(We) can do better

Today, Wednesday 3 October, Dr Joe Toscano and Dr Jean Ely launched a colourful campaign against a backdrop of Spring flowers outside Melbourne Town Hall. (Video-link below) They made the point that the other 8 candidates campaign as if Melbourne were a business proposition and neglect the 40 per cent of votes that come from non-business people in a uniquely skewed electoral system where some businesses get two or three votes. This vast electorate includes Carlton, North Carlton, Flemington, Kensington, South Melbourne, East Melbourne, Docklands, Parts of South Yarra and West Melbourne. Most public housing is located there but there are many homeless. There are a lot of children but public schools are rare.

Taking the public seriously

Dr Joseph Toscano began the launch by stating that this is a serious campaign for the Lord Mayor Election and the theme is, "Putting Public First."

He said that other candidates talk about running Melbourne as a business, but Melbourne is a community. It is a community of over 200,000 people, with 102,000 on the electoral role. It includes the CBD, Carlton, North Carlton, Flemington, Kensington, South Melbourne, East Melbourne, Docklands, Parts of South Yarra and West Melbourne.

The election should not be about running a business. It should be an election about people, about cities, about how people collectively and individually resolve the problems of having so many people in such a small area - four million in this city.

"We are standing to promote, protect and extend public housing and public schools in the city of Melbourne," said Dr Toscano.

And, "Listening to this election you forget that most of the public housing estates are in the city of Melbourne: North Carlton, Carlton, Flemington, West Melbourne, Kensington. Thousands of people living in public housing."

"So we think that it's fundamental that we look after people through public housing and public schools. What we have seen over the last 30 years is a revolution which has devalued and privatised public housing, public schools and public health."

Ten per cent city revenue to Seed-fund Local Collectives and Cooperatives for secure and satisfying employment

"The second thing is that we are not interested in running the city of Melbourne as a corporate focused city. We want to see the development of an alternative economic system based on cooperatives and collectives, which provide secure, sustainable employment and goods and services for the people of Melbourne. We are not interested in the people having part-time, poorly paid work. We want people to be self-sufficient, to work for themselves, and share the wealth which they create. We would like 10 per cent of the city's revenue to be diverted to provide seed funding to set up collectives and cooperatives, to set up a alternative economic system based on the satisfaction of real, not manufactured, human needs."

Because you do not need billions of dollars to survive, live or prosper. What you need is secure, safe, sustainable employment.

If you go to a bank and say you want to set up a food collective or a carpenters' collective or a plumbers' collective you will find that nothing happens. So 10 per cent of the city's revenue redirected to set up an alternative economic system.

Double rates on multi-million dollar Melbourne properties

Thirdly, some of the richest people and corporations live in the city of Melbourne. Everyone else is talking about reducing rates. We want to double rates for properties worth more than $10m and we want to quarantine the money raised to tackle the perennial problem of homelessness in Melbourne which is swept under the carpet on a year by year basis. We want to use the money to assist the 40 per cent of people who live in the city of Melbourne, who rely on social security benefits to survive.

Monument to honour indigenous people executed in Melbourne

Fourthly, since the last election Dr Ely and myself have been fighting - along with hundreds of other people - for the establishment of a significant monument for Tunnaminnerwait and Maulboyheenner, two indigenous freedom fighters who were executed on the corner of Bowan and Franklin Streets on the 20th of January 1842. Not just as some hsitorical monument, but as a gathering place for indigenous and non-indigenous Australians to learn about the city's unwritten history and to become involved in the struggle to finish the unfinished business that exists between indigenous and non-indigenous Australia. We se this as a tangible way of actually promoting that struggle of kick-starting the stalled reconciliation struggle. We would like to see the whole area with grass, get a monument there, where peple can go and talk and learn about the history.

Re-name City Square "Human Rights Square"

Lastly, want to see City Square renamed "Human Rights Square" to acknowledge the forceful eviction of Occupy Melbourne by police after getting the nod by Premier Baillieu and the Lord Mayor Doyle from that place for peacefully raising the idea that wealth and power should be redistributed.

Obviously we have many other ideas, but these are the five major ones.

Now, why are we standing? Very simply because this statement will be sent to every elector on the Melbourne electoral role, courtesy of the Australian Election Commission, where people can also read the stuff the other candidates put up like, "we want more parking, more or fewer roads ...."

Because we face difficult times, especially young people, because we are moving from a time of relative abundance to scarcity, as Greenhouse increases, human activity increases, as finite resources are used to manufacture goods we do not need to increase company profits and economy is dominated by economically based on the creation of ever more profits irrespective of social and environmental costs, we find that we need radical solutions.

Call to work around the corporate media by using social media

It is very interesting that apart from the local and community media, there is no media here today, despite the fact that we sent over 1000 emails and even some letters.

You are not going to get the government-gelded ABC or the corporate-owned media talking about a public campaign of putting public first. It is unattractive in a corporate dominated world. For us to get any traction we need people here to go to our website at www.anarchistmedia.org, to download the material, send it to your friends, use it for bloggling and in the social media sphere to promote the campaign.

Our statement cannot be beaten. It is a black caviar statement. It is miles ahead of what you will see elsewhere.

Inter-candidate debates ahead

Over the next three weeks I will be debating my colleagues about these issues, but we have two options - we come last out of nine candidates or we come fourth or fifth or third with your assistance on the social media to show people that there is support for ideas, not personalities.

Dr Ely on public housing and public schooling

Dr Ely spoke on the issues of Public Housing and Public Education. She said that there is a lot of homelessness in the electorate, adding that Mayor Doyle had been very quick to take a photo-opportunity with the homeless but that he had actually done nothing about them. She said that Joe and she were determined to give them a voice. She also wanted to encourage people to put more and more pressure on the state government to restore public schools which had been closed under Premier Jeff Kennett. She mentioned that West Melbourne school had been given to the Salvation Army by Jeff Kennett in 1993. "We want it back," she stated. There are children in this city who need government schools."

"That's why we want to campaign to raise rates on properties worth more than 10m," said Dr Toscano.

Dr Ely concluded by saying, "We are the future. We will have to leave the others to wander off into the past. The Fourth Estate is now on the ropes. The Fifth Estate is the Social Media."

Dr Toscano will be debating other candidates (with the exception of the current Lord Mayor, Mr Doyle, who apparently does not debate other candidates) at the Wheeler Centre on 16th of October between 6.15 and 7.30pm.

Melbourne Council's unusual voting system

The City of Melbourne has a very odd voting system where some businesses have two or three votes and it is slanted 60/40 in terms of business votes in relation to residents' votes. It is the only place in Australia where people have multiple voting legally. This system was created was to ensure that somebody from the business community would be Lord Mayor. This is also the only mayoral election where the mayor is elected by the people. In every other city the mayor is appointed by the councillors. The Melbourne system was designed to give the mayor a bit more power than other mayors to promote business interests.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics reports the highest population growth rate since 2009. An 18 per cent increase in annual net overseas migration to 197,200 is responsible for the rise. Australia is entering a period of uncertainty for which we will be better prepared if we do not have to support ever more people - native born or immigrants. -- Sustainable Population Australia (SPA)

Australia's population growth getting out of control

The latest figures that show Australia’s growth rate has risen to 1.5 per cent are alarming, according to Sustainable Population Australia (SPA).

The Australian Bureau of Statistics reports this is the highest growth rate since 2009. An 18 per cent increase in annual net overseas migration to 197,200 is responsible for the rise.

SPA National Vice-President, Dr John Coulter, says, irrespective of what Prime Minister Gillard once said, we are indeed hurtling down the track towards a big population.

Socially, environmentally and economically beyond the pale

“If we continue with a 1.5 per cent national growth rate, Australia will have doubled its population to 45 million by 2060,” says Dr Coulter. “This is totally untenable in environmental, social and economic terms.

“We are facing the twin challenges of climate change and peak conventional oil,” he says. “The latter will mean a possible doubling in oil prices by the end of the decade which will have grave implications for the economy.”

Dr Coulter says the current resources boom will not last and Australia will not be able to support even the present population, never mind a larger one.

Petroleum depletion, massive economic debt and climate change make three scary horsemen

“The US author Richard Heinberg is currently touring Australia. He warns that the end of economic growth is imminent because of the energy crisis, the debt bubble and climate change. If there is no economic growth, we certainly cannot support a growing population.

“Climate change is particularly worrying because we appear to be heading for a rise in temperature of at least 3.5o C which will wipe out much of Australian agriculture.

Dr Coulter said that Australia is entering a period of uncertainty for which we will be better prepared if we do not have to support ever more people, be they migrants or native-born.

Further information: John Coulter 08 8388 2153

Source: Press Release from SPA, www.population.org.au, 28 September 2012

NEW POPULATION BOOK: Sheila Newman has just published new theory in a new book, Demography, Territory & Law: The Rules of Animal and Human Populations (see link). Two chapters are on multi-species demography, the rest apply the theory to non-industrial societies and the author comes up with a completely new test for the collapse model of Easter Island, which will stun those who thought they knew all about it. Forensic biologist, Hans Brunner writes of it: "This book takes us to a completely new paradigm in multiple species population science. It shows how little we understand, and how much we need to know, of the sexual reactions when closed colonies with an orderly reproduction system are destroyed, be it people or animals."

__._,_.___

In her submission to the Victorian State Department of Planning and Community Services, Julianne Bell, Secretary of Protectors of Public Lands, quoting Professor Michael Buxton of the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) shows how the proposed changes to Victoria's urban planning laws will destroy the quality of life and sustainability of Melbourne.

Submission to Department of Planning and Community Services (DPCS) on Victoria's New Planning Zones

Introduction: I am writing on behalf of Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc., a coalition of 80 community, environmental and heritage groups dedicated to protecting and maintaining sites of environmental and heritage significance.

Here is a statement made by Professor Michael Buxton of RMIT covering the significance and the impact on Melbourne of the new zone proposals. He gave permission for me to quote him. I am then making a suggestion as to the need for a Parliamentary Inquiry by the Standing Committee on the Environment and Planning in order for there to be proper consultation with the public.

Significance of Review of Planning Zones: The Victorian government's proposed new planning zones are the most radical review of planning schemes in the history of Victorian planning. They will lead to fundamental changes in the way Melbourne operates, change the fabric of the city and its hinterland, and remove an extensive range of existing citizen rights. Every citizen will be affected.

The new zone proposals will:

• Replace the three existing residential zones with three new residential zones
• Replace the Business 1, 2 and 5 zones with a new Commercial 1 zone, and the Business 3 and 4 zones with a new Commercial 2 zone
• Extensively alter the Green Wedge zone, rural Conservation zone, Green Wedge A zone, Farming zone, Rural Activity zone and Rural Living zone
• Change the existing Mixed Use zone, Township zone and Low Density Residential zone
• Change the existing Industrial 1, 2 and 3 zones.

The government recently released the report of the Advisory Committee into the Victorian planning system and its response to this report. Neither this report nor the government response advocated the changes to zones now proposed. No other justification or strategic context has been provided for the radical changes to the statutory planning system. Clearly, the government worked extensively on its changes to zones in a secret parallel process while the public was diverted to a public process which proposed only moderate change.

Impact of New Planning Zones: The major impacts will be the introduction of extensive commercial uses into residential areas, the destruction of Melbourne's traditional strip retail centres, the dispersal of commercial activities to car based areas resulting in serious metropolitan wide traffic congestion, the de-facto removal of the urban growth boundary and the extension of a large number of urban related uses into green wedges. Resident rights of notification and objection will be seriously curtailed with many new uses allowed in these new zones without the need for permits.

In particular, the zones will:

• merge residential and commercial uses across urban zones, with an extension of commercial uses into residential areas and little difference between commercial and some industrial zones
• increase the price of commercial and rural land through the encouraging of land speculation
• lead to the growth of large numbers of out-of-centre car based commercial/retail developments including accommodation which will end the current functions of many strip retail centres and lead to substantial car use and increase road congestion across Melbourne
• increase the height of commercial/retail and mixed use developments.

The new zones constitute a largely deregulated land use planning system drawing from the reports and lobbying of market oriented bodies and development groups and growth focused government agencies. These zones, in effect, constitute unfair competition by attempting to allow a wide range of uses in many locations. Existing strip retail centres, for example, will have to compete against new retail development built on much cheaper land far from public transport; land traditionally used for agriculture and rural pursuits will become locations for urban related commercial development and accommodation facilities in unfair competition against higher priced urban land. The principle of unregulated markets also takes no account of their public economic, social and environmental impacts, for example, the impacts on congestion of dispersed commercial development and the associated costs in delays and road construction and maintenance.

The application of the zones and the use of schedules will be subject to ministerial approval. Councils may not be allowed to select zones they regard as appropriate to land in their municipalities.

The use of overlays and structure plans may not significantly reduce the impact of the zones. For example, the Heritage Overlay is increasingly ineffective in preventing development even under current zones, and the effects of structure plans depend on the content and the nature of their incorporation into planning schemes.

Melbourne will not be the same city if these new zones are approved even in a modified form.

Failure of the State Government to Consult Victorians Properly on New Planning Zones:

Here is my comment. This complex set of proposals concerning the new planning zones was sprung upon the public which was given only a month to comment. As commented above it appeared that the public was seriously misled as ..."Clearly, the government worked extensively on its changes to zones in a secret parallel process while the public was diverted to a public process which proposed only moderate change." A number of Councils held planning forums at which planning officers attempted to enlighten the public re detail of the changes. The public encountered difficulties when attempting to make submissions by the deadline last Friday when the DPCS computer crashed. The Planning Minister then gave the public an extension for a week. Our submissions will be referred to a small committee hand picked by the Minister. Members of the Committee cannot be said to be independent.

It is extraordinary that the Planning Minister did not refer the review which is of such great significance to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on the Environment and Planning. This has not had an inquiry for the past month or so. Public submissions (to this Standing Committee) are put on the Parliamentary website and presentations to the Committee recorded in Hansard. As far as I am aware most members of the public regard this process as open and transparent where people are given a "fair go". Even if members of Parliament are split on Party lines they can write a group dissenting report. Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc recommends that a proper Parliamentary Inquiry be held into the new planning zones.

Julianne Bell
Secretary Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc.
PO Box 197
Parkville 3052

Mobile: 0408 022408

Email: jbell5 [ AT ] bigpond.com

One of the finalists in the 2012 Voiceless Writing prize from Professor Steve Garlick is a poignant true story expressing intimate moments between humans and our native kangaroo. The story gives extraordinary insights that enrich our understanding of animals who are too often ignored and give us cause for hope when treated with respect and compassion. While the story is not included in the final Voiceless Anthology we think it is of significant merit to include it here in its entirety. You can read Voiceless' top ten stories at http://www.amazon.com/dp/B009CM65XI/ref=cm_sw_su_dp ...... it's only $1.81. Let us know what YOU think.

The Lucky Ones

(Of all the holes in the human heart, perhaps none is bigger than the space once occupied by our connections to wild things and the rhythms of nature…our self-imposed exile from our original network of natural relationships is civilisation’s most disorienting misstep.
Carl Safina
Song for the Blue Ocean and Voyage of the Turtle

The last rays of sun filter across the low grey-green hills and through the tops of the long yellow grass as Rosemary and I reach our destination deep into a large private wildlife sanctuary. There are thousands of acres here. It is not an easy place to get to, but that is one of the attractions for the wildlife that have made this place their home away from destructive humans and their motor vehicles, dogs and guns.

This is the place where for many years we have translocated and released into the wild hundreds of kangaroos that we have helped recover from serious injury and illness or the loss of their mother. We come to this place to monitor the progress of these gentle, affectionate and nurturing creatures. They are strong and resilient in their own sometimes harsh environment, but they are fragile and vulnerable in the human world. These animals have many of the qualities we might wish humans would have so as to ensure that all creatures can co-exist in a better world. Like responsible parents we want to make sure that they are adjusting from the pampered life of our wildlife recovery centre to their new home in the wild, where they need to fend for themselves.

This is also the place to which we come from time to time to renew ourselves, to spend time with the kangaroo friends we have grown to admire over the months and years they have been recovering in our care. We have treated, nursed and encouraged them, marvelled at their determination, watched their growing confidence, and celebrated their success. The response from these animals is our reward for the long hours of attention we have given them, the disappointment when things do not work out, the large personal expense, and the negativity and disregard of a human society which seems never to have the time or the interest to understand the remarkable qualities and world of these iconic creatures. These visits lift our spirits and give us impetus to keep going with the hundreds of severely injured and sick kangaroos that come to us for help every year. The world of these animals plays on our mind in contradistinction to a dissatisfying and insensitive human society into which we feel shoehorned and institutionally controlled.

Rosemary calls out a number of times in a loud voice, “hey bubbie, dubbies”. After just a few minutes, away into the distance little heads can be seen popping up above the long grass and are silhouetted against the fading light. “Hey bubbie dubbies, hey bubbie dubbies”, Rosemary calls out again. For the kangaroo the words themselves are not important, it’s the sound of the voice that makes the difference for them. The hearing of these animals is amazingly acute and their navigation skills are extraordinary.

Hearing is the main sense of the kangaroo. Their long ears rotate 360 degrees independently of each other like antennae to pick up and decode every sound with extraordinary accuracy. Their very life depends on their judgement and reactions based on this sense. It is only when they get close that their sense of smell takes on added importance. We must be at least two kilometres away. Despite these wild animals being very wary of humans, they quickly and confidently recognise Rosemary’s voice and soon make their way towards us, stopping now and then to call out in their distinctive chatter-cough as if to say, “I hear you, I’ll be there shortly, so don’t leave yet”.

By now a dark yellow full moon is beginning to emerge above the horizon and a gentle breeze from the east brings a crispness that reminds us that autumn is on the way. Within thirty minutes a mob of thirty one kangaroos has bounded and skipped its way to our special meeting place. Rosemary recognises and welcomes each and every one by name, even though some have been released to the wild for more than four years and their physique has changed. Each has a distinctive manner and personality that is recognisable to the trained eye if you take a close interest in them. The wise words of the fox in de Saint-Exupery’s The Little Prince seem appropriate:

“It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye” (de Saint-Exupery 1991: 68).

Some of our visitors want to rub noses as they did when in our care, a few want to embrace with firm hugs, and some just want to lie at our feet and have their necks scratched. Some of the females we raised now have infants of their own. But their mothers have taught their little ones well to be wary of humans; they are instructed to wait some 20 or 30 metres away while mum has her special time with those who cared and took an interest in her when she was injured or orphaned and needed help. These thirty one visiting kangaroos are just a small fraction of the hundreds of severely injured kangaroos we have rehabilitated, translocated and released to the wild over the past twelve years. We have, with the assistance of our veterinarian, mended their bones and their wounds and hopefully through the care we have given even mended their hearts. Sometimes when these kangaroos visit us in the wild they are accompanied by other wild kangaroos – their new mob. These other wild kangaroos stand at what they consider a safe distance and watch the odd behaviour of their animal friends as they closely interact with a genus of which they would normally be afraid.

These animals have excellent memories for what is important. They would not come to any other person. But they have come to visit us because they remember the kindness and care they received when they needed it most. We gave them a second chance.

On such a night there is something ethereal about being in intimate company with a mob of large wild animals. It is a privilege that cannot be bought with money and it costs little more than a large dose of kindness and compassion. It is hard to reconcile that anyone could be cruel to such heart-warming and graceful creatures… but they are. Indeed, the gentle kangaroo is the victim of the largest land-based wildlife slaughter by humans on the planet, employing some of the most brutal means imaginable. This is an unenviable record for a country to have and we, in the presence of these same unique animals, are tormented that we are part of this human world.

Rosemary rattles off the names of our visitors. First to arrive is Blanket and her infant BB. We named Blanket because like many small children she had a security blanket to comfort her when in our care. Some small joeys suck their grooming claw (just like a thumb), some suck their toes, some their tails and some suck their bags for security. Next to arrive is the ever-friendly Skippy who had a severe fracture of the pelvis when he came to our recovery centre, but with lots of rest and some physiotherapy made a full recovery. Skippy acts as a big brother to many of the other released joeys. Even now long after his release he arrives at the release site from what seems like nowhere when we translocate a new group of joeys. He then visits often to communicate with the new arrivals and they find great comfort in his presence.

At the last translocation of an initial seven joeys to the release enclosure, Rosemary slept under the stars to keep the joeys company. Jordan, a very sensitive joey, spent several hours lying next to Rosemary before she gained enough confidence to explore the new environment with her friends. All the while Skippy was just nearby munching on grass, keeping Rosemary company and acting as her minder. Rosemary says she always feels safe and never feels lonely when the kangaroos are with her, even in this isolated location.

Tish follows soon after Skippy. She came to us with severe malnutrition and the veterinarian did not think she would recover, but she has confounded everyone with her success. She still sucks her toe when she feels safe and relaxed. Maddie, her joey Macca, and Macca’s friends Betty, Joe and Bawley are the next to arrive. Maddie and Macca were in care with us together and we had the privilege of seeing Macca develop from a small frightened at-heel joey. Maddie had to have her toe amputated following a dog attack, while little Macca had to have two teeth removed due to an infection caused by a grass seed. What an extraordinary mother Maddie was. At our recovery centre she nurtured Betty, Joe and Bawley as well as her own Macca.

Bawley was brought to us with severe myopathy and after some intense treatment recovered well. Joe recovered from wire fence entanglement injuries and became a devoted friend to little Betty who was a miracle joey. She came to us as a small joey after having to leave her mother’s pouch early because her mother was injured. Betty was suffering from malnourishment, hypothermia, aspiration pneumonia, myopathy, fox attack wounds to the head and face and a laceration to the foot from a dog attack. Betty is always calm even in adversity and other gentle joeys like Joe are drawn to her. Joe would often be seen standing next to Betty sucking her ear.

Phoebe arrives with her close friend Chloe and they both have small joeys in their pouches. They were raised together and are inseparable and while Phoebe is quiet and confident, Chloe is shy and nervous. Phoebe had a fractured tail, fractured tibia and a traumatic cataract in one eye and Chloe was orphaned. Others to follow include Tara, who was orphaned; Bonnie who recovered from pneumonia and hypothermia; Malcolm who had fence wire entanglement injuries; and Donnie who had recovered from having barbed fencing wire embedded in the skin of his abdomen. Malcolm was always one of Rosemary’s favourites, a gentle and affectionate joey who loved chasing and playing with the smaller joeys.

Every one of these kangaroos has a harrowing story to tell about what had befallen them before they arrived at our recovery centre. There is no ambulance service or hospital for these creatures. We have been able to construct a narrative for each of them and it only increases our respect for these stoic creatures and our disdain for human disregard. For these once injured animals a picture does not account for the words that can be said and the emotion that can be felt about their ordeal. Every animal is an individual with its own life story and each has a different personality. Many humans would crumble if they had to endure what these kangaroos have been through.

The only way you will deeply know kangaroos is if you understand their everyday emotions – happiness, shyness, distress, fear, anger, nurturing, nervousness, inquisitiveness, and playfulness. You can only identify these emotions if you have a relational ethic of care of the ‘being-for’ kind with them over a long period. ‘Being-for’ relationships are about unconditional giving, with no expectation of reciprocity. The insights gained through such relationships with a kangaroo enable non-verbal communication between wild animal and human. Once you master communication with a wild animal so many things become clear. To believe you know a kangaroo without this personal insight is fraudulent. There is something profoundly disturbing about scientists and other humans claiming to know wildlife only through their disingenuous tinkering and experimentation, through the lens of a camera, or through media coverage designed more for entertainment than enlightenment.

But we have come to this meeting with our special friends for one other reason. We have come to apologise for being human and to gain some solace in their company from a self-interested and cruel human world. Like an out-of-control grand panjandrum, this human world shows no bounds to its ingenuity in finding even more grotesque ways, based on even more flaccid argument, to make a misery of the lives of innocent non-human animals of all kinds and in all situations – farm, wild, companion, introduced, and used for entertainment. The cruelty and disregard of humans toward animals torments us and every day of our lives we are confronted by the reality of it everywhere we turn. In return for our support for these animals we in turn also receive abuse from members of the human world.

We empathise with Coetzee’s Elizabeth Costello (‘The Lives of Animals’, 2001). Sometimes giving up on human society and adopting the life of a recluse vegan seems attractive. At other times there is a determination to confront the human disregard toward animals head on, with the hope that a few attitudes might change for the better. Unable to become reclusive in a world that constantly nags at you, wants you and then disregards you, periods of depression result – but this is the lot of those at the coalface of animal cruelty, who fight for justice for creatures whose voice is unheard.

At the butt-end of our torment are neoliberal politicians exhibiting Faustian principles; those pillaging farmers who have cleared and poisoned the soil and treated the animals in their care and other animals they come across with diabolical disregard; unethical scientists who tinker with and experiment on these animals for their own ends; and the self-interested who simply do not want to know about animal misery. These people prefer to have a life that is desensitised to the plight of others, rather than be embarrassed by what they eat and wear. These people turn away from the inconvenience of assisting an animal quietly whimpering in distress. They all earn our derision.

The air has turned noticeably chilly as we sit amongst the kangaroos. It is this chill and the shiver it creates that reminds us that at this same time, less than one hour away, an episode in extreme brutality is being played out against the same gentle animals by insensitive humans with SUVs, blinding spotlights and high-powered guns, contracted by the very people meant to be protecting our country. You can be certain that the government which has employed these contractors has not sought any due diligence, probity or professional indemnity evidence and it is highly unlikely there was any competitive tendering, as the rest of us might expect if the normal rules of transparency and accountability apply in contracting for government services in a free, fair and democratic society.

Our representations and legal challenges in opposing this act of gross indecency against a gentle and inoffensive resident of this land for 16 million years are met with nothing but neo-con politics and later proven false statements. It seems impossible to escape those politicians and their insensitive brand of politics. Their attitude is always bad for animals. Seven thousand innocent, free-living individuals are massacred based on the lies of politicians, the actions of a few bureaucrats more concerned about their next promotion than animal suffering, and a single ‘local’ scientist whose simplistic work can but give the field of ecology a bad reputation. None will know these animals as we do on this night in their company and few, if any, are interested in finding out. Killing, except to end pain and suffering, is the act of the unconnected human. Such a scene is like the 1995 Srebrenica massacres – thinking and feeling beings herded, cornered and slaughtered. We feel their terror before they feel the bullets that extinguish their innocent lives.

Having sat through every day of the Tribunal hearing of the Majura kangaroo killing and read the transcript of the decision, one can only be shocked at the low level of concern for animal life and the poor evidence the Court was prepared to accept in allowing the governments involved to carry out their programme of slaughter. Two questionable actions underpinned their decision.

The first was that photographs were accepted as the cornerstone of evidence of apparent kangaroo overgrazing – the prime reason given for the need to slaughter them. No evidence of causality was ever provided to this Tribunal and nor was it asked for - only photographic evidence of association. They said in paragraph 111 of the transcript of the hearing: "We accept that the photos are not representative of the MTA [military training area] as a whole, but they do demonstrate the existence of substantial damage caused by kangaroos to significant areas of the MTA." To rely on a photo without other relevant and comprehensive data and analysis is bad science. As scientists we know photos can never be a substitute for the full scientific analysis that demonstrates causality. This is tantamount to saying that because 99 per cent of people who develop bowel cancer drink coffee, then coffee must cause bowel cancer! Based on good science, the Tribunal’s statement connecting photographs with causality is just plain wrong.

The second action of the Tribunal was accepting the evidence of a scientist with no peer-reviewed research record, simply because he was ‘local’, whilst ignoring the contrary evidence of ‘outside’ scientists with internationally recognised knowledge and experience in kangaroo ecology. Statements that purport to be science that are not peer scrutinised must remain only opinion.
It is hard to imagine the sheer terror and panic the Majura kangaroos experienced this night; infants losing their mothers and being trampled in the pandemonium, others suffering great pain from inaccurate shots from the so-called ‘expert marksmen’, some suffering fractures and other injuries in the chaos, conscious pouch-bound infant joeys clubbed to death, beheaded or buried alive with their dead mothers, and vulnerable at-heel offspring left to be predated on.

Where was the politician who gave the orders to carry out the Majura murder this night? My vision is of him sitting down to a dinner of beef, lamb, chicken, or some other dead farm animal who had been through the same misery. Maybe he is having some ‘quality’ time with his family, as the children of other mammals are subjected to agony and terror before losing their lives. There is no quiet dinner for them on this night. And we, just one hour away, are in the company of the same creatures he is having murdered – not as intruders into a much gentler world, but as guests with lost souls seeking some meaning to being human from those who are not. There is little to find emotionally satisfying in this human world when exposed to the world of non-human animals.

How odd it is that some humans are slaughtering gentle kangaroos inhumanely with apparent complete indifference, while we humans not far away seek some guidance in life from the same creatures. How can an animal so frightened and distrustful of humans be so willing to share its world with us? How can two worlds be so different? We are so tormented by the illogicality of being a human animal in a world that is so mean spirited and brutal, while being temporarily accepted into a world of another animal species that is the target of human brutality, but in which the values of sharing, gentleness, and nurturing are commonplace. It leaves us with no answer.

Above the entrance to Australia’s Parliament House sits the nation’s coat of arms, the distinctly Australian kangaroo and emu. Every day politicians walk beneath this coat of arms, no doubt full of self-importance and conceit in the belief that they are making lofty decisions of meaning and significance for the nation and all its inhabitants. Most of these politicians would not take a second glance at this coat of arms, let alone stop to muse as to why these animals are an important symbol of what ought to be a moral platform upon which to build a nation. In fact, many of these same politicians have been directly complicit in the brutality toward these animals - a brutality that reflects post-colonial attitudes of taking what you can from the land while it is still available to take and a nasty interpretation of neoliberal economics that puts ‘the self’ and not ‘the other’ at the centre of importance.

This self-centred interpretation of a free market economy was not the one intended by Adam Smith. For Smith, the ‘invisible hand’ would only distribute the benefits of private enterprise more widely throughout society if there were some moral basis to it predicated on fairness. He reckoned humans had a ‘natural sympathy’ in seeing others benefit from their labour. This is not the neoliberal ‘free market’ economics we see everywhere around us today. Instead there is a culture of not wanting others to benefit from the labour of more capable individuals. The ‘natural sympathy’ of humans spoken about by Adam Smith is today regarded as a ‘free-rider’ effect, where the free-riders are despised. Unfortunately, we have allowed society to adopt the uncaring position: There is no compassion where there is a lack of capability. What chance do non-human animals have when vulnerable humans in our society are thought of in this way? Animal capability is not given any thought in this dialectic.

The kangaroo’s place on the Australian coat of arms and as a symbol in many other fields of endeavour is not only because it is uniquely Australian, but because it portrays a sense of survival in the sixteen million years it has lived in this fragile land, and because it reflects speed, strength and gracefulness. For those of us who know these animals well it also reflects deeper qualities than the simple biophysical. For us the kangaroo demonstrates a gentle and nurturing demeanour toward others and towards the land they have resided in for so long. These are characteristics that are important in creating a sustainable planet for all.

One year earlier, these same politicians were complicit in another brutal programme of kangaroo killing. In what has become known as the Belconnen Mother’s Day massacre, 514 free-living kangaroos were slaughtered to make way for yet another uninspiring ‘project-built’ housing estate. The significant feature of this gruesome event was that it was carried out within sight of the coat of arms and flag of Australia’s national Parliament House. Non-lethal alternatives were made available to the politicians, but their self-interest would not allow them to comprehend such ethical approaches that might help another species apparently less capable then them. Watching this traumatic event, not as some cruelty-loving voyeur but as someone with intense sadness and anger, it is hard to reconcile that we, in the company of such gentle, honest and nurturing creatures this night, are of the same species as the individuals employed to carry out these horrendous deeds and an overzealous police force whose numbers exceeded the quiet protestors on those fateful days. So deep is the cronyism between the government and the police that quiet and peaceful protestors face the maximum charge when arrested. Fortunately the court system sees the nonsense, lists no charges and imposes no fines, despite government lawyers seeking to have the charges increased with maximum fine.

My thoughts go to other events of extreme animal cruelty against the kangaroo initiated by governments across this country that deepen our torment toward those who unfeelingly contribute to a burgeoning world of animal cruelty. There is something morally very wrong when humans who have not sought to better themselves, or contribute to a better nation, are supported by governments in brutally killing thousands of kangaroos for a most unethical, unsustainable and uneconomic industry that makes private gain for a few from the misery of the native animals who belong to all of us. It is hard for caring people to imagine that their elected governments would stoop to such base practices, always in the name of money and supposed jobs, not for once realising that an immoral society provides no basis for a strong economy.

“Follow the money” was the famous one-liner used by the Deep Throat reporters on the trail of those behind the Watergate break-in as portrayed in the movie All the President’s Men. What is happening to animals in this country at the hands of politicians, their bureaucrats, ‘chosen’ scientists, consultants, farmers and the grubby end of business has the same ugly smell about it. That government in this country should support the commercial kangaroo killing industry as a crude way of making money and winning rural electorate votes smacks of cold-hearted and valueless politics that make Faust look like a junior league player. Nothing stacks up to support the continuance of the commercial kangaroo killing industry. Next to the Statue of Liberty, the kangaroo is one of the most recognised global icons and, along with other Australian wildlife, is a significant tourism booster that contributes many times more in national revenue than any commercial killing programme. The commercial killing of kangaroos fails all the tests of economics, human health, animal welfare, and environmental sustainability criteria.

How is it that some farmers who have drenched the earth with chemicals, clear-felled and overgrazed the landscape, and over-used scarce water supplies in a fragile land, and have an appalling record of animal welfare, have the temerity to blame kangaroos for environmental damage and loss in productivity?

This soft-footed animal has been an integral and important element in our landscape for sixteen million years. More to the point how is it that governments are persuaded by the lobbying of such unreliable witnesses? There is no factual evidence to support a case that kangaroos have a negative impact on productivity, as the farming lobby claims. Indeed, there is more scientific evidence that kangaroos have a beneficial impact on soil quality. Farmers have been one of the main agents in brutality towards kangaroos. Other animals also suffer at their hands. Such practices as sow pig stalls, caged chickens, mulesing of lambs, separating weaning calves from their mothers, and the live export trade cause farm animals extreme fear and suffering. That governments can continue to turn a blind eye to the barbaric treatment of animals, despite the overwhelming graphic evidence presented to them, is a serious indictment of their moral standing.

Human exceptionalism has got environmental sustainability completely wrong and it is time that we sought new knowledge about this from those creatures whose life has been inextricably connected to the land for millennia. Educated humans have created the global environmental mess we are in today. The argument that there is no limit to human creativity and knowledge and that this will save the planet from environmental catastrophe needs to be weighed against the notion of wisdom, since humans are, generally, a narcissistic, self-indulgent and sometimes brutal and destructive species. Their creativity and new knowledge does not always accord with a common planetary good and what a fair-minded society might expect.

This raises the question of what kind of education and learning is needed by humans to allow knowledge, innovation and creativity to wrestle effectively with the challenging and fundamental global problem of environmental sustainability. It also raises the interesting thought of the knowledge non-humans might share with humans in our learning about environmental sustainability - just as we, tormented in the presence of the kangaroos this night, seek their guidance on the important qualities of what being human could mean for a better world.

The kangaroo is an ideal creature from whom to learn about environmental sustainability. The social and gentle nature of kangaroos, their ability to range over large areas of the landscape, their vulnerability in limiting environments, and the overtness in the expression of their emotions makes them particularly suited, as wild animals, for humans to learn from about environmental integrity. A ‘new way of knowing’ about sustainability is required that seeks to learn directly from wildlife through their emotional states, as individuals and in their social groups, through a ‘being-for’ relational ethic of care. Based on this ethic, we can incorporate recent research on affective neuroscience in mammals to provide the building blocks for identifying and interpreting emotion markers in various contexts, including in the wild environment.

This approach to knowing about environmental sustainability seeks to go beyond learning superficially about animal biophysics and biota from obtuse, human, scientific experimentation and simple observation. Introducing learning into the mix of an encounter with a wild animal, underpinned by an ethic of care and a means of non-verbal communication, raises interesting implications that not only highlight the shallowness of common approaches to conservation, ecology and green politics, but also of utilitarian ethics.
Much of today’s conservation, ecology, green politics and animal welfare agenda have contributed to an increased dualism between humans and wildlife. Unfortunately, as a result, a collective, objectified, quantitative, non-relational approach to animal ‘science’ has taken precedence over the lives of individual animals, their emotions and their personalities and of how our relations with them can yield new information and learning through transformative encounters.

When it comes to wildlife, conservation and green politics rely on analysis of animal numbers in the form of a collective biota, viewing animals only as objects that respond physically to environmental stimuli, rather than as live subjects with cognition, emotion and individual personalities. If the conservationist assesses that there are ‘too many’ wild animals of a particular species in a particular environment a programme of killing is usually advocated and if ‘too few’, a programme of captive breeding is advocated. Such narrow quantitative determinism ensures that we make little real progress in our broader knowledge and learning of sustainability, because it assumes humans have all the answers and all the world’s environmental problems can be ‘managed’ and even solved by experimentation on animals by human scientists rather than by learning from them through relational transformation.
The animal rights agenda is also not always helpful in our learning about environmental sustainability from wildlife because it is built around moral and ethical concepts, value utility, and degrees of consciousness. Being in the presence of these animals and learning from them on this night, on their terms, suggests that the use of these concepts is an abstraction from the realism of a direct and prolonged meaningful relational encounter between a human and an animal. It might be argued that the animal rights and animal welfare philosophies rely too little on actual transformational connections with animals and too much on conceptual obliqueness.

On this occasion however we have come to these animals not only to renew a friendship and to learn about questions of environmental sustainability, but with a problem, as if travelling to Delphi to visit the Oracle, for dealing with a human torment – a torment that afflicts many right-minded caring humans. Why should we allow ourselves to be tormented and bullied by lesser beings – insensitive humans who practise brutality and disregard? In many ways they are lesser beings than those non-humans in our presence.

Whether it is the homeless, the disabled, the aged, the abused, or a fragile creature such as an infant kangaroo, wombat, magpie, lamb, chicken, calf or lizard, a better society is one in which a gentle hand is extended to all beings to give a second chance, when there is kindness and respect, when suffering is relieved and when hope and opportunity are supported to flourish. If there is no heart and no soul in this place and economic rationalism and complacency are the order of the day, society is diminished and unattractive. Where there is no recognition and responsibility toward otherness, the future will be uncertain and our cathedrals will continue to be the shopping malls, sports stadiums, plasma televisions and virtual reality, as short-term palliatives for our community’s bleakness and search for moral and ethical meaning.

It is now very late, almost midnight. Chronological time has raced along, but time for us has stood still. There has been a mass of overlapping and conflicting emotions while we have been in the presence of these wild kangaroos and we have not yet managed to logically untangle it. Perhaps it cannot be done. There has to be more to do than just wring our hands and yell out our quiet complaints to the animal abusers and the governments that facilitate animal cruelty. These animals cannot escape the harsh realities of a world made unsafe by humans by recourse to the pills, alcohol and virtual reality of the television and internet on which humans increasingly rely. These animals take it as it comes without complaint. Unlike Elizabeth Costello we cannot leave our torment unresolved – we owe it to the animals in our presence this night, to all the injured animals we rehabilitate for a second chance at life, and to all the animals suffering abuse and distress who have no voice and no money to capture attention .

Many politicians only know one language – they have been seduced by the ‘Faust factor’ and will do anything to be re-elected – to stay in power. They will respond to the loudest voice and the most money; so those with no voice and no money can hope for nothing. There is a need for a political party that appreciates that living beings of all kinds have lives of meaning in their own right and recognises that the policies and practices of governments should not put money ahead of lives, and power and ignorance ahead of understanding. The short-sighted nastiness of much of government today does not value animals for who they are, or cherish the remarkable worlds they seek to remain a part of. Government policy needs to embrace the two interconnected principles of wellbeing and capability. Wellbeing is based on fairness, so that animals can enjoy their rightful place on this Earth and be able to go about their normal lives without cruelty being inflicted on them by humans. Capability is based on the contribution of animals to our companionship, to our wonderment and joy, to our knowledge of other beings and to enhancing the sustainability of the landscape and seascape for all. It is also about an animal’s ability to nurture its young, to play, to be inquisitive, to make its home, and to grow old.

Our time in the presence of these wild animals this night comes to an abrupt and seemingly unsatisfactory end when a phone call from an animal rescuer informs us that a small injured kangaroo joey is being brought to us for help. We have to go and it is always hard to say goodbye. Seeing these animals flourishing in their own environment, but still maintaining a connection with us as a genus they ordinarily recoil from, has temporarily replenished our souls and we return again to the human world that does not want to leave you alone and does not satisfy.

When we meet the rescuer we find a very small female joey with an open fracture of the lower leg and a fractured tail as well as other wounds caused by a motor vehicle accident. Her mother is dead. She is also dehydrated, having been fully exposed near a busy road for many hours. Thousands of motorists must have passed this little injured joey without stopping to care or help. We call her Sylvie.

Even though it is well past midnight we call our dedicated wildlife veterinarian and explain the situation. Following his advice, Sylvie has pain relief, antibiotics and is rehydrated. Her wounds are cleaned and her fractures are reduced and splinted. She then has a warm bottle of formula and sleeps peacefully in a cosy bag. Over the following months Sylvie does well and grows into as strong a kangaroo as any. She is one of the lucky kangaroos who has survived severe trauma. Our way of relieving our torment in a human world is to give wild creatures such as Sylvie a second chance so that we might enjoy her company in the wild in the future, as we have done this night with the other lucky ones.*

* Read Sylvie's story of rehabilitation at http://candobetter.net/node/1937

Afterword:
In 2009 the author established the Animal Justice Party of Australia (AJP) which was registered as an official political party by the Australian Electoral Commission in March 2011. He was foundation president of the AJP in 2009-2012. This is Australia’s first and only political party with the specific goal of achieving better wellbeing and capability realisation for all Australia’s animals through the parliamentary system (see www.animaljusticeparty.org).

References:
Coetzee, J. M. 2001. The Lives of Animals, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
De Saint-Exupery, A. 1991. The Little Prince, Mammoth Press, London.
Safina, C. 1997. Song for the Blue Ocean: Encounters Along the World’s Coasts and Beneath the Seas, Henry Holt, New York.
Safina, C. 2007. Voyage of the Turtle: In pursuit of the Earth’s Last Dinosaur, Henry Holt, New York.

Author Background
Steve Garlick is an Adjunct Professor in Sustainable Regions at the University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia, and a Conjoint Professor in Urban and Regional studies at the University of Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia. He has previously held professorial positions at Southern Cross University, Swinburne University of Technology and the University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia. Steve is a spatial economist specializing in regional and community development and human capital, and also an applied ethicist, particularly specializing in animal ethics and animal studies.

Dr. Garlick is the immediate past Vice-President (2007-09) of the Australian Universities Community Engagement Alliance (AUCEA), and an inaugural fellow of that organization. He is a Board Member of the Pascal International Observatory, a Board Member of the Australian Government’s Innovative Regions initiative, a listed expert for the Talloires Education for Sustainable Development network, an advisor to the OECD on higher education and regional development, and founding president of the Animal Justice Party of Australia. He has been involved in international evaluation projects in higher education and regional development in Denmark, Sweden (three projects), Norway, Netherlands and Canada. In 2009 Steve was internationally recognized with the World Shining Compassion Award by the international Ching Hai organization and in 2010 was awarded the annual environment award by the Australian Wildlife Protection Council.

In his spare time, with his wife, Steve runs a recovery centre for severely injured wildlife particularly specializing in macropods and wombats.

Steve is a contributor to the upcoming book, Sustainability Frontiers: Essays from the Edges of Sustainability Education and a participant in an upcoming project on animals, ethics and education.

"This is the statement that will be posted to over 100,000 electors by the Victorian Electoral Commission during the Melbourne City Council Election. It encapsulates our political program for the City of Melbourne. Use it as a template for your political struggles, pass it on to all and sundry. Alternatives exist, we need to express them." Dr. Joseph Toscano and Dr. Jean Ely launch a campaign about running the city of Melbourne as a community, instead of as a money making 'business' opportunity for those who take and do not give.Campaign launch midday Wednesday 3rd October, cnr Collins & Swanston St, Melbourne."Let’s not forget that of the 100,000 people on the electoral roll, the majority live in Docklands, Parkville, Flemington, North Melbourne, West Melbourne, South Melbourne, Southbank, Kensington, part of South Yarra, East Melbourne, Carlton and North Melbourne, not the CBD."

Action Box Put Public First

We are standing to promote, protect and extend public housing and public schools in the City of Melbourne.

We want 10% of the City’s revenue to be set aside to provide seeding funding to establish an alternative economic system based on co-operatives and collectives that provides local residents with secure sustainable employment that provides sustainable goods and services to the community.

We will fight to double Council Rates on properties worth more than ten million dollars to provide services for the homeless and residents of Melbourne who rely on social security benefits to survive. We want a significant monument erected at the corner of Franklin and Bowen St to honour the indigenous freedom fighters Tunnerminnerwait and Maulboyheenner who were executed on the 20th January 1842 for daring to resist white colonisation.

We will rename City Square Human Rights Square to commemorate the forceful removal of peaceful Occupy Melbourne protesters from City Square in 2012.

Radical changes need to be made to ensure as a city and a community we are in the best position to deal with the four horsemen of an impending 21st century apocalypse: Increasing population growth; increasing greenhouse emissions due to human activity; rapidly diminishing finite resources, and the domination of the world economy by an economic system based on the creation of ever increasing profits irrespective of the human social and environmental costs have created conditions requiring radical change.

Dr. Joseph Toscano – Dr. Jean Ely.
Web Anarchist Media
Email [email protected]
Mobile 0439 395 489

The above is is the statement that will be posted to over 100,000 electors by the Victorian Electoral Commission during the Melbourne City Council Election. It encapsulates our political program for the City of Melbourne. Use it as a template for your political struggles, pass it on to all and sundry. Alternatives exist, we need to express them.

Join us Midday Wednesday 34d October for the launch of the Put Public First Melbourne City Council Mayoral Election Campang outside Melbourne Town Hall, Corner of Collins & Swanston St, Melbourne.

Dr. Joseph Toscano and Dr. Jean Ely,[1] sickened by the possibility the Melbourne City Council elections were going to be a conservative fifty shades of blue affair, have thrown their hat into the rink to raise a few radical ideas during the Melbourne Mayoral and Council election campaign. While everybody else talks about running the city as a business, we talk about running the city as a community. Let’s not forget that of the 100,000 people on the electoral roll, the majority live in Docklands, Parkville, Flemington, North Melbourne, West Melbourne, South Melbourne, Southbank, Kensington, part of South Yarra, East Melbourne, Carlton and North Melbourne, not the CBD.

While everybody else talks about cutting rates, we talk about doubling rates for properties over ten million dollars and using the money raised to tackle homelessness and poverty in the City of Melbourne.

While everybody else ignores public housing and public schools, we put public first pledging to make the public not the private sphere our number one priority. While everybody else is trying to ignore the way Occupy Melbourne was violently evicted by the Victoria Police after being given the nod by the Lord Mayor, we want to rename City Square Human Rights Square and use City Square as a focus for political and social activity, not commercial activities. While everyone else ignores the original inhabitants, we want to see a major monument erected to Tunnerminnerwait and Maulboyheenner, two indigenous freedom fighters who were executed at the corner of Bowen and Franklin St on the 20th January 1842 for resisting white colonisation. We want the area where the monument is erected to act as a focal point to help address the unfinished business that still exists between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians 224 years after colonisation began.

Join us, help us launch a Melbourne City Council Mayoral and Council election campaign that will put the cat among the conservative pigeons that stand against everything we stand for.

Joseph Toscano/ Libertarian Workers For A Self-Managed Society.

NOTES

[1] Dr. Jean Ely is a founding member of the Defence of Government Schools movement (DoGS) and is a regular presenter on 3CR's Public Education program. She is the author of Reality and Rhetoric: An Alternative History of Australian Education. She delivered the Lionel Murphy Lecture on October 26th 2000 at the Nindi Dana Quaranook centre in Morwell.

Planning Backlash Inc, a coalition of 250 resident groups across city, coast and country, is astonished at the complexity of the proposals for major changes to Melbourne and her Green Wedges and the limited time to understand it and make submissions. Coalition members are disappointed that there has been no thought given by Government to run public sessions to explain the changes. As a result the vast majority of people don’t know what is happening and have been given no opportunity to find out.

SUBMISSION TO PROPOSED CHANGES IN PLANNING LAWS

21st September 2012

INTRODUCTION
I am Mary Drost Convenor of PLANNING BACKLASH INC a coalition of 250 resident groups across city, coast and country.
We are astonished at the complexity of the proposals and the limited time to understand it and make submissions. We are disappointed that there has been no thought given by Government to run public sessions to explain the changes. As a result the vast majority of people don’t know what is happening and have been given no opportunity to find out.

Many people are not in a position to have access to internet and this is such a complex document it takes great skill to understand it all.

These proposed changes are very good for the suburban residential areas but there needs better understanding of Rural and Green Wedge areas and the Commercial Zones should be more clearly thought out.
TO RESPOND TO THE SECTIONS IN THE PROPOSALS
1. SUBURBS - Residential
Commercial
2. GREEN WEDGES
3. RURAL ZONES
4. THE FARMING ZONE
5. INDUSTRIAL
6. TOWNSHIPS

1. SUBURBAN - RESIDENTIAL
We agree with the Zones as finally we can have the protection against inappropriate development that we have been wanting since Melbourne 2030 was brought in and forced onto us in spite of our objections. The Residential Zones are excellent and we thank the Minister of Planning for his courage bringing these in, no doubt against the wishes of the DPCD.
However there are a number of points needing amendment and the Minister has agreed to a number these amendments during our meeting on the 10th September. Our agreement to the whole zone concept is dependent on these amendments, because if these are kept in, they would negate the advantages.

LIST OF AMENDMENTS THAT WE REQUEST

The Minister will scrap the ‘within 100 m’ of a commercial zone to prevent commercial creep into residential zones. This can in effect double the business area and has unwanted implications.

The Activity Centres will be Principal and Major also Central, and must have fixed boundaries, and not extending out 400 m.

Neighbourhood Activity Centres will be just local shopping strips.

There will be no population targets.

There will be no reduction in residents right to object and appeal.

Maximum heights must apply to all buildings in the zone.

The only uses not requiring permits in residential zones will be those not requiring permits now. Everything else requires a permit and residents retain the right to object. Current prohibitions must be retained and no dilution of present conditions. Rather, enhance the zones to provide the tools to enable the protection of neighbourhood character.

The Council working with residents can say where and how big the residential zones will be and the Minister will approve and the DPCD will not interfere.

If the Council wants mandatory heights the Minister will give it and the DPCD will not interfere.

We do not agree with office and shops as of right in the RGZ or the GRZ.

We do not agree with food and drink premises as of right in RGZ.

We do not agree with medical centres as of right in RGZ, GRZ or NRZ.

We do not agree with place of worship as of right in any residential zones

We do not agree with changes in size of land where houses can be built without a permit.

We do not agree with 9 mts building heights in NRZ areas as these areas are predominantly one and two storey houses.

Council must retain the current permit requirements under Res 1 and be retained in all residential zones.

Neighbourhood character must be considered and this could mean in areas of predominantly single story detached housing, rescode is varied to suit neighbourhood character, allowing prohibition of boundary to boundary houses

Height limits must apply to all buildings and not just residential.

We request Peer Review as promised by the Minister

SUBURBAN - COMMERCIAL

WE RECOMMEND THAT THESE COMMERCIAL ZONES ALL BE PUT ON HOLD UNTIL IT IS THOUGHT THROUGH PROPERLY AND PROPER CONSULTATION WITH COUNCILS AND COMMUNITY TAKES PLACE. Commercial is not likes as it is pushing high density housing.

IN BRIEF, however:

There must be permits to locate any offices in commercial zones, so that council can direct offices to suitable areas.

* Essential to have permits to locate gaming venues or taverns in Activity Centres

Must have permits to locate cinemas or shops or small supermarkets in enterprise corridors or any other areas.

Third party rights must be retained.

There must be strict height controls.

RURAL, FARMING, INDUSTRIAL AND GREEN WEDGE ZONES

2. GREEN WEDGES
We do not agree with the Green Wedges being encroached on, unless the Green Wedges Coalition agrees to any parts being taken out. We would suggest that if any part has to come out for some urgent reason that it be replaced somewhere else.
We do not agree with the proposed developments in the Green Wedges, such as new as of right uses especially rural industry and rural store. Nor should previously prohibited uses become discretionary such as abattoir, medical centre, place of assembly, sawmill, service station. These being discretionary will add to VCAT and council work and will significantly change the intended character of the Green Wedges.

There should be much further community consultation before any changes are brought in. Much more time is needed.
We have suggested to the Minister that instead, he do all possible to turn the Wedges into a Green Belt as there is around London and has development further out (providing it is not on good farming land) and that fast trains run out to new areas so that people can commute as they do into London.

In addition we recommend that the Minister takes immediate steps to protect the other Green strips running across Melbourne – the waterways. These are constantly threatened by development along their edges and these waterways should be protected and be Green Ribbons in Melbourne, with no building allowed near their edges so that they have natural growth along their length for future generations to enjoy.

We understand that Ted Baillieu agreed to the plan to create a Capital City Yarra Park and this should be done without delay before any more destruction by developers is allowed by VCAT.

3. RURAL ZONES
The changes in these zones have not been strategically justified.

We object strongly to the changes of prohibited to discretionary use and discretionary to as of right use. This will result in uncontrolled buildings and works and this should not be allowed. These include schools and service stations . Changes to the Section 173 agreements is opposed.

Rural Activities Zone

We oppose change to as of right for bed and breakfast occupation, primary produce sales, rural industry and rural stores – these must be controlled by the responsible authority.

We oppose the change to discretionary use for abattoir, accommodation other than dwelling, retail premises, sawmill and warehouse.

Rural Conservation Zone

We oppose the changes from prohibited into section 2 needing a permit, such as accommodation other than dwelling and dependent persons unit, animal boarding, agriculture freezing and cool storage changes, landscape garden supplies, leisure and recreation and primary and secondary schools, changes to requirements for restaurants

Rural Living Zone

We oppose the reduction in the minimum lot size for a dwelling from 8 hectares to 2 hectares. This zone is for rural residential way of life and this change would spoil that.

4. THE FARMING ZONE

We do not support the change from discretionary to as of right for primary produce sales, rural industry or rural store, increase of bed and breakfast from 6 to 10.

We do not support the change from prohibited to discretionary of abattoir, industry, landscape garden supplies, market, sawmill, trade supplies, warehouse.

This zone should protect natural resources

5. INDUSTRIAL

What is proposed raises serious questions and this should be looked into more carefully before being introduced as it has drastic implications. We suggest independent studies should be undertaken before proceeding.

6. TOWNSHIP ZONE

Basically there are improvements in this zone but we do not agree with Medical Centres or expanded Places of Worship being without permit.

However the Low Density Residential Zone, which is usually unsewered and lacking in services and in water catchment areas, will be worse off - we object to changes re Medical Centres and Takeaway Food Premises. Nor do we agree with the land subdivision to 2,000 sqm because of the effect it would have on Macedon, Kyneton, Gisborne etc. and possibly others in other areas.

ADDITIONAL ZONE SUGGESTED - WORLD HERITAGE ZONE

It would ensure the ongoing protection of this precious part of Melbourne to create its own zone with its own protective measures to both the Exhibition Building and surrounding garden.

CONCLUSION

We believe there is great merit in the proposed Residential Zones providing our amendments are carried through.

The other zones need a lot of more study and consultation.

Much of what has been proposed will permanently damage what makes Melbourne such a desirable city.

The push to keep the economy going by this means is very short sighted and does not work in the long run.

There is a lack of strategic justification and no statement re the economic and social impacts of the reforms.
There is a lack of information concerning transitioning to the new zones, resourcing, current planning applications and VCAT appeals.

At the moment there exists on the outskirts of Melbourne several years of supply of land owned by developers ready for development and in addition several years supply of land inside Melbourne. It is poor judgement to spread even further and destroy so much good farming land when there is no need. Maybe in the near future a Federal Government will put a hold on this excessive immigration that is spoiling our city. It is time to be clever and copy the Dutch who are going in for super high tech to keep the economy high while keeping a stable population.

FINALLY
I request to speak to the Panel when the Review committee runs public hearings.
Mary Drost
Convenor
Planning Backlash Inc
[Name and phone number excised by Candobetter editor]
28 SEPTEMBER 2012

Report on Richard Heinberg's tour of Australia, Melbourne talk: We should remember that the economy is a subset of the environment and that 'not sustainable' does not mean 'insufficiently eco-groovy'. Heinberg pointed to Australia's growing reliance on petroleum and its decreasing production and suggested that the policy of growing our population needs a profound rethink. Some strange and interesting responses from the audience. And a standing ovation for Australian MP Kelvin Thomson, who was chairing Heinberg's session. Not to mention Jenny Warfe - a terrific new Vice President for SPA Victoria and Tasmanian Branch.

Energy, Debt, Climate Change, Overpopulation

(The following is based on notes taken from Richard Heinberg's excellent talk and does not purport to be verbatim.)

Plentiful energy in the early 20th Century caused a 'problem' of overproduction. Consumers did not have the income to keep up. Tactics to overcome this structural resistance included advertising, planned obsolescence, fashion (bringing out new models), and, most of all, credit (i.e. debt.)

Credit is a key factor producing economic growth. Delinking money from precious metals helped this along because money could be created with little restraint.

Heinberg identifies the 1980s as a turning point and cites Robert F. Gordon, "Is US Economic Growth over?" (NBER Working Paper No. 18315, August 2012.) Gordon writes that there have been three periods of technological engineering leading to industrial growth:

1. Coal, steampower
2. Oil and electrification early 20th century
3. Computers, internet, cell phones etc.

The third phase does not generate as much economic growth as previous technological changes.

Globalisation, debt and economic growth

Globalisation has posed a problem for growth because, by internationalising wage competition, it drives wages, and therefore purchasing capacity, downwards. In the US, says Heinberg, the average wage is at levels of 1973.

More debt has been used as a strategy to get low income earners to purchase more consumables and to sure up economic growth.

Debt is now growing three times faster than GDP.

The Financialisation of the Economy

This financialisation of the economy has meant expansion of the Financial Industry. The Industry hs gained political power and the ability to influence profound changes in financial legislation.

But, says Heinberg, with the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) we reached the limits to debt.

Problems with current political-economic system

Lack of redundancy makes the system fragile. Heinberg talks about how ridiculous it is to make countries into specialist economies, evoking the danger of reliance on trading for most vital resources.

Like most peak-oilers he advocates relocalisation. The reasons are many but one of the main ones is the energy cost of transport. Our current land-use planning relies on us using cars. The only way to avoid reliance on cars (which will become too expensive to run as petroleum runs down) will be to redesign, default back to land-use that makes it possible to walk or cycle to town centers, and to grow and distribute most food and materials locally. At the moment the system discourages local initiatives to supplement or supply food and materials.

We need to stop using the GDP as a measure of production because it privileges any activity that makes money, without heed to the harm it might do.

We should encourage alternative currencies, worker ownership, and population stabilisation.

Australia's growing population problems - what do we think we are doing!

Heinberg gave Australia's population problems quite a lot of attention, focusing on our declining oil production and our growing consumption of fuels, asking is it really sensible to contemplate the signs of a long future financial decline and still grow the population by importing more and more people?

On Energy and Climate

We need low energy transportation, low energy buildings, low energy agriculture and renewable energy sources. Of course no-one should expect to have anything like the current level of economic activity based on these.

We should remember that the economy is a subset of the environment and that 'not sustainable' does not mean 'insufficiently eco-groovy'.

What's not peak

Community, satisfaction with honest work well done, intergenerational solidarity, artistry, beauty of built environment, happiness, healthy environment, cooperation.

Audience Response

As one familiar with peak resources and population discussions from way back, I was not too surprised by some of the questions, however I learn something each time.

Iceland and middle class attitudes

I asked Heinberg if he thought it would be a good idea to talk about how Iceland has refused to pay its GFC 'debt' and is pursuing 200 bankers on criminal charges. I added that people could benefit from realising that most of the countries in Continental Europe do not suffer from the same rapid population growth as Australia and other Anglophone economies.

Richard said that Iceland was a shining example and its economy, released from debt, had rebounded.

At this a young man behind me gave his spirited opinion that it was not so impressive to go from zero to zero. He seemed not to consider the importance of a people being freed from debt, but that might be explained by the fact that he identified himself as employed in the Financial Industry. He described himself as having only recently escaped a life of despair on a country farm for his employment in Melbourne. Remarking that there was far more community spirit in the country than in Melbourne, he nonetheless warned somewhat contemptuously that that most of this middle-class audience would experience a rude awakening from their romantic ideas about self-sufficiency if they chose to return to the land.

Clearly the importance of our economic reliance of fossil fuels - notably petroleum - simply had not sunk in at all. He seemed to think that the whole talk was about some kind of philosophical attitude, rather than a forewarning on survival in hard times to come.

Richard Heinberg's reply was that relocalisation and self-sufficiency wasn't about 'choice'. It was about dealing with an unavoidable situation. He said that his own father had been raised on a subsistence farm but had managed to get to the city and become the first in the family to get a university education. Richard added that he and his wife lived on a large block in a city where they had numerous fruit and nut trees and hens, and that, although it was sometimes hard work, they had more fun now than they had ever had.

What I learned from this exchange was that one psychological way of not dealing with finite resources is to assume that they are somehow discretionary. Though how a farm-boy could fail to appreciate the importance of petroleum defeats me, unless this young man is an indicator of how modern schools, even in rural areas, teach within paradigms separate from rural reality.

Goldcoast Climate change refugees

Another young man, closer to the front of the audience, whilst acknowledging that population poses a problem in Australia asked, "But what should Australia do about climate change refugees from poor countries? Don't we have an obligation to take some? How many should we take?

This view seemed to me to indicate that the person asking the question had somehow assumed that peak oil, global warming and financial implosion would only affect the 'third world'. Hence his question was, given the need to limit Australia's population size, what should our position be on climate change refugees? The picture was painted of millions seeking entry to our safe and prosperous shores.

I would have liked to asked him why he seemed to assume that Australia's economy will somehow not implode with the rest of the world's and that our own population will not be affected by sea-level rise, given that most of our populations live in coastal cities. We have seen what several feet rise in river levels did for the Brisbane CBD during the floods in 2011. Well, the Brisbane River opens onto the sea, which means, if there is a rise in sea levels, the CBD is likely to be inundated. As for the Gold Coast; those hundreds of skyscrapers lining the beach are completely vulnerable to permanent deluge. Their location is a testimony to shortsightedness and opportunistic investment overseen by negligent councils and state governments.

Sydney Harbour will have its valleys inundated. Port Philip Bay and Hastings (enclosing the Mornington Peninsula where developers are planning to build many new suburbs, a new railway, tollways and to massively increase cargo traffic), are doomed to lose many buildings. Likewise for Perth (on the Swan River), Darwin on the sea, Adelaide, and so many other towns and cities.

The same can be said, in metaphor, for our economy. Look at how Campbell Newman, the new Queensland Premier, has used recent floods as an excuse to sell off more assets and close down jobs!

Standing ovation for Kelvin Thomson

Throughout this talk I was impressed with the organisation of the event by SPA members and Vice President of SPA Victoria and Tasmania, Jenny Warfe (of Blue Wedges fame)'s presence. Her introductions of the event and the speakers set an excellent tone for the evening. Kelvin Thomson MP formally introduced Richard Heinberg, but he did not overshadow the main speaker.

Some questions later targeted Thomson's knowledge of local population policy problems. He answered some, but mostly deferred to Heinberg. Unusual for an Australian politician in such an event, the audience gave Kelvin a standing ovation and a number of people spoke of how grateful they were to him for representing Australians' democratic opinion on high immigration numbers, overpopulation and overdevelopment. Richard Heinberg, naturally received very strong applause and was obviously greatly appreciated.

The Significance of this event and the way forward for the Counter-Growth Lobby

This event, which took place at the Wheeler Centre in Melbourne, was unusually well attended for a counter-growth lobby population and resources lecture in Australia. The speaker, Richard Heinberg, has received far more coverage than any other non-Cornucopian population and resources speaker that I remember, apart from Tim Flannery perhaps. Sustainable Population Australia members in each state who set up his speaker tour deserve credit. Although Jill Quirk, the Victorian and Tasmanian President was unable to attend due to unforseeable events, her work in organising the branch response was vital.

The only criticism one can make is that more Australian speakers should be on this particular counter-growth lecture circuit and SPA has a number of good ones in its branches that it simply fails to promote, year after year, despite being the peak body in this field. SPA has symptoms of clique and cringe syndrome. If SPA only recycles the same national leaders and will not promote locals to prominence in speaker events and as spokespersons, its message will always be eclipsed by the mainstream and property development media, which are constantly anointing their own talking heads, with effect, despite little concern for quality. In fact raising the profile of good activists, no matter how humble, is one of the Candobetter.net's most important activities.

The Centre for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy (CASSE) and the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) were also involved in supporting this event.

This article was meant to appear yesterday but, owing to a bug in Acrobat that freezes the screen whenever I try to read an acrobat article, I had to reboot and lost everything I wrote yesterday.

The Japanese often refer to their nuclear power plants (NPPs) as apartments without toilets. This is due to the complete lack of planning by the power companies and the government regarding the disposal of spent nuclear fuel. As Japan gears up to restart its NPPs in the near future, the spent fuel pools are beginning to look more and more like flushless toilets...

Earlier this year, the Japanese government announced that it would formulate a national energy plan for 2030 that would include the percentage of nuclear power in the energy mix at that time, and put forward three options 0%, 15%, and 20-25%. (e.g. see my Japan’s Energy “Options” ) The government appeared to favour the 15% option (existing NPPs minus those over 40 years old in 2030), but public opinion came down heavily (70-80%) in favour of the “zero option” (which some mistakenly assumed meant an immediate nuclear phaseout).

When the government’s Energy and Environment Conference conclusion was announced last week we all did a double-take because they said they had chosen the “zero option” but have left the door open to a final nuclear phaseout sometime in the 2050s (maybe – since the fate of NPPs now under construction and planned is not yet certain and existing NPPs may still get up to 20-year extensions on their 40-year “lifetimes.” However, it also looks likely that Uranium resources will be scarce by the 2030s, so world nuclear power may all be winding down by that time anyway.). However, the people are not fooled, and respect for politicians has reached an all-time rock-bottom low. We were all astounded again when even this so-called “zero option” was ferociously opposed by Japan’s business circles, leading to failure to produce a cabinet decision endorsing the decision of the Energy and Environment Conference (itself consisting of cabinet members) that had come up with the “zero option” conclusion.

So, although the government makes sweet (and effectively meaningless) promises about the safe operation of the NPPs that are now undoubtedly going to be restarted, the one story it and the power companies do not like to mention (though all anti-nuke campaigns do) is what’s happening in the spent fuel pools at each of the NPPs.

Of the 57 fuel pools (50 reactors now; a few reactors share spent fuel pools and then each NPP has a common fuel pool - see “Japan SPF data.pdf” attached to this article.) 35 will run out of space for spent fuel in under 5 years. 14 have between 5 and 9 years to go and the remaining 8 have 7 between 10 and 14 years and one (in Hokkaido) has 28 years to go. Have a guess which NPP has the least remaining space available in its SFPs… It’s TEPCO’s F#1 Units 5 & 6 and their common pool, which each have only 0.7 years of remaining space!! (TEPCO’s Kashiwazaki-Kariwa#7 has only 0.2 years remaining!) There’s no way those reactors can start again till large amounts of spent nuclear fuel are removed, BUT the priority on the F#1 site is Unit 4, and that is reckoned (by Arnie Gundersen in his interview with Dr Helen Caldicott – Downloadable mp3) to take till 2015-2016!!

Of course, the power companies could remove the spent fuel assemblies (a ton each, according to Arnie Gundersen) and eventually place them in dry casks, but that costs money. Dry casks also are not the “final solution.” In the past, the next step was reprocessing and then reuse of the Uranium and Plutonium gained to generate more electricity (or for use in nuclear weapons). However Japan is now mulling over whether or not to forego the “nuclear cycle” – i.e. to give up on reprocessing (which it has never been able to run), and simply move to final disposal of the waste. Kingston (Japan’s Nuclear Village, Jeff Kingston ) correctly points out that this may be the “beginning of the end of nuclear power in Japan,” since once the lie of the “nuclear cycle” is revealed it will become clear that nuclear wastes cannot be recycled ad infinitum (they never could) but must eventually be somehow flushed out of the system (i.e. the environment we live in).

Some of the nuclear waste is currently stored at the site of the reprocessing facility at Rokkasho Village, in the north of Honshu – Aomori Prefecture. There is a “mid-term” storage facility there, (and one or two under construction) but the locals are saying, “If you’re not going to reprocess, then we don’t want the waste stored here (unto eternity). Please remove it.” But to where? Assuming another “mid-term” storage facility could be built (more mega-bucks), that is still not the final solution for the spent nuclear waste.

[More details at Rolling Update 3 on the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster - see entries for April 23 (Japan's Spent Nuclear Fuel and the Shimokita Peninsula) and April 30 (Nuclear Power Isn’t Cheap!), and Japan’s Establishment Grasping At Straws To Keep Nuclear Status Quo]

As you may know, no one has the final solution for spent nuclear waste. The US has apparently abandoned Yucca Mountain. The Finns have built Onkalo (see the movie Into Eternity, where the designers scratch their collective heads and declare themselves unsure whether it’s OK or not), the Swedes are building a facility UNDER the Baltic Sea (see Sweden's final spent nuclear fuel repository at Forsmark NPP), the French, for all their claims of having “conquered” the nuclear cycle (while the reprocessing plant at Le Havre vies for first place as Europe’s most polluting facility with the UK’s Sellafield), are storing waste nuclear fuel in Siberia (Arnie Gundersen in the interview mentioned above). Japan has “plans” to construct a final repository for its nuclear waste and has come up with three candidate areas (in the north, would you believe? Tokyo Newspaper, 2012/9/18) but this is not being taken very seriously given the active seismic nature of the real estate.

As you can see, the yummy nuclear tale is quickly turning extremely yuccy. Our generation, the one that has lived from just after WWII to now, has “enjoyed” the dubious fruits of nuclear power and nuclear weapons, as well as consuming the lion’s share of fossil fuels, and is now in the process of contaminating the planet with nuclear waste for the next thousand generations. How will these future generations judge us? They will HATE us (if there is anyone around, because infertility may make humanity extinct – See Busby on the Jerusalem sperm-count study: No more births in Israel by 2020*), just as we now totally condemn the actions of the “nuclear village” and their hangers-on. There may be a general election in Japan this autumn. It will be interesting to see if the Japanese people will wake up to the notion that it is not a good idea to have their future determined by politicians and business people who are largely science-illiterate and who have apparently swallowed hook, line and sinker, the lies and half-truths about “safe” nuclear power and radiation fed to them by their nuclear village pals.

* Here’s a recent follow-up to the Jerusalem sperm count study that suggests Israeli men may be effectively infertile by 2030. Please note that the study does not mention radiation or Uranium as the cause (or one of the causes) of the fertility decline. In the Youtube video above, however, Chris Busby claims that it is the Uranium used in weapons (not only depleted Uranium, apparently) during the wars in the Middle East over the last two decades that is causing at least part of the problem.

A French university study on long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and Roundup tolerant maize reports alarming results. Multiple mammary tumours and huge increase in death rate in 200 rats over two-year study. French government taking study very seriously. Scientist leading the study reports persecution by GM industry advocates. The study abstract has been published at the end of this article. These new findings threaten business as usual reliance on GM products by population growth lobby.

French long-term study: rats nourished with GM foods over a period of two years show massive increase in tumours.

The study was: "Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize," published in Food and Chemical Toxicology, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637. The authors were Gilles-Eric Séralini, Emilie Claira, Robin Mesnagea, Steeve Gressa, Nicolas Defargea, Manuela Malatestab, Didier Hennequinc, Joël Spiroux de Vendômois, involving Caen University Institute of Biology and the University of Verona Department of Neurological, Neuropsychological, Morhphological and Motor Sciences. The study abstract has been published at the end of this article.

The French study, widely reported on French radio and television yesterday, fed 200 rats genetically modified foods for two years - the life-time of a rat. Apparently this is one of few or perhaps the only study over such a long period, where most studies on rats only go for about three months.

Multiple mammary tumours and huge increase in death rate

In females after 13 months there were multiple mammary tumours. The report on Journal televise France2 showed a female rat with three huge tumours occupying about one quarter of her total body weight. In males after the same period, there were liver and kidney tumours or abnormalities.

The results are said to have shocked the scientists conducting the study. They appear to show unequivocally that consumption of a lot of genetically modified food has major impacts on foetal and adult health for rats, so why not for humans? There increases in cancers and deaths were huge.

Journalistic coverage shows a field of genetically modified sweet corn with a commentary, "Is this corn a poison? The results of a study say that it is."

France will push in Europe for much stricter controls over permissions to the GM industry

In France, since 2008, a moratorium prevents the cultivation of genetically modified foods, but does not prevent importing them in products used to nourish food animals and for use in pastries and other products. The French government appears to be taking the risks very seriously. The French Health and Saftey Office has been delegated to report on the matter. French Greens have demanded urgent action and the French Minister of Agriculture, Stéphane Le Foll, says he will take the study up with the European union for much stricter appraisal and control of genetically modified industry activities.

Gloves off

A Monsanto spokesperson has said that it is too early to comment on the study results, which are as yet not well known.

Eric Seralini, the scientist heading the experiment said that they had pushed further than previous experiments testing the impact of a genetically modified food and pesticide. He is described as living in comparative isolation and conducting his work in comparative isolation and having been subjected to a lot of pressure - criticism and restrictions on funding - from the GM lobby, which is very very influential and wealthy.

The two year study now has to be reproduced to show that it is truly valid and this will (naturally) take at least two more years. The scientist who headed the study was known for his scepticism about the safety of genetically modified foods, which means that he was independent of the GM lobby, but also that the GM lobby will probably try to accuse him of bias. The GM lobby has multi-billions of dollars riding on discrediting the results of Seralini's work.

Abstract for the Roundup rat study mortality

"Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize."

"The health effects of a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize (from 11% in the diet), cultivated with or without Roundup, and Roundup alone (from 0.1 ppb in water), were studied 2 years in rats. In females, all treated groups died 2–3 times more than controls, and more rapidly. This difference was visible in 3 male groups fed GMOs. All results were hormone and sex dependent, and the pathological profiles were comparable. Females developed large mammary tumors almost always more often than and before controls, the pituitary was the second most disabled organ; the sex hormonal balance was modified by GMO and Roundup treatments. In treated males, liver congestions and necrosis were 2.5–5.5 times higher. This pathology was confirmed by optic and transmission electron microscopy. Marked and severe kidney nephropathies were also generally 1.3–2.3 greater. Males presented 4 times more large palpable tumors than controls which occurred up to 600 days earlier. Biochemistry data confirmed very significant kidney chronic deficiencies; for all treatments and both sexes, 76% of the altered parameters were kidney related. These results can be explained by the non linear endocrine-disrupting effects of Roundup, but also by the overexpression of the transgene in the GMO and its metabolic consequences.

Highlights

-A Roundup-tolerant maize and Roundup provoked chronic hormone and sex dependent pathologies.
- Female mortality was 2–3 times increased mostly due to large mammary tumors and disabled pituitary.
- Males had liver congestions, necrosis, severe kidney nephropathies and large palpable tumors.
- This may be due to an endocrine disruption linked to Roundup and a new metabolism due to the transgene.
- GMOs and formulated pesticides must be evaluated by long term studies to measure toxic effects.."

Kelvin Thomson MP will be chairing Richard Heinberg's talk about his book, The End of Growth 7.30pm. on Saturday 22 September 2012 at The Wheeler Centre, 176 Little Lonsdale Street. Heinberg is a well-known peak oil blogger and writer who delivers an entertaining and stimulating message on the serious subject of resource depletion which Australian governments and development and financial planners at all levels simply cannot cope with. At a time when Australia continues to back military intervention in the oil-rich Middle East, Richard's talk is especially topical. As well as that, it is the reality we all must deal with. So go along and then take the message back to your state and federal political representative and your growth-obsessed local council.

Let's hear it for the End of Growth

Senior Fellow at America’s Post Carbon Institute, Richard Heinberg, will be in Melbourne on Saturday 22 September as part of his national speaking tour on how to shape the economy of the future.

Mr Heinberg, who has written extensively on peak oil, will speak to his latest book “The End of Growth”.

“Economies cannot grow forever, even if they are based on renewable energy. We must adjust to the fact that our own civilisation has reached limits with regard to population, water, soil, raw materials, and energy,” said Mr Heinberg.

Sustainable Population Australia (SPA) is hosting his national tour, and in Melbourne they are joined by The Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) and the Centre for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy (CASSE). The evening will be chaired by Kelvin Thomson MP, Federal Member for Wills and well known campaigner on population issues.

Good to see that Kelvin Thomson, one of very few politicians in this country who seems to 'get it' is chairing. Well done Jill Quirk, Jenny Warfe and Vivian Ortega for getting this up in Melbourne!

Victorian/Tasmanian branch president of SPA, Jill Quirk, said it was an opportune time for Richard Heinberg to visit Melbourne.

“Melbourne’s population is growing at an alarming rate,” said Ms Quirk. “Urban growth boundaries are being extended to cope with it and green wedges violated. More and more resources are required to provide infrastructure for all the extra people yet governments are unwilling to provide them.”

Before arriving in Melbourne, Mr Heinberg will have spoken to meetings in Brisbane, the Sunshine Coast, Sydney and Canberra. After Melbourne, his speaking tour will move to Adelaide and Perth and finish at the Sydney Festival of Dangerous Ideas.

Details of the Melbourne event:

The End of Growth: Peak Oil and the Economy of the Future

7.30 pm Saturday 22 September

The Wheeler Centre, 176 Little Lonsdale Street

Chaired by Kelvin Thomson MP

$5 entry at the door. RSVP and inquiries: Jenny Warfe via #10;">Email Jenny Warfe via SPAVic

(This article also looks at related population, immigration and democracy issues in the West.) A film, Innocence of Muslims has been released of which parts available on you-tube portray the founder of Islam in a bad personal and political light, to say the least. A strong theme depicts Muslims as aggressively anti-Christian. Apparently largely as a response to this film, there have been widespread riots by Muslims against foreign embassies, particularly US embassies, including riots in Sydney on 15 September 2012, with police injured. Meanwhile warships from more than 25 countries, including the United States, Britain, France, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, are together launching a military exercise in the Straits of Hormuz, in response to threats to close it off. There is plenty of reason for Muslims to be angry with and frightened by the West apart from that film. And maybe Westerners should hold their own governments to greater account if we are to avoid World War Three.

In this youtube film Syrian Girl Partisan puts forward a thoughtful hypothesis surrounding the timing of the release of the anti-Islamic film.

A Wikipedia article, although incomplete and ongoing, shows that authorship of the film Innocence of Muslims, remains extremely cloudy and confused.[1] Jewish sources have denied involvement but some aggressive marketing of the film by US Christian militants seems well documented.[1]

The President of the United States has apologised to Islam for the film. In Australia some politicians have come out saying that riots by Muslims in response to the film have exposed a 'downside' of multiculturalism, but they seem mute on the contradictions between fighting oil wars in Islamic countries and causing displacement that creates refugees and immigrants seeking homes here. I have received correspondence highlighting that the ability to express views in art and media is preferable to expressing those views via war and that non-censorship is a Western value worth defending. I agree. Reacting to a Muslim demonstrator's sign calling for beheading of critics of Islam, Australian MP, Kelvin Thomson, made a speech in parliament declaring that Australians, including those of migrant origin, are expected to uphold all laws in this country, even those they disagree with. He meant laws against inciting violence.

Muslim reactions

Despite the rightfulness of the need to uphold the law and avoid violence, I can understand why some Muslims are very insulted. Australians are poorly educated in history, or more might be aware of the context of current military interventions and a history of western interference beginning with colonial takeovers in the late 19th century and the fostering of worse and worse governments by British, US, French and other colonial and corporate forces. All countries become basket cases after colonisation, some sooner rather than later. Australia is on the way. In the mean time, making 'the enemy' look ridiculous dehumanises them and makes it easier for them to dehumanise Westerners. Dehumanising by both sides makes war seem excusable, even irresistable, to each side.

Although I have heard the argument that Christians do not riot violently in the street every time a work comes out making fun of Christianity (Life of Brian, Piss Christ etc), I think that maybe they would if Muslims rolled into Western states in tanks, put us under curfew, told us how to run our countries and went about privatising our government oil companies. In fact, what the foreign Christian-and secular-backed western governments are doing to the Islamic countries is a hell of a lot nastier than rioting in the streets. [2]

The film is a symbol - not the main game

Because of these realities, I am reluctant to publish articles that unilaterally mock Muslims who reacted furiously to the film in question, without also mocking the hypocrisy of non-Muslim regimes which create refugees in one place and take them in for safety in another, whilst pushing commercial interests as if they were democracy. There is more to this than a film. The film is just a symbol, but wars are actually in progress and people in the Middle East are terrified, as we all should be. I also don't think it achieves anything for ants to stir up other ants' nests with a stick, especially when Russia and China are the traditional lords of the region and the angry ants are sitting on most of the world's remaining oil reserves.

How did we get to here in Australia and where is the anti-war movement when you need them?

On discussion pages attached to recent SBS programs about the conditions that create asylum seekers, (Re "Go back to where you came from" - what about the NON-asylum seekers?)" someone observed that we have very strong pro-asylum seeker and pro-refugee protests in Australia these days, but almost none against the wars we are participating in, even though those wars coincide with exoduses of people claiming persecution. The comment pointed out that significant refugee streams from such situations consist of people who worked with the invading armies, noting that, in the asylum seeker film, one man stated that he had fought on our side: "I helped you," and presented this as an argument for his being accepted as an asylum seeker. The comment thus raised a number of controversial issues not often discussed in Australia and seems to have been removed.

Wars and invasions present citizens or inhabitants in the embattled and invaded country with invidious 'choices' which notably include fighting the invaders or working for them. See Greg Muttitt's Fuel on the fire, Bodley Head, London, 2011, for a brilliant history of oil and politics in Iraq. In a country where most of the population usually have not agreed to have their government taken over by foreigners, anyone apparently working willingly with the invaders, whether or not the invaders see themselves as peace-makers, risks being identified by their compatriots as collaborators with the enemy.[3] For this reason alone a person working with foreigners will incur the wrath of their compatriots. Since 'our' armies [i.e. allies of Australia] and interventions are currently always purportedly in support of minority dissidents and revolutionary armies, perhaps anyone who can show they fought on Australia's side tends to have a well-founded fear of persecution.

We never address these illogicalities, these contradictions in our asylum seeker and refugee discussions, where at least some of the people seeking asylum here may be considered heroes by Australians but traitors by their own countrymen. What sort of responsibility do we have for nationals who took positions as salaried workers or occasional assistants for foreign officials in an occupation? Is it not more likely that people who are already on the outer in their own country will take their chances with the occupying army? In a country where food and shelter are luxuries, working for the occupying forces may be the only way of surviving at any particular time, and resisting those forces may verge on suicidal. It may also be necessary to work with the occupying forces in order to save what is left of the country, even though the occupying forces initiated the destruction. This situation is again described superbly in Greg Muttitt's Fuel on the fire, mentioned above.

Refugees from Algerian and Vietnamese wars

When Australian Prime Minister, Malcolm Fraser, brought in Vietnamese refugees, many of these favoured the right wing government and fought against the nationalist wars in Vietnam. Years later the Vietnamese war is largely seen as a war for independence from colonial rule by the French, the Japanese, the British, the French again, then the United States. The Communist Party at the time was probably the largest of several political parties involved in the resistance. This observation should not be taken to label all Australians of Vietnamese origin here as right-wing, but the inference cannot be avoided that people who sided with Australia's allies during the war in Vietnam were not on the side that ultimately won in a war where Australia's participation is now widely seen as unjust.[3]

In the Algerian wars of independence against France the Harkis is the term given to those Algerians (mostly muslims) who were working for, either covertly or overtly, the French colonial government and who had an interest in defending that status quo. After the French withdrew - nearly one million of them, many who had been born and bred in Algeria going to live in France - the Harkis faced reprisals from their countrymen, who saw them as traitors. Many Harkis sought asylum in France, but the French government avoided what was seen by many as a responsibility to look after these people.

Where do militant religious sects fit in?

Where do militant religious sects, like the Taliban, or the less 'extreme' Hezbollah fit in? There are two ways that such sects serve a practical need. One is that they provide a cover for political action, organisation and resistance in countries where overt political meetings attract execution (both from national governments and from occupying forces). Another reason is that, in countries disorganised by war and occupation, they often retain some organising capability to meet local needs for food distribution, care for the sick, distribution of inheritances, care of orphans and widows. They also provide work, food and shelter. Some alternatives may present in the form of foreign aid organisations, including non-Muslim religious missionaries as well as the Red Cross or other non-sectarian samaritans. Seeking help from these non-local or alternative organisations may also carry the stigma of perceived collaboration with enemies, outsiders or poorly viewed minorities, and generally weakening local or national solidarity. Therefore seeking help from local organisations is likely to be safer. In Muslim countries, Western economic cultural practices which include banks that lend money with interest, buying, selling and consuming alcohol and incorporation of national assets and resources for private profit all run counter to religious and social philosophy. Siding with forces that market these practices is to accept the unacceptable and undermine your peoples' economic interests. Muslims share these values with many Westerners who do not, however, have the support of their social and religious communities or the local organisation to help them fight these economic ills.

Australia's silent anti-war movement, vocal pro-immigration lobby - what's the connection?

As well as Australia having a lot of protest about the need to take in asylum seekers and refugees, but little or no recent protest against involvement in wars in their countries of origin, Australia also lacks concerted protest against an undemocratic and unwanted policy of high immigration. Part of the reason for this is probably that high immigration is dishonestly marketed by government and commercial growth lobbyists as if it consisted largely of refugees and asylum seekers, although the vast majority of immigrants to Australia are wealthy economic migrants. You would think that this situation should still lead to protests against our involvement in unjust wars, but somehow it does not. One explanation could be that our mass media wants to promote both war and mass migration and therefore suppresses publication of contrary views, giving us the false impression that no-one cares about the other side.

Divide, conquer and grow

Another reason that protest is muted seems to be the doctrine of multiculturalism. This ideology is used covertly to engineer massive population growth by growing populations of different ethnic identities, at the same time dividing and conquering democratic input about high immigration. When people protest about the increase in immigration numbers causing inflation, and pressure on the environment and services, they are accused of attacking the ethnicity of those immigrants. Australian and state governments generally side-step the numbers issue and divert talk to how they welcome people from different ethnicities and races, implying that complaints about high immigration are really only about shifts in Australia's cultural center of gravity. In fact the official encouragement of multiple separate ethnic communities in Australia is obviously a source of concern to Australians of all origins. It seems that most people have a sense that after "Divide" comes "Conquer," and Australians feel they are being divided and losing their standard of living, quality of life and security. Housing inflation causing new levels of debt and homelessness is the most obvious example of the cost of population growth.

Look out for the enemy

Along with "Divide and Conquer" there is the policy of "Look out for the enemy". The enemy at the moment is identified as Islam. Since 9-11 the presentation of this old traditional enemy of Europe as an imminent threat has been ramped up to fever pitch and offered as a reason to enter Islamic countries - even where they were secular states - and endlessly seek weapons of mass destruction even after it has been shown there were none. At home in the Anglophone and other European states, harsh new anti-democratic policies have been brought in to counter threats of Islamic terrorism, making it possible to accuse people of terrorism without giving public proof. The wars for 'democracy' in the Middle East are eroding democracy in the West. At the same time new streams of Islamic immigrants (and refugees) have been welcomed to the very states making war on their homes.

Saudi Arabia - curiously part of the Western club

One Islamic state stands out for its exemption from foreign intervention and its collusion with the allies against its Islamic neighbours. That is Saudi Arabia. Saudi royal family members are legion. Jet-setting globe-trotters, they are members of an international power elite, founded on oil-wells. At the same time they are among the most repressive governments in the world, with astounding records of human rights abuse and slavery, crowned by their nation-wide enchattlement of women. These representatives of Islam seem to be the only Middle Eastern Islamic government friends of European governments and immune to revolution or NATO intervention.

Confusion from West to East

Should we be surprised that there is now confusion all round, with many Westerners convinced that Islam is out to destroy their way of life, and many Muslims convinced that Westernism is out to destroy their way of life? If you look at what is happening in the world today, the evidence seems to be weighted in favour of the Muslim perception, with a history going back to the 19th century. It is hard to say that Islam is persecuting the West when Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya lie in pieces after foreign 'intervention' and warships from more than 25 countries, including the United States, Britain, France, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, are together launching a military exercise in the Straits of Hormuz as I write.

In this context, riots in response to the release of a film, Innocence of Muslims, that seems extremely inflammatory and insulting to Islam and its popularisation by US Christian militants, seem predictable. I have not seen most of the film, but I have seen several minutes on you-tube and I can see what the Muslims are angry about. It may well be that the film makes justifiable criticisms of Islamic culture and beliefs, but, as Jon Faine recently said, "Why poke a stick in an anthill?" Under such circumstances, the launch of Innocence of Muslims looks suspiciously like a politically detonating device, so I am glad that Obama has apologised.

Real political pressures created by high immigration and wars to fuel big populations

The fact remains that, in Australia, as in Canada, the United States and Britain, high immigration and overseas wars are creating political pressures. The power and commercial elites responsible for the high immigration that is depriving incumbent populations of their rights are the same people who are pushing in the Middle East for control of oil production and infrastructure roll-out so as to be able to grow corporate profits and continue their population growth and economic 'growth' agendas at home. Although democracy is a word so often brandished in the Middle East by Western forces, what is more often meant is capitalism, imposed by force, incurring many deaths. Iraq is a sad example of this - see Oil on the Fire and The Shock Doctrine and Saving the Baghdad Zoo: A True Story of Hope and Heroes. Libya's atomization through foreign intervention, purportedly to bring democracy, is a more recent example of the same kind of activity. We are now watching on the world theatre, with our bags of pop-corn, the purported democratization forces gather in the Bay of Hormuz, ready to 'reform'.

Grass roots democracy on the internet - not so easy to keep us in the dark now

But the internet has broadened the information we can get about wars now. Syrians who don't like the war there are managing to get its own side out to the world. Syrian Girl Partisan is a notable example, and she has broadened her commentary and explanations now to include an interpretation of what happened in Libya on "US Ambassador Lynched like Gaddafi And Youtube Censors." as well as the later film linked a the top of this article.

Several Egyptian demonstrators have confessed that they were paid to protest about the Innocence of Muslims near the US Embassy in Cairo, the Middle East News Agency cites Prime Minister Hesham Kandil as saying. (Source: RT News Anti-US riots grip Muslim world," http://rt.com/news/anti-american-protests-live-updates-053/

Former Congresswoman, Cynthia McKinney

On 16 September 2012, in an email, Former US Congresswoman, Cynthia McKinney wrote:

"U.S. bombs continue to fall in Somalia, Pakistan, Yemen, and now it is reported that the US drones are flying all over Libya and are bombing from Benghazi to Tripoli. Reports from Libya today are that foreign oil companies have evacuated their employees and stopped operations and that U.S. troops are in various parts of the country.

Tragedy continues to unfold in Libya. [...]"

McKinney: Questions on killings in Libya

"Every loss of life is tragic and that is why I oppose the current US policy of killing. The US is currently regularly killing people in Asia and in Africa. Taken to its extreme, the Obama Administration even claims authority to kill US citizens on US soil!

The unfolding situation in Libya is troubling, not only for the bloodletting and carnage that is taking place, but also because of the murkiness that surrounds the events themselves. I have several observations and a few questions:

1. The scenario of an anti-Islamic hate film triggering a protest that leads to violence replicates the events that took place in the initial uprising in Benghazi in early 2011. At that time, the annual protest in Benghazi against the anti-Islamic Danish cartoons was taking place. The march was infiltrated by persons with an agenda, who used the event as an opportunity to seize military equipment from the Jamahiriya government and use it against the Libyan population. If it is known that Muslim protest on the streets can be touched off by attacking the Qur'an, then once again parties with another agenda can spark then infiltrate that protest and use it as cover. It worked before to launch an entire chain of events in Libya, why not again? The reports on who created and financed the film are very muddled.

2. Today, the Libyan/Al Qaeda/US/NATO/Israel government is bombing Sabha and the black Libyan Toubu people who constitute a stronghold of the vibrant Libyan resistance. Interestingly, no R2P is being invoked to do so here, but could this be covertly directed against the Green Resistance (self-described as well financed and ready to fight to the last bullet, the last man, the last dollar)?

3. A video is available of the 12 September attack on the US convoy that killed 2 US citizens and injured 14, indicating Day Two of an uprising/action.

4. There are photos published today of US special ops forces landing in Libya. If true, is this to counter the Green Resistance, or springboard into Egypt if need be, or worse? Foreign troops are in Libya already securing oil platforms. What might this have to do with Iran? Libyan oil was theorized to ensure oil to Europe in the case of a shutoff from Iran. Does this have anything to do with the impending Netanyahu visit to the US?"

NOTES

[1] Excerpt from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_of_Muslims" describes known history of film production.
"Production

The cast and crew have publicly stated that they were deceived about the purpose and content of the film. In a statement obtained by CNN, the film's 80 cast and crew members disavowed the film, saying: "The entire cast and crew are extremely upset and feel taken advantage of by the producer. We are 100% not behind this film and were grossly misled about its intent and purpose." It further explained, "We are shocked by the drastic re-writes of the script and lies that were told to all involved. We are deeply saddened by the tragedies that have occurred." Cindy Lee Garcia, who played the mother of Muhammad's bride-to-be, said the script was for a movie about life in Egypt 2,000 years ago, called Desert Warrior (and possibly also Desert Storm), and that the character "Muhammad" was referred to as "Master George" on set. According to Garcia, "Bacile" claimed to be an Israeli real estate mogul. Later, however, he told her he was Egyptian and she heard him speaking in Arabic with other men on set. Garcia stated it makes her "sick" that she was involved in the film and that she is considering legal action against "Bacile." Sarah Abdurrahman, a producer for WNYC's On the Media program, watched the trailer and concluded that all of the religious references were overdubbed after filming.[30] The independent film was directed by a person first identified in casting calls as Alan Roberts, whose original cut did not include references to Muhammad or Islam.

In September 2012, "Sam Bacile" was initially described as a 56-year-old (52-year-old according to the Wall Street Journal) real estate developer from Israel who spoke by phone with the Associated Press. Israeli authorities found no sign of him being an Israeli citizen, and there was no indication of a 'Sam Bacile' around 50 years old living in California, having a real estate license or participating in Hollywood filmmaking. Though "Bacile" claimed the film had been made for $5 million from more than 100 Jewish donors, Hollywood Reporter described the film's appearance as unprofessional, bringing this claim into doubt. According to a man who identified himself to the Wall Street Journal as Bacile, the film was produced to call attention to what he called the "hypocrisies" of Islam.[40] After further reports suggested that Bacile was neither Israeli nor Jewish, Rabbi Abraham Cooper condemned initial reports that Bacile was Jewish and the movie was financed by "100 Jewish donors," saying that whoever told this to the Associated Press committed a blood libel and said that the media did not thoroughly research this claim. Cooper said that to "catapult what might be a nonexistent Jewish element could lead to violence against Jews," and called on the media to learn from this incident, while investigating who exactly created the film.

Later, "Sam Bacile" was identified as Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, a Coptic Christian immigrant from Egypt living in Cerritos, California, near Los Angeles. In 2010, Nakoula, who had served prison time on a 1990s conviction for manufacturing methamphetamine, pleaded no contest to bank fraud and was sentenced to 21 months in prison; he was released on probation from prison in June 2011. Authorities said Nakoula told the police that he had written the movie's script while in prison and, together with his son, Abanob Basseley, raised between $50,000 and $60,000 from his wife's family in Egypt to finance the film. According to CNN, the FBI contacted him because of the potential for threats, but he is not under investigation by the FBI. However, federal officials are investigating whether Nakoula violated the terms of his probation, which barred him from using the Internet for five years. According to The Smoking Gun, Nakoula had planned to produce the film as early as May 2009, when he first took out ads for crew members. However, he was arrested on the bank fraud charges a month later; after his arrest, Nakoula cooperated with prosecution to obtain a reduced sentence.

American non-profit Media for Christ obtained film permits to shoot the movie in August 2011, and Nakoula provided his home as a set and paid the actors, according to government officials and those involved in the production. Media for Christ president Joseph Nassralla Abdelmasih reportedly went into hiding after the violent response to the film.

Steve Klein, a Vietnam veteran who has been active in opposing Islam and has been associated with paramilitary style "hate groups" at his church according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, was asked by Nakoula to be the spokesman for the film. The movie's self-identified consultant, Klein reportedly told Nakoula: "You're going to be the next Theo van Gogh." Klein later told journalist Jeffrey Goldberg that "Bacile" is not a real person and is neither Israeli nor Jewish, as has been reported, and that the name is a pseudonym for about 15 Copts and Evangelical Christians from Syria, Turkey, Pakistan and Egypt; Goldberg questioned the reliability of Klein. Klein rejected any blame for the violent reaction to the movie, saying, "Do I feel guilty that these people were incited? Guess what? I didn't incite them. They're pre-incited, they're pre-programmed to do this."
Release

The film's screening as "Innocence of Bn Laden" was advertised in the "Arab World newspaper" during the months of both May and June. The ad cost $300 to run three times in the paper and was paid by an individual identified only as "Joseph". The ads were noted by the Anti-Defamation League. The Islamic affairs director stated: "When we saw the advertisement in the paper, we were interested in knowing if it was some kind of pro-jihadist movie." Brian Donnelly, a guide for a Los Angeles based tour of famous crime scenes, noticed the poster advertising at the Vine Theatre. "I didn't know if it was a good thing or a bad thing. We didn't know what it was about because we can't read Arabic. The earlier version of the film was screened once at the Vine Theatre in Hollywood California of June 23, 2012 to an audience of only ten people. The film had no subtitles and was presented in English. An employee of the theatre stated: “The film we screened was titled ‘The Innocence of Bin Laden’,” and added that it was a “small viewing.”

A second screening was planned for June 30, 2012. A local Hollywood blogger, John Walsh attended a June 29 Los Angeles City Council meeting where he raised his concerns about the film's screening. “There is an alarming event occurring in Hollywood on Saturday,” he stated. “A group has rented the Vine Street theater to show a video entitled ‘Innocence of Bin Laden.’ We have no idea what this group is.” The blog site reported that the June 30 screening had been canceled. A Current TV producer photographed the poster while it was being displayed at the theatre as advertising to later discuss on the program "The Young Turks." According to one attendee, "the acting was of the worst caliber," and he "had no inkling that that movie was anti-Islamic and did not recall the movie referencing the prophet Mohammad," but he did not see the whole film.

It was reported on September 14, 2012, that a planned screening by a Hindu organization in Toronto will be coupled with "snippets from other movies that are offensive to Christians and Hindus." Because of security concerns no public venue has been willing to show the film; it will be shown in private for a small audience of 200 people. Siobhán Dowling of the The Guardian reported that "a far-right Islamophobic group in Germany", The Pro Deutschland Citizens' Movement, has uploaded the trailer on their own website and wants to show the entire film but authorities are attempting to prevent it.

Two clips were posted on YouTube on July 1 (13'02", title "The Real Life of Muhammad", comment "Part of the movie, "Life of Muhammad"..... ????? ?? ???? ???? ????") and 2nd (13'50", title "Muhammad Movie Trailer", comment "????? ??????? ??????") by user "sam bacile". By September, the film had been dubbed into Arabic and was brought to the attention of the Arabic-speaking world by Coptic blogger Morris Sadek, whose Egyptian citizenship had been revoked for promoting calls for an attack on Egypt. A two-minute excerpt dubbed in Arabic was broadcast on September 8 by Sheikh Khalad Abdalla[65] on Al-Nas, an Egyptian television station, On September 11, "Sam Bacile" YouTube account commented in Egyptian Arabic on a video from Al-Nahar TV uploaded 2 days earlier "??????? ?? ???? ?????? 100%" which means: "Idiots, this is an American film 100%".

The film was supported by pastor Terry Jones, whose burning of copies of the Quran previously led to deadly riots around the world. On September 11, 2012, Jones said that he planned to show a 13-minute trailer that night at his church the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida. Jones said in a statement that "it is an American production, not designed to attack Muslims but to show the destructive ideology of Islam. The movie further reveals in a satirical fashion the life of Muhammad."

[2] I realise that our governments are currently privatising our resources, encouraging overpopulation and making harsh laws, but so far the Australian government has not taken up arms against citizens, nor have the foreign corporate entities that have taken over Australian resources and assets - yet.

[3] An unusual source documenting the problems of survival in an occupied capital it the remarkable book by Babylon's Ark by authors Lawrence Anthony and Graham Spence
"Most of the Iraqi zoo staff who walked to and from work braved a daily gauntlet of bullets, looters, and murderous fedayeen [see definition end paragraph] keen to slit the throats of anyone associating with foreigners. Despite being senior-ranking veterinarians, Dr. Adel and Dr. Husham also trekked the hazardous miles from their homes, taking the same chances as the humblest laborer. We never knew who would pitch up each morning, and we never blamed those who deemed it too dangerous to make it that day." Anthony, Lawrence; Spence, Graham (2007-03-06). Babylon's Ark: The Incredible Wartime Rescue of the Baghdad Zoo (Kindle Locations 1932-1936). Macmillan. Kindle Edition. " "Fedayeen": The Fedayeen was first created by an Iranian from Qom named Hassan-i-Sabbah, who held the main headquarters in Alamut-- modern day Qazvin, Iran. Fedayeen are any of various groups of people known to be volunteers, not connected to an organized government or military, in the Near East. They are usually deployed for a cause where the government has been viewed as failed or non-existent. They are associated with the role of resistance against occupation or tyranny. The name "fedayeen" is used to refer to armed struggle against any form of enslavement with actions based on resistance." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fedayeen

[3] There is also a view that under the Fraser government they were encouraged to weaken the Australian union movement, notably the Australian Postal and Telecommunications Union in Victoria.

According to the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, at 30 June 2010, an estimated 566 815 New Zealand citizens were present in Australia. Total departures to Australia were a record 53,900 departures, offset by14,000 arrivals from Australia.
Already there are unlimited temporary sponsored working visas to Australia. These "temporary" workers are then allowed, after 4 years, to apply for PR. New Zealanders can enter Australia unlimited. Business-savvy migrants with at least $5 million to invest in Australia can apply for new investor visas from November.

Unlimited New Zealanders

Under various arrangements since the 1920s, there has been a free flow of people between Australia and New Zealand.

The 1973 Trans-Tasman Travel Arrangement has allowed Australian and New Zealand citizens to enter each other's country to visit, live and work, without the need to apply for authority to enter the other country.

According to the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, at 30 June 2010, an estimated 566 815 New Zealand citizens were present in Australia.

Clifford Hayes, Victorian Senate candidate for the new Stable Population Party, said rapid growth was worsening urban congestion and damaging the environment. Australia's population grew by 1.4 per cent to reach 22.5 million by the end of last year.

Cr Hayes, who is deputy mayor of Bayside Council, said more than 50,000 New Zealanders moved to Australia during the past year.
He said the deal that allows unlimited trans-Tasman migration should be abolished.

Call to Stem Kiwi tide as States Head Count Surges- Herald Sun

Total departures to Australia were a record 53,900 departures, offset by14,000 arrivals from Australia. In both directions, most migrants were Kiwis. They seek higher wages and a better standard of living, thus creating a political issue for the National government, which vowed to reverse the trend.

From the data gathered the findings suggest that the Amendment to the TransTasman Travel Agreement has had a number of negative impacts on the Pacific Islander and Maori population in South East Queensland. The younger generation experience barriers to education, which constrains employment opportunities and exacerbates social problems within families, communities and broader Australia.

Out of Reach, Out of Sight : Unequal Opportunities across the Tasman. Tove Andersson, Rebecca Latta, Jeremy Leonard and Jordan Stock . University of Queensland.

457 Working Visas

Already there are unlimited temporary sponsored working visas to Australia. These "temporary" workers are then allowed, after 4 years, to apply for PR. New Zealanders can enter Australia unlimited.

This 457 visa allows a business to employ someone from outside Australia in a skilled job in Australia. If you hold this visa, you can:
- work in Australia for up to four years
- bring your family with you (people who may not be skilled)
- travel in and out of Australia as often as you want

The 457 visa is Australia’s principal long-term working visa, and as such is the favoured means among Australian employers looking to bring on skilled offshore talent, or individuals who want to work temporarily in Australia.

The 457 visa program is demand driven and therefore uncapped (unlimited in the number of visas the government can approve) and the Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC) "Centres of Excellence" who process these applications prioritise quick processing so that Australian businesses can access the skilled workers they need from overseas without delay through the visa process.

Immigration Program: record numbers, city bound

At the time of the 2012 May Budget announcements the Labor Government indicated that there would be a further increase in the permanent-entry program from 163,000 in 2010–11 and 185,000 in 2011–12 to 190,000 in 2012–13.

The skilled program includes points-tested, state-sponsored, business-sponsored and employer-sponsored migrants. The humanitarian program is likely to add another 14,000. These categories add to 204,000, which is the highest annual permanent entry level since World War Two.

This record-high intake will occur at the same time as the Labor Government is permitting employers to sponsor an unlimited number of temporary entry 457 visa holders.

(The 2012–13 immigration program: record numbers, city-bound Bob Birrell and Genevieve Heard. Centre for Population and Urban Research , Monash University, May 2012)

Their conclusion:

The Government’s migration program is out-of-date. It is now part of the problem. The new circumstances require a smaller and better targeted intake, which delivers scarce skills to the industries and locations which really need them. The rest of the program should be culled until the current employment crisis is over.

With little industry in Australia, and heavy reliance on the now-peaked mining industries, wealth creation and revenue raising has resorted to actually poaching not only skilled from Asia and developing nations, but the wealthy too. It assumes that Australia has unlimited natural resources to plunder, and that any population pressures, infrastructure shortages and costs of living can simply be passed onto voters who will bear the brunt of this excessive welcome to Australia of unlimited numbers of foreigners.

Discussing of population has been (almost) successively squashed by political correctness, and any criticism of our immigration levels - mostly from Asia - is often unreasonably deemed "racist" and "xenophobic".

We face challenging times ahead, with a changing climate and managing natural resource depletions. Adding more people is a sign that those who have their bums on seats in our political power-houses have little appreciation of Nature, planetary threats, social justice issues, and the pressures on our social and environmental structures that are exacerbated by increasing populations.

Australia is being wrecked by an environmentally bankrupt administration. They imagine that Australia is no more than an Economy, and our economy can survive, despite a sterile and depleted environment, overwhelmed by concrete housing, urban sprawl and the multiple demands of growing human numbers.

False assumptions

Birrell and Heard conclude that the Labor government has acted on two assumptions. One is that the minerals boom will require a huge increase in skilled workers who must be drawn in part from migration. The other is that, as a consequence of the resources boom, the rest of the Australian economy will surge, generating a nation-wide shortage of skilled workers.

The first of these assumptions is correct, but not the second. DIAC’s skilled visas are structured on the assumption that there are nation-wide shortages of skilled workers and that employers everywhere should be allowed to sponsor 457s and permanent migrants in any skilled occupation, industry or location in Australia. As a result most of the migrants in the record-high intake planned will end up in East coast cities, particularly Sydney and Melbourne. They will add to the stresses of Australian workers struggling to find work in a weak labour market.

It's also tunnel-vision thinking – the jobs market, skills supply and economic development do not embrace democratic considerations, housing, costs of living pressure, environmental impacts, human footprints, and social/economic implications for existing Australians.

New Business migration

Business-savvy migrants with at least Got $5 million? Here's a visa - The Age can apply for new investor visas from November. The investment visas were announced in May and Immigration Minister Chris Bowen released what the conditions were on Wednesday.

People can submit expressions of interest through SkillSelect from November 24.

Australia seen as a refuge in a troubled world

The Australian Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC) is uncovering record numbers of fraudulent weddings and spouse claims being made by visa cheats in order to gain Australian citizenship.

The Herald Sun recently reported details of DIAC's efforts to find and act upon the fraudulent claims:
Immigration report reveals Former foreign students switched visas in a bid to stay in Australia

More than 1300 overseas-born partners have been sent packing in the past four years after their relationships with Australian residents and citizens were exposed as lies - 406, or eight a week, in the past year alone.

Given the increasing value of an Australian visa in a troubled world and the massive interest in coming to Australia it is high time that we raised the bar, Monash University immigration expert Bob Birrell said.

 Immigration officials granted 45,150 partner visas in the past year, almost 20,000 more than 15 years ago.

Australia is assumed to be a repository, a safe haven, and unlimited resource for jobs, housing, food, and immune from the world's increasing problems – caused largely by human overpopulation.

The Government and opposition's population engineering continues to wreck havoc on democracy and land-tenure, affecting both private property and public lands, and impacting on established low-key local commerce. New proposed uses for the Green Wedge actually include saw-mills and display homes. The Flinders Community Association have begun issuing an information-packed alert for distribution to the local community detailing the damage that State Government changes to our Green Wedges can do to peoples' local natural, social and commercial environment, whilst removing their ability to defend what is theirs. Other communities may wish to take a similar democratic initiative before all our rights to self-government are swept away by unjust legislation to benefit developers. Note that these moves were begun by the previous Labor Government - which is hardly fighting them now. The incumbent government should be rolling back what Bracks and Brumby did, but instead, they are making things worse.MEETING IN FLINDERS COMMUNITY HALL 4 PM SATURDAY SEPTEMBER 15th 2012

Flinders Community Association warning

Minister Louise Asher of the State Government has already set in motion sweeping changes that threaten the National parks but further changes announced by Planning Minister Matthew Guy will also materially affect the character and ambience of the Mornington Peninsula and its towns and villages.

These changes, announced if fully implemented are far reaching and will affect all of us in some way.

This “one shoe fits all” approach to planning is considered by the FCA to be inappropriate – particularly after analysing how the changes would affect the Mornington Peninsula.

Some publicity has been given to aspects of the substantial changes announced by the Minister earlier this month. These have not involved prior consultation yet responses are sought from interested parties by September 21, this year.

The new approach to planning will impact on the future of the Green Wedge, on farming and on the Flinders township - while also putting pressure on the vital Urban Boundaries. In addition, commercial interests will be encouraged to invest in tourism ventures in the National Parks and Reserves.

Ironically, the stated objective of removing uncertainty about rules, policies and planning regulations to encourage greater investment will create further uncertainty, according to our shire planning department, which believes VCAT will be used more often for decision-making and we will have “planning by appeal”. In some cases landowners and developers will be given “as of right” permission to do anything they want without anyone knowing about it and leaving others with no right of appeal!

A couple of specific local examples would be that the hotel (opposed by all parties, local members and community groups) proposed a few years ago to be sited at the corner of Browns and Greens roads beside the Mornington Peninsula National Park would just be given the go-ahead without even needing to pretend it was in any way rural or interested in environmental studies. A development like T’Gallant, the restaurant, would not have to be heard over the number of customers it could service as the limit of 150 patrons is to be scrapped, as will the requirement of 40 hectares site minimum in the Green Wedge needed before building group accommodation. Medical centres, places of assembly and primary and secondary schools are all listed as acceptable for the Green Wedge etc. etc.

What the Amendment Proposes

- Green Wedge zone provisions are to be liberalized to increase the range of agricultural uses allowed without a permit. These include Primary produce sales (for produce grown on the land) and Rural Industry (other than an Abattoir and Sawmill and limited floor area to 200m2) but not within 100m of a dwelling in separate ownership and sale area less than 50 sq m.

Comment: Not requiring a permit means people have the 'as of right' means to do anything they want without having to advertise their intentions so it could mean developments could spring up before anyone knows anything about it and with no right of appeal. The damage would be irreversible. In the interest of conserving landscape and amenity, the siting and design of new buildings such as Rural store demands a permit process. Compliance supervision will need to increase to ensure retail activities sources product only from the property. Near-by urban Industrial zones can readily accommodate rural service industry.

- The list of Green Wedge zone uses subject to permit are to be widened to include Abattoir, Medical centre, Primary school, Sawmill, and Secondary school. Permits can be sought for many other uses including those previously prohibited such as Display home, and Service station, Place of assembly including Amusement parlor, Cinema, Drive-in-theatre, Library and Nightclub

Comment: These permits may not have to be advertised and can be purely at Council's discretion. There are no mandatory provisions that apply. These uses are essentially urban uses and should be located close to the urban population with access to the necessary utility services. Conflicts with farming activities producing smells, dust, noise, waste discharge etc are likely.

- Mandatory conditions are to be deleted relating to the establishment of Function Centre, Group Accommodation, R& D Centre and Research centre, Residential building, Restaurant in conjunction with agriculture etc.

Comment: Large cabin/camping parks, Function centres, and Restaurants etc and could be established on relatively small sites unrelated to agricultural activity. The main tourist routes could become lined with an uninterrupted ribbon of retail activities and restaurants.

Retention of conditions on lot size, area of use, number of patrons, and use “in conjunction with agriculture” etc is necessary to ensure that these uses do not become intrusive in the landscape. Conserving landscape and amenity is critical to maintaining the attraction of the Mornington Peninsula as a key recreation and tourist destination.

- Mandatory restriction on further subdivision in the Green Wedge zone is removed leaving management and control to Council policy.

Comment: Since 1975 the planning scheme has sought to limit the fragmentation of the farming areas from subdivision. Unless relatively strict controls over further subdivision are implemented, adequate sites for agriculture will be difficult to obtain and the further detriment to Peninsula landscapes from closer settlement will occur.

- Three new residential zones (Residential Growth, General Residential, Neighbourhood Residential) are to replace the current five Residential zones. - These will have more guidelines and multiple schedules. ResCode will stay in place as will control on building heights and some local policies (DDO).

Comment: The proposal to indicate growth/change expectations for residential zones could have merit but how will this translate to Flinders? Maintenance of existing village character is essential using existing DDO’s and policies but we will have to fight hard to ensure they remain in place. Growth should be limited to infill development within the Urban Growth Boundary.

- Shops, Offices, Cafés, Medical, Centres etc are to be allowed in these Residential zones without need for a permit within 100 metres of a Commercial zone on the same road frontage.

Comment: In Flinders, there is already an over-supply of retail floor space. The commercial frontage will be doubled under the Amendment. This 'as of right' process gives no opportunity for community review or participation in a permit process for any new development.

- Two new Commercial Zones C1 and C2 replace the 5 existing Business zones, encouraging combined business, retail and office activities. Areas in the existing Business zones 3 and 4 (used for offices, service industry and bulky household goods retailing) will now allow supermarkets and shops to establish.

Comment: Shopping functions will be spread over a wider area and may result in the death of shopping activity in many of the main business centres by encouraging new out of centre developments.

- Industrial zones are to be changed to remove limits on size of offices and allow supermarkets up to 2000sqm and some shops up to 500sqm.in area.

Comment: Industrial activities will be disadvantaged by intrusion of new shopping uses, which would be better placed in the established commercial activity centres.

What can you do?

It is vital we all understand the damage that can be done under these changes. This could irrevocably change the Peninsula as we know it – and its towns and villages. Surely this is the whole reason why tourists come here, to see something that's different not something they have just come from. Do we want the Peninsula to end up just like the Gold Coast in Queensland or the central coast of NSW? Do we want the Great Ocean Road and Wilsons Promontory to also fall under the developers hammer? Tourists want more than just a flash hotel to stay in, another fancy restaurant, another theme park. More and more they want to experience nature, history, the way things work like farming, wine making, cheese making, wildlife reserves.

If you are concerned …

If you are sufficiently concerned by all of this go to the FCA webpage at www.flindersvillage.com.auand click on the various links that give you the full detail of the Government's intentions. You can then send a submission (a letter) to the Government giving your opinions and reasons why to

Mr. P. Allen
Executive Director Planning Systems
Dept. of Planning and Community Development
GPO Box 2392
Melbourne. 3001

Meeting in Flinders

You can also come to an FCA meeting at the Flinders Community Hall at 4pm on Saturday September 15th where the FCA will be seeking approval to make a submission under the FCA banner. But, you should also send yours; the more the better.

Another thing you can do is spread the word. Only the voice of the community can persuade the Government to think twice.

Peter Hall
President.
August 2012

September is Biodiversity Month and its purpose is to promote the importance of protecting, conserving and improving biological diversity in Australia and globally. Australia has between 600,000 and 700,000 species, many of which are endemic.Human activities are reducing genetic, species and ecosystem biodiversity in Australia and population growth is a major driver, according to Sustainable Population Australia Inc. (SPA)

This is a copy of Kelvin Thomson's speech to the Annual General Meeting, Royal Park Protection Group Inc. Flemington Community Centre, 8 September 2012. Kelvin Thomson is a Federal Labor politician in the seat of Wills who stands out for his independent views on democracy and population in a government and opposition that seems depressingly unaware of the importance of these concepts and their effect on each other.
Note: Headings in this article are editorial additions by Candobetter.net

Australia's natural environment its greatest asset

There are many great things about Australia, but to my mind the greatest is the proximity we have to the natural world, to our physical surroundings. And for many people living in inner northern Melbourne, Royal Park remains a place where we still have that. It’s always held fond memories for me. I don’t have many fond memories of a fortnight spent in the Royal Childrens Hospital as a kid after I had my appendix removed, but the one consolation was looking down from my hospital window onto Royal Park and watching the bright orange Flame Robins which came in there in winter. Later on my brother and I learned a lot about native plants from the little native garden built around the Burke and Wills Memorial, and later again as a Melbourne University student I sometimes escaped to the native plant garden off Gatehouse Street. Royal Park has long been, and still is, a very special place. This afternoon I want to talk to you about Melbourne’s traffic mess – what causes it, and what the solutions are for it, and why the East-West Tunnel is not one of them.

Population growth the main cause of Melbourne's traffic problems

The key cause is population growth, which has exploded this century.

Melbourne has been growing at 200 people per day, 1500 per week,
75,000 each year. This brings with it numerous unwelcome consequences – electricity, water and council rates rising much faster than the rate of inflation (and I’ve got copies of a speech explaining how this works down the back for people interested in this issue), the loss of a say in planning decisions for ordinary residents and communities, loss of housing affordability for young people in particular, and pressure on open space and native wildlife.

But the consequence I want to zero in on this afternoon is traffic congestion. The 2001 Census recorded Melbourne at 3.3 million people. By the end of 2009 we got to 4 million; we are on our way to 7 million by 2050.

This of course leads to more car ownership.

There are now 500,000 more cars on Victorian roads than 10 years ago, with most being purchased by people living on Melbourne’s rapidly growing outer fringe. In 1991, Melbournians owned 1.8 million cars and by 2005, car ownership had jumped by almost 700,000 vehicles to
2.45 million. At the current rate of car possession per household, we will have an extra 1.1 million cars by 2036. Does anyone in this room seriously think moving in Melbourne is going to get anything but harder? 1 million extra cars! We get proposals for still more freeways to deal with all these cars but they don’t solve the problem; they just turn into toll roads that make motoring more expensive. Melbourne has one of the highest ratios of road space to population of any city, with Melbournians taking up more road space and generating more emissions per capita than Londoners. In 2007 there were an average 13.37 million trips a day in Melbourne, with 12 million of those taken by car. This increased car ownership and use in turn generates traffic congestion – Melbourne’s traffic mess.

A major problem lurking for our economy is the burgeoning cost of traffic congestion in our major cities. Building new communities and new roads on the urban fringes of Melbourne will lead to more congestion, traffic which will ultimately hurt our economy.

Congestion cost Australia $12.7 billion in 1995 and is envisaged to increase to $29.5 billion by 2015. In Melbourne, it cost $2.7 billion in
1995. Congestion costs equated to $840 per capita. It is estimated this cost will rise to $8 billion by 2015, and equate to $2100 per capita. Road congestion costs in Melbourne will reach nearly $3 billion a year by 2020 under the present regime, a cost borne by every business and household.

Infrastructure Australia's proposed tolls and taxes no solution

This morning I read the head of Infrastructure Australia saying that policymakers have to confront the challenges of traffic congestion. I agree with him that this is a major issue – I don’t think it gets anywhere near enough attention. The amount of time Melbourne drivers spend stuck in traffic, making our lives a misery and fuelling road rage, is a scandal. But where I part company with Infrastructure Australia is their proposed solutions – road tolls, a congestion tax on motorists who drive at peak times, allowing B triple trucks. These things won’t make life better for motorists, they will make things worse. But Infrastructure Australia’s candour about tolls means motorists can be very clear that if the East West Tunnel is built they’ll be paying tolls to drive on it – your weekly motoring bill will rise.

Economists and tycoons benefit from our sacrifices but still make us pay

I guess I will just have to add congestion taxes to the already long list of sacrifices that economists and business tycoons think we should make rather than rethink our addiction to population growth and GDP. They keep telling us that we are better off now than we were in the 1950s, 60s and 70s. Really? When we had free roads, free education, cheap petrol, water and electricity, and ice was delivered by a man with a van and a smile, not by a drug dealer.

How to reduce population growth

As I have outlined in my 14 Point Plan for Population Reform, there is a better way. We can stabilize Australia and Melbourne’s population by reducing net overseas migration to the more sustainable levels we had in the 1980s, significantly reducing skilled migration, capping the Trans-
Tasman open door migration agreement with New Zealand, removing the baby bonus and increasing our foreign aid. This will reduce the pressures on our infrastructure and ease traffic congestion. Trying to build more infrastructure to keep up with population growth is a recipe for disaster – just like a dog chasing its tail, we will never be able to meet our infrastructure pressures until we stabilize our population levels. However until the happy day when Melbourne, Victoria and Australia embraces population reform, it is vital that we maintain the fight to protect our city’s liveability by protecting our city’s green wedges, open spaces, and preventing the constructing of more freeways, such as the East West Link Tunnel. Building more roads does not address congestion, it creates more congestion.

Baillieu Government makes unpopular East-West Tunnel its No.1 objective

In July this year I wrote to Prime Minister Julia Gillard, Minister for Infrastructure Anthony Albanese, Victorian Premier Ted Baillieu, and Opposition Leader Tony Abbott, following the announcement by Tony Abbott that a Liberal Government would contribute $1.5 billion towards an East-West Link Tunnel, and that Premier Ted Baillieu has now made it clear that the construction of an East-West Road Tunnel is his Government’s number one infrastructure priority, despite have no electoral mandate to do so.

Traffic sewers

In my letter I explained that inner areas of Melbourne, including the suburbs of Coburg and Brunswick which I represent, are experiencing increasingly high levels of motor vehicle traffic, and becoming traffic sewers. Constructing a new road tunnel with entry and exit points accessing inner city areas will significantly exacerbate traffic issues. Research has been conducted which shows minimal numbers of motorists actually undertake the total east-west journey on a daily basis, rendering the entire proposal seriously flawed.

In April 2007 I made my first submission to the East-West Link Needs Assessment Study being conducted by Sir Rod Eddington, under the direction of the then Victorian Labor Government. In my submission I outlined how the Victorian population was forecast to increase from the then 4.8 million people to over 6.2 million by 2031, and that it is essential our state has access to the most efficient and effective transport services.

A plan for an additional road link between each and west Melbourne was first discussed by former Premier Jeff Kennett in the late 1990s, and ruled out in the Department of Infrastructure’s Northern Central Corridor Study in 2001. The central reason why the plan failed was because of its lack of utility, as the reality was the tunnel just wasn’t needed.

The findings from the Department of Infrastructure’s original study also outlined that the proposal was rejected at that stage because it was identified that the arterial network could adequately provide for existing east west movements between the Eastern Freeway and Ballarat and Geelong Roads.

East-West tunnel is unnecessary

The Department of Infrastructure also found the tunnel to be unnecessary because relatively little traffic actually crossed between the freeways. Congestion along the Eastern Freeway mostly came, according to their research, from peak hour commuters heading for inner Melbourne.

A lot of these reasons why the East-West Link Tunnel was not needed in the late 1990s are the same reasons why we don’t need it now.

At the time of making my first submission, in 2007, the tunnel was estimated by cost $10 billion. Yet recent reports suggest the tunnel will cost $5 billion, half the price despite being 5 years later. Think about it! Tackling congestion is not solved by building more roads. There is a variety of evidence which shows that increasing road capacity in congested road networks does not simply meet existing growth; it generates and induces more vehicle trips. As Kevin Costner said in “Field of Dreams”, “build it and they will come”.

I outlined a number of evidence based studies in my 2007 submission, including findings from a leading international study that traffic grows when roads are uncongested, but growth rates decline as congestion develops.

Citylink, Western Link, failed to deliver us from congestion

A local study conducted by the Department of Infrastructure in 1999 on the impact of traffic flows on the heavily congested Eastern Freeway since the construction of the Toll Free Western Link, found it “had no changes in the volumes on the Eastern Freeway”.

Before its opening, CityLink was hailed as the solution to Melbourne’s cross-city traffic problems. Although while many expected the big increase in road space to result in free flowing traffic, the reality has been that daily congestion plagues CityLink, with large numbers of single vehicle occupants dominating.

The findings of these leading international and local studies still ring true today – more roads result in more congestion. By simply increasing capacity and not trying to manage congestion we end up with more vehicle trips than would otherwise occur.

The Eddington Report of 2008 made 20 recommendations. Some had many commendable features – such as plans for a rail tunnel from Footscray to Caulfield; a rail link from Werribee to Sunshine; and the proposal for electrification to Sunbury. But I did not support the proposal for a $10 billion east-west road tunnel. It is not just a question of the money, though we all know how these road projects have an uncanny knack of blowing out to double, or more, their pre-construction estimates. It is a question of how such a controversial megaproject will completely soak up the time and energy of the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, of department officers and of engineers so that other projects simply get postponed.

East-West tunnel relies on speculative data

The demand projections in the East West Needs Assessment are speculative. The traffic forecast for a new road tunnel assumes a low toll price and fails to factor in toll avoidance. This is odd given the experience of the Cross City and Lane Cove tunnels in NSW, both of which massively underestimated toll avoidance and hence over estimated traffic flows.

Even with these assumptions the road tunnel only has a cost benefit of less than 0.74 which means for every dollar spent there will be less than
74 cents of benefit. In Sir Rod Eddington’s report to the UK Government he warned them to be wary of projects based on such speculative demand modeling. This advice should equally apply to the East West Needs Assessment study:

“There is no substitute for careful cost-benefit analysis based on robust economic evidence and there are many examples around the world of projects founded on speculative demand forecasts, which did not deliver their purported economic benefits. Further research would be needed to understand the potential scale of these latent demands and the benefits may well be speculative. There is certainly enough for government to be getting on with in the meantime, to tackle the more certain looming challenges of congestion and overcrowding, where intervention offers far more certain economic benefits. Prioritization of transport spending must mean focusing on those schemes where the economic benefits are more certain’."

No light at the end of the East-West tunnel

If the tunnel goes ahead, it will be inevitably at the expense of public transport infrastructure in the eastern suburbs and other areas of Melbourne outer suburbs. It is those projects that we really need to meet Melbourne’s transport needs. This is not anti motorist, or anti truckie. Indeed, I believe many truckies and motorists who have no choice but to use the roads would welcome an invigorated public network which reduced road congestion and shortened their travel times.

However despite the evidence that a road tunnel will worsen congestion, it appears Ted Baillieu has his heart set on getting the project underway. He announced in the Victorian Budget that the State Government would allocate $15 million towards an East-West Tunnel Study. This is a waste of money. It doesn’t bring the tunnel any closer. It’s a sham. There is simply no light at the end of the East-West Tunnel. Inner city residents have previously made it clear they do not want such a tunnel in their neighbourhood.

This costly useless tunnel will scar Royal Park

In July it was reported that drilling in Royal Park is to proceed, with the State Government plotting 13 drill sites in and around the park to investigate a possible route for the East-West Road Tunnel. The cost of this project was said two years ago to be $10 billion. Now it is said to be $5 billion, with the Federal Opposition saying they’ll find $1.5 billion for it. What will happen is that motorists will have to pay tolls to use it. Whatever the amount of public money involved, I believe the East-West Tunnel is the wrong priority.

It will not ease traffic congestion in Melbourne. For years we have been told that one more freeway would solve Melbourne’s traffic congestion problems. I supported CityLink, I supported East Line, I supported the Metropolitan Ring Road, I supported the Craigieburn By-pass. But it never works. As many studies around the world have shown, freeways generate new traffic and new trips.

Money in public transport would be better spent

It would be better to put public money into public transport. This will do more to help traffic congestion, more to contain carbon emissions, and more to help people who don’t drive cars, for example younger people, older people and people with disabilities.

Public transport infrastructure is one of the great unmet needs of our time. Ever since the car took off in Australia, post-war public transport infrastructure has failed to keep pace with suburban growth. In Melbourne, there is a strong public transport infrastructure of train and tram lines out to Melbourne’s city limits circa 1950, but beyond that there is precious little. The million Melbournians who live beyond Melbourne’s 1950 city limits have to drive cars in order to leave their suburbs. Those who commute to the city or other parts of Melbourne to work face long, expensive and tiring trips to and from work every day. Taking their cars through the inner suburbs turns many inner areas into traffic sewers, doing nothing for the quality of life in inner Melbourne. Public transport currently plays a minor role in how this city gets around. Cars account for 91% of passenger kilometers, up from 89% in the mid 1970s, while public transport takes 9%, down from 16% in the mid 1970s.

Serious problems linked to automobile dependency

Serious economic, environmental and social problems are linked to automobile dependency. Economically, car dependence is not good for cities as auto cities have the highest ratio of total transport costs as a proportion of city wealth. The cost of car over a lifetime is $750,000. If a family uses one less car it could save this money for superannuation or spend it on other areas of the economy. I support the proposal for the construction of the Regional Rail Link, a
50 kilometre railway connection from west of Werribee to Southern Cross Station which will link the Melbourne-Geelong railway from west of Werribee to Southern Cross Station via the Melbourne-Ballarat railway.

It is public transport projects like these that should be the priority for connecting our already sprawling city, instead of more roads and freeways.

PUblic transport especially needed on urban fringes

Almost half of all new housing expected in Melbourne over the next decade will be built on the urban fringes where there is little access to public transport. A recent parliamentary report found that only in 100 residents in some of Melbourne’s outer suburbs used only public transport to get to work.

There is a great deal of evidence which shows that when services are improved, more people use them. In 1991 a trial involving improving train services on the Sandringham line from every 20 minutes to every
15 resulted in a one-third increase in passengers. The Mont Albert tram line was extended to Box Hill in 2002 and as a result patronage on the far end of the tram line increased by over 60% between 2000 and 2004. Similarly, the extension of the St Albans suburban train line to Sydenham led to a 30% increase in patronage for the entire line between
2000 and 2004. Suburban train services were extended from Broadmeadows to Craigieburn in 2007, resulting in a significant increase in train frequencies to Craigieburn station. Within the first 12 months of the new service, patronage through Craigieburn station grew threefold. The evidence clearly suggests that if we provide more options for people living on Melbourne’s urban fringe to travel, they will use them. We must do everything we can do to reduce car dependency and the solution lies in better public transport services.

Carbon emissions

Then there is the question of carbon emissions. One of the greatest challenges facing the 21st century is the challenge of climate change. We cannot tackle climate change by building more roads. By all means let us build more transport infrastructure – let’s be a nation of builders – but let it be public transport infrastructure – trains, trams and buses. We cannot build out way out of congestion. We have been trying it for years and it does not work. Time and time again we have seen that increasing road capacity in congested road networks generates and induces more vehicle trips. US studies have shown that those US cities with a decent rail system have fewer congestion problems than cities which do not have a decent rail system. Professor Ross Garnaut’s paper on transport and urban planning included an issues paper which found that building new roads may make Australia’s greenhouse emissions from transport issues worsen. He noted that the provision of road infrastructure may induce growth in passenger car use by reducing the competitive advantage of public transport.

Melbourne Railway projects ready to go

There are plenty of worthy urban public infrastructure projects ready, willing and able to go. In Melbourne, the Eastern Transport Coalition incorporates the councils of Greater Dandenong, Knox, Manningham, Maroondah, Monash, Whitehorse, and Yarra Ranges.

Its chair, Councillor Mick Van de Vreede, has said that, following the Eddington study, it is clear that we need a transport plan for the rest of Melbourne and, in particular, the eastern suburbs. He is right, and the sorts of projects that plan could end up giving effect to are a rail service along the Eastern Freeway corridor from Victoria Park to Doncaster; a heavy rail connection from Huntingdale station to Rowville, along the median of Wellington Road to Stud Park shopping centre; or duplication of the Belgrave and Lilydale lines beyond Ringwood station, with the addition of a third track in a number of locations along the Belgrave and Lilydale lines. There are also some good ideas for improving public transport access to Monash University.

I believe the Doncaster project is a no brainer. Doncaster is an important commercial and civic hub in Melbourne’s north east, and the City of Manningham is the only metropolitan Melbourne municipality without train or tram services. A report by Curtin and RMIT university transport experts in July found a railway line in Doncaster could be built for $840 million, and linked to the proposed Metro rail tunnel for an extra $300 million. It would then be likely to transport around 100,000 passengers per day, the same number of vehicles it is claimed will use the East West Tunnel, which comes with a price tag of at least $5 billion! The Doncaster Railway should go down the Eastern Freeway median, just as Perth’s highly successful Mandurah railway line runs for most of its length along the median of the Kwinana Freeway. It carried 19 million passengers last year, more than it was initially projected to carry by
2020.

Conclusion

The evidence is clear. Our rapid population growth is putting unprecedented pressure on our public infrastructure, especially roads. And the evidence is also just as clear, building an East-West Tunnel will simply fuel congestion, at the expense of investing in genuine forms of sustainable transport including public transport and cycling. We have a responsibility to protect the livability and amenity of our beautiful city, so that future generations, our children and grand-children, are handed over a city in as beautiful condition as the one our parents and grandparents gave to us.

Kelvin Thomson MP Federal Member for Wills

On the ABC News radio this morning (9 Sept 2012) we heard that private coal companies are demanding compensation for carbon trading costs from the Victorian Government and apparently this is being taken seriously!

All the brown coal stations in Victoria belonged to the State electricity Commission of Victoria until 1994 when they were privatised by Jeff Kennett.
Now the current government is saying that it may have to compensate brown coal producers for their not being able to use it because it is too polluting and will be too costly under the carbon trading system.

Do we require further proof of how corrupt and unproductive privatisation is?
What gives when a government not only sells off our assets but then somehow agrees to retain liability for business risks?

You would have thought that the private corporations would have assumed responsibility for the debt.
They have profited from the privatisation over the years and are now crying poor and demanding compensation!
How about making the parliamentarians who agreed to selling off these assets personally financially responsible for any such compensation?

We've known of the dangers of coal since the 18th century. Our leaders should be held responsible for getting us into this mess.

WHO, UNSCEAR, IAEA, ICRP, governments and academia protect the nuclear industry by claiming that low-levels of ionizing radiation do not result in large numbers of health effects such as cancers and congenital abnormalities. It appears, however, that the ICRP risk factors underestimate health effects by a factor of 200 to 600. The Second Event Theory is one attempt to develop a mechanism that explains the dangers of low-level radiation. Meanwhile, in Japan recently, Mr. Hobun Ikeya, a veterinary surgeon and president of the Ecosystem Conservation Society-Japan caused an uproar by stating, “People in areas over which the radioactive plumes passed should not marry [...] If they give birth to children after getting married, the incidence of deformities may be very high.” He was referring to approximately 30 million people. He was asked by a number of Fukushima City councilors to retract the statement, but did not.

In a lecture given in Tokyo on radiation contamination from the disaster at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant in July this year, Mr. Hobun Ikeya, a veterinary surgeon and president of the Ecosystem Conservation Society-Japan¹ caused an uproar by stating, “People in areas over which the radioactive plumes passed should not marry [...] If they give birth to children after getting married, the incidence of deformities may be very high.”² This apparently included not only Fukushima, but also Tokyo and surrounding areas, inhabited by about 30 million people, roughly a quarter of Japan’s population. He was asked by a number of Fukushima City councilors to retract the statement, but did not. Note that radiation in Fukushima City since March 11, 2011 has been high enough to warrant evacuation by children and pregnant women, but no such officially organized evacuation has been planned. Rather, the government has worked hard to try to keep the population in place.

The usual argument given for proclaiming that it is safe for all to live in Fukushima City is that an external dose of up to 20 mSv/yr [milli-Sieverts per year] (100 mSv/yr according to some)³ is “not harmful to health.” Chris Busby explained when he was in Japan in June 2011 that what ‘establishment experts’ who wish to play down the dangers of radiation exposure do not take into account is internal exposure, basing their judgments regarding safety on the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) external exposure risks only. These risk factors are partly the result of research into the health effects studied after the Hiroshima (and Nagasaki) A-bombs, basically an acute single dose of external radiation, are quite different from radiation releases from nuclear power plant accidents or even normally functioning nuclear power plants. (It does also seem that the US-controlled Hiroshima research was “tilted” to arrive at certain conclusions by discounting internal radiation.)⁴

The European Committee on Radiation Risks⁵ (ECRR, of which Chris Busby is the scientific secretary) estimates that the ICRP risk factors underestimate effects to human health by something like a factor of 200-600. What we generally hear is that if a small particle containing radioactive isotopes (like a hot particle containing Uranium or Plutonium) enters your body through inhalation or in food or drink, it may get lodged in some part of your body, e.g. your lung, or migrate preferentially to some organ that has an affinity for the isotope, such as Iodine-131 concentrating in the thyroid gland, and since, if the half life of the radioisotope is long, it may remain there, emitting radiation, for literally decades, the possibility of cancer arising in the irradiated tissue is therefore high. For the lay person, this is a reasonably easily acceptable notion, and to some extent explains why internal exposure is dangerous.

However, though the science is a bit more difficult, there is a much more convincing theory of how internal exposure causes cancers and other problems involving DNA mutation. This theory also explains why the isotopes present in natural background radiation are unlikely to result in cancers and other problems. The theory is called the Second Event Theory and was developed by Chris Busby in the late 80s.

Firstly, we have to talk a little about how cells work. Most cells in the living body are in a quiescent state. However, anything that can cause damage to the cell or the DNA within its nucleus, e.g. a “hit” by ionizing radiation, can cause the cell to become active and undergo a DNA repair and replication process followed by a cell division into two daughter cells. Simply, this is how evolution has prepared the cell to repair any DNA damage that might occur. This process of repair and replication of the cell’s DNA keeps our DNA free of mutations that might occur from natural background radiation 99.99999% of the time. The process from the cell becoming active to division into two daughter cells takes roughly 10 to 12 hours.

Here comes the problem. Once the repair and replication process for the cell’s DNA has begun, it cannot stop and will continue through to cell division. So if a second “hit” from ionizing radiation strikes the cell DNA during that 10 to 12-hour “window” the cell may suffer a mutation that gets passed on to its daughter cells and their descendants thereafter, and I think you can see how that might lead to a future cancer. ICRP risk factors do not account for this. For the ICRP, the external dose is averaged out over the whole body, each cell in your body receiving on average one radiation hit per year at a natural background dose rate of about 1 mSv/yr, making the possibility that a second hit will occur within the 10 to 12-hour window after the first event vanishingly small.

Now some man-made radioisotopes, those being produced as fission products in nuclear power stations as well as in nuclear weapons explosions, Strontium-90 (St-90) being one of them, fit right into this second event theory pattern in a very surprising way. 1) When they decay to another isotope, the isotope thus produced is also an unstable isotope with a relatively short half-life (which means that it is decaying relatively quickly). So if only one atom of St-90 finds its way into a cell, it may decay, sending out a beta-particle, which can damage a DNA strand, and then there is some possibility that the resulting atom of Yttrium-90 (Yt-90) may decay, emitting another beta-particle within the next 10 to 12 hours, damaging the DNA again, only this time the damage will be irreparable and will likely result in a mutation. This is how serious health effects may occur at internal dose rates that are far, far below natural background radiation. The main isotopes from Fukushima No.1 that show this second event type of decay are Strontium-90/Yttrium-90, Tellurium-132/Iodine-132, and Uranium particles, which will also show a second event, but there are several others.⁶

2) Another surprising fact is that St has an affinity for the Phosphorus on the backbone chain of DNA. That means that an atom of St-90 can actually enter the cell and affix itself right onto the DNA, so that when the second decay of the Yt-90 occurs, it does not even have to “aim” very well to hit the DNA a second time! Another element that binds to DNA is Uranium.⁷ Both Uranium and Plutonium (e.g. in the form of Uranium oxide from depleted uranium⁸ or Plutonium oxide released from nuclear power plants and reprocessing plants) may enter the body through inhalation and from there enter the lymphatic system. Since the likelihood of absorption of another gamma-ray (or X-ray) is proportional to the fourth power of the atomic number (which is why lead is used to shield against radiation), in the case of Uranium (atomic number 92) or Plutonium (atomic number 94), the chance of a hit by an incoming gamma ray from some source either inside or outside the person becomes even higher.⁹

Another important characteristic of the interaction between radioisotopes and tissue is the bystander effect, through which genomic instability may be induced over an area of tissue. Briefly, “if a cell is damaged by radiation … there is some factor induced in the cell and its descendants that predispose them to general mutation increases, which may be manifested as chromosome aberrations or other more visible damage. The process is termed ‘genomic instability’. And this is not all. It also turns out that it is not only the primary cell that is hit that manifests the genomic instability, but also about one third of the cells within a … radius of about 400 cell diameters which also exhibit this phenomenon. This is called the ‘bystander effect’.”¹⁰ This also helps to explain why cancers can arise due to internal exposure with a much larger probability than predicted by such risk factors as those published by the ICRP and in other publications.¹¹ Furthermore, once the genome has been damaged, there is no way to repair it. Failing the elimination of the damaged genome from the population by death without issue (as Mr. Ikeya so kindly suggests) the genomic aberrations may be passed down through dozens of generations.

Let’s compare what we have studied above with natural background radiation. The nuclear industry likes to point out that we are receiving doses of so many mSv of radiation from the environment and that these are much larger than the small amounts of radiation mentioned in low-level radiation studies. They also mention that there are places on Earth where the natural background radiation is relatively high, but that no especial health effects are seen in these areas. The main sources of radiation from the environment (as well as cosmic rays from space) are Carbon-14, Potassium-60, and Radon gas (Radon-222) from the decay of Uranium found in granite and other rocks.¹² These can all enter the body through inhalation and ingestion. But they are not second event isotopes – i.e. when they decay, they result in a stable isotope, so the radiation they emit when they decay may activate a cell, but there is far less probability of a second decay striking the DNA of the same cell within the ensuing 10 to 12-hour time window. As noted above, that’s how evolution has provided us and other life with a mechanism that prevents against DNA mutation from natural background radiation.¹³

So, are we likely to see cancers, birth irregularities (such as deformities, stillbirths, infant mortality or premature births, due perhaps to internal exposure of both male and female reproductive cells to ionizing radiation) and other health effects associated with radioactive contamination in Fukushima, or as far away as areas just south of Tokyo? Given the evidence from Belarus and many other areas of Europe after the Chernobyl nuclear catastrophe, which the establishment (IAEA, WHO, UNSCEAR, the governments, the nuclear industry and pro-nuclear academia) have most assiduously attempted to hide, but which has been revealed by Yablokov et al.¹⁴ and many other writers and filmmakers, and given the early evidence of hot particles in the air in Tokyo, and even on the west coast of the USA, in March/April 2011 from the examination of car filters and so on, and the ingestion of amounts of radioisotopes in food as revealed by Rick Wilcox’s July 2012 article¹⁵ on Japan’s low-dose radiation disaster, it would seem very probable that problems are going to occur in the coming years and decades.

But does that mean we should counsel people not to get married? No, I don’t think so. What I think we should do, although now possibly too late (though it may actually never be too late) is encourage young people to do what they can to avoid internal exposure and to attempt to detoxify themselves if they think they are seriously internally exposed (and if they are within 250 km of the Fukushima nuclear disaster site then it is quite possible that they are). There are ways of doing this, and the one way to avoid exposure is to leave the area, though the Japanese government is making this problematical by implementing the burning and storage of radioactive earthquake and tsunami rubble all over the country. The other thing is to warn young people of the possible dangers they face so that they are aware of the risks when they decide to get married and start a family. They may then make their own choices, including what to do when they see the results of pre-natal screenings.

The Japanese government and the nuclear establishment has told the nation nothing of these risks, preferring to deceive their gullible population with ICRP risk factors, which are little more than simplistic lies. Thus Mr. Hobun Ikeya and the Fukushima City councilors can engage in polemics through the pages of newspapers and on the Internet while neither they themselves nor the general public have any idea of what the real situation might be. Now that we know quite a lot more of what the mechanisms of internal exposure to man-made radioisotopes are likely to be, and that it certainly does look as if the risk factors are 200-600 times greater than those given by ICRP calculations, we can only see the actions of the government and the nuclear establishment in concealing the realities of internal exposure as a horrendous human rights crime against their own people and the people of other countries who are also receiving some of the fallout from the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe. It seems that this is what they have to do in order to justify the restart of nuclear power stations in Japan for the purposes of “protecting the people’s livelihoods,” for protecting Japan’s economy and for protecting the nuclear industry as well as for some clumsily disguised aspiration for nuclear weapons (“national security”),¹⁶ despite the clear and well-understood seismic dangers, the mounting spent nuclear fuel waste issue, and the huge public majority in favour of a total nuclear phaseout. And let’s not pretend that the government and the nuclear establishment can claim innocence regarding the effects of internal exposure; they know of Chris Busby’s work as well as I do, and spend enormous amounts of time, effort and money in the attempt to refute, exclude, and otherwise keep his work and the work of others from public attention.

I think we and the Japanese people should be asking the following questions: Can “we” really put the genome of the people on the same balance as “protecting livelihoods, the economy and the nuclear industry?” What exactly is this national security that coerces potentially a quarter to a third of the nation to carry a compromised genome? What is it that is so important to protect that even the genome of the Japanese nation can be thrown down onto the sacrificial chopping-block with a shrug of the shoulders and a look in the other direction? Why are we seeing the government become the enemy of the people in so many countries now? What are we missing here? Is there some important secret we’re not being told, some crucially imperative necessity we’re unaware of? It feels like there’s some large, evil monster secreting itself in a dark corner of the room. Perhaps it will not be too long before we begin to perceive its true form.

References
Material for this article was drawn from three books by Dr Chris Busby:
Chris C. Busby, Radiation and Cancer in Wales: The biological consequences of low-level radiation, Green Audit (Wales) Ltd., 1994. [Referred to below as “R&CinW”]
Chris Busby, Wings of Death: Nuclear pollution and human health, Green Audit Books, Green Audit (Wales) Ltd., 1995. [Referred to below as “WoD”]
Chris Busby, Wolves of Water: A study constructed from atomic radiation, morality, epidemiology, science, bias, philosophy and death, Green Audit, 2006. [Referred to below as “WoW”]

A scientific paper on the Second Event Theory has also been published:
Busby, C. C. (1998), ‘Enhanced mutagenicity from internal sequentially decaying beta emitters from second event effects.’ In ‘Die Wirkung niedriger Strahlendosen- im kindes-und Jugendalter, in der Medizin, Umwelt ind technik, am Arbeitsplatz’. Proceedings of International Congress of the German Society for Radiation Protection. Eds: Koehnlein W and Nussbaum R. Muenster, 28 March 1998 (Bremen: Gesellschaft fur Strahlenschutz)

1. Ecosystem Conservation Society-Japan

2. Japanese Veterinary Physician: Rate of deformed babies in Tokyo area will skyrocket from Fukushima disaster — “People who were there should not marry at all costs,” , and Asahi: Fukushima gov’t trying to stamp out ‘harmful rumors’ — Officials target group leader who discussed deformed babies, (both August 30, 2012).

3. School as usual up to 20 mSv/yr – 13 schools in Fukushima Prefecture restrict outdoor activity – school safety criteria, (April 19, 2011, in Japanese), and Complaints pile up against radiation advisor Prof. Shun’ichi Yamashita, who says “up to 100 mSv/yr is safe,” (May 6, 2011, in Japanese).

4. Chris Busby, WoD, pp.105-110.

5. See The Low-Level Radiation Campaign. There is some discussion of the Second Event Theory at this website.

6. Especially Barium-140/Lanthanum-140. Both Strontium and Barium are in the same chemical family as Calcium, and therefore bind to chromosomes as well as being incorporated into bones (WoW, p.60-61; see WoD, p.203, Table 7-3, and R&CinW, p.41-42, Table 3-1). Tritium is also dangerous as it freely exchanges with the Hydrogen atom on DNA, the two events being delivered by different atoms, as with Uranium or Plutonium particles (WoW, p.61), and also with Iodine-131, which has a very short half life of 8 days, and which concentrates in the thyroid resulting in large amounts of radiation in a small volume of tissue.

7. Chris Busby, WoW, p.61.

8. For reproduction health effects attributed to Uranium, see Samira Alaani, Mohannad A.R. Fallouji, Christopher Busby, and Malak Hamdan, Pilot Study of Congenital Anomaly Rates at Birth in Fallujah, Iraq, 2010, Journal of the Islamic Medical Association of North America, Vol.44, No 1.

9. Chris Busby, WoW, p.49, 61

10. Chris Busby, WoW, p.67-8

11. E.g. Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) VII: Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, BEIR VII Phase 2, Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, Board on Radiation Effects Research, Division on Earth and Life Studies, National Research Council of the National Academies, The National Academies Press,

12. Chris Busby, WoW, p.53 (natural background radiation), and WoD, p.82 (on Radon-222 gas)

13. Radium-226, naturally present in some environments, does undergo a sequential decay process, but the DNA mutation hazard of this is thought to be almost zero for reasons set out by Chris Busby in WoD, p.205-206.

14. Alexey V. Yablokov et al., Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Volume 1181, ; also see Rosalie Bertell, Victims of the Nuclear Age, The Ecologist. November 1999 (Volume 29, No. 7), pp. 408 to 411.

15. Richard Wilcox, No Safe Dose - Japan's Low-Dose Radiation Disaster

16. “Protecting the people’s livelihoods” was one of the reasons given by PM Noda when he decided on the restart of Ohi nuclear power plant reactors 3 and 4 in June 2012 (e.g. this news item - in Japanese). “Protecting the Japanese economy” is a standard phrase often used with reference to nuclear power stations in business circles, e.g. by Keidanren Chairman Yonekura. As an example see this news item (15 June, 2012, in Japanese). “Protecting the nuclear industry” is what ordinary Japanese people believe PM Noda and the government are trying to do. Regarding “national security reasons,” several important politicians have mentioned the need for Japan to keep nuclear power plants running in order to maintain the façade of the capability of building nuclear weapons. On August 28, 2012, PM Noda stated, “Since it is interconnected with national security, we cannot simply say ‘zero nuclear power’.” (in Japanese). On the very day I am writing this article (September 6, 2012) p.1 of the Tokyo Newspaper is criticizing the current Defense Minister Morimoto for a statement made in January this year, before he became Defense Minister, to the effect that “nuclear power stations are not simply for generating electricity; they are performing a very important deterrent function from the viewpoint of surrounding countries.”

The Green Wedges Coalition explains how Planning Minister Matthew Guy wants to turn 6000ha of Melbourne's green wedges over to development. The Liberal Government has a majority of one in parliament and this green wedges destruction is a foregone conclusion if the Libs all vote to support Matthew. CDB Editor says: Ask your government representative what he or she intends to do to prevent this abrogation of democracy and this insult to our natural environment and the wildlife it shelters. Let us know their answer. If you read this after the voting, then ask your MP what he voted for. You can look it up on Hansard too. Addition: The “Logical Inclusions” (6000 ha excised from the green wedges, taking habitat wetlands etc.) was passed by Parliament on 14/8. The new threat to Green Wedges – may be even worse as it affects the non-growth councils like MPSC as well as the growth councils – is the proposed changes to the zones which would allow a lot of urban uses into the Green Wedges.

Mathew Guy MP plans 6000 ha grab of our Green Wedges

In the latest assault on Melbourne’s green wedges, Planning Minister Matthew Guy plans to take another 6000 ha from the green wedges to give Melbourne more urban sprawl and to concrete over more fertile farmland and environmentally significant wetlands, grasslands and woodlands. This is subject to a vote in Parliament which will bring huge unearned windfall profits to landholders, developers and their lobbyists, including Liberal party donors and fund-raisers: an estimated $500 million for one 103 ha property (see the Age Liberal-donors-win-big-from-rezoning; Coalition policy is for another Urban Growth Boundary Review (UGB) review is due in two years, about the time of the next election.

This latest Green Wedge land grab will create continuing uncertainty around the Urban Growth Boundary by proposing 14 areas to be excised from the green wedges for urban growth and recommending a further 16 areas for “possible future review.” This signals that Melbourne will go on sprawling for as long as the Coalition Government stays in office. A further 20 green wedge areas were ruled out for urban development.

Overwhelming majority of Victorians are against this

This latest green wedge land grab is particularly deplorable as it is not based on any demonstrated need for more development land. The Growth Areas Authority recently estimated that the Growth Corridor Plans (for the 43,600 ha of land rezoned in 2010) would provide 20 to 50 years’ land supply for the continued urban sprawl which most of us don’t want. Every representative survey conducted, from Manningham’s in 2002 to Kingston’s in 2011, finds overwhelming majorities want green wedges protected for environmental conservation, agriculture, parklands, landscape value and recreation.

Even Victoria's rotten environmental laws don't condone this

It appears to breach federal requirements that environmental strategies to protect endangered species including Southern Brown Bandicoot, Growling Grass Frog and Golden Sun Moth must be finalised first and that urban development plans must work around them. None of these environmental strategies have been finalised and the SBB strategy has been postponed for six months. Meanwhile land that spans a proposed bandicoot habitat corridor in Casey has been approved for excision from the green wedge. See VNPA media release.

What is Mathew Guy in parliament for if not to listen to the electorate? That is the question.

We are calling on Matthew Guy to listen to communities, abandon plans for illogical incursions and return to policies to protect the green wedges. This may disappoint the developers and property consultants, but will please everyone else.

Source: Much of this article (but not the headings) was based on a statement from Rosemary West, Joint Coordinator, Green Wedges Coalition. Predominant Source of this article: Green Wedges Coalition - a vision for Melbourne, 16 June, 2012, Media Release. Local details have been dropped off this article because some of them have changed.

Jon Faine surprised many Victorians yesterday morning (4 September 2012) when he lambasted the abuse of 457 Visas in Victoria at a time of high local unemployment. He drew listeners' attention robustly to the folly of importing thousands of workers to industries where Australians could not even afford to train. Today, 5 September 2012, on ABC Radio 774, his guest was the Executive Director of the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI), but we heard not a word about how mass immigration is driving Australia's housing shortage nor how the property development growth lobby is driving mass immigration and the destruction of Victoria's green wedges and other greens spaces. Should we expect more of Jon Faine and the ABC or are ABC announcers constrained to toe the government line that supports the property development lobby?

Jon Faine and the abuse of 457 Visas

Jon Faine surprised many Victorians yesterday morning (4 September 2012) when he lambasted the abuse of 457 Visas in Victoria at a time of high local unemployment. Careful to underline his support of multiculturalism or refugee rights or simply the right to migrate (I cannot remember which exactly) he drew listeners' attention robustly to the folly of importing thousands of workers to industries where Australians could not even afford to train. A number of people rang in - and nurses were well represented - to say how foreign workers were taking over industries and supplanting them.

The Housing connection missed entirely with 457 visas

No-one said anything, however, about how this was driving up the cost of housing and thereby driving up the cost of wages - because people have to pay rent and mortgages in this inflationary situation. It's not like Jon Faine doesn't know about it though. He seems to be in a position where, overall, he consistently promotes 'experts' who are highly influential in the property development and population growth lobbies.

The Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI)

What a contrast today (5 September 2012) when John had as his guest Dr Ian Winter, the Executive Director of the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI).

AHURI flies under a touchy-feely banner of social welfare housing affordability independent research, so listeners may have been surprised by the relatively supine attitude it seems to hold towards Victorians' plummeting quality of life and narrowing choices. They might be less surprised if they realised that AHURI gets most of its funding from government and that some of its board members are highly placed in the property development industry inseparable from the population growth lobby. In contrast to the people who rang in yesterday deploring what was happening with the 457 visas, the callers today seemed suspiciously keen to celebrate our declining choices. Were they for real?

If AHURI is the best Australia can come up with to defend peoples' rights to housing, then it looks like we are sunk.

Not so touchy-feely really

The reality is that AHURI is in there with Australand, the Property Council of Australia, and various state land development corporations, which everyone should realise are just property development mills with inextricable links to private interests. While Dr Ian Winter has a benign history as a former Principal Research Fellow at the Australian Institute of Family Studies, the Chairman of AHURI's Board is Rod Fehring who is a Foundation Member & Chairman of the Residential Development Council and Director of the Property Council of Australia. He was a Chief Executive of socially and environmentally destructive Delfin Lend Lease and Head of Lend Lease Communities, Asia Pacific. As well as several similar past positions, he was appointed in 2010 as Executive General Manager – Residential of Australand Ltd. (a company more than half-owned by the Singapore Government through CapitaLand, part of the Singapore-government owned Temasek).

Some alert Victorians many remember that it was to Australand that Mr Bracks (ex-Premier of Victoria) gave away 80million dollars and 20 hectares of Melbourne's dearly loved Royal Park. In addition, the Federation-style Heritage-listed buildings of the old Royal Park Psychiatric Hospital, restored at taxpayers’ expense and promised for community use, were then included in the deal, divided into units, and then sold for up to $800,000 a unit - often off the plan - providing a portal to people not even resident in Australia. There was a minute 'social housing' component in the whole deal, but the amount of land and money and taxpayer funding given to Australand could have been put to much greater and more direct use by Australians in need of housing, and we could have retained 20 ha of parkland. If the land had not been given away to this foreign company, the standing Victorian government invitation to overseas immigrants via www.liveinvictoria.com.au could not have done as much damage.

Michael Kerry is the Executive Director of the AHURI Board of Management. He is also the Managing Director, Planning, Design and Development – Australia New Zealand for AECOM [which is an international engineering and construction corporation]. Previously he was Regional Director (Queensland) for Parsons Brinckerhoff [construction and engineering corporation], a senior executive with Babcock & Brown Australia [Investment and Infrastructure, went belly-up in 2009], a Director with the Springfield Land Corporation

"Greater Springfield is the largest privately owned master planned city in Australia. Springfield Land Corporation is the master developer of the entire 2,860 hectare (7,067 acre) Greater Springfield land parcel which has become home to nearly 23,000 residents and 8,700 students since it was established in 1991."

.
(Isn't that where Bart Simpson lives?)
Michael also had extensive involvement in planning urban development in Queensland from 2004 [pity about those buildings on the flood plains]. From 1992-2004 he was Divisional Manager, Urban Management, with the Brisbane City Council, a Director of the South Bank Corporation for 12 years and an inaugural Director of Brisbane City Enterprises Pty Ltd. Before joining Brisbane City Council in 1992, he was Executive Director of the Western Australian Planning Commission and Chief Executive Officer of the Joondalup Development Corporation in Perth; Planning Manager for Metropolitan Adelaide in South Australia; Director of Planning in the Northern Territory and Senior Urban Planner with the Albury-Wodonga Development Corporation and National Capital Development Commission. International experience includes 3 years in the United Kingdom in environmental planning and urban renewal; local government capacity building in South Africa; and strategic planning advisor for Riyahd, Saudi Arabia. Michael is immediate Past-President of the Planning Institute Australia (Queensland Division) a Board Member of the Centre for Subtropical Design and the Urban Land Development Authority (ULDA) among other positions.

It is of course to the advantage of the growth lobby to be on boards of charitable organisations and organisations that sound high-minded. They can give advice on funding, whilst being associated with 'worthwhile causes'.

New twists and turns in the growthist philosophy of manufactured consent

The theme of the Jon Faine/AHURI show seemed to be to present as a kind of philosophy the following message: "We" have now been through the McMansion greed phase where everyone aspires to a big house. Now we are happily downsizing and looking at what we can salvage from those [enforced] decisions, because there are more on the way and resistance is futile."

The AHURI/Faine show was taking phone calls from suspiciously docile and mini-minded people. I say, "suspiciously" because the calls were in such massive contrast to those received the day before on the subject of 457 visas pushing Australians out of work.

For instance one woman rang in saying that her family had lots of money to buy a big block with a big house, but had purposefully elected to move into a small house with 'only' three bedrooms and one toilet - which she added tonily was "actually in the bathroom!" The stated reason was to avoid the division and isolation of family members that occurs when they are all distributed within a multi-lifestyle roomed dwelling.

Uncriticized was the fact that this purported lifestyle decision was really a lifestyle decision, i.e. the one-bathroom woman had a choice. For most Victorians, where they live is a Hobson's choice: it is what they can afford in an unaffordable market where 457 visas make the situation worse. It is also anti-social that our shelter, self-sufficiency and primary outgoings should be consigned to a 'market' where no-one has any political pull unless they have a lot of money. AHURI, with its government funded track record of cooperating with the big commercial developer boys can say and do nothing strong in this area.

Brave new world

Another female caller said how wonderful the retirement village was that she and her husband had chosen to move into, from a four bedroom house with a big garden in the country - which was much too big. [Such a common problem - not!]

"It's such a young place: we are only 60 and some of the people there moved there when they were in their mid-fifties!" Jon Faine asked the woman questions about what made the place so young. She gave a list of 'activities' that the residents all do there. It sounded like a holiday camp for children. Among the activities were bowls, exercises, crafts... No hint of political engagement. No hint of adult responsibility. It gave the impression that the people who go to retirement villages are totally given over to consumption and self, incidentally filling the pockets of developers, depleting their local communities of stability, and cashing in their children's inheritance. If that is really the 'lifestyle' aspiration fostered in such places, what an empty lifestyle and what an abrogation of duty when we need adults who are not too busy to go out and represent the rest of us (working too many hours to pay off huge mortgages and unreasonable rents to keep up with what is going on, let alone engage).

We need more Mary Drosts, Julianne Bells and Lady Hamers to balance out the commercial infantilisation of our elders. See "Anti-Growth Lobby: Women in politics: why don't more participate - or do they? (Melbourne, Australia)"

The truth is that those who can even afford to go into some kind of 'retirement village' are a distinct minority. "The number of households who own their home outright has fallen since 1995 from 42 per cent to 34 per cent" (AHURI "Home ownership".) A lot of us are destined for boarding houses and special accommodation homes, if not the street. The shameful fact that Australian mining billionaire Gina Rheinhart is getting a ton of media coverage as she recommends third world wages for Australians means that some of us may be picking over garbage heaps for food quite soon.

Rising cost of oil means more poverty for all

This listener also wondered what these retirement village birds have left for their children and other relatives, as they capitalise on the only family asset in a brutal land and housing market that is likely to leave a growing segment of Australians destitute. It is obvious that they have left nothing for other Australians as they sell up and allow developers to move in and bulldoze perfectly good housing stock and land that could save a future generation from starvation and feudal subjugation as petroleum gets more and more expensive.

Nuclear dreaming

And don't tell me about nuclear energy saving us all.

http://www.indaily.com.au/?iid=67480&sr=0#folio=1
"BHP Billiton CEO Marius Kloppers said in May this year that Olympic Dam mine expansion (to create the world’s largest copper and uranium mine) will not go ahead because general industry-wide cost increases, coupled with high energy costs, notably of diesel fuel, of which enormous volumes are required for mining, has made the project unviable. The project would have required something like five years and 2 billion litres of diesel fuel to remove a billion tonnes of overburden before ore mining could begin at more than 400m depth. Although BHP is still talking about finding another less energy intensive way of expanding, short of importing millions of low-waged immigrants with picks and shovels to dig up the uranium, ideas seem few and far between. South Australian Green,Mark Parnell, has pointed out that the costs of taxpayer subsidies for this fuel would have exceeded the royalties paid to the government by BHP to the tune of 60m per annum.

Where does that leave us?

Without power to maintain Australia's complex system of mechanised food production and transport, as well as overseas trades, Australians will need the productive backyards that many people had before the advent of cheap fuel and supermarkets. If we build over those yards they won't be productive. Food prices will skyrocket again. If you live in a high rise where will you get food if you are not one of a minority of very well paid people?

Somehow I don't think that AHURI will do anything to stop the growthist jugganaut that is bringing this situation closer every day.

Faine finished up the session by mentioning that he had recently heard of a couple who sold up and took off round Australia in a campervan to see how long they could go for.

If you sell your house for a campervan, you have liquidated most of your asset. If your campervan busts, what do you have left? Nonetheless, fewer and fewer Australians will own a house to choose to downsize or go out in a campervan.

The hold that the property development lobby has over the population and land-use planning system in this country has removed choice, and is causing continual reduction in living standards and quality of life. Even worse, this all comports concommitant reductions in democracy, as governments listen only to developers, Jon Faine and other public radio jocks massage the indigestible message by promoting the property lobby merchants as good-guys, and unregulated banks run the mortgage show. In a country subsumed to mass migration, what voice do most people really have?

What can we expect from the ABC?

I began this article with the question, "Should we expect more of Jon Faine and the ABC or are ABC announcers constrained to toe the government line that supports the property development lobby?"

I think we should be able to expect much more, but we don't actually know what the law and policy is for ABC employees. If they are allowed to express their views then we need more diverse representation of views and Australians are badly in need of better information than they are getting.

"Any encroachment into our green spaces is irreversible. On the other hand, remaining faithful to the original intention of the green wedges, would give us all a more disciplined, sustainable, and welcoming city for the future." (Lady Hamer on 29 August 2012 as the Libs prepare to give bulldozers open slather on our green wedges, destroying wildlife and natural amenity.) Labor and the Liberals response is less than edifying and does not solve the problem. Basically both parties are in cahoots with the developers against the people of Melbourne.

Lady Hamer defends green wedges in absence of parliamentary backbone

Lady Hamer, widow of Rupert Hamer, a former Liberal premier who planned for Melbourne to retain the green areas (typically spreading from some major water courses radiating through Melbourne), has come out courageously against the Liberal Planning policy to horribly amputate, for more intensive development, thousands of hectares of Melbourne's green wedges, without community or electoral approval. It is great to see an elderly woman stand up and be heard, and to speak so convincingly and confidently on a moral and environmental issue. We should also not forget the many other women in Melbourne who have also spoken out on this issue, again and again. See "Anti-Growth Lobby: Women in politics: why don't more participate - or do they? (Melbourne, Australia)."

Lady Hamer said,

"Any encroachment into our green spaces is irreversible. On the other hand, remaining faithful to the original intention of the green wedges, would give us all a more disciplined, sustainable, and welcoming city for the future." Lady Hamer on 29 August 2012.

Mathew Guy's excuse is no excuse

The state's planning minister, Mathew Guy, protested that the former Bracks and Brumby Labor Government significantly expanded development boundaries into green wedge land.

Yes, and that was wrong, because it was undemocratic, based on covert population engineering through mass migration, and aggressively reduced peoples' rights and quality of life. But that only highlights the urgent need to reverse the goose stepping army of planners who are trampling our society. It does not justify Mathew Guy continuing the destruction that Jeff Kennett began and Labor continued.

People voted Brumby out (and would have voted Bracks out if he had not suddenly resigned) because of their absurdly high-handed related attitudes to the green wedges, mass immigration, and local democracy.

Brian Tee, ALP, rewrites history

Brian Tee (Shadow minister for planning) only added to the shameful obfuscation when he posted to the ALP site a laughable greenwash piece entitled,"Lady April Hamer and Bracks unite to save green wedge," (August 29,2012) following Lady Hamer's speech.

Truly, the tradition in Victoria of requiring the people to believe six impossible things before breakfast continues, proudly led by parliamentarians. The people of Melbourne are treated like complete fools. We need a giant Alice to weep on us and wash away the caucus.

Victoria is a Destruction Zone for the profit of the growth lobby!

Victoria is a destruction zone. The earth is continually churned by machines driven by greedy developers and financiers. People are becoming mentally and physically ill trying to stand up to the orkish tyrants.

At the heart of all this is the utterly undemocratic pursuit by governments of massive population growth through economic immigration. See http://www.liveinvictoria.com.au

Dingoes on Fraser Island, Australia are dying of starvation, with sand and grass in their stomachs. One woman tried to alert the world to this and was sentenced and fined for her trouble. On 25th of August 2012 Jennifer Parkhusrt received a national award from the Australian Wildlife Protection Council in recognition of outstanding contributions to the preservation and protection of Australian native Wildlife. What a contrast to the treatment she received from the Queensland government!

(Jennifer Parkhurst's website. More information about donations at end of this article.)

Dingoes on Fraser Island are protected because of their purity. This may be, at first sight an ideal situation and would find acceptance by most people and dog- or specifically dingo lovers. As for the tourist trade it has boosted the numbers of tourists to the island who wanted to have a dingo experience. From the outside it looked very good and only very committed people objectively examined how these beautiful creatures are actually managed.

One of these people is Jennifer Parkhurst and I refer to her as the Dingo Lady who has lived on Fraser Island for seven Years. She loves and adores dingoes and has observed them throughout the island. She scrutinized their behavior and took hundreds of photos of them. Her entire life was committed to them.

Frazer Island dingo pups dying of starvation, eating sand and grass

To her horror she discovered that most of the dingoes were starving and only ten percent of pups survived to adulthood. Stomachs examined of dead pups contained only grass and sand. This is partly the result of the shooting of their parents while they are desperately searching for food along the beach where tourists, who do not know how to behave, make reports of “dangerous” dingoes. But it is not only the pups that are starving. Her photos show adults with all their ribs clearly visible. When the alpha female goes looking for food and returns, her pups run eagerly towards her only to realize that she did not find food for them. Then, they scratch around in the soil to possibly find a grub or they chew on bark of woody plants like rabbits do in drought situations.

There is no game to hunt for dingoes on this island. They have become desperate scavengers and beach combers.

To make matters worse, large areas are unnecessarily burnt, reducing their food source and shelter even further. If one would examine the food remains found in their droppings the way it is done regularly in food habit studies on the mainland, it would surely expose embarrassing results. Often dingoes are ear-tagged and radio-collared unnecessarily as if they were criminals in order to follow their movements on this restricted island. Culling dingoes, especially adults, has serious implications for their family structure and learning, resulting in subsequent misbehavior and breeding problems. If this maltreatment of dogs in refuge and dog shelters occurred, the owners of these shelters would certainly be heavily fined and their shelters closed. What then is the difference on Fraser Island?

What is it about dingoes and women that bothers Australian governments so?

And now back to a REPEAT of the savage miss-handling of the Azaria Chamberlain Case. The dingo lady, who noticed the many starving dingoes struggling to survive, gave some poor animals a few pieces of coconut. For this she was convicted and fined $40.000 as well as sentenced to a 9 month jail term suspended for three years and has now a criminal record! She could just not control her distressed feelings for these ailing animals. The “stone-walling” of her defense and the brutality of the prosecution resulted in her inability to work and she lives now on a disability pension while she still has to pay off her fine. You can make up your own mind as to what the government is trying to hide and why they try to silence the Dingo Lady.

Dingoes were brought to this island by the Aborigines where they became dependent on the Aborigines to compensate them for the dingo’s lack of prey species. In recent years some exotic, large animals were introduced to the island which benefited the dingoes. The Forestry workers wormed and fed the dingoes, and before the island was heritage listed, rangers fed them. Fishermen were also allowed to give the dingoes their offal. But now, all these extra food sources have been removed and there is now no real hunting opportunity left for them.

Please ask for food supplements for the dingoes

I would implore people to write to their local MP’s or the federal minister for the environment, and ask that random food drops be introduced to Fraser Island. I would also ask that people request a complete moratorium on all culling of dingoes. While Fraser Island is in Queensland, and seems far away from us down here in Victoria, it is a Heritage Listed Icon of Australia and belongs to us all. One day you might like to take your children there to show them a world-famous dingo. Without action this may soon be impossible.

I was fortunate to be present when on the 25th of August 2012 the dingo Lady, Jennifer Parkhurst, received a national award from the Australian Wildlife Protection Council in recognition of outstanding contributions to the preservation and protection of Australian native Wildlife. What a contrast to the treatment she received from the Queensland government!

Hans Brunner (M. App. Sc.)

More Information

Australian Story featured Jennifer Parkhurst's horrible experiences with the law and her attempts to represent dingoes. You can see the program here: http://www.abc.net.au/austory/specials/dogsofwar/default.htm or just click on the picture at the top of this article.

Donations to help Jennifer pay her fine can be sent either to SFID or to your local Magistrates court. Payee is ‘State Penalties Enforcement Registry’ and her Party ID is: 62883053. Please be sure to get a receipt, and she asks if you would be so kind as to post her a copy of the receipt for her records, she would be most grateful.

Mail can be sent to Jennifer C/O SFID: 50 Old Maryborough Rd Pialba Qld 4655

The magistrate who convicted and so severely punished Jennifer Parkhurst with a suspended sentence and a $40,000 fine was Magistrate John Smith in a case at Maryborough Magistrates Court. Adam Randall , who was Jennifer's partner at the time and fed the Dingos with her was fined only $2500.

Hans Brunner is one of many scientists and other people who have tried to stand up for the Fraser Island dingoes. Australian Story gives others. Another example is:

Dr. Alan Wilton (1953-2011) Prominent Australian Geneticist, Assoc. Professor of the School of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences at the University of NSW. Dr. Wilton devoted much of his academic life in studying the ancestry and significance of the dingo in Australia. http://savefraserislanddingoes.com/

Check out Dr Earnest Healey's Dingo Care Network here: http://home.vicnet.net.au/~dingo/ffg.htm

Tim Murray opines on free lunches, Canada as an international flophouse, the Republican manufacture and marketing of moral hallucinogens, and the notion of manifest destiny in the light of the laws of thermodynamics [you can't have your cake and eat it], as he listens to the US GOP (Republican) Convention.

It was a miracle!I Heard the speeches but didn't vomit

Having had to abandon email traffic this week to meet the demands of a pressing home reno project, I nevertheless could not resist pausing between hammer blows to listen to the live coverage of the GOP convention. I heard the speeches of Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, Rubio and Romney, and managed, somehow, to avoid ejecting my stomach contents in the process.

No free lunch

Don't get me wrong. I am not a "liberal", or a Keynesian, or a socialist. In fact, I guess you might even call me a radical small c "conservative". It took me four decades to get there, having been dragged by reality kicking and screaming but alas, I reluctantly realized that Milton was right after all--- there is no free lunch. You don't need to go to Greece or Spain to realize that---just look at our much vaunted Canadian 'socialized' medical system and you'll get the picture. Like I always say, Canadian Medicare consists of "free" and universal access to a six month waiting list. And the more money we throw at it, the longer the wait lists seem to get. I truly hope that one day Michael Moore finds himself on a Canadian surgery list awaiting hip replacement. If he comes up here, he should be advised to keep to the right side of the road however. Otherwise he will be run over by the 46,000 Canadians who travel south each year to get timely medical treatment in the United States. Who knows, maybe Canadian money will keep Obamacare from Code Blue for a while. Like maybe another day or two.

I believe that government is at best a blunt and clumsy instrument, that the small business sector is the engine of job creation, and the crony capitalism of Obama--- and let's face it--- of most governments in the world, is corrupt, colossally wasteful and dangerous. So I admit, a lot of the rhetoric I heard from that convention struck a chord with me---until I realized that it was rooted in bullshit.

Vampire energy economics

The statement that best encapsulated the nonsense spouted in Tampa Bay was made by VP nominee Ryan. Something to the effect that while the Democrats wanted to grow the government, the Republicans wanted to grow the economy. The truth is, both have habitually grown the size of government, and both habitually will try to grow the economy. Trouble is, continuing economic growth is physically impossible. Except in their world. According to Rice and Romney, "we", that is Americans, can achieve "North American energy self-sufficiency". How interesting that American politicians don't even bother to grant Canada the courtesy of a mention. They are no Canadian resources anymore, they’re North American resources. Americans assume that Canada is just a goblet to be drained. The worst part of it is that they’re right.

Canada as a flophouse

I am actually thinking of trying to find the text of the four speeches I heard and mine them for quotable quotes and one-liners that scored a hit with the crowd. I think they pretty well sum up North American mythology. I say "North American" because most of things these politicians said about the "American dream" could be said with equivalent truth about "the Canadian dream". In Canada, we also measure our worth in terms of how many people the world over would kill to live here. It flatters us. It is if, as a slum landlord, the mere fact that there are so many destitute people who want to rent my cockroach-infested tenement is proof that well, my shit-hole is not so bad after all, and I am not that bad of a landlord either. Another way of putting is that because we have not yet finished the task of blanketing the landscape with strip malls, highways and suburbs and consuming all of our low-hanging fruit, this is still a great place to live because, relative to the rest of the world, it is. Since everyone else on UN Street has overbooked their hotel by a factor of a hundred, then ours is relatively vacant since we are only overbooked by a factor of 10. Or so goes the logic.

Republican hallucinogen

I think Republican strategists have really honed in on our weaknesses. Paul, Ryan, Rubio, Romney--and so I hear---Rice, all used a formula that is a proven hallucinogen. Their speeches were like a date-rape drug slipped into our drinks while we were looking the other way. It sure made me whoozy at times---those "right wing" shibboleths really do it for me---especially when they talk about getting tough with Iran. Seriously . Even Clint Eastwood's pathetic performance sent chills up my spine. He made my day. As far as I could discern, the major ingredients to the Republican elixir went something like this:

1. Exploit our love for the human interest story. Forget analysis, talk about the people in your life. Talk about your Mom, or your parents, or your wife, or the Cambodian family in your neighbourhood that works all night to make donuts to go with your morning coffee. And of course, all of their kids are now in medical school.
2. Use the "immigrant-makes-good" story as a backdrop to illustrate how you began from humble beginnings, and why America is an exceptional country full of exceptional people whose dreams were realized through the legacy they left children because only in America are you judged by what you do, and not by who you are or where you came from. If your inspiring portrait of America does not suffice to impress, then run down somebody else's country. Especially the one that your parents, or grandparents or neighbours ran away from. How brave it was for Rubio to stand at podium in Florida and talk about the absence of freedom in Castro's Cuba. He is dead right of course, but then, I suspect that freedom of enterprise was the freedom that concerned him most. Batista's Cuba was not a haven of democracy either.
3. Make the humble owner of a small business the iconic hero of American society. The government didn't get up at 5 am to open the doors to my mom's shop. The government didn't work 12 hour days to keep her business alive. The government didn't take on the risks she incurred and worry about how she was going to meet her payroll. The government didn't build her business---SHE did!
4. And after you tell the audience ---over and over and over again----that "we"---that is the real Americans, the industrious, enterprising businessmen and women--- BUILT that---you end your speech by saying that Americans owe everything to the Lord Whose Light Shines In All Of Us. In other words, GOD BUILT THAT!

And that, perhaps, in a sense, is where Republican sloganeering inadvertently bumped into reality. For if you are a deist, then presumably, you believe that it was God who provided the exceptional bounty of natural non-renewable resources that our parents or grandparents--- or in my case--- great grandparents, stumbled upon.

So we really aren't the "exceptional" people after all. We're the goddamn LUCKY people--- as Catton and Clugston have tried to tell us.

Somehow, though, I think our luck has peaked, don’t you?

Tim Murray

September 1, 2012

NOTES

[1] GOP stands for "Grand Old Party", the ancient nickname given to the Republicans, the party of Abraham Lincoln, the party that freed the slaves, etc.

Australia and Canada are in a race to the bottom to dig up all their minerals. They are importing workers and failing to train their own. Their politicians are caught up in the myth of sustainable economic growth. "The tar sands are the engine of that growth. And we'll want top dollar for what we export because the thirst for tax revenue is insatiable. We'll want the Americans to compete with the Chinese for the privilege of burning our bounty of black death. No wonder then that the support for continued mass immigration is bipartisan. We are in a big hurry to get that resource out of the ground and get it shipped out ASAP---so we bringing in migrant labour like mad to satisfy a "shortage" in skilled labour that we assume to exist because we have never conducted a proper inventory nor seriously tried to train our own people."

Bill McKibben has recently given us the latest terrifying math about global warming http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-new-math-20120719

More terrifying math

Here is some more terrifying math:

There are 3 major political parties in Canada's House of Commons.
Guess how many of them support the Alberta oil sands project? Three.

What? How can that be? The Green-Left and those who lap up whatever Avaaz.org, Common Dreams, 350.org, Huffington Post et al have to say are led to believe that is the Hated Harper who is responsible for pushing through this project and the two major proposed pipelines. No doubt. He is our current Prime Minister and he does have the captain's wheel. But wait...

Both Liberal Leader Bob Rae and NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair, when pressed, say they favour the "sustainable development" of the "oil" sands. (That's what people call it when they are addressing Alberta voters). But they caution that it must be done in an "environmentally responsible" way. "Sustainability is not just about the environment", Rae said, "There is also social sustainability and economic sustainability---we need a balanced approach. We need sustainability and we need development."
That is exactly what Harper says too, though he might reverse the word order to read "development and sustainability". What rubbish. http://www.populationmedia.org/2010/06/25/there-really-is-only-one-kind-of-sustainability

Questions:

a) How does one "develop" the tar sands to extract a finite resource "sustainably"? The resource is finite. A finite resource cannot be replenished in a time scale relevant to the human race. Get it?
b) How does one develop the tar sands in an "environmentally responsible" way when the mere extraction will not only threaten the Athabaska River with lethal toxins but use up much of the remaining global "budget" of 565 'gigatons' of C02, which if exceeded are thought to make runaway temperature increases inevitable.

All parties, all politicians and all corporations are shopping the same soothing, oxymoronic lies, the same greenwash. If there are differences, they are merely ones of nuance and emphasis. The bottom line is that they all want economic growth---Oops, sorry, I meant "development"---but they want it to be aesthetically tidy enough to convince the public that nothing irrevocably damaging is being done to Mother Earth. Trouble is, "Mom" is not fooled by euphemisms.

This Coalition of Deceit and Ruin looks at the polls and realizes that the majority of Canadians of all political hues---even those who say they support the NDP, the Liberals or the Greens-----want jobs. Aboriginals want jobs. All levels of government want jobs---- and the tax revenues that flow from them. We are hooked on growth because we are hooked on pensions, medical care, education, and a standard of living to which we have grown accustomed. We rely on economic growth to pay for all this and to outgrow our debts. Our pension system requires a cash injection of $6 billion more today than it did two years ago. Our heath care system needed $5 billion more this year just to alleviate surgery waiting lists that force 46,000 Canadians a year to leave the country in search of timely treatment. So much for Michael Moore's utopian portraits of the "Canadian Way".

Sustained growth economics an impossible dream

Both our pension and health care systems are on unsustainable trajectories. Where are governments going to find the money? Oh, I know, "tax the rich". Sorry, that’s been tried. Ask the socialists in Greece and Spain. Ask the socialists who were elected to office in four Canadian provinces on the coat-tails of that slogan, and then backed off when they realized what Bill Clinton and the Swedish Social Democrats realized in the mid-90s. Money has wings. Raising taxes on the "rich" does not necessarily raise tax revenue. In fact, at some point, the reverse is true (the famous Laffer curve). That is why Clinton and the Swedish socialists lowered marginal tax rates. We believe that we are entitled to our "entitlements", and continuing economic growth (necessary but alas impossible) is the ticket out of the box we have built for ourselves.

Why import workers?

The tar sands are the engine of that growth. And we'll want top dollar for what we export because the thirst for tax revenue is insatiable. We'll want the Americans to compete with the Chinese for the privilege of burning our bounty of black death. No wonder then that the support for continued mass immigration is bipartisan. We are in a big hurry to get that resource out of the ground and get it shipped out ASAP---so we bringing in migrant labour like mad to satisfy a "shortage" in skilled labour that we assume to exist because we have never conducted a proper inventory nor seriously tried to train our own people.

Of course, the voices on the establishment "Left" would like to see the pace of this "development" slowed down, and the hearings drag on so to make the government sweat. But this is political gamesmanship. Were they in office---the tar sands project would continue. It would have to if the Opposition wanted to keep its own voter base, a base that looks to government to defend and extend our straining social safety net.

Jugganaut

This project is UNSTOPPABLE. We can argue about the pace and the disposition of the pipelines, but that oil is coming out and it is going to be exported. And while there is currently a sizeable opposition to the Northern Gateway Pipeline in British Columbia, the recent news that the Chinese National Offshore Oil Corporation paid a 60% premium above market value to purchase to purchase a majority stake---$15.1 billion---- in Nexen reinforces a belief that somehow, some way, Canadian tar sands oil will find a way to the Pacific coast. Until the Nexen takeover----still awaiting government approval----CNOOC, PetroChina and Sinopec Group have poured over $18 billion into buying minority stakes in tar sands projects operated by other companies.

The Chinese don't gamble that kind of money on maybes. The opposition NDP will win the BC election, and it may block the pipeline for three years---but that's it. Money talks. My bet is that will strike a deal and greenwash its nature. If they don't, they're gone.

Meanwhile, Harper wears the goat horns and the Green-Left gives the Liberals and the NDP a free pass. The hypocrisy sickens me.

Gutless, deceitful and as slimy as the oil they argue about---that about sums up the whole lot of them.

Tim Murray
July 25, 2012

NOTES

Source of images used: http://www.ecmperformance.com/images/mining-pit.jpg

During the high immigration Howard era- the fuss about the boats was a smokescreen for the fact that we were getting a lot of extra government induced totally legal non- refugee immigration which was putting pressure on absolutely everything- environment, roads, housing etc. . Howard was a high population PM whist pretending to be jealously protecting Australia’s borders. This hypocrisy and the same game still goes on with Julia Gillard although without “children overboard”.

In their second series of Go back to where you came from SBS Television convey the message that a large section of Australian society are really worried about asylum seekers, notably 'boat people' flooding Australia. It seems that those same Australians do not have a clue as to the real flood, which consists of hundreds of thousands of economic migrants and their families. It appears (from what Mr Reith said on Insight on Friday 31 August 2012) that governments believe that Australians are pacified simply by the being told by governments that immigrants are 'legal' and that the immigration stream is properly managed.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The Truth about immigration in Australia

During the high immigration Howard era, the fuss about the boats was a smokescreen for the fact that we were getting a lot of extra government induced totally legal non-refugee immigration which was putting pressure on absolutely everything: environment, roads, housing etc. . Howard was a high population PM whist pretending to be jealously protecting Australia’s borders. This hypocrisy and the same game still goes on with Julia Gillard although without “children overboard”.

Asylum Seekers - Onshore or Offshore Processing; that is the question

The asylum seekers have the right to seek asylum. They are not “illegals” as Tony Abbott calls them. Whether their claims should be processed on or offshore is the main question. The numbers of people who arrive by boat are very low compared with the numbers of people who come in as immigrants under our skilled migrations scheme. The numbers the government plan to admit as permanent entries in the non-refugee "planned" migration stream this coming year is 190,000 up from 185,000 in the year 2011-12.

Think of all the additional houses, roads, cars, schools, teachers, doctors, hospitals needed for this extra population!

Australia brings in about 14,000 people under its humanitarian program and any successful applicants amongst the boat arrivals are included in this quota. I think the government has just recently increased this to 20,000.

Numbers in Australia

The ultimate carrying capacity for Australia is, I believe (from my reading of books and Internet) quite low. The Aborigines numbered less than one million when Europeans arrived. Australia now carries more than 20 times that number of people largely because fossil fuels enable our very infertile and intermittently watered soils to produce far more than they would without this assistance.

Australia is already overpopulated: immigration is now costing more than money

Australia is already overpopulated. This is clear from all the environmental indicators. See for instance, the 2008 State of the Environment Report for Victoria. All indicators are declining because of population pressures. These include waterways coastal areas, biodiversity...

Australia really needs to stabilise its population as soon as possible and then allow it to reduce. With no immigration at all Australia’s population would increase by about 150,000 p.a. for the next few decades due to the number of women of childbearing age in our population. Until there are fewer women in their child bearing years, as the population ages, without high immigration, the growth rate would remain around half what it is now, which would still be quite high.

See the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) figures for 2011 at http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/3101.0/

In other words- I do not get too worried about asylum seekers as a component of Australia's population growth when governments are significantly undermining our lives, our future and unraveling our environment through huge numbers of invited and economic immigrants, whether asylum seekers come or not.

I find it strange and somewhat alarming that apparently so many viewers of SBS do not have a clue about the problem of the growing numbers in the planned immigration stream. Why didn't SBS even mention this in their four nights of program on the subject of fear of asylum seeker floods?

A new film, "Compliance," examines "the human desire to follow and obey authority."

Also published on Global Research, paulcraigroberts.org on 28 Aug 2012
See also: Carr tries to justify Australian support for NATO war against Syria of 12 April 2012.

Liberal institutions, such as the media, universities, federal courts, and human rights organizations, which have traditionally functioned as checks on the blind obedience to authority, have in our day gone over to power's side. The subversion of these institutions has transformed them from checks on power into servants of power. The result is the transformation of culture from the rule of law to unaccountable authority resting on power maintained by propaganda.

Propaganda is important in the inculcation of trust in authority.The Pussy Riot case shows the power of Washington's propaganda even inside Russia itself and reveals that Washington's propaganda has suborned important human rights organizations such as Human Rights Watch, Chatham House, and Amnesty International.

Pussy Riot is described in the western media as a punk rock group, but seems in fact to be a group known as Voina (War) that performs lewd or scandalous unannounced public performances such as the one in the Russian cathedral, a sexual orgy in a museum, and events such as these. (see also http://plucer.livejournal.com/265584.html).

Three of the cathedral performers were apprehended, indicted, tried, convicted of breaking a statutory law, and given two-year prison sentences. The Voice of Russia recently broadcast a discussion of the case from its London studio. Representatives from Human Rights Watch and Chatham House argued that the case was really a free speech case and that the women were political prisoners for criticizing Russian President Putin.

This claim was disingenuous. In the blasphemous performance in the Russian cathedral, Putin was not mentioned. The references to Putin were added to the video posted on the Internet after the event in order to turn a crime into a political protest.

The human rights representatives also argued that the women's conviction could only happen in Putin's Russia. However, the program host pointed out that in fact most European countries have similar laws as Russia's and that a number of European offenders have been arrested and punished even more severely.  Indeed, I recently read a news report from Germany that a copycat group of women had staged a similar protest in support of Pussy Riot and had been arrested. An analysis of these issues is available here: http://mercouris.wordpress.com .

The human rights representatives seemed to believe that Putin had failed the democratic test by failing to stop the prosecution. But a country either has the rule of law or doesn't have the rule of law. If Putin overrides the law, it means Putin is the law.

Whether Washington had a hand in the Pussy Riot event via the Russian protest groups it funds, Hitlery Clinton was quick to make propaganda.  Free expression was threatened in Russia, she said.

Washington used the Pussy Riot case to pay Putin back for opposing Washington's destruction of Syria.  The overlooked legal issue is Washington's interference in internal Russian affairs. The close alignment of human rights organizations with Washington's propaganda hurts the credibility of human rights advocacy.  If human rights groups are seen as auxiliaries of Washington's propaganda, their moral authority evaporates.

The prevalence of the English language, due to the British domination of the world in the 18th and 19th centuries and American domination in the 20th and first decade of the 21st century, makes it easy for Washington to control the explanations. Other languages simply do not have the reach to compete.

Washington also has the advantage of having worn the White Hat in the Cold War. The peoples who were constituent parts of the Soviet empire and even many Russians themselves still see Washington as the wearer of the White Hat. Washington has used this advantage to finance "color revolutions" that have moved countries from the Russian sphere of influence into Washington's sphere of influence.

Tony Cartalucci concludes that "Amnesty International is US State Department Propaganda."  http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article32257.htm

Cartalucci notes that  Amnesty's executive director is former State Department official Suzanne Nossel, who conflates "human rights advocacy" with US global hegemony.

Amnesty does seem like an amplifier for Washington's propaganda. Amnesty's latest email to members (August 27) is: "As if the recent trial and sentencing of three members of Pussy Riot wasn't shameful enough, now Russian police are hunting down others in the band. Make no mistake about it: Russian authorities are relentless. Just how far are the Russian authorities willing to go to silence voices of dissent? Tell the Russian government to stop hunting Pussy Riot!"

Amnesty International's August 23 email to its members, "Wake Up World," is completely one-sided and puts all blame for violence on the Syrian government, not on al Qaeda and other outside groups that Washington has armed and unleashed on the Syrian people. Amnesty is only concerned with getting visual images damning to the Syrian government before the public: "We are working to get this damning footage into the hands of journalists around the world. Support our work and help ensure that our first-hand video is seen by influential members of the media."

At least Pussy Riot got a trial. That's more than US Marine, Brandon Raub, a veteran of two tours of combat duty, got. Raub posted on Facebook his opinion that he had been misused by Washington in behalf of an illegal agenda. Local police, FBI, and Secret Service descended upon his home, dragged him out, and on the authority of a social worker, committed him to a mental hospital for observation. http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/citizen-warrior/2012/aug/23/judge-orders-brandon-raub-released-hospital/.

I did not see any protests from Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, or Chatham House.  Instead, a Virginia circuit court judge, W. Allan Sharrett, demanded Raub's immediate release, stating that there was no reason to detain and commit Raub except to punish him for exercising his free speech right.

Americans are increasingly punished for exercising free speech rights.  A number of videos of police violence against the occupy movement are available on youtube. They show the goon thug gestapo cops beating women, pepper spraying protestors sitting with their heads bowed, truncheons flashing as American heads are broken and protestors beat senseless are dragged off in handcuffs for peacefully exercising a constitutionally protected right.

There has been more protest over Pussy Riot than over the illegal detention and torture of Bradley Manning or the UK government's threat to invade the Embassy of Ecuador and to drag out WikiLeaks' Julian Assange.

When a Chinese dissident sought asylum in the US embassy in China, the Chinese government bowed to international law and permitted the dissident's safe passage to the US. But "freedom and democracy" Great Britain refuses free passage to Assange who has been granted asylum, and there is no protest from Clinton at the State Department.

In "China's Rise, America's Fall," Ron Unz makes a compelling argument that the Chinese government is more respectful of the rule of law and more responsive to the people it governs than is Washington. http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/chinas-rise-americas-fall/.

Today it is Russia and China, not the UK and Europe, that challenge Washington's claim that the US government is above international law and has the right to overthrow governments of which it disapproves.

The lawlessness that now characterizes the US and UK governments is a large threat to humanity's finest achievement--the rule of law--for which the British fought from the time of Alfred the Great in the ninth century to the Glorious Revolution of the 17th century.

Where are the protests over the Anglo-American destruction of the rule of law?

Why Aren't Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and Chatham House on the case?

Paul Craig Roberts is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Paul Craig Roberts Subscribe to the Global Research E-Newsletter

Please support Global Research
Global Research relies on the financial support of its readers.

Your endorsement is greatly appreciated

The disingenuous who cannot refute your arguments often resort to sleight-of-hand alterations in terminology to make their case. Conflations are their stock in trade..... Lets not let our opponents get away with it.

This delightful cartoon, by Marco Marilungo Pictor, depicts a conflated Pinocchio, apparently overwhelmed by his own complexity, under the somewhat calculating regard of his inventor, which so seemed to suit this topic that I purchased it fromhttp://www.toonpool.com/cartoons/cartoon_47352

Definition

CONFLATION
con•fla•tion
noun \-?fl?-sh?n\
Definition: blend, fusion; especially : a composite reading or text

Examples:
First Known Use: 15th century

Synonyms: admixture, alloy, amalgam, amalgamation, cocktail, combination, composite, compound, blend, emulsion, fusion, intermixture, meld, mix, mixture, synthesis
Related Words: half-and-half; absorption, blending, coalescence, coalition, commingling, commixture, compost, concretion, homogenization, immingling, immixture, incorporation, integration, interfusion, intermingling, mergence, merger, merging, mingling; assortment, hash, hodgepodge, hotchpotch, jumble, medley, mélange, mishmash, motley, patchwork, potpourri, variety; accumulation, aggregation, conglomeration
Near Antonyms: component, constituent, element, ingredient
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The disingenuous who cannot refute your arguments often resort to sleight-of-hand alterations in terminology to make their case. Conflations are their stock in trade. They exploit a common weakness---our inability to notice nuances that make one word or one concept fundamentally different than another. Our failure to identify these subtle differences allow the polemicist to confuse the audience or the readership by blending two distinct ideas. Here are some classic examples of these deceitful tactics which confuse the issue:

Pro-Israel=anti-Arab
Anti-Zionism = anti-semitism
A critique of Islamic fundamentalism = Islamophobia
Well-founded fear=phobia
Tolerance=acceptance
Acceptance=approval
In-group altruism=nativism
Concern about cultural displacement=xenophobia
Opposition to human population growth = misanthropy
Pro-choice = Pro abortion
GDP= per capita GDP
Growth=Prosperity
Steady-state=stagnation
Anti-socialist = pro-capitalist
Ethnocentrism = racism
Opposition to cultural diversity= Opposition to racial or genetic diversity
All races are equal = all cultures are equal
Internationalism = Globalism
Internationalism = support for a borderless world
International cooperation = removing impediments to migration
Population growth=economic growth
Nimbyism=support for development elsewhere
Being left wing = support for environmental causes
Being right wing= being anti-environment
Equal opportunity == Equal results
No proof of discrimination=systemic racism
Equity=Equality
Social justice=egalitarianism
Climate skepticism=Climate denialism

And my personal favourite is (drum-rolls):
ANTI-IMMIGRATION=ANTI-IMMIGRANT

If more come to your mind, please suggest them .

Conflations are the inverse of false dichotomies. Instead of "either or", conflations blend polarities. The first is a case of binary thinking, the second is a case of lazy thinking. Lets not let our opponents get away with it.

Tim Murray
August 19, 2012

This is a fascinating video of a huge protest in Sydney on 5 August 2012 and we have put up a video of it with a number of interesting interviews from marchers, with comments from what they think of the Bashar Assad Government to how they don't like the Australian Greens policy on this matter and believe that we are risking World War Three by backing intervention in Syria. There is also some background on how Syria has been the long-term host one of the largest refugee populations in the world, which makes you wonder why it doesn't receive more support from Greens and Refugee activists. It must seem ironic that some candobetter.net EcoMalthusians are more inclined to give Syria that recognition! Please let us know if you have views on the democratic status of the Syrian government; we find it hard to judge. All comments and greetings welcome.

See also: Australians for Syria.

The video of this march also contains commentaries and is the product and published by Truth News with Reporter Hereward Fenton, who interviewed Naja (a Syrian Australian), Tim Anderson, and John Burgess (of the 911 truth movement). Thanks for your work at Truth News.

"On 5 August 2012 a rally was held in Sydney in support of the Syrian government by members of the Syrian community and Australians. Some four thousand people gathered peacefully at The Sydney Town Hall to express solidarity about the tragedy in Syria. A number of speakers, from various sections of the community, addressed the audience concerning the external forces that have invaded Syria and are fighting the [...][1]government. The people then marched peacefully to The Australian Department of Foreign Affairs in the Sydney city area, where more speakers addressed the people. Appreciation for Russia and China voting against the US proposed UN-NATO involvement were expressed. The meeting then peacefully dispersed." (Source: Commentary under video on Truth News)

Naja, Syrian-Australian protester speaks

Naja, a Syrian-Australian protester said,

"I would just like to say one thing to the Australian Government. The Syrian president - 75% of the people elected him and only the Syrian people can impeach him. I just want to say another thing, that Barack Obama ought to go back home. Hands off Syria! We just need to raise our voice and we're sticking with the President! ... He is a very popular leader, he's a doctor and he studied in England. He doesn't kill his people. We've got militants in Syria. They're terrorists. They're not free Syrian army. They're killing people. I've got my family back home. They're kidnapping people. After they kill them, they amputate their body parts and they send them home to - bodies without heads, without arms - and we've got to put a stop to it. We want him to stay in power. That's my message. "

Tim Anderson spoke powerfully on behalf of the Syrian Government

"People in this country are very ignorant of what's going on in Syria. That's understandable. That's not a crime in itself, but, what is not acceptable is the unethical use of this ignorance. All of those people from Hilary Clinton through the media through all sorts of silly people in this country - those people saying Assad must go - they have no ethical basis to make that sort of claim. They haven't understood that it's the foundation of the post colonial era, it's the foundation of human rights that a people have a right to self-determination and the Syrian Government is only for the Syrian people and no-one else. We see the result across the border in Iraq. What a tragedy in Iraq. What a great tragedy in Iraq! But we can't allow that to happen in your country. So I'm here just to say as a non-Syrian Australian, at least some of us here are in solidarity with you today."

Tim Anderson, author of Take Two, The Criminal Justice System revisited has the remarkable history of having been completely exonerated after erroneous conviction for the Hilton Bombing in 1978 (Fraser Government). The real perpetrators have never been found. Evidence that Australian security forces may have been responsible [in a false flag attack] led to the New South Wales parliament unanimously calling for an inquiry in 1991[1] and 1995.[2] The Government of Australia vetoed any inquiry. You can read more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Hilton_bombing or here in an pdf file at http://www.reasoninrevolt.net.au/pdf/a000803.pdf with an interview of Anderson published in July 1991 that contains some very interesting comments on Asio and Special Branch activities in NSW leading up to this time.

Tony Backhouse on Australian Greens policy on Libya and Syria

Tony was also marching. Interviewed by Truth News, he said that he had originally joined the Greens because of their stance on Iraq and policy of peace and non-violence, which is a platform of the NSW branch constitution, but he has just resigned from them over their support for UN Nato intervention in Syria. He stated, "I see this as akin to starting World War Three in Syria. I find it totally hypocritical and that's why I've left."

Tony said that, to him, it seems this position was taken initially by Bob Brown and then by Christine Milne (NSW) and Adam Bandt (in Victoria) and that perhaps the Federal Greens are falling into line with the European Greens. It was what had been going on in Aleppo that got him to make his mind up. He added that he nearly left the Greens over their position on Libya especially after Gaddafi's house was bombed and his granddaughter and other members of Gaddafi's family were killed. He noticed in the week of this Australians for Syria protest in Sydney that Leon Panetta [23rd and current United States Secretary of Defense] had actually threatened Assad's family: "And I thought, this is just ridiculous. I can't support this. I mean, my party is supporting a military intervention basically in Syria against their own constitution!"

Commentary on Democracy, Refugees and the Australian Greens - Please contribute if you can

The beginning of this article was taken from Truth News and we left out these words, [1] "elected democratic." Whilst we support non-intervention in Syria and basically support the current government, we disagree that the Bashar Asaad Government was elected democratically, since there was no opposition. Maybe we are wrong. Please educate us. You can read more about the Syrian government here. Nonetheless we agree that Bashar seems to be a very popular president and Syria did recently hold a very well supported referendum in which Syrians voted yes for to have multiparty government recently, to remove the constitutional definition of the B'aath Party as the ruling party of Syria, and to limit the time a person could remain president to 14 years.

Bashar Asaad himself seems to be pretty enlightened in a terrible region where colonial intervention has from the 19th century consistently preferred dictators and continuously reduced the self-organising ability of peoples. Bashar Asaad's father was a more severe dictator but, still, his people were provided for, in an area where there are far worse, far more brutal dictatorships. To illustrate the unbalanced basis of foreign intervention encouraging civil war in Syria, the Western powers currently include Saudi Arabia as their ally against the Syrian Government. This is not just ironic, but it is shocking, because the Saudi Government is incontestably depraved, yet able to get away literally with murder, mutilation, suppression of subjects and shocking, institutionalised, bizarre ill-treatment and disenfranchisement - enslavement really - of women. It is truly unacceptable that the United States and NATO hob-nob with this monarchy. There has to be a better and more globally cooperative way to power down with oil than this.

With regard to the Syrian Government, a Syrian-based Catholic nun recently said,

I am not Syrian, but I have been living in Syria for today almost 20 years. Syria was under a kind of totalitarian regime but not in only a way a repressive way but it was that all the decision would be taken by few persons. But there was security, there was food, education and people were living - of course not in ... kind that they would say their thinking in a loud voice.

Now, this totalitarianism is not good, and it's obsolete, but if the armed insurrection is implementing another totalitarianism which is maybe worse because there is blood, they can behead you, they can cut your - in last week in our village they cut the fingers of a so-called 'collaborator', who is not ev[en] from the village. Then they behead him, they cut him in piece and they left him in the street, where even children would see it.

So this kinds of acts of atrocities cannot help people to really believe that what is happening is a strive for freedom.

The majority of the Syrian population, I say, is taken as hostage, and sometimes as a tool, as [?enemy] by these armed, insurrection armed...armed insurrection people. They come and they take place in the civilian areas.

Australians, particularly Greens and Refugee Action supporters, logically should be speaking out in support of Syria which has taken in and managed to deal fairly with an extraordinary number of refugees and asylum seekers from this tumultuous region where, bizarrely, the Greens have been supporting NATO backing for civil war.

According to the 2012 UNHCR country operations profile on the Syrian Arab Republic,

The Syrian Arab Republic hosts one of the largest urban refugee and asylum-seeker populations in the world. The Government and people of the Syrian Arab Republic continue to maintain a generous open door policy that allows Iraqi refugees to seek asylum and gain access to basic services such as education and primary health care. Moreover, the normalization of relations between Iraq and the Syrian Arab Republic in early 2011 has led to a simplification of the visa process for Iraqis wishing to enter the Syrian Arab Republic.

UNHCR, with the support of the international community and in active partnership with the Syrian authorities, was able to maintain the protection space granted to refugees and asylum-seekers. With the assistance of the Syrian Arab Red Crescent, it has continued to provide them with essential services and assistance. Source: http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49e486a76.html

If nothing else, the counter-intuitive stance on Syria of the Greens is yet another indication that the people leading the Greens these days are career politicians with ideas and principles a very long way from the original participants and founders of Green Party's in Australia. As to where Bob Brown stands or ever stood... some of us do wonder. For those among us who care about our country and realise that overpopulation will quickly deprive us of ecological conditions and human rights, it is baffling that the Greens, who have so let us down in matters of ecology and population policy, do not stand up for Syria and its generosity to refugees.

Attention Avaaz, Amnesty International, NATO, Hilary...
"Let the Syrian people alone. Let the Syrian people alone! Leave us alone! You are not bringing anything else but death, fear, chaos, instability, with your big declarations and with your big assemblies, and, also, with your big powers."
This is the transcription of the brave protest against foreign intervention in Syria by a Syrian-based Catholic nun, (video included) speaking for a number of Syrian leaders, whom she describes as including Muslims, pacifists, family and tribal leaders. Mother Mariam shows leadership in a new internet tradition where women are beginning to speak out against warmongers where their men cannot or will not. Mother Agnes Mariam and Syrian Girl Partisan are two great ladies speaking up for peace, truth and justice. We would like to encourage other women to magnify these women's voices and help them to forge a local, non-violent movement as well as to defend what is good in Syria.Attention Avaaz, Amnesty International, NATO, Hilary...

"Let the Syrian people alone. Let the Syrian people alone! Leave us alone! You are not bringing anything else but death, fear, chaos, instability, with your big declarations and with your big assemblies, and, also, with your big powers."
This is the transcription of the brave protest against foreign intervention in Syria by a Syrian-based Catholic nun, (video included) speaking for a number of Syrian leaders, whom she describes as including Muslims, pacifists, family and tribal leaders. Mother Mariam shows leadership in a new internet tradition where women are beginning to speak out against warmongers where their men cannot or will not. Mother Agnes Mariam and Syrian Girl Partisan are two great ladies speaking up for peace, truth and justice. We would like to encourage other women to magnify these women's voices and help them to forge a local, non-violent movement as well as to defend what is good in Syria.

The interview took place in Ireland on 12 August 2012 and was filmed and published on the Irish Times by Patsy McGarry.

Mother Agnes Mariam to Outside Powers

It's a life of fear, of insecurity and of lack of future. We are divided like a kind of tumour. In every part we have armed people coming and forcing people - civilians - to live following their orders.

And what they want is to paralyse civilian life so there is no more shops. If you need something ou can't find a worker. And, of course, you don't have nutrition, you don't have alimentation. Lack of food, lack of fuel, lack of electricity.

And this fear, because you don't know when it will be your turn to be considered as a collaborator. And we think that something is going wrong mroe and more in the general way of orienting this strive ... what's so-called for freedom an democracy.

On the totalitarian regime in Syria and its violent replacement

I am not Syrian, but I have been living in Syria for today almost 20 years. Syria was under a kind of totalitarian regime but not in only a way a repressive way but it was that all the decision would be taken by few persons. But there was security, there was food, education and people were living - of course not in ... kind that they would say their thinking in a loud voice.

Now, this totalitarianism is not good, and it's obsolete, but if the armed insurrection is implementing another totalitarianism which is maybe worse because there is blood, they can behead you, they can cut your - in last week in our village they cut the fingers of a so-called 'collaborator', who is not ev[en] from the village. Then they behead him, they cut him in piece and they left him in the street, where even children would see it.

So this kinds of acts of atrocities cannot help people to really believe that what is happening is a strive for freedom.

The majority of the Syrian population, I say, is taken as hostage, and sometimes as a tool, as [?enemy] by these armed, insurrection armed...armed insurrection people. They come and they take place in the civilian areas.

Why isn't the fighting in the desert instead of amongst civilian residences?

Why?

Why you don't make your combat - We have a lot of desert. It is against international laws.

Western world seems to be encouraging sectarian violence to topple Assad

But what really scandalises us and leaves us in distress is that the Western world seemed to be encouraging this rise of sectarian violence just to topple the regime.

We are, we are against violence and we are against justifying violence.

You can't say that this man is killing another man and he is justified to kill him. Moreover when, through his movements, he is putting in real danger and having terrible collateral damage, to a whole civilian population, which was not - That's what is happening in Aleppo.

You know, we are responsible and we are - if we are not responsible today, we are responsible tomorrow, to history.

To not speak out is to allow terrible atrocities to continue

Once all those atrocity will be revealed, when you will see a family whose girl has been abused, or, I have heard about collective abusing - whose son has been beheaded, whose father has been abducted.

You know that there are thousands of people we don't know where they are because they have been abducted.

Sometimes they are bandits. They say, "We are in the revolution," but they are bandits. Mafias who come to ask ransome.

Some others they have like sectarian hatred, so they take this one because he is [?Arab or Alep]; they take this one because he is a moderate Muslim.

So we don't know. It's a confusion, it's a chaos.

"What are they doing in Aleppo? Why are they doing? Why are they funded and helped and fueled with weapons and why are they introducing themselves in between the civilian population?"

International Community hypocritical, untrustworthy, funding violence

And what really grieve us is that the international community holds a paradox.

On one side they want, they say, with hypocrisy, "We want peace, we want to protect the civilian population." They even want to intervene in a military way like in other countries. But on the other hand, they are funding, sending intelligence helps and sending weapons to rebels - really you don't know from where they come.

Syrians are trying to forge non-violence movement

We are working with our religious leaders, with Muslim religious leaders, with pacifist, with also a leader - family leaders, tribal leaders - to say that there is a third way. And the third way is a way of non-violence, but real non-violence. When there is no attacks and aggression, there is not - there is no motivation for any repression.

Syrians asking International Community to respect their Human Rights and Geneva Convention

Second, the civilian society in Syria is upset and we are asking for human rights. Not only human rights for rebels, but human rights for the normal citizens, who are caught in between.

And we are asking also why should the combats be held in civilian areas, for example, in Aleppo, those people they came from outside. I have been talking with prelates, I have been talking with families. They don't know whom they are. They are foreigners. Either they come from Northern villages -from Idlib or from North Aleppo countryside, or they come from foreign countries. What are they doing in Aleppo? Why are they doing? Why are they funded and helped and fueled with weapons and why are they introducing themselves in between the civilian population? And then they say that the army is bombing civilian areas.

Please! Don't enter in civilian population. Don't enter in residence area. Go to the desert if you want to make your war. It is against human rights and it is against the Charter of Geneva.

Ghandi, Mandela - non-violent path the best, and finding common ground

So, I want to say to all who are looking at me, "I am a Christian, and I believe in God. I believe in Jesus Christ. Non-violence is the best way to get what we want. The non-violence. And in all good revolutions - you look at Ghandi, you look at Nelson Mandela - even, you look here, in Ireland, when you can stop violence and you can enter in a real path of dialogue, accepting the other. Sometimes you have to forget your interest. You cannot take everything. You forget it. We can arrive to a common ground. We can make a new social pact. You know.

Asks foreign powers: Please leave the Syrian people alone and don't encourage martyrs

And I want to also to ask: Let the Syrian people alone. Let the Syrian people alone! Leave us alone! You are not bringing anything else but death, fear, chaos, instability, with your big declarations and with your big assemblies, and, also, with your big powers. Leave the Syrian people alone. Enough, it's enough! Leave those people and stop funding weapons for 'rebels' you bring from I don't know what. We are crying also because those people they have a mother, they have a father, they are human beings and, sometimes, they don't know where they are. And they think that fighting in Syria or fighting where they are fighting, will open for them heaven and paradise, and this is alienating.

It is great to see two politically engaged women speak out about Syria. On the one hand we have Syrian Girl Partisan, who has reported in around 20 home-made films. Now a Catholic nun based in Syria has stood up and denounced Western reporting on events there. What she and others seek in Syria is “reform, no violence, no foreign intervention.” She hopes for “a new, third way, a new social pact where the right to autodetermination without outside interference” would be respected.

This article with the video is republished from Global research TV

Click on arrow to watch video interview with Sister Agnes Mariam.

Media Coverage of Syrian Violence Partial and Untrue
by grtv

As posted on theIrish Times by Patsy McGarry:

A NUN who has been superior at a Syrian monastery for the past 18 years has warned that media coverage of ongoing violence in that country has been “partial and untrue”. It is “a fake”, Mother Agnes Mariam said, which “hides atrocities committed in the name of liberty and democracy”.

Superior of the Melkite Greek Catholic monastery of St James the Mutilated in Qara, in Syria’s diocese of Homs, which is in full communion with Rome, she left Ireland yesterday after a three-day visit during which she met representatives of the Irish Catholic Bishops’ Conference in Maynooth.

She told The Irish Times she was in Ireland “not to advocate for the (Assad) regime but for the facts”. Most news reports from Syria were “forged, with only one side emphasised”, she said. This also applied to the UN, whose reports were “one-sided and not worthy of that organisation”.

UN observers in Syria had been “moderate with the rebels and covered for them in taking back positions after the withdrawal of heavy equipment, as seen so tragically in Homs”, she said.

When it was put to her this suggested the whole world was out of step except for Syria, Russia and China, she protested: “No, no, there are 20 countries, including some in Latin America” of the same view.

The reason the media was being denied easy access to Syria currently was because in the Libyan conflict journalists placed electronic devices for Nato in rooms used at press conferences in that country, she said. “So Syria didn’t want journalists,” she said.

Christians make up about 10 per cent of Syria’s population, dispersed throughout the country, she said. The Assad regime “does not favour Christians”, she said. “It is a secular regime based on equality for all, even though in the constitution it says the Koran is the source of legislation.”

But “Christians are less put aside [in Syria] than in other Islamic countries, for example Saudi Arabia,” she said. “The social fabric of Syria is very diverse, so Christians live in peace.”

The “Arab insurrection” under way in that country included “sectarian factions which promote fundamentalist Islam, which is not genuine Islam”, she said.

The majority of Muslims in Syria are moderate and open to other cultural and interfaith elements, she said. “Wahhabism (a fundamentalist branch of Islam) is not open,” she added.

Christians in Syria were “doubtful about the future if the project to topple the regime succeeded”. The alternative was “a religious sectarian state where all minorities would feel threatened and discriminated against”, she said.

There was “a need to end the violence”, she said. “The West and Gulf states must not give finance to armed insurrectionists who are sectarian terrorists, most of whom are from al-Qaeda, according to a report presented to the German parliament,” she said.

“We don’t want to be invaded, as in Aleppo, by mercenaries, some of whom think they are fighting Israel. They bring terror, destruction, fear and nobody protects the civilians,” she said. There were “very few Syrians among the rebels”, she said. “Mercenaries should go home,” she said.

What she and others sought in Syria was “reform, no violence, no foreign intervention.” She hoped for “a new, third way, a new social pact where the right to autodetermination without outside interference” would be respected. (Source: Irish Times)