NONE, Of The Above

They have a Dream

2009-01-16T16:33:00.003+11:00

I'm told some animals, even non-human animals, dream to some extent. In fact, I've seen a video of a cat chasing an imaginary mouse while sleepwalking. But I think that it would be fair to say that non-humans dream of everyday stuff, like mice or other tasty treats or perhaps being chased by a predator. I doubt they dream of grand ideas like liberty or democracy. Only humans dare to dream beyond their everyday experience.

Take the people of Palestine for instance. They've not experienced real liberty in living memory, yet they dream of one day returning to their homeland that they believe is rightfully theirs. Why? Because it is the land in which their grandfathers, great-grandfathers, etc., were born.

Only one thing prevents their return; the dream of another people who believe that many thousands of years ago their God gave them the very same bit of this Earth.

They took their chance to return to their homeland at the end of the Second World War after two millennia living elsewhere. They organized themselves; they fundraised to buy arms; they formed militant groups which carried out terrorist activities against the Arab population (the Palestinians) and the British, who still had colonial control of Palestine; they mobilized World opinion and eventually the UN ratified their claim to the land of Palestine.

The Palestinians meanwhile were either forced to flee to refugee camps in neighbouring countries or live as second-class citizens in their (old) homeland.

Two peoples; each believing in rightful sole ownership of the same bit of dirt. Each with a dream of living peacefully in their homeland. It’s a real dilemma.

This brings us then to the thing that really sets us apart from the animals. We alone seem to have the ability to believe that our dreams can be authoritative statements of reality even when there is no supporting evidence or even evidence to the contrary. We can cross the line from imagination to delusion.

So let’s look at the Israeli/Palestinian issue with this distinction in mind. Whose dream is more real? Which is rooted more in reality? Which is more evidence-based and which is more fanciful? Who has more right to the bit of the Earth now comprising the State of Israel and the two Palestinian territories, the West Bank and Gaza.

Are the Palestinians delusional in their claim of ownership based on 2000 years of tenure or are the Israelis even more realistic and righteous in their belief that their God* gave the land to them? Does divine proclamation override legal title based on inheritance?

Well, let's give the issue a contemporary Australian context and see if that helps us decide? See if this makes sense to you.

Put simply, if you side with the Palestinians you probably have a right to give short shrift to any Aboriginal person who knocks on your door and claims ownership of your house on the basis that his Dreamtime belief is that his people are the rightful owners of your land.

If you side with the Israelis then you should immediately contact your local Aboriginal Land Council and organize the transfer of ownership of any properties you enjoy title to.

Unless you’re delusional, of course.

*Possibly the same God as the Palestinians’ God and if so, this begs the question- Why didn’t he tell the Palestinians he was dispossessing them?

Tampa II ?

2007-11-22T23:39:00.000+11:00

Just when you thought it was safe to throw your children back in the water a lone boatload of 16 asylum seekers has sunk off NW Australia.

Independent candidate for Gilmore, Of None asks, “Could this be a Tampa Mk II situation all over again, with the PM and local Liberal pollies spruiking the “We’ll decide who’ll come here….” line to great effect.”

“Or have we, as a nation, grown up just that little bit in the last few years to the extent that we are a more compassionate people, willing to accept our share of the worldwide refugee problem that in some cases, such as for those refugees from Iraq and Afghanistan, we helped create.”

Mr. None muses that perhaps someone is testing us.

“Perhaps it’s fitting that this situation has occurred on the eve of the election. We all need the limits of our tolerance and compassion tested from time to time, he said”.

“On Saturday we might find out what sort of nation we are.”

10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4...

2007-11-11T14:14:00.000+11:00

I'm holding a launch/get-together on Friday evening from about 7pm, in the rooms under the Grandstand of the Berry Showground. Lots of politically incorrect fun, some music and easy on the speeches.

Come along if you would like to join in. Bring a plate to share.

Less than two weeks to go

2007-11-11T14:09:00.000+11:00

Things are hotting up and slowly the media are taking notice, although not always from around here. I did a radio interview with Red Symonds on ABC 774 Melbourne last Thursday and apparently was featured in the Melbourne Age last week.

Stephen Mayne from www.crikey.com.au has been in touch and will do something on me and the other Independents around the country next week. He is standing in Peter Costello's seat of Higgins.

Now is the time get it off your chest and write that letter to the Editor you've been bottling up. Send to editor.scregister@ruralpress.com

Less Chatter, More Action on Dental Health

2007-11-11T14:08:00.000+11:00

Independent candidate for Gilmore, Of None, has called for dental treatment to become part of mainstream health care by including it in the Medicare program.

“Why should the state of a person’s teeth be seen as a non-health issue when every other condition associated with the human body is?” he asks.

“For teeth to not be covered by Medicare is as silly as not including tonsils, when you think about it,” he said today.

Mr. None points to studies that link periodontal disease to a significantly higher incidence of heart disease, stroke and premature death.

“Numerous studies show that dental care is vital to minimising the risk of these causes of death. In fact most studies have shown that dental disease is a larger risk factor for heart disease than being overweight, having a high cholesterol level, not exercising or smoking,” he said.

Mr. None advocates that dental care for all Australians should be a priority of the next government, particularly at this time of economic prosperity.

“Cut back on the proposed tax cuts for higher income earners or increase the Medicare Levy, or both, as necessary to make dental health part of the regular health care system,” he replied when asked how his proposal should be funded.

“Millions are spent telling us to lose weight, not smoke, eat better etc to prevent heart disease and strokes but a seemingly far greater risk factor, the state of one’s teeth, is ‘your problem’, unless you’re privately insured of course. That’s not good enough; such a serious risk to health deserves a universal approach,” he concluded.

None Of The Above in Centre of Field

2007-11-11T14:06:00.000+11:00

The only Independent candidate for the seat of Gilmore drew the centre position on the ballot paper at Friday’s ballot for positions conducted in Nowra by the Australian Electoral Commission’s District Returning Officer, Peter Manley.

Mr. Of None whose full name will appear on the ballot paper as NONE, Of The Above said that whilst, for obvious reasons, he was hoping to draw the bottom position he was more than happy to be allocated 5th out of 9 candidates.

“I will be dead-centre of the nine candidates and, looking at the extreme views of some of the parties represented, that is about where I would consider myself to be on the left-right spectrum,” he said.

He cited the “whacko” policies of the Citizens Electoral Council, who base their beliefs on the works of the disgraced, self-promoting American demagogue Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. whose racist and homophobic teachings include that the federal (US) government allowed AIDS to spread because it didn't want to "estrange the votes of a bunch of faggots and cocaine sniffers, the organized gay lobby, as it's called in the United States. (I don't know why they're `gay,' they're the most miserable creatures I ever saw!)".

According to LaRouche, The Beatles (who "had no genuine musical talent") were created by the "British Psychological Warfare Division" and promoted "by agencies which are controlled by British intelligence." Furthermore, the Queen of England and the British royal family run the global drug trade.

In 1989 LaRouche was convicted and sentenced to 15 years in prison for federal conspiracy, mail fraud and tax law violations.

Pro-LaRouche publications have been at the forefront of denying the reality of global warming and have denounced Greenpeace and other ecology groups. One of the major planks of the LaRouche platform is the immediate construction of numerous nuclear power plants.

Mr. None is campaigning with ‘No Nuclear reactor at Jervis Bay’ as his major policy platform.

The other party that voters should be wary of, according to Mr. None, is the Liberty and Democracy Party whose beliefs centre around a “libertarian” lifestyle including almost unrestricted gun ownership. It believes speed limits should be determined by what most motorists regard as safe, not what public servants deem to be acceptable. It does not believe government should tell us to eat healthy foods, to not smoke, to wear a helmet when we ride a bicycle, to not use marijuana, how to discipline our children, whether we can renovate our houses and who we are permitted to marry.

“Voters should look beyond the names and slogans and more closely at the policies of candidates and parties before voting,” he advised.

MEDIA RELEASE 16.10.07 None says "NO" to tax cuts

2007-10-27T06:24:00.000+10:00

Independent candidate for Gilmore, Of None, has rebuked the Prime Minister’s election promise of $34 billion in tax cuts, suggesting instead that the bulk of any budget surplus be spent on public infrastructure, government services and the environment.

Mr None made an interesting and thought provoking analogy.

"No parent would spend the family savings on a holiday if their child was sick and in need a lifesaving operation. Well, our country is sick; the rivers are drying, food production is falling and more and more of our country is becoming uninhabitable. We have the funds to do something about it but unfortunately the PM is going to splash it about in an effort to buy his way back into power. I think Australians expect better stewardship than that," he said.

On tax cuts, Mr. None remarked that under the present government middle and high-income earners have already done very well.

"If tax cuts are to be given at this time they should be to the bottom 30% of income earners only," he said.

MEDIA RELEASE 13/9/07 Candidate to Return Electoral Funding to Community

2007-10-27T06:17:00.000+10:00

Independent candidate for the seat of Gilmore, Of None, has pledged to donate his entitlements under the Public Funding of Elections Act to various community groups should he receive the required minimum of 4% of the primary vote in the South Coast seat.

Public Funding of Elections legislation means that when you cast your vote, the candidate or party next to whom you place the coveted number 1, known as your primary vote, will receive $2.05 from taxpayer’s funds. This idea was originally introduced as being a way of assisting the small parties and independents but Mr. None pointed to the Australian Electoral Commission’s figures for the 2004 election as evidence that the reality is that the two major parties get most of the funds. (see below)

Mr. None claims, " Voting is an act which transfers millions of dollars* from schools and hospitals and reimburses political parties for all those slick party ads we are about to become so sick of".

"The catch for us little guys is that funding only kicks in if the candidate receives a minimum of 4% of the primary vote. In the case of Gilmore this is about 3500 votes. That means, should I be so lucky, I will receive about $7000 which I am under no obligation to part with," he said.

"However the idea that I should make a ‘profit’ from being a candidate is repugnant to me, so I have pledged to give any excess, over and above expenses, to a variety of community groups starting with $2000 to the Nowra Youth Centre," he added.

Mr. None says he would welcome suggestions as to what to do with the other $3000 he may have to distribute and muses that whether or not he receives electoral funding, a vote for him will benefit the community.

"Should I not receive the 4% minimum required under the Act, the voter’s $2.05 stays with a hospital or school. Either way, voting 1 NONE, Of The Above, can be seen as a win-win for the community." he concluded.

* Total election public funding paid for the 2004 Federal election was $41,926,158.91. including Liberal Party $17,956,326.48 , Labor Party $16,710,043.43 , Australian Greens $3,316,702.48 , National Party $2,966,531.27 , Pauline Hanson $199,886.77 (source: Australian Electoral Commission)

MEDIA RELEASE 23/8/07 A Reactor or a Referendum?

2007-10-27T06:16:00.000+10:00

Independent candidate for the Federal seat of Gilmore, Mr. Of None, has challenged the Prime Minister to hold referenda concurrent with the coming Federal election on the vexed questions of a nuclear power industry and the locations of the Government’s proposed twenty five nuclear reactors.

This follows the PM’s announcement that any area where a reactor is proposed would have a binding, publicly funded plebiscite to determine the area’s acceptance of the idea.

"The PM has said that citizens of each area will have a plebiscite to determine whether they have a nuclear reactor built in their area but he didn’t say at what stage in the planning process such a vote would be taken and what constitutes an ‘area’. Is it just the surrounding streets, a suburb or is it a whole Federal electorate?" Mr. None asked.

"It’s obvious that this is just an attempt to defuse the issue of the locations of Mr. Howard’s twenty five nuclear reactors until after the election by lulling electors into a false sense of security that they will be in control of the process," he said.

"Also the concept of plebiscites on locations would seem to assume that Australians have accepted as fact the construction of reactors somewhere in Australia. This proposition has also never been tested," he remarked.

Mr. None believes that such referenda should ask two simple questions-
1. Do you agree to the building of nuclear reactors for power generation in Australia?
2. Do you agree that a nuclear reactor should be built within this Federal electorate?

Mr. None said referenda held with the Federal election will save an enormous amount of money in otherwise staging multiple plebiscites, trying to find an area that actually wants a reactor and in addition, companies wishing to construct reactors will have certainty as to which electorates would welcome them from as early as late this year.

Mr. None proposed that the results should be irrevocably binding for 25 years- ie approximately one generation- from the date of the election.

"Conducting referenda at the time of the next Federal election is the only way the electorate can know the Prime Minister is fair dinkum on the issue," he concluded.

MEDIA RELEASE 23/8/07 GREEN SEES IN BLACK AND WHITE- YOUR IN OR YOUR OUT

2007-10-27T06:15:00.000+10:00

Of None, Independent candidate for Gilmore has reacted angrily to the statement by Christian Democratic Party Senate hopeful, Pastor Paul Green, that Muslim immigration be put on hold for ten years. In doing so Mr. Green likened Muslims to an advance of a deadly infectious agent such as bird flu and called for an Impact Statement on Muslim Immigration.

Mr. None said "Paul Green’s descent into the grubby world of race-based politics is disgraceful and an insult to every decent, tolerant Australian".

"The immigration of every racial/religious group has enriched Australian society far more than any negatives which have arisen. In most cases problems occur due to a lack of understanding and unwillingness to try on the part of a small minority of those of us already here," he said.

Mr. None pointed out that with the exception of the indigenous population we are all, by definition, immigrants or the descendents of relatively recent immigrants.

"Perhaps if the Aboriginal population of Sydney Cove had called for a White Fella Impact Statement in 1788 Australia could have avoided any immigration-based problems altogether," he remarked wryly.

MEDIA RELEASE 16/9/07 PM’s About Face, Quick March, Cross your Fingers.

2007-10-27T06:13:00.000+10:00

Of None, Independent candidate for Gilmore has rebuffed the Federal Member in her assessment that Government members are firmly behind the Prime Minister, John Howard.

Mr. None offered this assessment of last week’s events in Canberra; "The PM asked Alexander Downer to find out whether his Cabinet colleagues continued to support him as Leader. The answer was that they did not, but no one was game to challenge him. The PM then issued an ultimatum; support me or perish. Faced with the certainty of losing their seats in an obviously fragmented party the troops have, for the moment, decided to back their General. But any semblance of unity behind John Howard is only a façade until after the election. Mutiny can only be but an election away."

Mr. None believes the Prime Minister’s latest tactic is to turn the last eleven years on its head.

"For the entire period of his office John Howard has been anything but a team player. He sent Australian troops to Iraq despite the objections of the overwhelming majority of Australians or the promised Parliamentary debate on the issue. The recent ten billion dollar "Save the Murray/Darling" plan was developed on the back of an envelope and announced without Cabinet consideration or approval," he said.

"His Prime Ministership has largely been a one man band," he remarked

"John Howard has asked the Australian people for one more chance do a ‘few more things’.
Presumably these things would include keeping us in Iraq longer and establishing a nuclear industry of twenty-five nuclear reactors and a nuclear waste dump. I can think of no better reasons to deny him the chance," concluded Mr. None.

MEDIA RELEASE 17/8/07 PM Declares Shoalhaven a Nuclear Target- Gash Outed.

2007-10-27T06:10:00.000+10:00

Speaking in Parliament, the Prime Minister has specifically named the "Shire of Shoalhaven" as a likely site for a future nuclear reactor in a re-elected Liberal government.

Independent candidate for the seat of Gilmore, Mr. Of None says this frank admission by the PM completely overshadows the recent statements of the Member for Gilmore in declaring that whilst she is in favour of a nuclear industry she is opposed to a reactor in the Shoalhaven and therefore a reactor at Jervis Bay is unlikely.

"The local Member has been outed by her boss. All her showmanship of recent weeks, including starting two petitions- one for and one against a reactor, can now be seen as a blatant attempt by her to sell by deception the unsaleable to the unwilling," he said.

"The government obviously has the Shoalhaven in its sights but I do not believe that residents of the Shoalhaven want a nuclear future," he declared.

Mr. None concluded, "The issue of nuclear energy in the Shoalhaven is now as crystal clear as the waters of Jervis Bay. A vote for the current Member for Gilmore is a vote for a nuclear reactor".

Been Slack lately

2007-10-27T05:20:00.000+10:00

I have not posted an entry for some time because I have been incredibly busy focussing on getting the message out via the media. No. 1 message-that I exist; no. 2- that there are more than two opinions on most political questions.

Whilst we maintain the fiction that the views of the two major parties are the only legitimate points of view, we not only repeatedly hand them an enormous amount of power but limit our vision of the future and the ability to shape it.

Once either party achieves power in its own right all the vested interests and favours have to be catered for. The following two and a half years becomes an orgy of payback. Then, six months before an election, they'll suddenly have revelation after revelation like " I think the planet could be warming up, we'd better set up a committee to investigate and make lots of promises on the subject" or tune in to public sentiment like "That nice man David Hicks, once one of the world's dangerous men, has spent far to long in prison and it would be good if he were sent home (on conditions which mean his story can't come out til after the election, please George)

I'll put some of my recent media releases up on this blog in the next few days for you to read.

Another player joins the game; another race card played

2007-08-27T18:57:00.000+10:00

The Shoalhaven's own Pastor/Councillor Paul Green has been named as the Christian Democtratic Party's number one Senate candidate.

In a rehash of his disgraceful effort prior to the NSW State election he again called for a 10-year moritorium on Muslim immigration and a Muslim Impact Statement for Australia. In re-announcing his party's immigration policy he attempted to jazz it up by equating Muslim immigration with the threat of an outbreak of the deadly bird flu virus.

What a grubby excursion into the basest refuge of an aspiring politician, the bottomless abyss of race-based politics.

All decent, tolerant Australians should loudly condemn Paul Green and the CDP's blatant appeal to the racist vote.

Tell Paul Green what you think about his policy at greenp@shoalhaven.nsw.gov.au

Another Milestone

2007-08-15T19:45:00.000+10:00

How time and money just fly by when your having fun.

The counter at left ticked over the $450 billion mark and I failed to notice for a few days. It's now 7.50pm, 15/8/07 and the US expenditure in Iraq is at $US 452,332,581,115 and counting.

A quick click on the more info link shows this could have been used to build over 4,000,000 houses or employed nearly 8,000,000 teachers for one year in the US .

Instead we chose to kill 100,000 Iraqis and plunge the World into decades of fear.

It's a strange World we live in.

The Medium or the Message?

2007-08-14T06:19:00.000+10:00

Marshall McLuhan, first father and leading prophet of the electronic age, once famously wrote, "The Medium is the Message".

We might very well update and politicise this wisdom as, "The election campaign is your mortgage".

Liberal and Labor are about to embark on a multi-billion dollar vote-buying exercise designed to appeal to the greed that lurks not far from the surface in all of us.

At the same time each will continue this silly argument about who will keep interest rates low/lowest/at record lows/lower than them/relatively low/low-ish.

The effect of all their promises of course will almost certainly be another raft of interest rate rises, increasing inflation and the need for another 'correction' or two to the economy; all after the election of course.

Will we ever get the message? Are our politicians prophets of prosperity or just part-time economy mechanics with a better understanding of the psyche of the passengers than the workings of the motor?

Show us the Money

2007-08-11T10:43:00.000+10:00

Bateman's Bay Hospital needs more money.

It is not short of expertise in the area of in-house hospital administration; its doctors and nurses are not less able; the Bateman's Bay community is not more sick than other comparable communities. It just needs more money.

Since money is money and State and Federal dollars are indistinguishable and of equal value, then one real solution to the problem would be for a concerned current Federal Member to have a word to her PM and front up with a bag full of $$$$$$ asap.

If you're serious Jo, forget the showmanship and hollow promise of a Federal government takeover (presumably after the election); just turn up with the money now. Simple really.

If only it was.

Counting the Cost

2007-08-05T18:49:00.000+10:00

As a former Science/Maths teacher I'm often caught calculating this and that instead of simply accepting things as they are.

It's true; if you stop to count the petals you may not appreciate the flower.

I do try and resist my natural urge to count and calculate at the drop of a hat falling with an acceleration due to gravity of 9.8 m/s/s, in order to experience the greater totality of life but the recent Federal government takeover of the Mersey Hospital sent my cogs whirring.

At $45,000,000 to service 35,000 people, it works out at $1285 each or about $4,000 per family unit.

All so they won't have to travel 60km to the next nearest hospital.

For that money the government could provide a fleet of chauffer-driven limousines to ferry the sick Merseysiders to Bernie; and throw in a comlimentary bottle of champers per trip to boot.

Now for a little algebra.

If T= the total government money available then T/20,000,000 is the amount of government money available to spend on each Australian.

If the good Burghers of Mersey get first bite to the tune of $45,000,000 then the total money avavilable is now T - $45,000,000.

Since (T - $45,000,000)/20,000,000 is less than T/20,000,000 then it follows that; you guessed it, YOU GET LESS.

This Fight's Not Over Yet

2007-08-05T11:18:00.000+10:00

…and there’s the bell folks for the end of Round 13; only two to go in this championship fight for the title.

So far The Champ, Hurricane Howard, has managed to avoid what all the pundits were predicting; and that’s a KO by his much younger and stronger opponent here tonight, Rapacious 'Rolls Royce' Rudd.

Hurricane may have lost much of his punching power since his last championship contest, almost three years ago, but he’s as fast on his feet as ever. He’s ducked, he’s weaved, he’s taken three mandatory eight counts but so far RR has failed to deliver the knockout blow.

RR has taunted Hurricane all week with the line “I’m the Rolls Royce, you’re just a Morris Minor”.

Is there really a Rolls Royce engine inside that sleek exterior or just another Holden like previous challengers Bomber Beasley and Lethal Latham? We'll know very soon.

Everyone said it would be over in five, but let me tell you this is going right down to the wire although the challenger is well ahead on points, 55 to 45; and Hurricane will need to summon all his strength and somehow KO Rapacious Rudd in the next two rounds to win.

Early in the fight Rapacious seemed to be able to land blows at will but Hurricane has fought back with guile and cunning and in the last few rounds has shown promise of snatching a remarkable victory.

Can The Champ yet pull a rabbit out of the hat?

Medicos were worried earlier in the week that he may be punch drunk when, at a press conference, he couldn't remember his trainer’s name. But he passed the medical at nearby Mersey Hospital and that’s all that counts.

By the way, rumour has it that services at the hospital are on standby; expecting one of these men to need their help before the night is out.

Hurricane’s corner looks worried. It’s said that even many of his sparring partners think they would have had a better chance than The Champ. Ambitious Abbott used to be a mean fighter in his day. Turnbull the Terrific and Nimble Nelson both fancy their chances too.

Still, there they are towelling him down, giving advice and encouragement, although I must say his trainer of the last 11 years, Cosmo Costello, looks particularly worried. The Champ has spent a fortune preparing for this fight and the future of both these men depends on Hurricane collecting the winner’s purse tonight.

Every favour has been called in and word is he’s promised small fortunes to all and sundry in order to pull off a surprise defence of his title.

If he wins; will he retire? We’ll, some say he will, some say he won’t.

Too early for that though; this fight’s not over yet. Stay tuned to this station folks.

Rules of Engagement

2007-08-03T07:42:00.000+10:00

Unfortunately the AFP's Chief Cop has failed to learn from any of the culprits he has interrogated over the years nor have his own Masters, those Ministers of Fun within the Federal Government.

Rule No. 1: Keep it simple and keep it consistent.

Rule No. 2: Keep saying it. Eventually you will be believed.

Apparently the only one playing by the rules so far is Dr. Haneef.

More hasty exits please.

2007-07-29T18:33:00.000+10:00

I have refrained from commenting on the Dr. Mohamed Haneef case until now despite the bumbling efforts of the AFP and DPP because if the anti-terror laws are to work then a degree of trust in the integrity of the government and government agencies is required. To this end I was prepared to give the maximum possible time for a legitimate case against him to be put together.

Now, however, it is obvious to all that not only is Dr. Haneef almost certainly innocent but that our governemnt was intent on using his predicament to gain the maximum political advantage for itself in the run-up to the election.

Selective leaks and total red herrings were the order of the day from the AFP, DPP and government Ministers. Anything to paint Dr. Haneef as a danger to us all.

But that's not the reason I am moved to write this now. I do so because I have just heard the news that Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews has described Dr. Haneef's hasty departure from Australia upon his release from detention as "suspicious". How tacky; how petty; how totally un-Australian is that?

Did it not occur to the Minister that perhaps Dr. Haneef was just a little keen to see his newborn child for the first time. He was afterall originally arrested at the airport attempting to go home some four weeks ago when he learnt of his newborn daughters illness.

Perhaps then (and now) he thought, as a father, he wanted to be there; perhaps, as a doctor, he thought he could help. Alternatively, like those other monsters who threw their Children Overboard he had an ulterior motive. Which would be more likely?

Increasingly I find that this Federal government, in particular the troika of Howard, Ruddock and Andrews, does not reflect my values or morality. I do not find them ethical role models.

If the Immigration Minister were to declare the three of them 'non-Australians' and deport themselves asap I hereby promise not to call their departure "suspicious".

Trees, nuclear reactors and re-elected governments

2007-07-23T22:04:00.000+10:00

I'm a little loathe to inject into this blog a criticism of the RTA's removal of 97 trees along Moss Vale Rd, Kangaroo Valley since it is, after all, a State Government matter. However it is also a matter very close to home for me (about 6 kms to be exact) and there is a valuable lesson re the upcoming Federal election to be learnt.
But firstly, for what its worth, my take on the issue at hand.
There are three factors that should have been taken into account before any decision to remove the trees.
1. The safety of the road through Kangaroo Valley, from one side of the valley to the other, for trucks, coaches and other oversize vehicles and car drivers with a determination to drive excessively fast. I would argue that the geography of the valley, especially the egress and ingress is completely unsuitable for large vehicles. Many of these vehicles currently exceed the nominal weight limit on the historic Hampden Bridge with the full knowledge of the RTA. As for the speedsters; where to start? Perhaps with a blanket speed limit of, say, 60km/hr for the whole of the valley. The only exception would of course be the school zone in the centre of town. Numerous signs announcing "TOURIST ROAD. KV speed limit is 60km/hr" together with a speed camera or two should slow most down.
2. An acceptance by the RTA that Moss Vale Road is not and never should become, a freeway. It is first and foremost a road of utility for the residents of Kangaroo Valley. Secondly, it is a road for use by tourists and an access road between the coast and Highlands for those who wish to drive according to the speed limits and the conditions.
3. An acceptance by the RTA that a community has some right to have a say in the government infrastructure that impacts on their lives within their community and in many ways defines what their sense of community is. Is KV a pitstop tourist town on a freeway or a rural village with a part-time tourism focus but with a very real local community life nevertheless?

Unfortunately all three above points depend on the RTA and the State government getting the message. They no doubt would have been far more accessible prior to the recent election but now, having won easily, are back to their same old arrogant ways.

The lesson in all this. All governments become stale, arrogant and lazy over time. Just as a re-elected State governemnt is now turning its back on the people of Kangaroo Valley, a re-elected Liberal-National coalition government in Canberra is unlikely to listen as the people of the Shoalhaven cry foul when the decision to build a nuclear reactor at Jervis Bay is announced.

Don't Mention the Oil

2007-07-06T12:41:00.000+10:00

Defence Minister Brendan Nelson's admission that our presence in Iraq is about preserving our access to that country's oil reserves, serves to not only condemn his government's decision to join "The coalition of the Willing" in the first place but also sheds further light on the Prime Minister's modus operandi in the NT.

Before the Iraq War began we were told that we needed to disarm that country of Weapons of Mass Destruction, the private playthings of that monster, Saddam Hussein. But our motivation definitely had nothing to do with oil.

When the WMD story was found to be fiction, Howard, Bush and Blair attempted to justify their illegal invasion on the grounds that Saddam was an evil dictator anyway and we had done the world a service by overthrowing him. Again, the fact that we had, in the process, thwarted French and Russian oil deals with Saddam had nothing to do with our sacrifice on behalf of the Iraqi people.

Now Nelson has let the cat out of the transparent bag and, whether by slip of the tongue or outburst of honesty, admitted that we are indeed in it for the oil.

A few weeks ago, after reading the latest in a long line of reports on the matter, a suitably shocked PM told us that the Federal government must intervene in the NT to fix the rampant problem of sexual abuse of Aboriginal children.

Central to his strategy for a quick fix to the problem were mandatory intimate physical examinations of every NT Aboriginal child under sixteen years of age.

For some as yet unexplained reason, Aboriginal Lands would also be seized as part of the solution and the permit system that allows Aboriginal people to bar certain persons, including white paedophiles, from entry, will be scrapped.

Now, a week or so later, like the Iraq War, the PM’s plan is unravelling. The proposed mandatory intimate physical examinations are now replaced by voluntary health checks that will not necessarily detect any evidence of sexual abuse at all. More individuals and organisations, both black and white, are criticising the government’s strategies and motivations.

But the land grab remains. Could this have anything to do with US company Halliburton’s plans to transport uranium ore out and nuclear waste in via the Adelaide-Darwin railway it recently built, a pet project of the Prime Minister? (Halliburton is US Vice-President Dick Cheney’s company.)

How long before a government Minister ‘does a Brendan’ and admits that they are actually in it for the Land? Unfortunately, probably not before Aboriginal objections to the fate of their Lands can be ignored and expanded uranium mining and a nuclear waste dump are in place.

Shhhh! Don’t mention the Land.

Father of the Nation- I think not

2007-07-01T18:43:00.000+10:00

I've been trying to think of what upsets me most about Howard's plan to 'fix' the Aboriginal sex abuse problem in the NT.

It's not that I think the PM is not genuinely concerned to do some good. Anyone with a beating heart would feel inclined to do something after reading any of the numerous reports of the last ten years. The Howard/Brough plan will no doubt do some good, somewhere, sometime. Enough money and resouces are going to be thrown at the problem after all.

I think the thing that upsets me most is the fact that Howard and his government have ignored the problem for the last 11 years only to suddenly see the light just before an election. Again that wouldn't be so bad if the motivation was clearly and solely to win political brownie points (ie votes) for being compassionate. Unfortunately there is more to it than that. The second string to his agenda is to once again garner the ex-One Nation vote by demonising all Aborigines as drunken paedophiles.

Locally we had a brush with this approach last week when the Federal Member for Gilmore followed her PM's lead and pointed the finger of suspicion at the Wreck Bay Aboriginal community.

This was a totally gratuitous and cheap shot designed to let the white-pointy-hat brigade know that she too is willing to be tough on blacks.

How best then to regard Howard and his willing followers in this matter?

Well consider this analogy: How would you regard parents who only fed and dressed their kids adequately when Grandma was due for her weekly visit. And that only because they had one eye firmly on the contents of Grandma's last will and testament? You wouldn't begrudge the kids their one hearty meal of the week but you wouldn't regard Mum and Dad as model parents either.

To suddenly 'discover' that the problems of Aboriginal communities are a "National emergency" a few months before an election that the polls say he is likely to lose, is equally cynical and self-serving but I wouldn't deny the Aboriginal communities any good that might flow from the PM's sudden awakening.

Who would have thought?

2007-06-30T18:08:00.000+10:00

Just found this on GetUp. Verrrry interesting. Howard to blame for Canada's Indigenous rights backflip: report

Howard Deals Third Race Card from Bottom of Deck- Joker still in play.

2007-06-30T10:18:00.000+10:00

“The purpose of this is not to violate people's land rights. The purpose of this is to get control of these townships and if there is any disturbance of title then just compensation will be paid.” John Howard, 29/6/07

Here we go again folks. In his frantic search for an election-winning ‘rabbit out of a hat’ the PM and his sidekick, Mal Brough, have again elected to play the race card, choosing to suddenly discover the plight of indigenous children in the NT.

After all, it worked before with the Tampa and Children Overboard distortions of the truth.

In each case the fundamentals are the same. Each is based on white Australia’s lack of understanding that, whilst other peoples may have a different culture, they are fundamentally human too and so share most, if not all, the basic human urges- a quest for happiness, a love of partners and children, a desire for a better future etc.

Common sense would tell us that no race is intrinsically evil but this is the pre-election premise the PM would like us to assume every three years.

In the case of the 433 asylum seekers on the Tampa, John Howard asked us to believe that they were merely economic refugees/illegal immigrants, seeking a more lucrative future in OUR Australia. Over time most were accepted as genuine refugees, either by Australia or other countries, but not before an election was won on their backs and the expenditure of a billion dollars of your money. That’s a couple of hospitals or dozens of schools.

‘Children Overboard’ asked us to suspend all logic and believe that a group of people from a particular ethnic group would willingly risk their children’s lives by throwing them into the sea. Of course the truth turned out to be that their ship was sinking and, luckily, our Navy was there to rescue them.

In ‘Operation NT’, the PM is again asking us to believe the incredible; that Aboriginal people, men in particular, are all drunken paedophiles who have the NT’s children living in a state of fear.

It is true that many individual Aboriginal people and communities in the NT could be described as dysfunctional based on their anti-social behaviours, addiction to drink, petrol sniffing other drugs or just the depression brought about by the seeming hopelessness of their day to day existence.

But this is not a new phenomenon. I’m 57 and it has been the case for as long as I can remember. The PM is the second longest serving Member of the Federal Parliament; 33 years. I don’t recall him making a significant statement about Aboriginal welfare in all that time until now.

At least in this case some good will probably be done, although I doubt its Blitzkrieg approach will be very cost effective. Unfortunately, the downside in this case is likely to be far more severe than the couple of years on Nauru to which we subjected the Tampa people. It would seem that Howard and Brough have their eyes on the annexation of Aboriginal Lands as a longer-term objective.

Once considered worthless desert, these Lands are now either laden with minerals; particularly the PM’s mineral of the moment, uranium, or ideal sites for the dumping of the world’s nuclear waste. The Adelaide- Darwin railway was built for the transport of these two materials by a subsidiary of Halliburton, Dick Cheney’s company. Halliburton is heavily involved in the nuclear industry.

The only question left to ponder is what will be the Liberal’s election slogan and catchcry. How about, “Caring for all Australians” and “We will decide who gets Centrelink benefits and the circumstances in which it’s doled out”.

Whatever they are, you can bet they will have racial connotations and be sold to us with lots of pics of drunken Aboriginal men and the PM clutching a particularly photogenic Aboriginal child.

" Me thinks White Man speak with forked tongue"- Traditional

A Lesson from Katrina- revisited

2007-06-29T10:33:00.000+10:00

John Howard has referred to Hurricane Katrina in his attempts to sell his invasion and annexation of Aboriginal Lands in the NT. Readers might be interested in my take on Katrina first published in an early, email edition of The Tank

A Lesson from Katrina
The disaster that is currently playing out in New Orleans and the other Gulf towns of the USA did not start with the first furious winds of Hurricane Katrina. It has its roots in the fact that America and Americans seem to have never really come to grips with the basic concepts of their own Constitution.
When America freed the slaves, following the American Civil War, it failed to free its minds and embrace the elemental truth that it is unacceptable in any society that calls itself civilised to allow a large underclass of its citizens to live an impoverished, marginalised and hopeless existence.
This group of mostly Afro-Americans, the descendants of former slaves, is kept in check with miserly welfare handouts, the constant threat of imprisonment and the ready availability of drugs.
But release the pressure for a moment and all the resentment that has been bottled up for generations surfaces.
I don’t condone for a moment the actions of a small element of those trapped in the Superdome and elsewhere. But at the same time they are victims of the system that Americans have allowed to perpetuate. It’s a system based on maintaining a wide disparity between haves and have-nots and the illusion that all can eat their fill of crumbs from an endless cake at the rich man’s table The fact is that most of the working poor will be forced to work for low wages in menial jobs or sign up as cannon fodder to fight in wars waged to shore up the economic interests of wealthy individuals and corporations.
Faced with the grinding poverty and mindless existence that is the lot of so many citizens of the richest country of Earth, the victims of the system are forced to adopt a sceptical, even paranoid, stance to any effort by authorities to ease their burden.
U.S. society, despite the freedoms espoused in its Constitution and by its President, is fundamentally still rooted in the notion that the few are at liberty to prey on the many. If in the process the poor can scavenge enough of the crumbs of the rich man’s table, a façade of seemingly natural order is maintained.
But this order is an illusion. Any disturbance out of the ordinary; the assassinations of Malcolm X and Martin Luther King or the destruction wrought by Hurricane Katrina, will see the lid lifted on the cauldron that has been boiling secretly for decades.
Whether those in power consciously understand the system they oversee, or wield their power instinctively, I really don’t know but it’s at times like these that the opportunity arises to enter a dialogue about how the inherent deficiencies of the system can be fixed to create a truly free and equal society.
The lesson for us here in Australia is obvious. We proceed down the greed is good, might is right, haves and have-nots path at our peril.
Perhaps this is a good time for all of us to ask the question, “What is a society and what is my role in it.”
If the answer is that we Homo sapiens have come together for reasons of mutual advantage such as defence, health care, education of our children etc then a fairer, more compassionate system than the US model is obviously needed.
If we have aggregated so that the strong can prey on the weak, the rich on the poor, the powerful on the marginalised, then the system we have seen exposed in New Orleans should suit us just fine.

Another Lesson in History

2007-06-27T10:01:00.001+10:00

Question: What do March 20, 2003; Jan 26, 1788 and June 27, 2007 have in common?
Answer: All mark the invasion of the Country of other peoples.
In each case the expressed reason for doing so was seemingly morally unassailable or innocuous whilst existing as a subterfuge for far more base and self-serving motives.
The former was the day the “Coalition of the Willing” invaded Iraq, ostensibly to liberate it from that evil dictator, Saddam Hussein. Of course, after being told an assortment of lies about weapons of mass destruction etc, it’s now almost universally accepted that the real motive was a blatant grab for the resources of Iraq, its oil reserves.
We also now know that the effect of this invasion was the disintegration of Iraqi society with various factions fighting a guerilla war between themselves and against their common occupiers.
The latter, today, June 27 2007, is the day the Federal coalition and its willing State governments will invade the Northern Territory, in particular the Lands of the various Aboriginal peoples there.
The stated reason: to liberate Aboriginal children from the oppression of sexual predators.
The subplot (#1): to effect the displacement of Aboriginal peoples from their lands so that it is freed for the mining and uranium waste disposal industries to have their way. Why else the scrapping of the permit system which allows Aboriginal people to exclude grog peddlers and other undesirables from their Country, in some cases some of their own including those known to be pedophiles?
Subplot (#2): it’s not a coincidence that an election is only months way. Howard has been shown to be cold, hard and cynical on a number of ‘human’ issues; refugees, David Hicks, Children Overboard etc. He needed a softer image in this area. What better than to turn things on their head and get the Children Onboard. The Federal Government has had the 1989, 1991, 1993, 1997 and 2002 reports on the plight of Aboriginal children in the NT gathering dust until now. Why has he suddenly got an attack of the compassionates.
Even if you accept that a primary motive in Howard’s invasion of NT is the protection of Aboriginal children, his modus operandi bears disturbingly close parallels with the disastrous invasion of Iraq. One can only wonder if the outcome will be equally unsatisfactory.
In Iraq, the US and its allies acted unilaterally without the approval of the UN. This made it an illegal war under International Law. However Colin Powell, US Secretary of State, did a snow job on the UN with pictures of supposedly WMD trucks and blurry photos of buildings said to be WMD factories and the UN decided to turn a collective blind eye.
In the formulation of his invasion plans, the PM and his ex-Army officer Minister for Indigenous Affairs, Mal Brough have consulted with no-one, least of all Aboriginal leaders and Elders of the NT. Instead the plan has been announced as a fait accompli to be enacted within days.
Over recent days the TV and print news has been full of pics of lots of Aboriginal children (aren’t they cute?) and Aboriginal men- either drunk or with a slab of beer under their arm, presumably off to get drunk. And rape and pillage too if the PM is to be believed.
No scenes of Aboriginal adults behaving soberly, peacefully, interacting lovingly with their children. No news report that only 15% of Aboriginal people drink alcohol (compared to 87% of non-Aboriginal Australians).
The Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commissioner yesterday gave the NT operation his blessing with only a superficial examination of the plan and contrary to what the average citizen would expect would be his decision if a government agency suddenly decided that all children under sixteen living in, say, Vaucluse or Toorak were to be forcibly medically examined.
Iraq was invaded, occupied and its resources plundered. 100,000 Iraqis are estimated to have died. The carnage continues daily. The average Iraqi has few rights in his/her own country even less freedom and little hope for a brighter future. Little wonder then that many have decided to ‘head for the hills’ in order to fight what they see as a war of resistance.
Already there are repots that Aboriginal women are picking up their children and “heading for the sandhills” of central Australia as their only way of resisting the impending invasion of their Country and their childrens’ dignity.
This continent was invaded on Jan 26, 1788. Captain Arthur Phillip carried instructions that the Aborigines' lives and livelihoods were to be protected and friendly relations with them encouraged, but the instructions made no mention of protecting or even recognising their lands. It was assumed that Australia was terra nullius, that is, land belonging to no one. This assumption shaped land law and occupation for more than 200 years until the Mabo decision.
We of the white tribe now have a 219 year history of occupying every bit we see of value and plundering the resources therein. As we discover more resources in more remote bits of the country we have somehow found excuses why those bits are no longer suitable for the original inhabitants and either move them on, ‘resettle’ them or confine them to ever-smaller bits of their own Country.
Enough is enough.
History is a great teacher; but you have to listen.

Two Petitions, No Courage

2007-06-15T16:18:00.000+10:00

One can only marvel at the duplicity of the current Member for Gilmore’s announcement that she is starting a petition AGAINST the construction of a nuclear reactor in Gilmore given that the most likely site, Murray’s Beach, is not in Gilmore at all but adjacent to it, in ACT territory and the fact that her website, www.joannagash.com.au has two petitions available for download- one FOR and one AGAINST a reactor in Gilmore.

It seems that she lacks the courage to make a decision and stick to it, for fear of losing votes in what is shaping as an unexpectedly unsafe seat for the Government.

Those who will eventually make the decision on the locations of Australia’s proposed 25 nuclear reactors will not take seriously any petition against a nuclear reactor, in any electorate, for two very good reasons.

Firstly, a decision on locations is 7 to 8 years away. Government Ministers have confirmed this timeframe. Both her petitions will be gathering dust by then.

Secondly, at the first hint of a nuclear reactor being proposed in their electorate every other Member of Parliament will be organizing their own petition against their electorate being chosen, as will numerous community groups. The Gilmore petition(s) will be just two of a crowd.

The only real way to prevent the possibility of a nuclear reactor being built in, or near, the electorate of Gilmore is to make sure the Government does not impose a nuclear industry on this country and its citizens, their children and grandchildren.

Given the fact that Ms Gash and her Government are determined to do exactly that, the only certain way to negate the threat for the electorate of Gilmore is to make the coming Federal election a referendum on the issue.

The choice is clear: Vote for the current member for Gilmore for a nuclear industry and the possibility of a nuclear reactor in the Shoalhaven.

Vote for a genuine anti-nuclear candidate to elect someone who will work against the establishment of a nuclear industry and for the development of alternative energy strategies to combat Climate Change and Global Warming.

Shoalhaven Reactor One Step Closer

2007-05-30T12:42:00.000+10:00

Following her announcement that she is now a declared supporter of a nuclear industry for Australia but would object to any plans to build a reactor at Jervis Bay, the current Member for Gilmore’s position on the subject might best be described as that of “Nuclear Nimby”.

Ms Gash apparently wants her (yellow?) cake and to eat (metaphorically we hope) it too. She will not defy her Prime Minister’s hell-bent drive to establish 25 nuclear reactors around the country but wants to enjoy the continued support of her electorate by refusing to countenance one at Jervis Bay, one of the most likely sites, on the grounds that it would be unsightly. [Ironically, since a modern nuclear reactor would impose itself on he landscape less than the proposed changes to Kuskisson village, her silence on that issue is somewhat deafening.]

Given that any decision on the location of the reactors is seven to ten years away, any chance that she will still be in a position to prevent a reactor being built in the Shoalhaven at that time is extremely remote.

I believe that this election will decide whether or not Australia embarks on the nuclear path and consequently whether the Shoalhaven becomes a target of the nuclear industry.

Dr Clive Hamilton, executive director of the Australia Institute has identified “the area south of Wollongong” as a likely site for a reactor.

Murray's Beach was selected some decades ago as the site for our second reactor and some construction work was begun. It has a number of unique features that make its re-selection more than likely-
1. It has a deepwater port
2. It is within ACT territory and so would not be subject to a challenge from a State government
3. It is next to HMAS Creswell and so has inbuilt security against nuclear terrorism, a very real possibility.

Nuclear reactors require large amounts of water for cooling and so are typically on the coast or near a river with a reliable water flow.

Ms Gash has said that she would oppose the siting of a reactor at Jervis Bay for aesthetic reasons but has left open the possibility of a reactor on the Shoalhaven River by saying that any other location was a question of community opinion.

I am opposed to any further nuclear reactors being built in Australia. I believe wholehearted commitment to a mix of alternative energy technologies in combination with energy saving measures is a more viable option to combat climate change.

Under the Government’s plans no reactor will be completed before 2020 but that will be far too late to halt global warming. If a Liberal-National government is re-elected the only thing that may prevent a reactor being built at Murray’s Beach is the fact that the site will probably be under water.

Of's Website Online

2007-04-07T06:41:00.000+10:00

The website, www.noneoftheabove.com.au , is now up and running. It's only one simple page with a link to this blog at the moment but as the campaign proceeds it will start to fill with policy statements, a mesage board, details of events, disclosure of finances etc. I'll keep the blog going though for my day to day ramblings or to post any breaking news.

Take a look at the site and put in in your favourites. I'll let you know here when it contains more substantial info.

Any suggestions would be gratefully received at none@shoalhaven.net.au .

Copied from GetUp FYI

2007-04-06T16:07:00.000+10:00

It beggars belief, but this federal election tens of thousands of eligible Australians will be stopped from voting. Will you be one of them?
The Federal Government has passed extraordinary legislation that will close the rolls for voters at 8pm, on the very night the election is officially called. In the last election, 83,000 first-time voters enrolled in the first week after the election was called. Hundreds of thousands more registered at their new address. But this time they won't get that chance - unless we act urgently.
That's why whether you're enroled to vote or not, there's a crucial role for you to play right now.
Click on the link below to demand this law be revoked, and help friends and family enrol correctly by April 16 - before new changes and extra red tape come into effect on April 16 making it even harder!

In Australia we never know what date to expect the federal election; it's up to the party in power to decide. Typically, the big announcement prompts tens of thousands of people, especially young, newly-eligible voters, to enrol that week. Hundreds of thousands more remember to register at their new address.
It's been that way since Federation with no evidence of widespread voter fraud. But this time if you're too busy or don't hear about the election in time, and you're not already correctly enrolled, you can't vote.
And even if you're organised enough to get in early, new forms and ID requirements are about to come into effect on April 16 - making it that much harder for many Australians overseas or in rural areas to register.
The effect of this law - the Orwellian-inspired "Electoral Integrity Act" - is to stop people from voting. Ours is to fight back. We've made it easy to spread the word to ensure your friends and family are correctly enrolled before the polls slam shut: just use the note below to share this essential campaign with everyone you know, including Australians overseas!
www.getup.org.au/campaign/DontLetThemStopYouFromVoting

No Word from Bob

2007-04-06T15:42:00.000+10:00

No word yet from the US Ambassador on what David Hicks could expect for Christmas Dinner (see Christmas Fare for a Christmas Unfair, posted 7/12/06). Perhaps he thought I meant next Christmas.
Hopefuly David will be home by then and spending his last Christmas in incarceration; in an Aussie gaol.
By then also the US may have ceased the travesty of justice that is the illegal imprisonment and torture of suspects in that gulag in the Caribbean.

Name Change Official

2007-04-03T21:30:00.000+10:00

My name change from Geoff Richardson to Of The Above None was registered at the Wollongong office of the Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages on 16th March 2007.

It cost me $127 to register. I'm not sure if that is a campaign expense or not? Given that I intend to keep the name after the election, I think I'll book it up to me personally.

Speaking of campaign expenses, I should at this eary stage set the record straight with what I see as fair and reasonable ground rules.

Yes, I will be accepting donations but not anonymously. All donations will be acknowledged on the website by name and amount. All fundraising receipts will be listed on the website as will all expenses. The campaign finances will be 100 % transparent.

Should I receive 4% of the primary vote or more (ie 4% or more of the electorate put a 1 in the box next to NONE, Of The Above on the ballot paper) then I will receive $2.05 per vote in election funding. If there is a balance after paying all outstanding expenses then the balance will be put aside towards the next campaign.

The Plea Bargain as an Instrument of Torture

2007-03-28T09:37:00.000+10:00

If torture can be described as the imposition of pain or stress to effect compliance then the plea bargaining process as used by the US Military Commission against David Hicks can be seen as a new and effective refinement of the torture process.

The US and Australian Governments needed David Hicks to plead guilty to a terrorism related offence in order to justify their own positions in demonising him over the last 5 years and were prepared to go to any lengths to ensure his compliance.

Torture often uses a mix of carrots and sticks to torment and confuse the subject into submission and the plea bargaining process as practiced by the prosecution at Guantanamo Bay has done exactly that.

After several years of solitary confinement they allowed him to briefly meet with his family and then began the Military Commission process by disbarring two of his three lawyers at the last possible moment. Everyone, including David, knew at that point, if it wasn’t obvious before, that the Commission had no possibility of ever finding him innocent.

The stick in this process was obvious; a not guilty plea would result in the maximum sentence of 20 years, quite possibly in solitary at Guantanamo Bay with the prospect of rarely, if ever, seeing his family again. The carrot was a considerably lesser sentence to be served in Australia with regular visits by family and friends.

What would you do?

Whatever the outcome for David we will never be sure that any small semblance of justice was served by the process.

What we can be sure of, however, is that our own Australian Government, whose brief it is to protect the rights of Australian citizens, stood by and watched with shameful anticipation while an Australian citizen was faced with a choice he should never been forced to make.

I Know Him Not

2007-03-10T06:56:00.000+11:00

The Government and Opposition have both been in the wars lately re their associations with persons of dubious character. As a candidate in the next Federal election I thought I too should set the record straight.

The Prime Minister is a distant relative by marriage. He is also the man who committed Australian troops to the illegal war in Iraq. (Click here and here if you still believe it was UN sanctioned). He also has acquiesced in the US’s barbaric treatment of David Hicks. Unlike the US, Australia does recognize the International Criminal Court and the International War Crimes Tribunal. If anyone was game to charge the PM with war crimes the Tribunal would almost certainly be obliged to find him guilty. ( Click here and here for others’ opinions on this statement).

For the record I would like to state that I have never had any form of meeting with John Howard, not even socially at a family function and I certainly have not provided him with a reference.

What Will We Tell Them?

2007-02-06T22:03:00.000+11:00

Don’t move.
We have all been witnesses to a crime, a crime against a man and a crime against humanity. We have all seen it, little by little, night by night on the evening news. A man has been abandoned by his Government, forsaken by his countrymen, tortured by his accusers and played with for political advantage by those whose duty it was to protect him.
What will we tell our grandchildren when they ask, “ What did you do to help David Hicks?”
Perhaps he will still be in Guantanamo Bay when one of them turns the legal or political key to release him, some decades from now.
How will we explain our inaction?
Was the Government too powerful, the time too short, the mortgage to pressing or the task too daunting?
What will we tell them?

STOP PRESS: Non-Cricketer Wins Father of the Year

2006-12-28T19:52:00.000+11:00

A retiring Shane Warne was in the mix. The Pigeon, Glen McGrath, was also a possibility. Captain Courageous, Ricky Ponting must have gone close. We treasure those Ashes after all and all three worked extremely hard over fifteen long, hot days to bring them 'home'.

But no, my 2006 Australian Father of the Year is not a cricketer. However he also has been working hard to effect a repatriation; that of his son David from the Most Powerful Nation on Earth's gulag, Guantanamo Bay.

Of course that man is Terry Hicks.

No son could have asked for a more courageous and dedicated father who for five long, gruelling years has battled to save his son from the tortures that are been inflicted upon him by the cowardly Neo-Cons of the Whitehouse.

Well played Terry.

Thank You

2006-12-24T20:01:00.000+11:00

I would like to thank readers for their support and encouragement this year and wish you all a safe, peaceful and refreshing Christmas/ New Year break.

Next year is a double whammy year as far as elections are concerned in NSW; State (March), and Federal (whenever the PM is game) elections are going to keep us busy sorting fact from fiction.

In particular the Federal election will, arguably, be the most important ever. If a Coalition government is re-elected Australia will almost certainly be lumbered with a nuclear industry. They will make sure the process is irreversible. In particular, the Shoalhaven is almost certain to get a reactor at Jervis Bay. If we elect a Federal Labor government we have more chance of avoiding this fate but the pro-nuclear lobby has been working overtime on them too.

A re-elected State Labor government will probably extract every last drop of water from the Shoalhaven, at least until a desalination plant is built. A State Liberal government, led by Peter Debnam, will probably do exactly the same but blame Labor for it. Iemma or Debnam; what a choice.

So be merry and say plenty of “Ho, ho, hoes” for the next week or two. It may be the last chance you get for some time.

Maybe our kids can be our inspiration. Remember the look on the faces of our kids/grandkids/kids-next-door on Christmas morning and let that joy and optimism be our motivation for the year ahead. Kids are wonderful teachers and judges of character. If only they could vote. We mightn’t get such disastrous governments.

Christmas Fare for a Christmas Unfair

2006-12-08T18:36:00.000+11:00

David Hicks is about to experience yet another Christmas at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
I thought it might be interesting to ask the US Ambassador to Australia, Mr Robert D. McCallum, Jr, what will be on the menu this Christmas dinner for David.
Email him at info@usembassy-australia.state.gov
While your at it you might like to also ask him when David can expect to enjoy a Christmas at home here in Australia with his loved ones.
I'll publish his reply as soon as I get one.

More info about David's situation is available at http://www.fairgofordavid.org/

A Nice Little Earner

2006-12-08T12:36:00.000+11:00

Pauline Hanson has flagged that she may be back on the election trail with some typically racist and erroneous comments.
Her motivation? Some say it's to promote the sales of her forthcoming autobiography (buy it and I'll leap through your monitor and rip yer bloody arms orf!) but I think she's on to a nice racket. Her name and notoriety mean she will have to spend nothing from her own pocket on election advertising whilst at the same time picking up the election funding provided by the Australian Electoral Commission for candidates who poll more than 4% of the primary vote; a likely result for her.
Registered political parties are entitled to election funding where an endorsed candidate or Senate group receives at least 4% of the total formal first preference votes. Independent candidates and Senate groups are also entitled to election funding if they receive 4% of the vote.
For more info click here.
At $2.05 per vote she can pick up a cool $200,000 by getting just 4% of the vote in her home state of Queensland if she ran for the Senate.
As long as her (limited) popularity stays above 4% she can do this indefinelty. Expect to see much more of Pauline Hanson, professional losing politician, over the next decade or so.

Oils Ain’t No Oils

2006-12-06T16:23:00.000+11:00

Like so many actions and statements of the Prime Minister, his latest denial of a request for assistance from the Prime Minister of Fiji had me scratching my head in disbelief at his blatant hypocracy.
No we will not intervene in the coup in aid of the democratically elected government. That would be tantamount to an invasion. “We don’t do that.”
Breathtaking stuff. Ask the people of Iraq if Australia invades other countries.
Oops! Silly me. I forgot the unwritten subtext that, by now, I should have picked up on. I should have understood, “No oil, no help”.

Babies and Bathwater: the difference explained.

2006-12-05T22:32:00.000+11:00

The Federal government has assumed responsibility for the sales of Aussie wheat for the next six months whilst it considers its position on the single desk policy wherein one agency, most recently AWB Ltd, has sole rights to trade in wheat for export.
Of course we now know what the government says it didn't know (but should have). ie that AWB was paying kickbacks to purchasers, in particular Saddam Hussein, in contravention of UN sanctions on pre-invasion Iraq.
This was disgraceful, immoral and more than likely illegal but does it mean that the single desk policy is fundamentally flawed? The farmers love it. They see it as ensuring that they have the strength in the marketplace to compete with the big boys, Canada and the US.
The single desk concept is not so different to the way trade unions negotiate favourable wages and conditions outcomes for their members. Or did pre-Work Choices.
By not allowing wheat buyers to pick off the weakest or most desperate farmers first and so set an inadequately low floor price, the single desk policy ensures that Aussie farmers get the best returns for their labours.
For the next six months we are to have the Minister behind a single desk acting as a kind of government appointed farmer's union leader but at the same time the same government is busy telling us that trade unions are passe and that workers will achieve better wage outcomes under its deregulated Work Choices system.
Let's keep the single desk and the union movement and toss out AWB and Work Choices.