and cut off as I was. Those who supported the Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory were given a sympathetic hearing. Official Conspiracy Theory arguments which have been demolished time and time again in the past were repeated over and over by you almost as if you think that such arguments had not even been considered before by those who don't accept the Bush Government's explanation of 9/11.

If it had been a fair debate there is no way that you or your Official Conspiracy Theory guest would have been left standing in your viewers' eyes at the end, but of course a debate in which one side is able to talk over, shout down and cut off those with whom they disagree as you did, cannot be considered fair.

Yours sincerely,

James Sinnamon
Melbourne

Any response from Ben Fordham will be posted here.

Further update 5.34 PM: I phoned 02 8514 9500 a second time, basically to ask if Ben Fordham would be replying to my e-mail. The woman who answered me told me that he would try.

I also put to her, in the course of the phone call, some of the substance of my complaint. She gave me the familiar lame excuse that it is hard for Ben to handle with all of his callers when he had ten waiting in the queue.

Before I could respond, I was cut off and left listening to Ben Fordham's program.

In spite of the claimed lengthy queue, it seems that Ben Fordham found himself better able to 'handle' the calls of some, that is those who agreed with his Official 9/.11 Conspiracy Theory views.

Footnotes

1. Please also see article on candobetter My submission to the Human Rights Consultation on National Security of 7 Sep 2009

FourFooted Messiah (not verified)

Fri, 2011-09-02 11:00

That's the current state of affairs in the Arctic. If we don't develop it, we can easily lose it to whomever does. That's been the rule of territoriality since humans still had tails - those who claim territory, defend it adequately, and _make the most of that territory_ are considered the rightful owners of that territory. The story of the Canadian Native is, in fact, instructive for those of us who _built Canada into a nation_. Canadians NEVER had territorial wars with Natives. What did we do, then? We simply swamped them, demographically. The Natives didn't see what was coming until they were literally surrounded by whites. White guilt is suicidal foolishness, and not a valid reason to commit cultural and national suicide by allowing the same to happen to us. And hey, if Natives don't like Whitey, sure, void the treaties you signed and send us back to the UK and France. But I hope you don't mind if we raze the buildings to the ground, and take all our technology with us. After all, it would be wrong to pollute your glorious Pre-Columbian stone age society that you seem anxious to enjoy like your distant ancestors did, with our evil guns and alcohol and central heating and stuff like that.

Mary (not verified)

Fri, 2011-09-02 10:40

This generation is one that is spoiled by gadgets, conveniences, greed and the desperate desire to grow and expand. We are like bacteria confined and manipulated to foolishly grow in a petri dish while the laboratory workers watch them enjoying the moments of growth, but knowing their impending doom when they reach the edges of the dish - and die. The victims merrily keep consuming, relishing in it through their ignorance. The growth frenzy, and scale of environmental and species destruction due to one expanding species as opposed to natural disaster has never happened before on our planet. Except for rodents, there has never been a large species like humans that have had global dominance. It's scary, and our closed Earth's system is being devastated, depleted and overwhelmed. September 7th is endangered species Day - the day the last Tasmanian Tiger died in Hobart, 1936. The extinction and number of endangered species in Australia continues to growth as humans proliferate. We humans are ignorantly and fatalistically driving ourselves into the same predicament as the bacteria - enjoying the moments of growth and superficially reassurances that the planet will expand, but it won't and can't. While we are distracted by such things are recycling, avoiding plastic bags, and pretending to be "green", the monsters of overpopulation, pollution and ecological overshoot will eventually be evident.

end random dog ... (not verified)

Thu, 2011-09-01 09:02

Dogs are considered a commodity for raising profits in Australia. People buy dogs for their appearance and style. The dangerous breeds are for image, a "macho" personality and appearance. They are not suitable for suburban backyards, and for public places. The breeding of dogs is not regulated. Businesses can set up puppy factories, quite legally, while shelters are full and "death row" continues to quietly remove the excess dogs and cats from the market. How we treat companion animals is shameful, but these dangerous breeds need committed owners. Puppies for sale in pet shops means that the new owners have little idea of the breed, their needs, their adult size, and the training needed. Some breeds need high quality ownership and obedience training, and there is no mandatory requirement as such. The whole dog breeding industry needs an overhaul, but those with vested interests have powerful lobby groups. They include breeders, pet food manufacturers, animal "managers", pet shops and some vets.

From Tigerquoll (not verified)

Wed, 2011-08-31 23:11

I'm a taxpayer, and the Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC) is funded from our taxes. Yet, despite ABC promotions about its new iView service, the bloody online service has been inoperable for over a week! Consistently one gets the message: " The server at www.abc.net.au is taking too long to respond." I am about to lodge my tax return, and I want a massive refund, the bastards! I've even tried going to the source of most decent ABC programmes, the BBC, but the BBC p[rohibits access outside teh UK, the bastards! Are we expected to put up with commercial crap with all those torturous insulting Harvey Normous ads? Where's my local member? Tigerquoll Suggan Buggan

Alienated National (not verified)

Wed, 2011-08-31 22:36

Nimby writes: "We are a sovereign nation, and we are free to make our own policies, and decide who and how many people come here." Are we really a sovereign nation? I thought we were a colony.

Tigerquoll

Wed, 2011-08-31 20:42

Tony, thanks for your input. Pragmatically in your case, would you remain in a country that is systemically depressed, economically, socially and culturally, like Iraq or Haiti, just because one's memory of it is positive? Evaluate your personal options. One only has a 40 year adult lifespan of choice. Know when to jump ship. Isn't the premise of globalism, mobility and to shun geographic loyalty? Tigerquoll Suggan Buggan Snowy River Region Victoria 3885 Australia

nimby (not verified)

Wed, 2011-08-31 15:20

In a major upset for the Government, the full bench of the high court has this afternoon found the plan to send 800 asylum seekers to Malaysia be legally flawed. "Asylum seekers who entered Australia at Christmas Island can be taken for processing of their asylum claims,” a statement said. The "welcome mat" has now got larger, thanks to the High Court.

The flow of asylum seekers is very small compared to the massive number of economic immigrants coming to live in Australia each year. However, they are able to grab all the media attention on "immigration" issues, while the elephant in the room - students, "temporary" workers, skilled immigrants, and family reunions - are not only ignored but any discussion is deliberately shunned.

There can be no appeals to the High Court on this decision, however the Government may seek to amend the legislation in the parliament in order to get its plan through.

The ruling is a massive blow for the Gillard government, which had hoped the Malaysian refugee swap would be the deterrent it needed to halt the flow of asylum-seeker boats to Australia.

Australia will still be bound under the deal to accept 4000 extra refugees from Malaysia, while being unable to send 800 asylum-seekers there for processing
.
How many Federal governments continue to muddle around with various "solution" to control asylum seekers, and now this last deal has been over-ridden by the High Court?

Our government, and Julia Gillard, needs to show some leadership. Why are we enslaved to the UN and their outdated 1951 refugee convention? All the detention centres, armed guards, riots, off-shore processing, claims etc. We are a sovereign nation, and we are free to make our own policies, and decide who and how many people come here. Our massive economic immigration program should be declared illegal and discriminatory. Our government only wants the ready-education and well-off to save money on education, and people to buy into property - not the displaced and poor.

keep Melbourne ... (not verified)

Wed, 2011-08-31 13:28

MELBOURNE has been crowned the world's most liveable city, snaring the top spot from former number one Vancouver, in a survey ranking 140 cities around the world. Melbourne's status is a reflection on the rest of the world's cities. We have rising crime, congestion, developments, high-rises, land-clearing and urban expansion choking our access outwards and inwards. If we let these developers and planners have access to more of our suburbs and resources, we will lose the title like Vancouver did. What economists consider the "best" cities is not necessarily how the residents rate it. Economist Intelligence Unit survey editor Jon Copestake said in a media release that Australian cities were so well placed in the survey ranking due to the "low population density and relatively low crime rates''. Really - if these economists have their way, the remnant benefits of living in Melbourne will soon be used to see high population and high crime rates.

James Sinnamon

Wed, 2011-08-31 11:47

This morning, I attempted to 'phone ABC Melbourne Local Radio's Jon Faine to put some views about recycling and Australian politics.

The phone was cut off and I was not able to get back before the 11.00AM news, despite repeated attempts.I kept getting the engaged tone, in spite of Jon Faine and the voices of others on ABC Melbourne Local Radio (774) repeatedly urging their listeners to dial 1300 222 774. ("thirteen hundred, triple two, seven, seven four"). Just possibly this was bad luck on my part, however I am placing my experience on the record here to see whether or not others have had similar experiences.

I was motivated to call by talk of the use of renewable solar and wind energy (which I considered to be addressing only a tiny fraction of the environmental problems now faced by humankind.) That motivation was added to by Jon Faine's announcement that Queensland Premier Anna Bligh, now visiting Melbourne was to appear on Jon Faine's show. She was said to have said that she considered Brisbane the Capital city of Queensland, and not Melbourne, to be the world's most livable city.

I had stood in the 2009 elections as an Independent candidate in order to oppose privatisation and let Queensland electors, whom I knew to be opposed to privatistion, where all candidates, particularly candidates from the major parties, stood on privatisation. I even wrote an Open Letter to Premier Anna Bligh and the State Treasurer Andrew Fraser in order to get a straight answer from them as to whether or not they intended to privatise any more of Queensland's public assets.

Andrew Fraser was the Labor candidate for the seat of Mount Coot-tha, against whom I was standing as an Independent candidate, Both failed to answer my question, but soon after being re-elected announced plans to privatise hundreds of millions of dollars worth of publicly owned assets to the outrage of Queensland residents. Polls showed at times over 80% of Queenslanders and always well over 70% were opposed to privation.

I wanted to raise these and other issues when I phoned 1300 222 774.

A lady called 'Katrina' answered. I got off to a good start when I told Katrina that I thought that Brisbane was the world's most unlivable city until I move to Melbourne. Now I thin that Melbourne is the world's most unlivable city. This seemed to have gotten a small laugh from Katrina. Had I left it at that I think I might have got on the program, but I went on to add that I was disappointed with the reporting of politics where the press presume that voters will only ever consider voting for one or other of the major parties and never for independent candidates. After that the phone went dead and I could not get on.

I intend to try again in coming days but it would be interesting to see if others who also wish to express viewpoints considered by most of the mainstream media as fringe have better luck than I had.

Geoffrey Taylor

Tue, 2011-08-30 00:50

Editorial comment: The allegations that Libyan Loyalists have committed atrocities against unarmed opponents had been addressed in Cynthia McKinney's excellent speech in print republished here with the YouTube broadcast embedded: "In times of war, both sides commit [atrocities] but whatever government forces did pale compared to NATO's savagery and its hired assassins."

The same newsmedia which has been filled with barefaced lies about Libya since at least March this year is now reporting a gruesome discovery of charred bodies of those it claims were murdered by Libyan Loyalists. In the reports I have viewed so, the numbers claimed to have been murdered are 50 and 150. (One other radio news report made the grim and spectacular claim that as many as 50,000 opponents of Government of Muammar Gaddiffi had gone missing, but I have yet to see further news about that claim.)

Although the scale of that crime seems considerably smaller that the totality of crime so far committed against Libya (and vastly smaller than crimes already committed against Iraq, Libya and citizens of the US), it is hard to conceive of circumstances where the killing of so many unarmed opponents of Colonel Gaddaffi on the one occasion would be justified. Just possibly, Loyalist Libyans faced with their country about to by over-run and ruled by NATO and its flunkys, after having endured from them, over six months of unprovoked aerial and naval bombardment and terrorism, in desperation killed known supporters of the TNC/NATO whilst they were unarmed.

Whatever the truth behind these claims it should be brought into the open. Let's hope that the writers at Global Research will soon bring more light onto this issue.

Accusations that Gaddaffi was close to previous US Government engaged in criminal wars against Afghanistan, Iraq

One other story which seems to contradict the recent highly favourable impression I have gained of Muammar Gaddafi is the Global Research story WikiLeaks cables expose Washington’s close ties to Gaddafi. Another is claims of Muammar Gaddaffii's apparent fondness for the US Secretary of State under the criminal former US President George W Bush, Condoleezza Rice who notoriously lied about the 9/11 false flag terrorist attack.


Further editorial comment: The story alleging Gaddaffi's infatuation with liar and former US Head of State Condoleezza Rice attracted comments, nearly all of which were, at best, ill-informed, but one, near the end, which is of value, follows:

Since 9/11 the US and NATO have set very dangerous precedents. By encouraging criminal warfare in which private residences are bombed and individuals hunted down and the destruction of civilian infrastructure of weaker enemies.This is against all international law on warfare, the Red Cross code and many international standards. Should we then if this same "warfare" is turned against the US now feel moral outrage? What the US and NATO does is the same as the public necklacing of alleged perpetrators. Those who do the necklacing bypass civilised moral standards, and institutions of law. That is why Gaddafi now enjoys my moral esteem and the western powers have difinitively portrayed themselves as criminals, looters, murderers and twisters of the truth, purveyors of violence. This kind of propaganda is calculated to deflect our moral scrutiny of what NATO and the US have done in Libya: a public lynching of a country.

Desalination madness (not verified)

Mon, 2011-08-29 17:15

Documents from the Victorian Environment Protection Authority published in August 2008 show that the boron level in water from the proposed Wonthaggi desalination plant would be at least two times the level specified in the contract between the state government and the international consortium AquaSure. It could kill the deadly contract. According to the contract, desalinated water with boron levels greater than 0.5 milligrams per litre will attract penalties, and that with boron levels in excess of 1 milligram per litre the plant will have to cease operations Read more: Desalination plant's quality hard to swallow of 28 August by Kenneth Davidson at http://www.watoday.com.au/opinion/politics/desalination-plants-quality-h.... AquaSure must meet its contract to build a plant with the capacity to produce 200 gigalitres of water with only 0.5 milligrams per litre of boron. If it can't, the state government should be legally entitled to break the contract and avoid the $24 billion contractual obligation. The availability of water, a prime basic human need, should be set the tipping point for our population growth limits. Artificially supplying water means great expense, denying other areas of water, and risks communities. The desal plant was based on greed, and a way of supplying a water solution to swelling population numbers. It's the elephant in the room - Brumby's drive to increase our economy through population growth is the root cause of this mess. The result of this mess is Brumby - and we have the costs of water set to rise, increase in greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption, polluted water and unknown effects on the marine ecosystems. It's about being "sustainable" - a word often thrown about but never taken seriously. Boron is a cumulative toxin. The desalination plant may not be able to meet these objectives. Our unrealistic population growth rate is outstripping natural resources. Droughts could happen again, and other disasters too. With our rampant population growth, the public were encouraged to be "sustainable" by using less water and installing tanks, but with a population growth rate of 2% per year, our growth will jeopardize a basic - water that we shouldn't need to pay luxury prices for. It's all about appeasing the real estate investors, and consumers. It's time governments had "sustainable" policies too. Vote: Stable Population Party!

Geoffrey Taylor

Mon, 2011-08-29 02:01

Editorial comment: The comment below largely repeats what is already included in the article, but, thanks, all the same Geoffrey. I can understand how you would have been so moved to draw the attention of others to Glen Ford's words, that you may have forgotten to fully read the article you were commenting on before you republished Glen Ford's words. - Ed

An astoundingly well-written and touching piece is a transcript of a talk by a black American radio journalist Glen Ford, The Libyan Soldier: The True Heroes of NATO’s War. It is published on Global Research.

Glen Ford rightly praises the heroism of ordinary Libyan soldiers, who stood their ground for seven months against the horrendous firepower of NATO's deadly sky-born weapons with the Spanish Republican Loyalist soldiers who fought against General Franco's Fascist uprising in 1936 and almost succeeded in extinguishing it. They fought on the ground, constantly spied upon by aircraft and satellites and blasted and shot at by bombers, drones and helicopters they could not hope to shoot down.

The so-called rebels won not a single battle, except as walk-ons to a Euro-American military production. They are little more than extras for imperial theater, a mob that travelled to battle under the protective umbrella of American full spectrum dominance of the air. They advanced along roads already littered with the charcoal-blackened bodies of far better men, who died challenging Empire.

Sheila Newman

Mon, 2011-08-29 00:39

Hi Greg, I feel that I should acknowledge on behalf of Admin the borrowing of your elegant term for the media, "the public messaging system" here. Thanks for your comment.
Tony Boys's picture

Tony Boys

Sun, 2011-08-28 18:55

Right! We're angry and we want to take back the power from those who seemingly do not know what it's for and who are abusing it! I'm in Japan. It's the same story. Tomorrow (Aug 29th) we will have a new PM here and it is likely to be Banri Kaieda. Despite a newspaper poll showing 85% of the population in favour of a nuclear phase-out, Mr Kaieda is one of the most pro-nuke politicians in the Japan Democratic Party. I'm now in Sendai City, north Japan, since about noon today. There are anti-nuke activists (about 5 of them) handing out leaflets and paper fans in the busiest part of the shopping mall. Try talking to them. They're angry about politicians looking the other way and about the new taxes that will be imposed soon, about TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership), and about what will happen to Japan and the yen when the US dollar goes into meltdown. Lots of Sunday afternoon shoppers who do not look angry at all. I hope it will all stay that way, but by the end of the year or the early part of next year there may be many more angry people in Japan too. There's political/social unrest and economic catastrophe just around the corner. Since the politicians are not going to change and there is no effective opposition I don't see anyway out of it. Do we have no wisdom? Are we just apes living in an overcrowded ape park?? How much more misery do we need before people, all of them - or at least a critical mass of them, wake up?

End Jumps racing (not verified)

Sun, 2011-08-28 17:34

Six-year-old jumps racehorse Fergus McIver became the fourth horse to die in a jumps race this season in Victoria when he crashed at the last obstacle in the Houlahan Hurdle at Sandown. Activists were there at Sandown at the time, protesting.

Racing Victoria Limited (RVL) announced in November 2009 it would stop jumps racing because of a rising incidence of falls and fatalities, despite changes made to improve the safety of the sport. However, the "safety" of the "sport" are misnomers! Horses are simply tools, or throw-away items in an industry that cares not for animals but uses them for gambling profits.
Deputy Premier Peter Ryan said there would be a review of jumps racing after two years. How many more fine-tuned racehorses must graphically die in the meantime before we see some leadership from the Racing Minister, Denis Napthine (denis.napthine [AT] parliament.vic.gov.au, ph 03 9095 4170)?

Geoffrey Taylor

Sun, 2011-08-28 08:17

This BrassCheck TV broadcast shows a crowd of Indians waving Indian flags presented by BBC World News as crowds of Libyans celebrating the recent 'liberation' of Tripoli. If this was an isolated incident it would be just possible to put it down to a stupid mistake behind the scenes, however as the BBC's coverage since the start of the conflict over seven months a go has been a tissue of lies, designed to demonise the Libyan Government and conceal the unpalatable truth about the TNC 'rebels', it was far more likely to be the result of a rush by the BBC to present footage of Libyans celebrating the conquest of Tripoli by the TNC where none existed. Another piece of film footage (which I can't find now) showing crowds celebrating the 'liberation' of Tripoli has been shown to be clearly a place other than Green Square in Tripoli and therefore must have been staged.

Real footage of crowds showing at least hundreds of thousands of Libyans and at one demonstration over a million Libyans, demonstrating in support of Muammar Gaddafi has been systemeticaly kept from the eyes of viewers of the BBC and the other mainstream newsmedia. One of many examples of films of huge pro-Gaddafi rallies suppressed by the mainstream (and most of the 'left') newsmedia is the YouTube Broadcast HUGE PRO GADDAFI RALLY in Tripoli - Raw Footage at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWzNhk3zv4U .

quark

Sat, 2011-08-27 17:38

Kelvin Thomson's "witches hats" imagery illustrates just what happens when governments see their realm through the prism of pleasing self interested lobbyists especially those representing Big Business. As soon as changes are indicated to accommodate more people there is an inconvenience and disadvantage to the public especially if changes are on a large scale. People like change if they see an advantage to themselves but not if the change involves a loss for them. Australians have been told via the main media for a couple of decades that they have to give up the 1/4 acre block. Somehow, whoever is telling them this seems to have got the SPIN right because the public seem to have accepted this loss. People are, however not enjoying increasingly crowded public transport perhaps because they have not been primed for this. Nobody enjoys traffic congestion nor do they enjoy parking restrictions and parking fines- all consequences of increases in population and population density. If they were aware of it they would not be pleased about the steady decline of important aspects of the environment and the loss of agricultural land as it goes under more and more housing. The Victorian Labor government most likely lost the election at the end of last year as a consequence of population growth. The issues which caused friction and discontent were the Wonthaggi Desalination Plant , the North South Pipeline- taking water from the north of the state to the bloated and thirsty city of Melbourne, then there was the clearways issue - where the state government in its efforts to set free traffic gridlock from the constantly increasing number of cars proposed that certain thoroughfares should have extended periods where no parking was allowed on the side of the road in the direction of commuting traffic. This caused huge concern to those with (mainly small) businesses along these road routes. It seemed that the present population was sacrificing in so many ways for an ever growing population which Victoria really did not have to have at all! Unfortunately, the change of government in November 2010 gave the state no relief from the impositions of this process. The present government may avoid one "witches hat" but they will hit another. My guess is that the same number of "witches hats" will fall over no matter which party is in power unless population growth slows. This is of course no consolation to the voters as all they see- saw between powers for whom the best interests of the majority are not a priority

Greg (not verified)

Sat, 2011-08-27 05:06

The fundamental concern within the behavior of our privatised, autocratic mass media is its power to dominantly influence the social conversation and, concomitantly, its conscious intent to use this power to misinform and misdirect the social conversation toward belief and action that benefits undemocratic, narrowly beneficial agendas. This is not a free press. It is a private propaganda machine masquerading as a free press. Two primary aspects within it can and should be addressed. 'News' reporting must be subjected to sound standards regarding the reliable inclusion of all reasonably available fact, and balance of fact, pertinent to the matter being reported. Any entity has the right to publish opinion, satire and rhetoric constructed upon a select range of facts, but these forms should not be presented as or within 'News' reporting. When they are, readers should have effective recourse to compensation for the product fraud being broadly committed upon them. We do not tolerate being supplied with rat poison when purchasing peanuts. Why tolerate twisted logic based upon consciously edited half-truths when we purchase news reporting. The impact of this flawed product is not limited to just the discomfort of its consumption. It also distorts and disables the conversations we must then engage with and suffer throughout the day. Clear, measurable and un-contentious standards exist for objective journalism. Why not demand that commercial news reporting maintain such standards? Publishers can go for broke within opinion and magazine sections, however news reporting has a public interest obligation that transcends the proprietor's sole rights. Without primary access to a sound body of the basic available facts of a matter, how can there be any meaningful social conversation and thence any democratically useful public opinion? The other factor is distribution and location of media ownership. Ideally communities of interest should own their own newspapers. A lot of obstacles impede this, not least the yawning complacency and apathy of a consumer mentality that has been steadily geared toward immediate convenience over the pursuit of genuine satisfaction. Getting people to subscribe to their own long term interests is not easy. However that doesn't make the goal any less of an imperative. Some further thought on this matter on Geoff Davies' web site at: http://www.geoffdavies.com/Commentaries/Media.html

End logging at ... (not verified)

Fri, 2011-08-26 18:30

All logging has been halted at Sylvia Creek until 19th September. See Sylvia Creek Court Injunction The portaloo was transported out of Gun Barrel at 10:30am and the gates were thrown open at 3:00pm. People still need to visit in case logging takes place without surveys. The vigil hasn't ended yet!

Cheshire Cat (not verified)

Fri, 2011-08-26 18:14

I agree that Euro zone decision makers have become transfixed in 'Eurothink' but I disagree with your analysis.

1) Europe's current debt crisis has NOT been blatantly caused by financially reckless governments. One could argue that these governments have been financial recklessly borrowing for decades prior to joining. It takes two to trade. To create the present situation we need to add a single currency PLUS reckless lenders to feed the reckless borrower, and Euro institutions that allow and mismanaged these trades. The Euro is badly designed and its flaws are exploited (but by who?)

2) The so-called rescue packages don't seem to be saving any particular country but are designed to save and protect banks - 'too big to fail' . I can't see any one in Greece or Germany benefiting from these packages - so who wins? Moral hazard can be applied to the lender as well as the borrower.

3) Modern Money is formed by debt -creation. Sovereign debt (what our children have to pay / what our children will received) becomes a serious problem when (1) there is no limit on debt creation (a lack of an effective central bank) and (2) the distribution of that debt changes (in the Euro zone fuelled by the need to finance trading imbalances).

4) Government have the democratic right to commit their people to external debts if they are transparent and accountable. Here we could use the idea of odious debts (http://journal.probeinternational.org/odious-debts/). Again it takes two to make a corrupt deal - briber and the bribe-taking.

5) The present set of global austerity measures are suitable candidates for 'groupthink'. Deflation benefits creditors rather than borrowers; likewise inflation benefits debtors rather than creditors. So I would argue that the current round of austerity measures are not interest of German or Greek voters. 'Groupthink' is to think inflation is the main danger during a deflation period.

I agree with some of your conclusions but arrive there from a different direction - see my blog - http://redesigning-the-foot.blogspot.com .

Pepe (not verified)

Fri, 2011-08-26 14:06

Subject was:

Chávez - war about oil

Chávez accused Western powers of riding roughshod over international laws by supporting the rebels in their revolt against Gaddafi.

He likened it to a "caveman era.”

Venezuela's leader spoke after rebels overran Gaddafi's compound in Tripoli in what appeared to be the end of his 42-year rule.

“We only recognize one government, the one led by Muammar Gaddafi,” Chávez said to applause as he presided over a cabinet meeting broadcast live on state TV.

The 57-year-old former soldier once again accused Western powers of fueling the conflict to steal Libya's oil.

He accused the United States of arranging the war. “They provided the arms, the mercenaries. They better not attempt to apply the Libyan formula to Venezuela or we'll have to show them our power.”

Both Chávez and Gaddafi are military men who forged a friendship during half a dozen encounters in the past decade. They have enjoyed a long-standing alliance based on left-wing economic ideas, antagonistic relations with the United States, and their countries' membership in OPEC.

Some media reports have suggested Gaddafi could seek asylum in Venezuela but Chávez has made no reference to that.

Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi has had Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez as his ally and fan, who regretted the attacks of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the United States on Libya. He even volunteered to join a diplomatic effort in order to find a peaceful solution for, in his words, a "civil war" in Libya.

As it stands now, Colonel Gaddafi faces prosecution by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for crimes against humanity.

On Wednesday, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez denounced the attack against his country's embassy in Libya, calling it a " regrettable" incident. Chavez urged the armed groups to obey international law, and demanded respect for his country's ambassador and embassy staff in Libya.

Asked about such efforts to hunt for Gaddafi, Chavez said they reflect a "madness let loose." "What the Yankee empire and the European powers ... want is Libya's oil," Chavez said.

"They've destroyed a country and they continue destroying it," Chavez said. "How many Libyan children have died?"

nimby (not verified)

Fri, 2011-08-26 13:23

Population from 2000 to 2005 grew by 38.052 million in Latin America. There are almost three times as many Africans alive today (767 million) as there were in 1960. Asia, by far the most populous region, has more than doubled in size (to over 3.6 billion), as has Latin America and the Caribbean. This staggering population growth is likely to have serious political, economic, social, strategic, and other implications. Too rapid population growth now is viewed widely as aggravating the problems of development and putting severe strains on services and facilities. Strong opposition from the church and the military has caused a lack of family planning in Latin America. Food production in most of Latin America has not kept pace with population growth. Economic dilemmas facing Latin America include widespread poverty, the world's highest per capita debt, unemployment and massive underemployment. It is clear that in Latin America most of the generation of university-trained young people are Marxists. A close relationship exists between unchecked population growth, spiraling socioeconomic problems, and the potential for political breakdown, destabilization, and internal unrest in Latin America. High population density and growth rates can also accentuate the risk of conflict by heightening competition for physical and social resources. Young, unemployed populations can be politically volatile and prone to violence, placing less trust in traditional patterns of authority. We have witnesses this in the Middle East and in the UK riots. Social disorder is contagious. The more we see it happening elsewhere the more it becomes imaginable where one lives. The rise in the population from the current 7 billion to 11 billion by the middle of the 21st century, and the limited energy, water, and food resources will be a major source of global socio-political instability. Nothing in a closed planetary system can sustain perpetual growth. Tensions will inevitably rise when there is unemployment and scarcity of space and high prices for goods and services. Vote for Stable Population Party so that Australia leads the way into the 21st century, and can continue to export much needed food to the Middle East - rather than consuming it all here because of a 'big Australia' and a sell-off of land to foreign countries.

francis (not verified)

Fri, 2011-08-26 11:28

Kelvin Thomson stands out for his integrity, and clear statements and needle-sharp mind. He hasn't descended into the typical mainstream propaganda of the "growth is good" and pursuing population growth under the "economic growth" banner. Few would deny people the ability to buy affordable housing, and even the need for economic growth. There is no stability with our level of ongoing population growth, something that is assumed as inevitable and something that we must address. We have planning ministers giving favours to developers, due to the corruption of political donations. The same is for big businesses and the livestock industries. They have a monopoly on governments due to their economic and political power. We have a form of political patronage that supports the growth agenda. The Brumby government's excessive population push made him force onto the people of Victoria the irrational and knee-jerk plans for the desalination plant, the growth of the urban boundary, and the stress on housing that displaced many people from home ownership. There is little difference with the Baillieu government. The carbon tax has tested the Gillard government's accountability and popularity. While the carbon tax policy has credits, while there are so many inconsistencies, mainly to do with population growth, it will be hard to get the public support while costs of living are already climbing, and the carbon tax will add to the cost of power, and manufactured goods. Kelvin Thomson is an example of what leadership should be about - representing his constituents rather than pander to the interests of big businesses and global market forces. He actually is logical and likeable for his sincerity.

Sheila Newman

Thu, 2011-08-25 22:20

We welcome these forest posts. Please use candobetter to build a history of these cases and our battles to save our trees. The volunteer writers and reporters and editors cannot do everything so, yes, please take initiative here.Thanks.

Anonymous (not verified)

Thu, 2011-08-25 21:37

Logging will be temporarily halted in a Victorian forest said to house endangered possums under a court order. MyEnvironment applied to the Victorian Supreme Court for an urgent injunction to stop VicForests logging trees in the Sylvia Creek Forest near Toolangi. In addition to the two remaining tree-sitters from yesterday, another was put in place overnight to protect the area that was being logged yesterday. Nevertheless the large group of community members who were standing by could hear chainsaws in the coupe this morning, though no falling trees. A barrister for the group, Kristen Walker, told the court the area provided a habitat for the endangered Leadbeater's Possum. http://interceder.net/topic/VicForests

BeattyK (not verified)

Thu, 2011-08-25 12:46

Vivienne: so you sent an actual letter to the Minister, Hon. Burke? Thanks for putting a copy of it on here, too. Can you believe that there exists an agency called VicForestry, one that's exactly the logging branch of the Victorian State Government?? So our state government (is meant to) manage our Parks in the form of Parks Victoria - as well as illegally log the leadbeater's habitat and trees in a non-N.P forest? I hope you might hear something from Hon. Burke. So he should respond. Seriously!!

Geoffrey Taylor

Thu, 2011-08-25 11:26

An article of Time magazine Bye-Bye, Gaddafi: How Italy Will Profit from the New Libyan Regime brazenly reveals what the war against Libyan people by the NATO Afrika Korps was really about: an attempt by Libya's former Italian colonisers togother with other Europen colonisers of Africa -- The UK France, and Germany -- to resume its past theft of Libyan wealth that was ended by the end of Italian colonialism and well and truly ended by Gaddafy in 1973

nimby

Thu, 2011-08-25 09:27

Dear Mr Burke

I respect and support your stance against our Victorian government for allowing livestock to use our Alpine National parks. There are further breaches happening by our Liberal-National State government.

They are illegally logging in Sylvia Creek Toolangi in the Central Highlands. This is for woodchipping, mainly for Reflex paper.

Leadbeater's Possums are our State's native symbol. However, their numbers are dropping. Those at Toolangi were fortunate to survive Black Saturday, but they are under threat from VicForests - logging in an area they are supposed to be. There is only a reported 1000 left.

They have failed to make the necessary surveys and there is even reports that the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act is to be watered down to ignore endangered species - for more logging. Protesters have been arrested, and a legal suit is being sent to the Supreme court to stop the logging, but it is continuing.

This is an urgent situation. Logging is also threatening koala numbers in the Strzelecki ranges. Ranges in South Gippsland are being replaced by shining gums in plantation areas after mountain ash harvest.

Please exercise our common-sense and duty as a Federal Minister of the Environment to stop this vandalism. I have emailed Ted Baillieu, but it makes no difference.

The EPBC act should enforce the protection of our endangered animals, and while we have an obligation to cut our carbon emissions, we need more than a carbon tax to do so. These forests are some of the most carbon dense in the world!

All this is happening for a few dollars - myopia at its worse! Please take action as a Federal Environment Minister.

Thank you
Vivienne Ortega
Victoria

Editorial comment: Thank you, Vivienne, for having posted a copy of your letter Tony Burke to candobetter. Please feel more than welcome to also post here any responses from Tony Burke (or please let us know if he fails to repond). - Ed

Sheila Newman

Thu, 2011-08-25 05:01

Thanks for this article, Geoffrey. I hope very much that it will attract some thoughtful comment and somehow contribute to reversing the scary tide of manufactured opinion. Historic negotiator and innovator, Gaddafi started OPEC, the world organisation that led the oil-producing Arab world out of colonial oppression, into independence and the capacity to negotiate fair prices on the world stage. To this day we rely on OPEC for world oil-pricing. As the unreasonable economic demands of the west have increased to service unwise population and economic growth in the face of projected oil decline, the west has renewed its campaign to dominate oil supplies at all costs, by removing Arab self-government by any means. It seems that the aim is to replace effective leaders it with puppet fundamentalists. Now, added to a shameful list which includes propaganda to justify war against Iraq, Afghanistan, and interference in Bahrain, World powers and their corporate newsmedia seem to misrepresent and shamefully prosecute a real hero. Gaddafi was no self-obsessed Islamic fundamentalist. He employed female guards and, as your film also shows, he worked to benefit the poor. A few weeks ago his daughter, a lawyer in Tripoli, came out to defend him articulately and movingly on the French news. Only quite recently his hand was shaken by Tony Blair, by US diplomats, by Sarkosi and by Berlusconi. In hindsight, that was their privilege and and now it is their shame to share in the pretence that this man is a monster. Where is the evidence? I note that the "Rebels" have been reported as likely to favour NATO states and to discriminate against those states which have been less keen to condemn Gaddafi. I also noticed, in the Financial Review (24 August 2011, p.15, "Rebel team positive but doubts linger") that the rebels sound like a grab-bag of disparate figures and it looks to me as if they are being set up by the corporate makers and fakers of world opinion to be 'managed' by foreign forces, like Iraq, Bahrain and so many other once-proudly independent oil producing nations at the beginning of OPEC. (If I have made some errors of fact, please write in and let me know. I have a lot to learn about Libya, but I do know a thing or two about oil economics history.) Sheila Newman, population and energy sociologist, Editor/Author of The Final Energy Crisis, Pluto Press, UK, 2008.

Geoffrey Taylor

Mon, 2011-08-22 22:53

The latest news from Libya reported by the ABC is that the Government of Muammar Ghaddaffi has lost control of 95% of Tripoli. And supporters of the Transitional National Council are now celebrating in Tripoli's "Green Square" which they have renamed "Martyr's Square". It is now hard to envision supporters of the Government of Muammar Ghadaffi being able to now regain the upper hand and win the civil war.

For more than six months the Libyans have endured naval and aerial bombardments, attacks by terrorists armed and supplied by NATO, theft of their country's resources and finances, diplomatic isolation and the cessation of overseas trade. A massive and sudden escalation last night of that war by NATO finally broke the Libyan people.

Why a number of those opposing the NATO war against Libya, including Global Research writers Thierry Meyssan, Joost van der Heuvel, and in Tripoli, political analyst Mahdi Nazemroaya and reporter Lizzie Phelan had interpreted events of only yesterday as a rout of the Libyan rebels from which would follow their elimination and the survival of the government of Muammar Ghaddafi is not clear. Possibly some answers my be found in the following Global Research articles: BREAKING NEWS. VIDEO. "Massive Atrocious Criminal Bombings" by NATO of 22 August by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya NATO SLAUGHTER IN TRIPOLI: "Operation Mermaid Dawn" Signals Assault by Rebels' Al Qaeda Death Squads of 22 August by Thierry Meyssan, VIDEO: NATO Attacks in Tripoli Threaten Lives of Journalists of 21 August by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, NATO Attacks in Tripoli Threaten Lives of Journalists of 21 August.

Evidence of participation by Western 'advisers'

From NATO-Backed Forces Move into Tripoli of 22 August in Global Research:

“The overwhelming game-changer in the war has been international support for the rebels,” the Independent wrote Saturday. The newspaper described the scene in Zintan, southwest of Tripoli, a key center of the “rebels,” where their reporter encountered “a group of Western men in unmarked combat clothing, watchful, carrying guns. They were shy to speak to me and would not say who they were. According to rebel fighters, the current success in the field has been due to the planning carried out by these ‘advisers.’”

A second report in the Independent, published Sunday, declared: “The regime forces, after being pulverised for months by NATO, do not appear to have the capabilities to break through the rebels and re-establish a lifeline to the outside world. The rebels are still pretty inept, but they are receiving training and considerable assistance from Western former forces contractors, who are now planning and accompanying their missions.”

Workers' Liberty, a 'socialist' supporter of the war against Libya

Workers' Liberty, which supported the six month NATO war against Libya, had seemingly lost its voice in regard to Libya for quite a few months. For many hours after the reported overthrow of Gaddafi, Workers' Liberty maintained its deafening silence. Finally, some time before 11.30PM +10 they posted the story with the ludicrous title Victory to the working class of Libya!. This story makes no mention of the massive escalation of the NATO aerial bombardment last night nor of the landing of thousands of 'rebel' fighters on the beaches of Tripoli by NATO warships. If it were not for the fact that this is a web-site that poses as a socialist organisation opposed to war and US and UK imperialism, the deceit of this web-site could be judged no worse than that of the Murdoch newsmedia so indignantly denounced by Workers' Liberty.

In fact, Workers' Liberty is even more sinister and more deceitful than the Murdoch Press. Almost certainly the influnece that this organisation and other phony socialist organisations were able to wield in British politics prevented an anti-war movement that would have stopped the UK from bombing Libya from emerging.

nimby (not verified)

Mon, 2011-08-22 09:54

Prominent business and union leaders have endorsed a new strategy on asylum seekers that would have mandatory detention phased out within two years and Australia's intake of refugees significantly increased over five years.

Read more: Plea for asylum policy rethink in the Age of 22 August 2011 bu Michael Gordon.

Predictably, Heather Ridout and Janet Holmes a Court, along with ACTU chief are among more than 30 well-known Australians to back the strategy. More people will ensure the "big Australia" policy heads towards reality.

After the refugee swap with Malaysia, there are doubts about whether Kuala Lumpur is capable of honouring its commitment under the deal to uphold the human rights of the asylum seekers returned.

A spokesman for the United Nations High Commissioner argued that until Australia can overcome its "collective paranoia" about boat arrivals, it will be difficult to achieve sensible decision-making.

He says that Australia is the only nation with mandatory detention, yet "we see far fewer asylum arrivals than other countries and host far fewer of the world's refugees". Maybe that's because we are the driest continent, and the country with the most un affordable housing, climate change threats, irregular water supplies, and rising poverty. It our environment that supports our survival and our "carrying capacity", not economics or government policy.

The obvious way to solve the asylum seeker issue is to dis entangle ourselves as a nation from the UN's 1951 refugee convention. We shouldn't be directed by the UN. We should uphold our sovereignty and make our own decisions on how we deal with refugees. Our immigration program is completely discriminatory and biased towards economic immigrants - mainly students and the well-off to buy into our property market.

People are scared of asylum seekers as they fear their numbers will push us closer a "big Australia". However, this is not the case. We are heading there anyway, not because of refugees but because of our government's policy. Humanitarian intake is only about 14,000 per year, yet overall it is 185,000. The media focus is cleverly on a "solution" for the asylum seekers, but it's pathetically easy to live in Australia if you are young and willing to pay hefty education fees. Only the well-off can get here without political or media attention.

Geoffrey Taylor

Mon, 2011-08-22 08:54

Only last night a report on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) news was confidently predicting the end of the embattled Government of Muamar Ghadaffii. within about a day. Almost immediately afterwards, I was to learn from Global Research, that in fact, the 'rebels' had been routed near Tripoli. The recent set-backs of the NATO-propped Libyan 'Transitional National Council' had been deliberately concealed from the public by political leaders and their media fearing the consequences of their intended victims' survival of over six months of aerial and naval bombardment, a sustained ground war by terrorists funded and supplied by NATO countries and the illegal seizure of funds and assets belong to the Libyan people - prosecutions the International Criminal Court in Belgium of the individual leaders who have conducted that criminal campaign - Sarkozy, Cemeron, US President of State Hillary Clinton and US President Barack Obama, the head of NATO Anders Rasmussen. Today, the Reuters story Analysis: Libya rebels seek to avoid Tripoli battle claimed that "gauging the loyalty of Tripoli's population is far from easy." It was only "far from easy" for those in the past kept ignorant, by the likes of Reuters, of news of daily demonstration of at least hundreds of thousands, showing the Libyan peoples' overwhelming support for their Government standing up to the US and NATO . These massive demonstrations were acknowledged in the following sentence, which still attempted to downplay that support: "Gaddafi loyalists have put on many marches and demonstrations of loyalty in recent months," It is not only the mainstream western newsmedia who have attempted to deceive the public about Libya over recent months, but also some of the supposed far-left 'socialist' newsmedia. At best, they have said very little or even maintained total silence. However one publication, the UK Workers' Liberty actually came out in support of the bombing of Libya. Note: Rupert Murdoch's Australian, which has shamelessly peddled NATO's lies, at least since NATO imposed a suppose "no-fly zone" over Libya on 18 March, has nevertheless, included in its story More than six months of conflict in Libya of 22 August, a useful chronology of the conflict.

nimby (not verified)

Sun, 2011-08-21 09:09

A leading Japanese recruiter of teachers from Australia is placing recruits closer to leaky nuclear reactors than recommended by Canberra's radiation safety agency. It maintains no teacher will be placed in an area the Japanese Government deems "unsafe". A magnitude 6.8 quake jolted Japan off Fukushima, tsunami advisory 19 Aug 2011. A 50 cm tsunami advisory was issued for the coast of Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures. No damage or injuries have been reported, and the tsunami advisory was lifted after no waves were sighted. The quake was strongly felt in Fukushima and Miyagi prefectures, causing the Shinkansen bullet train in the region to suspend service and expressways to be closed. Rice, still a significant staple, has not been planted in many areas. Others face stringent tests and potentially harmful shipping bans after radioactive cesium was found in rice straw. Relations between the United States and Japan, already strained over the delayed relocation of an American military base on Okinawa, received no help this week when a retired U.S. envoy publicly criticized Tokyo's initial response in March to the nation's nuclear crisis. U.S. officials worried about the lack of leadership shown by Prime Minister Naoto Kan's government after the March 11 earthquake and tsunami led to partial reactor meltdowns at the coastal plant. Japan has approved the full resumption of the commercial operations of an atomic reactor for the first time since the March 11 earthquake and tsunami set off the Fukushima nuclear disaster. The Japanese economy is chronically stagnant and has been further threatened by the energy shortages. An overwhelming number of Japanese, for years ambivalent about nuclear power, are now calling for the country’s remaining reactors to be shut down. Citizens, anti-nuclear groups, and government officials gathered recently in Hiroshima and Nagasaki to push for renewable energy sources and nuclear non-proliferation.

James Sinnamon

Sun, 2011-08-21 01:49

I just posted this comment to GetUp suggestion for the ABC to return to its Charter and it was not posted as far as as I was able to tell. So the need for me to post it here and not let it go to waste.- JS

If you want to see what abysmal service the ABC provides see how they failed to even to act upon my request that they find out what all the candidates' intentions were in regard to privatisation prior to the 2009 Queensland elections please look hereat 6 . Had they done so, either the Labor Government would have been made to promise not to sell off any assets or they would have been voted out, but YOUR ABC did neither and they gave me, the one candidate campaigning against privatisation in the 2009 elections almost no air-time.

After Bligh got back into power, she announced her plans to sell off huge amounts of publicly owned assets, again the wishes of more than 80% of Qld electors according to some opinion polls.

This is not only a good reason to sack Bligh and every labor member from Parliament and from ever again holding any job paid for with taxpayers' funds it is also a good reason for Direct Democracy.

Could you consider supporting my proposal for Direct Democracy at tinyurl.com/3nmwwjq ? I think if Direct Democracy were law, we would stand a much greater chance of having great suggestions such as this adopted as law.

Please also see http://candobetter.net/DirectDemocracy.

Bandicoot

Sat, 2011-08-20 13:46

Some contend that recognition of Aboriginal customary law as part of Australian legislation entitles other cultures to similar privileges. However, Aboriginal communities and their laws predated British colonisation and mass immigration, and they have a primary right in some cases to enforce their own justice. Islam is an introduced culture, and the default result of immigration, not something organically belonging to Australia or our heritage. As the host country we are entitled to demand adherence to our legal system without a parallel conflicting one. Sharia laws are especially used to over-ride divorce laws, and discriminate against women who are denied the same rights. The introduction of hybrid laws or sharia arbitration for family or criminal matters could transgress our laws and mean mean constant revision and stress on our existing system. Their laws are based on theocracy, not democracy. Laws from 7th-century Arabia may not be applicable in the 21st.

Pages

Click to read all comments.