« July 2007 »
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31
Entries by Topic
All topics  «
about editor
aust govt
big media
contact us
donations to SAM
election nsw 2007
election Oz 2007
free SAM content
human rights
independent media
local news
nsw govt
nuke threats
publish a story
zero waste
Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
RSS Feed
View Profile
official indymedia
ecology action Australia
ecology action
Advertise on SAM
details for advertisers
You are not logged in. Log in

sydney alternative media - non-profit community independent trustworthy
Tuesday, 24 July 2007
Baird to stand again in Cook?
Mood:  a-ok
Topic: human rights

Bruce Baird is known as a strong supporter of human rights. We notice Imre Salusinszky on the abc 702 radio just now about Baird may stand again. On Sunday we wrote this during the tv free to air political talkies:

"Its very close [re 9 Sunday web poll 47pc Howard step down before election] in the conservative ranks we think. Bill Heffernan was looking very grim on the vision on abc tv last night over the Cook pre-selection farce to replace Bruce Baird. Baird should re stand. "

Does Imre read my stuff? Or someone? Baird is a vote for Costello in the leadership tensions if he re stands, and that may well be why he will or won't.

His excuse previously was he wanted to avoid familial conflicts of policy interest between his son as state MP for Manly and his own idealistic work in the federal sphere. A  pretty lame excuse but that's what he said ... again on abc radio some weeks ago.

Postscript #1 11.15 am 26th July 2007

Bruce Baird has just ruled out running again with Richard Fidler on the Conversation Hour ABC radio:  "I was approached on the weekend on what conditions  would I consider running again ......after 20 years in politics ... you can stay too long". Ouch PM Howard, there's the hint.


Posted by editor at 11:38 AM NZT
Updated: Thursday, 26 July 2007 1:19 PM NZT
Monday, 23 July 2007
Rudd responds to 4% swing to Govt on Haneef 'farce' with redneck appeasement of Tas loggers/woodchippers
Mood:  irritated
Topic: ecology

Preface: worth recalling in the 1996 election a Democrat (?) aligned Australian Conservation Foundation leader (Jim Downey), and The Wilderness Society under guidance of then new director Alec Marr moved from a pro ALP position to at best agnostic or deliberately antagonistic.

This resulted in 'a moral chill' going out in the electorate which created a political space for the Howard led Coalition (pre Iraq war, pre the nuke love in) to harvest anti Keating sentiment. In other words, the ALP leader (read Rudd today?) lost his moral veil which all political parties need to garner broader support. Notice yesterday Downer announced a $400M AIDS package for the Asia Pacific region - that's the beginnings of a moral veil of sorts for a whole of govt election platform, similar to Premier Iemma budget allocations for health both prior and since the recent state election:

Also worth recalling, that earlier this year Rudd said he was guided by science on Tas forests but the science is all against him on this latest announcement as per 100 signatories of a top scientists letter in 2004 here

9/2004 - statement of Australia's best forest scientists on Tasmanian logging problem

Peter Garrett sounded shocking on PM show last night and on Glover political round up before that both for a very bad cold and for content around a shallow front man for a corrupt policy. Sings other peoples songs, but stands for very little himself. He's a joke compared to Bob Brown as here same PM show http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2007/s1986038.htm

And worth recalling that Kevin Rudd's good mates in the Forestry division of the logging union are responsible for this

Full story here ...

Posted by editor at 5:47 PM NZT
Updated: Monday, 30 July 2007 9:16 PM NZT
Sunday, 22 July 2007
Sunday political talkies - a rodent led recovery for the Coalition looks doubtful
Mood:  incredulous
Topic: election Oz 2007


Author’s general introductory note (skip this if you know this regular weekly column):




This is not a well packaged story. It’s a contemporaneous traverse of the Sunday television free to air political talkies indicating the agenda of Establishment interests: Better to know ones rivals and allies  in Big Politics and Big Media.




Indeed it’s the tv version monitoring task similar to what Nelson Mandela refers to here in his book Long Walk to Freedom (1994, Abacus) written in Robben Island prison (where he was meant to die like other African resister chiefs of history in the 19C), at page 208




“..newspapers are only a shadow of reality; their information is important to a freedom fighter not because it reveals the truth, but because it discloses the biases and perceptions of both those who produce the paper and those who read it.”




Just substitute ‘Sunday tv political talkie shows’ for "newspapers" in the quote above.




For actual transcripts go to web sites quoted below except with Riley Diary on 7. And note transcripts don’t really give you the image content value.





Media backgrounder:


continued ... full story here

Posted by editor at 9:57 AM NZT
Updated: Tuesday, 31 July 2007 11:55 AM NZT
Saturday, 21 July 2007
Saturday comment - Why Peter Costello must challenge for PM in the national interest
Mood:  bright
Topic: election Oz 2007

I get Peter Costello’s argument: Resisting personal ambition to sustain a stable team and thus keep the Coalition govt show on the road 'is the right thing to do for the country'. Even at his own expense, despite gibes, slings and arrow.


I get why this pause and reflection while he still has relative youth at 49 is cause for both


- Howard loyalists in the Nats or ultra right of the Libs to pander to his patience with gentle praise he will be PM, will be one day, the way nirvana never arrives, in fact piss in his pocket, and


- on the other hand the attack dogs of the ALP misinterpret the pause as cowardice and lack of ticker like Beazley, even as he keeps an eye on economic health of the country.


Well there has been logic to that approach for quite some time now. But the time has gone and a new reality has evolved slowly since I stood amongst the Canberra press gallery outside the Phillip St offices in Sydney in July 2006: Having a natter to the odd Cabinet Minister Minchin and Coonan and alternatively ingratiating myself and scolding the Riley’s, Middletons and even grand  old man Oakes. The assembly was waiting on what we fully expected to be and was the Clayton's Costello challenge. [Claytons being a non alcoholic drink here.]


Costello eschews loyalty to his own career ambition for the national interest. I give him credit for that as defined according to his own lights.


But we are approaching a much greater moral reality for the national interest as follows:


-         the biography of Howard reveals an emotionally secure and mildly successful intrinsically average man. We don’t say mediocre. We say determined, nurtured supported and inculcated with a iron clad value of hard work. Notice not enough to get top grades at school but strong enough to keep going industriously. Combine such endeavour with 45 years of practice at anything let alone politics and one does become good. Very good… from experience. One learns for instance to grab and co opt far greater intellects for one’s own exploitation.


-         This is the place Costello like many unusually talented people finds himself in. Exploited by lesser mortals like Howard. Ensnared and harnessed (and paradoxically marginalised) to a player of some 19 years greater experience. Just think it – a man like Howard who has lived twice as many adult career lives virtually. And yet Costello conceding such a huge headstart is still seen as competitive to some degree. Incredible.


-         Rudd similarly 19 years junior and seen as far more competitive, indeed triumphing in the polls … so far, even as Morgan late Friday shows a 4% point improve for the Coalition on the Haneef fracas trawling the simpleton One Nation vote.



 Picture: The Sydney Daily Telegraph running interference today on the real news about a stupid legal farce in the Dr Haneef case that reflects quite badly on federal governance of law and order around terrorism issues. This "farce" seems to have been caused by the systemic break down in the rules of subjudice under the supervision of Howard loyalist Phillip Ruddock as Attorney General. As a result the whole case is being run in the pages of the Big Media instead in the courts.



-         But Howard for all his 48 years experience or more in politics remains exactly what his brand signifies – average. An average intellect, an average ability, an average sensibility. Like his friend George Bush. The only really unusual thing about John is his enormous emotional security gifted from his mother, and career longevity. So we don’t say mediocre. We say a triumph of hard work and time and the power of a mother’s emotional nurturing generating a sublime self confidence, and a very helpful disdain for pretension and privilege in a time of disproportionate wealth appealing to voters. But also of course cunning/wisdom built up on the long long road, and school of hard knocks.


-         These are fine qualities when everything is going pretty safely with the world. A Cold War is over. Economic reforms of the 80ies and 90ies have kicked in. The current PM Keating is suffering a political disjunction from the same average mob of voters he actually needed to take with him, however long it was going to take but didn't have the patience. A steady hand on the tiller indeed.


-         But we don’t live in that world anymore. Greenhouse driven climate change is threatening the globe. It takes real intellect and foresight to get this and listen to the best and brightest and honest scientists, that an unprecedented situation is arising. Cleverness and tricks won't replace quality in such a situation - and a good marriage just won't do it either. Again, a new phase of decaying USA empire is making life tricky for a middle power wedged between China and Uncle Sam, not least loose cannon military industrial commercial agendas sucking the public revenue dry in the USA and here. And not just keeping us poor but feeding them into cataclysmic nuclear technologies. Planning for the inevitable down turn distinct from squandering a boom in mineral resources -  if only because China is choking on its own hyper development and may hit domestic turbulence - takes real brightness.


-         these are not times like 1996-2002 for average intellects who play the game of ‘leader’ by being just behind the bow wave, and following the real vanguard once it is safe to do so: Who run interference on the real news like The Sydney Daily Telegraph today above. No, we are going to need the best and brightest and talented Australia has to offer. Some guy who can master multi tonal Mandarin for instance (Rudd). Some guy who can against all expectation find legal rights in common law to beat the union in an ALP-ACTU federal  milieu of the early 90ies (Costello). Our next PM in 4 months has to be a very smart and indeed brilliant person for the demanding times. With creativity to reorganise our carbon economy. Someone who is not easily led on the path of least resistance by bully boys in say the nuke industry, or USA/China geo politik or even geo capital markets when it comes to private equity and takeovers. Average guys are not okay in extraordinary times. Mechanics are no good as brain surgeons so don't expect them to be or give them the wrong job. The family car, yes. The health of your kid - no.


In summary this is why Costello should challenge lose, win or draw. In his heart of hearts he must know a Rudd prime ministership is better for this country than a Howard re-election, as would a Costello victory. Australia can’t afford another term of an average guy, the way Curtin replaced Menzies in WW2 because he was intrinsically smarter, indeed brilliant. It wasn't about helping the forgotten people, it was about bare survival, forging an inclusive alliance across the breadth of society left to right, rich to poor, and now today greenie and brownie.


There are some things that experience just don’t deliver. There are times when average is not enough. And that time is here. Yes, a challenge will fracture the Coalition and cause a lot of turmoil and could even result in a defeat. But then a Coalition Opposition would be in much better shape for the next 3 years to compete again. On the other hand the country would be better led, and there is no saying such a loss is inevitable. Hawke replaced Heydon late in the piece and won, colour and brilliance over steady and bland.


So we say win lose or draw Costello should run for PM. If Howard stays and wins we all lose. If he stays he will probably lose anyway against the quality of Kevin Rudd. In these terms it’s a no brainer Costello should run for PM for himself, sure, but far more importantly for the well being of the country, and in our own humble way, the well being of the world.


The only other patriotic option is to retire pre election. Because sometimes losing is also winning, and vice versa.


What say you Peter?


Postscript #1: early Monday 23rd July 07


Well the Sunday Telegraph yesterday 22nd July 07 following our column above was a doozy. Never seen such a harsh, indeed savage, attack on the Howard led Coalition from the ALP inspired focus group sledging of Howard via Costello supporter Glen Milne front page over to several pages, to ex Nat Senator Bill O'Chee banruptcy/life problems (keeping in mind its the Nats who prefer Howard for his agrarian socialism).


If yesterday's conservative Telegraph is not a proverbial tap on the Howard shoulder in his own city then what is?


Further, call us slow but we have realised there is a third option for the Treasurer Peter Costello turning 50 in the several months (distinct from challenging or retiring to cause Howard to be replaced as PM), namely to be drafted by the Coalition. As you can see from the Shanahan Weekend Australian headline above Costello is saying ostensibly "I won't challenge" presumably to keep Coalition Party unity fairly stable. This may well carry the sub text - you must draft me.

Posted by editor at 12:52 PM NZT
Updated: Monday, 23 July 2007 9:11 AM NZT
Friday, 20 July 2007
Howard govt reprises BBC nuke classic - Edge of Darkness
Mood:  irritated
Topic: nuke threats

YouTube has serialised parts of this chilling BBC classic


Australia May Sign Up to US World Nuclear Energy Partnership - Bloomberg - 9 hours ago

Australia won't become nuke waste dump: PM - Melbourne Herald Sun - 2 hours ago


[Media Releases]

Friday, 20 July 2007

Howard-Bush nuclear deal puts Australia at risk - Greens
The Prime Minister's plan to sign a nuclear pact with President Bush risks Australia's future security and environmental wellbeing, Greens Leader Bob Brown said today.
"A thirty percent reallocation of current electricity supplies through energy efficiency, to meet future industrial, retail and domestic needs is a much safer, cleaner, cheaper option to dangerous nuclear power," Senator Brown said.
"Mr Howard's proposed pact with President Bush will anger neighbours like Indonesia and Malaysia and foster nuclear installations in our neighbourhood. The massive radioactive leak in Tokyo Electrics' giant nuclear plant this week shows how dangerous nuclear power stations on Java could be."
"The Howard move will inevitably bring Australia under pressure to become a global nuclear waste dump. It will increase terrorists' focus on Australia and will create a direct incentive for nuclear power plants to be built near our major cities, like Sydney and Melbourne," Senator Brown said.
Further information: Ebony Bennett 0409 164 603


Howard’s US nuclear push turns up heat on Iemma’s weak laws
Media release: 20 July 2007
Greens NSW MP John Kaye said he would be pushing ahead with his
legislation to trigger a plebiscite in the event that the federal
government tried to impose a nuclear facility on this state.
Dr Kaye said: “The only way to counter John Howard’s desperation to
join President George Bush’s nuclear club is to allow the people of NSW
to have their say.
“The problem is that the existing state laws that supposedly protect
the state from nuclear facilities are toothless.
“The construction of the OPAL reactor at Lucas Heights proved how
little power or political will there is in the NSW government to oppose
the expansion of the nuclear industry in this state.
“We have given notice of legislation that would automatically trigger a
referendum if any federal government tries to force this state to accept
a nuclear facility.
“Our bill is a direct challenge to the Iemma government to strengthen
their stand against nuclear power by giving the people a direct say in
their own future.
“The Greens are confident that there would be an overwhelming vote
against any move to impose nuclear reactors, enrichment, reprocessing or
storage onto a neighbourhood in this state.
“No community wants to risk poisonous waste, toxic leakages and
devastating accidents.
“No society should tolerate the economic damage and geopolitical
destabilisation that a nuclear industry would bring. 
“If Premier Iemma is serious about keeping NSW safe from John Howard’s
nuclear ambitions, he will join with us in strengthening state laws and
making sure that the people have a say before they end up with a reactor
in their back yard,” Dr Kaye said.
For more information: John Kaye 0407 195 455


"the confrontation of good and evil"


This via Benny Zable long time peace activist we have adopted as patron of ecology action australia 

Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2007 10:17 AM

Subject: Australia poised to sign nuclear deal with US


 This email .....confirms what has been going on behind the
 scenes of clearing the way for Nuclear Dumps and the railway links
 Halliburton is building.
 We need to highlight the ramification of what this deal is truly about, of
 why produce more radioactive waste products.
 "Fueling a new breed of Nuclear Weapons."
 I am heading off to New York City on Wednesday and will be discussing this
 matter with Nanci Callahan who produces and directs ECOFEST at the
 Center. <
 I will also be performing in New Jersey on Hiroshima Day.
 Yours Benny Zable
 Alice Slater
 Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, New York
 446 E. 86 St.
 New York, NY 10028
 -----Original Message-----
 Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 7:13 PM
 Subject:  Australia poised to sign onto GNEP with US


[Sydney Morning Herald writer Anne Davies article follows:]

 Australia poised to sign nuclear deal with US
 Anne Davies, Washington
 July 20, 2007
 According to draft plans seen by The Age, Foreign Minister Alexander Downer
 and Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane want the deal announced when US
 President George Bush comes to Australia in September for the APEC leaders'
 The deal could advance Prime Minister John Howard's push for Australia to
 embrace nuclear power, including providing access to the latest
 technological advances.
 "The proposed action plan would help to open the way for valuable nuclear
 energy co-operation with the United States," a briefing note says.
 "It would also be consistent with the Government's strategy for the nuclear
 industry in Australia. An action plan on nuclear energy would also have
 bilateral advantages further broadening our relationship with the
 "While the US has not raised the possibility, the action plan may be a
 possible 'announceable' for President Bush's visit in September."
 But the proposal appears to stop short of recommending Australia sign up
 with the controversial club of nuclear nations, the Global Nuclear Energy
 Partnership (GNEP), being championed by Mr Bush.
 An initiative of Washington, the GNEP is seeking to control the
 distribution, reprocessing and storage of nuclear fuel around the world.
 Member nations include Russia, China, the US, Japan and France.
 Mr Bush has said the initiative is central to tackling climate change, and
 that its aim is to ensure the safe growth of the nuclear industry while
 limiting the risk of proliferation of nuclear material for weapons.
 US officials have indicated that Australia's status as a "totally reliable
 and trustworthy" nation could allow its inclusion in the plan as a fuel
 But the proposal is controversial for Australia partly because storage of
 nuclear waste by GNEP partners is an integral part of the arrangement.
 The Federal Government has repeatedly said Australia will not take other
 countries' waste.
 The GNEP countries met in Washington in May and agreed to work on plans that
 control the supply of all nuclear fuel and its reprocessing and waste
 disposal. Non-partnership countries would be leased fuel only if they
 complied with the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
 Australia, the world's biggest exporter of unprocessed uranium, and Canada,
 another big supplier, have expressed interest in GNEP.
 But GNEP is seen by some developing nations as highly divisive, and
 Australia's membership could alarm neighbours including Indonesia.
 It would also rekindle heated debate in Australia over the development of
 nuclear power, and would inevitably raise the spectre of a nuclear waste
 Officials working on the US-Australia initiative flag this concern in their
 note, saying that signing "a joint nuclear energy action plan would be on
 the basis that this would not limit possible future choices regarding
 Australia's nuclear industry. It will be important also to ensure there is
 no misperception on the United States' part that conclusion of an action
 plan could have implications for the Government's policy of not taking other
 countries' radioactive waste or spent nuclear fuel."
 A US Energy Department spokeswoman, Angela Hill, said: "The vision of GNEP
 is something we would hope Australia and other countries can support."
 A spokesman for Mr Downer confirmed that discussions on an agreement were
 under way, focusing on safeguards and research and development.

 Alfred Meyer, Program Director
 Alliance for Nuclear Accountability
322 4th Street NE
 Washington, DC 20002

 202-544-6143 fax


Posted by editor at 10:46 PM NZT
Updated: Monday, 23 July 2007 9:26 AM NZT
A message from ex PM Fraser to get out of Iraq via Get Up lobby group
Mood:  sad
Topic: peace

Picture of 2003 added by SAM editor.


Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 10:01 AM
Subject: A Message From Malcolm Fraser, Former PM

Dear GetUp Members,

The situation in Iraq continues to deteriorate with more loss of lives, with even more hardship to Iraqi civilians.

The serious divisions within Iraq, unleashed by the war itself, have not been reduced. The Iraqi government has made no significant steps towards reconciliation and accommodation between the warring parties.

This is a situation that cannot be controlled by military force. The troop surge, such as it was, failed. There were over half a million Americans in Vietnam. They failed. With only a fraction of that number in Iraq it should be no surprise that continued reliance on military means is not succeeding.

More and more Americans are coming to accept that withdrawal must take place. Senior and highly respected Republican Senators are deserting President Bush on this issue. The original objectives are almost entirely forgotten. There is no talk of Iraq establishing a benign, American style democracy that will spread to the rest of the Middle East.

Our withdrawal must be carefully planned, as a precipitous withdrawal in a week or a month would add to the chaos. And as the Baker-Hamilton Committee reported to Congress, all regional players, including Iran and Syria, must be drawn into discussions before we leave. Diplomacy now offers the only chance of a withdrawal accompanied by relative calm and peace.

One of the things we should say to the Americans, quite simply, is that if the United States is not prepared to involve itself in high level diplomacy concerning Iraq and other Middle East questions, our forces will be withdrawn before Christmas.

I encourage you to support GetUp's campaign for a change in policy. Add your voice below to the thousands who have spoken already. If enough speak, the Government has to listen.


Malcolm Fraser AC CH
Former Prime Minister of Australia

Posted by editor at 9:39 PM NZT
Gulaga forest benefit at Tilba Hall Sat. 28th July 07
Mood:  amorous
Topic: ecology

  A cosy night of music and home made food will be held at Tilba Hall 
on Saturday 28th July. Cover charge $10 - $5 con. with children 
getting in free. Local songwriters and performers will be 
entertaining us from 6pm with a kids movie being shown in the kid 
friendly area. All proceeds will go to helping save the foothills of 
Gulaga from woodchipping. Please come and bring your 20 closest 
friends. BYO
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 5:59 PM
Subject: [chipstop] Update on man in jail for trying to save Gulaga forest

Sooty attended court in Bateman's Bay today and was granted bail. It appears that upon being charged yesterday, he was not even offered bail, so his night in the slammer was not as a result of refusing bail conditions.


A man is in jail tonight as a result of his efforts to save Gulaga Forest, near Tilba today.
As the Gulaga blockade approaches its twelfth week, the man was charged following his attempts to stop contractors and Forests NSW officers entering the forest to undertake logging.
He was taken by police to Batemans Bay and held in custody overnight; he is expected to appear in Narooma Local Court tomorrow (Thursday) morning.
The Gulaga blockade is a peaceful, non-violent protest against the logging of the foothills of a mountain sacred to local Koori people. In its early weeks, almost 20 traditional owners and elders issued an eviction notice to Forests NSW, demanding for a halt to logging.
Contact: 62923267  0414908997
18 July 2007


Between 2,500 and 3,000 trees from SE NSW and East Gippsland are cut down every working day to supply the Eden chipmill
CHIPSTOP campaign against woodchipping the SE forests, 02-64923134, PO Box 797 Bega NSW 2550 Australia, http://www.chipstop.forests.org.au






Linda Burney MP launches NAIDOC week action at Addison Gallery Marrickville 2pm Sunday 8th July 07

Posted by editor at 9:11 PM NZT
Updated: Friday, 20 July 2007 9:36 PM NZT
Vegans boast climate friendly diet, this Sunday at Petersham Town Hall
Mood:  hungry
Topic: globalWarming


Posted by editor at 9:03 PM NZT
Thursday, 19 July 2007
Build a bicycle trailer with no welding - cost $20
Mood:  a-ok
Topic: local news


We are going to burn alot less petrol and alot more fat with this home made and designed bicycle trailer. It only cost about $20 because we were lucky to find and scavenge alot of the materials and buy the balance from The Bower at 142 Addison Rd Centre. We blame the ABC inventors show and necessity for this invention.

 From top left clockwise the picture reveals

1. Not as great a design as the Hills Hoist but we are still quite proud;

2. The swivel mechanism - a chunky bit of wood (the swivel beam) with 2 holes (via power drill using skinny drill bit in a circle, and chisel out): A hole at one end for bike seat pole and another hole for the swivel over the back wheel (a 2nd fork cannabalised from one of the trailer frames). Notice the hole in the wooden cross beam (main trailer cross beam) on the trailer at top left of the image which will fit onto the swivel. Take care to measure the length of the swivel beam, seat to swivel (say 30 cm roughly), such that when the main trailer cross beam fits onto the swivel the metal axle pole of the trailer (fed through the two absent bottom brackets) has decent clearance from the rear wheel of the bike.  This swivel beam is essential to prevent trailer running into the back of the bike on down hill momentum (we first tested a bit of climbing rope fine going flat or up but as you would expect no good slowing down or down hill). The swivel fork over the rear bike wheel is essential for attachment - trailer to rear wheel to back seat - but also to keep the trailer 'up' over the rear wheel, and thirdly to allow cornering. It also allows a straight line of load force from trailer to bike  

(See below for the attachment of the lower fork ends of the swivel to the rear axle of the bike rear frame. Another (commercial) method of trailer yoke design is arms of a trailer direct to the rear axle of the bike good for avoiding bounce, but that's another story and may require welding ability and a wider rear bike wheel axle. Our design does not anticipate bounce with a fairly heavy lower shelf, bottom bracket axle, and swivel to stabilise travel vibration.)

3. One of the two 20 cm bolt assemblies through one of two front trailer frames (two cannabalised and stripped old bike frames front wheel removed) fed to metal plate at bottom end of what used to be hole for front forks, fixing chunky wooden cross beam at front of the trailer - big enough for hole to be drilled in middle for the swivel pole. The wooden cross beam is the trailer attachment to the swivel on the bike but also supports the top storage shelf of the trailer.

4. Right trailer wheel (facing forward on bike) inner attachment to wooden cross beam. We only had a skinny front bike wheel to recycle which is skinnier than a stripped regular rear wheel. As a result we ended up using a little U bolt to ensure wheel travel clearance onto a 2nd bigger U bolt onto the hard wood cross beam.

5. The attachment of the lower fork of the swivel to the rear bike wheel frame - if the bike has unusually wide rear axle then maybe just fit as a second set of forks, but more likely you will have to marry the Allen key bolt holes of the respective forks (originally designed to mount panier racks). It's alot easier if you reverse the swivel fork as if facing backwards to make room to line the holes up and screw the Allen bolts in.

6. metal pole cross beam fed through the two absent bottom brackets of the bike frames. Note at right the U bolt onto some 9 mm ply shelving. Notice this pole axle is fixed with some bashing with a hammer to slightly flatten the circumference of the pole each side of the bike frame.

7. rear safety attachment of bread basket shelving (light bright strong and weather proof) with some unused climbing carabiners.

8. left hand wheel of trailer with U bold attachment, notice this wheel is a back wheel stripped of its cogs (for lightness) and provides much better clearance for attachment of wooden cross beam.

9. rear shelving fixed by safety bolt.

10. top shelf fixed by safety bolt to swivel fork with metal plate and recylced handlebar nut off stripped frame.

12. under carriage showing wooden rear cross beam, bottom bracket axle, lower shelving bolts

13. Not shown - trailer rear wooden cross beam for upper shelf attached with u bolts through drill holes.

Note - care should be taken to provide all nuts with either a split washer or plastic insert in the nut to hold the nut fast from vibrations. We found many of these from an old metal couch in a local lane.

The above still needs some road testing and probably a flag in the trailer empty seat holes and reflectors on the rear especially at night to aid visibility on the road. Riding is likely to be mainly low gears. Design weight on the trailer we expect to be around 50 to 100 kg.

Posted by editor at 4:13 PM NZT
Updated: Friday, 20 July 2007 2:28 PM NZT
Tuesday, 17 July 2007
The breaking down of Dr Haneef, tear in eye after 10 days
Mood:  accident prone
Topic: legal
My instinct is the federal police are gaming both the Big Media and defence lawyer/civil liberty lobby. The premium and priority for the AFP and security services in this situation surely is ANY intel Haneef innocently or not can provide as access into the world of Al Qaeda. In this way the 'good' Doctor is a gem of intel they would never willingly give up from the most serious to trivial cultural insights he might have into the bad 2nd cousins. Law Council on Fran Kelly abc 576 earlier today says they would be "surprised" if the full evidence was not presented to the Qld magistrate regarding bail. But even if the Law Council is right, that still leaves all the intel Haneef potential holds not directly probitive of charge(s). The longer Haneef is held the looser his tongue will be - even Nelson Mandela says solitary is the worst suffering for an intelligent man after 2 or 3 days. We need that contact to really live. Also a trivial charge helps keep open lines of inquiry and investigation without tipping the police hand to the opponents so the Law Council and civil liberties lobby may yet get that surprise. And that is even allowing for the "scathing" view of lawyers Rob Starry (UTS lecture 2006, last night UTS) and Lex Lasry thesis (Trioli abc 702 show this morning) of deliberate contamination of the public, and Richard Neville (former editor Oz Magazine) incredulity as to systemic failure (no doubt) of sub judice in this Haneef case on Glover (ABC 702) last evening, making a fair trial virtually impossible. It's all about the intel, and little people get crushed in that spooky world.
Tom McLoughlin, solicitor

Postscript #1

Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 8:00 PM
Subject: Tony Burke MP spotted at Keating The Musical

Opposition spokes on Immigration Tony Burke was spotted Sunday 8th July at the Seymour Centre in Sydney for the last week 2nd season of Paul Keating the Musical. It was a packed house. Was it 'John Howard' singing like a bellowing heifer "I want power", or 'Bob Hawke' with a tinny schmoozing women in the front row, or kinky Paul "doing John Hewson slowly" that appealed to MP Burke? Or was it ribald 'Alex' getting "freaky"? Burke so quick to play the angles should fit right in to a future Rudd musical after me-tooing the ruthless Haneef star chamber. 'Whatever it takes' - alive and well here in Sydney.
Tom McLoughlin

Postscript #2 18th July 07, 8.45 am

Well the dynamic real politik of this situation is really flowing and it's not entirely in anyone's control would be my view.

1. Crikey ezine  notes with some heavy logic  the govt's anti terror laws didn't keep their target Haneef in detention, causing them to rely on immigration law. Strike 1 the federal government.

2. AG Ruddock is saying last night (Lateline?) Parliament may need to stiffen the no presumption of bail laws causing Tim Bugg of the Law Council to sound warnings about civil liberties 'built up over centuries' on Trioli 702 this morning (as we write). Work in progress.

3.  The ALP is 'quiet on this' to quote Fran Kelly this morning in talkies with Michelle Grattan earlier today, noting their Tony Burke maintains 'bipartisan support for the government with nothing futher to say on this operational matter'.  That's out sense of it too - operational. But also ruthless as regards rights but also fairness to 'good' Dr Haneef.

4. There is a fraught debate over the 1st of 2 records of interview (all 142 pages of transcript) leaked, that's right, leaked to The Australian. AFP chief Mick Kelty in mild grave tones was on AM abc 702 after 8am this morning and what a cracking quiet interview it was. Along the lines of 'I [Kelty] have rung the editor [Chris Mitchell] already this morning and been assured the transcript didn't come from the AFP, and he knows I am publicly holding him to that.' The interview sails on with speculation it could be lawyers of defence or prosecution or maybe govt [departmental/ministerial staff - say Immigration or Attorney Generals on the visa cancellation?] Kelty swears on air Ministers couldn't have access to the transcript, but that the leak to a newspaper is contempt of court - presumably for running evidence in public that is subjudice. Kelty is surely correct about that too including contempt by the newspaper, but given the systemic abuse of subjudice it's a collective Big Media guilt, and a faint hope of Kelty perhaps due to the election climate to flush the truth of this case out. Right to know and all that.

5. Kelty incredibly says the transcript #1 leak damages the prosecution case. But does it? How Kelty can offer that legal advice is beyond me. Doubt he is a litigation lawyer even if a top police officer. Maybe he means it sabotages the legal process due to mis-trial for contempt. But it certainly helps the immigration visa cancellation rationale of Immigration Minister Andrews (causing some outrage) for showing the good Dr was financed in his studies by the UK arrestee, was in fairly regular social contact, and shared a flat.  [Actually he didn't share a flat apparently, only visited for several days: Refer front pager The Australian 20/7/07. Also on reflection it is fair to say transcript #1 does damage the prosecution as per the headline quoting Haneef 'I am no radical' front page The Australian 18th July.]
You will notice we don't link to the 142 page transcript posted apparently by The Australian because we suspect that's not open to a practicising lawyer (this writer) in a case where the charge is before the court.

6. What becomes apparent from the transcript summarised in paper version of The Australian is that Dr Haneef at first failed his UK medical exams which is explicable on many levels - culture shock, language, pressure to get paid work. That he was loaned 300 pounds by the arrestee cousin etc etc. But it could also suggest he was not the 'the best and brightest' to quote Michael Sheur ex CIA Bin Laden unit and therefore not in fact Al Qaeda material? On the other hand he might have been more vulnerable to their ideology too?

7. Later same abc AM show Peter Russo, defence solicitor doing a stirling job as advocate states categorically he didn't leak the transcript #1, and is annoyed at being treated like "a mushroom" by "someone".

8. Chris Merritt, legal editor of The Australian, for the last two months has been reporting the demise of a very stupid idea from the peak Qld lawyers union (Law Society there?) that the profession's Code of Conduct should ban lawyers speaking to the media during a court case. That is, self censorship. The idea which limped along under the radar it seems sort of evaporated on contact with sunlight after howls of derision from lawyers on the ground calling it "bizarre". Indeed. Imagine Peter Russo, Qld solicitor being gagged after his stirling work this last week in maybe the biggest case of his life? And what a nuggety humble weather beaten (Bruce Willis in 16 Blocks?) type of lawyer he proves to be, visiting the cells up there in Qld. Bravo Peter Russo. You're doing the profession proud. Just be yourself. Your rough hewn sincerity is priceless.
Postscript #3 late 18th July 2007

Well what do you know, the defence barrister not so much leaked, as released the transcript to The Australian, saying its only what would have been presented into public hearings at a commital hearing. No bail has been posted and Dr Haneef now resides in a Qld prison, and not Villawood Immigration Detention Centre in Sydney as hoped by the Federal Govt. And the PM and his AG Ruddock are fairly ropable on the nightly tv news bulletin/s that someone else should dare to seize the Big Media initiative in place of tactical prosecution leaks. Ouch.
 [acknowleding Crikey.com.au cartoon ran 19th July 07]
We at SAM were not the only ones thinking it was a govt placement into The Australian, and we even rung around a bit with the theory it could lead to a mistrial get Haneef out of the Qld legal system and into Villawood. We still don't understand why this material was not subjudice and thus a breach of those rules by The Australian and the defence and indeed earlier leaks by the govt/prosecution. It's all too weird.

Postscript #4 8.30 am 19th July 07
The Qld Law Society is backing the ethical judgement of the defence barrister, The Australian is defiant with legal editor Chris Merritt front page (still to read), and the barrister Stephen Keim SC is determined in the Big Media like Lateline last night and the press generally. Indeed he has repudiated the personal attacks of PM, AG and AFP chief Mick Kelty. It's legal high drama for us more humble lawyers, and indeed thrilling to see senior lawyers in possibly their best light fighting for the little guy (like Mandela, Robert Kennedy, Gandhi).

What becomes apparent is that senior Victorian defence lawyer Rob Starry naming in the most profound "scathing" way the racket whereby the govt/prosecution tactically, strategically leaks evidence in terrorism cases against the defence over the last 2 years in various cases, where the AG Ruddock and PM have turned a blind eye, has now compromised their ability to credibly criticise the action of the defence barrister Keim (pictured front of The Australian today).

It is legal reporting AO1 to not run contentious evidence through the general media, indeed a matter this writer was effectively
sacked/resigned over for refusing to circulate so in a previous job with Sydney City Hub front cover story about a King Cross sex shop raid. Suffice to say we don't have high profile friends to back us up and were not willing to put our practicising certificate at risk based on say the ABC legal handbook advice.
[We note Richard Ackland in his column in the Herald, it has to be said rival to The Australian but still trustworthy, dated 20/7/07, reinforces our understanding of orthodox subjudice rules of legal reporting by quoting the Qld Bar Association Rule 60(a) to not publish or assist publishing material concerning a current proceeding except for quite "anodyne" matters which don't cover the police Q & A transcript. The reason such a rule exists is orthodox subjudice as we expressed above.]

So why is this basic and sound rule of subjudice breaking down in such a systemic way now from both the prosecution and defence side of things (to the delight of Big Media helping to sell newspapers)? Because the political leadership of the country has allowed the principle to be corrupted selectively and that is a matter of accountability at AG Ruddock's door. The aghast AFP's Mick Kelty on AM yesterday who notes the unravelling legal norm might realistically be directing his criticism at the federal govt failure of political leadership in sustaining the sound legal administration of justice for nurturing  a culture of evidence leaks in sensitive cases for political gain.

We say it was inevitable defence lawyers of real mettle as Keim so obviously is, were going to take action sooner or later, and so it has happened. But the point is the corrupted legal culture under this federal govt.

Postscript #5 9am 19th July 07

Trioli show 702 is digging into this in the biggest city in Australia (Sydney).
Prefaced the interview with ex PM Fraser (Liberal), and Barry Jones ex MP (ALP),  but that outrage glosses the "operational" nature of the situation as regards evidence withheld from the Qld magistrate, including the 2nd transcript of interview with Dr Haneef.

As we write Prof Mark Findlay legal academic on criminology is the talent. He says in normal criminal trial such docs would be provided to the defence. [Sure, accepted.]
Findlay notes AFP/DPP refers to contempt of court, not national security strictures against publishing.
But what of the publication of the transcript? Interview not probitive of subjudice principle? Reference to both sides doing the wrong thing by Trioli, defence forced into the public arena suggests Findlay.
Bongiorno decision in Tamil case in Melbourne referred to as indicative of broader legal industry concern as to selective Big Media duress on the judicial decision making.

[reminds of family holidays as  14 year old in Casino NSW with the Bongiorno family - caught drinking out of the milk carton by Big Bernard! How embarrassing. Funny how you remember such things.]

[Chris Merritt legal editor at The Australian has front page today squarely challenged the principle of subjudice with this sentence "Do the authorities really believe that jurors are so stupid that they cannot tell the difference between a newspaper report and evidence that is tested in court?" In context this is explosive impertinence because The Australian has put contentious evidence into the public arena in deliberate attack on the subjudice legal reporting rule AO1. And probably News Ltd in particular have been doing so in various cases for the last 2 years.

It's a very serious and determined attack on the principle of subjudice we are witnessing here, done slyly for the prosecution till now in the last 2 years (says Rob Starry et al), and openly for the defence here in the Haneef case yesterday by agency of The Australian. Notice this allusion to the clash of judicial power and Big Media power i.e. 2nd (exec govt), 3rd (judiciary) versus 4th (media) estates also by Chris Merritt same article:

"the court of public opinion [in the Hicks Case] can sometimes be far more powerful than a court of law".

That's an allusion to bare faced trespass on the judicial constitutional power being excused by Merritt with it seems an axe to grind over the failure to put Hicks away forever. Strange times indeed.

A "sober" assessment would say subjudice is a good and valid public policy for legal administration. Trouble is its been selectively implemented and we are now in the swirling waters of a poisoned paradigm, law of the jungle extreme free speech. That's poor governance in my book. We need a treaty amongst the 2nd, 3rd and 4th estate and re establishment of the principle of subjudice or else its a crazy free for all of selective leaking of contentious evidence to sell newspapers. Where is the public interest indeed in feeding the Big Media meglomania during a trial?  




Further besides the tussle over the principle of subjudice itself, there is also a real tension in all this between the public Right to Know agenda of the Big Media and the national security interest in covert operational matters, as surely Merritt knows. Will we ever read the content of transcript #2 in the Haneef case, and should we, and when, if ever? A question of fine moral judgement balancing subjudice, operational covert investigations and public Right to Know. Whoa my brain hurts.

The Trioli spin doctors section has a commentator [Antony McLellan] that there is no contempt of court for publishing the transcript #1, but I hold my judgement on that. The ABC legal handbook is pretty categorical that once a person is charged its bare facts only as suitable for reportage. This bares far more authoritive legal analysis - for instance subjudice prevents a potential juror begging off saying 'I've read about this and its affected my thinking' to avoid jury duty.

And the idea a judge is not affected by Big Media is highly unconvincing. Sure judges are only supposed to take "judicial notice"  of very uncontroverisal general knowledge and ignore the rest. But they live such constrained lives my guess is they are voracious consumers of the quality media.

The Supreme Cout of NSW if memory serves is a client of Media Monitors based on my 2 years as a reader analyst there 2000-2001. That begs the question why such an interest in Big Media by the judges? Because they defend their power like all the others. 
( By the by, the client list of Media Monitors is commerical in confidence but we had to learn the client codes by heart like a foriegn language along with all the other institutional interests in society also represented. There must have been hundreds. The real proverbial Big Brother on life in Australia.)

Sean Carney interviewed from The Age notes Treasurer Costello has damaged Howard re personal bad relations, lack of economic respect for colleague PM Howard. BUT what it really significes is a deliberate distancing by Costello from Howard leadership consistently sinking in the polls, and building a post Howard career foundation.

Postscript #6 20th July 2007

Well what a wild legal reporting media politik ride this Haneef matter has become. Our traverse of the quality press does we agree show a dynamic democracy at work as per Dennis Shanahan's large comment piece in The Australian today.

It does also reflect a broad suspicioun of a rodent led federal govt prone to  'crying wolf ' as per the allusion of the Sydney Morning Herald editorial today.

Incredibly subjudice has been totally junked with front page story in The Australian testing and in fact convincingly junking the affidavit evidence of the AFP as to Haneef's character based on factual errors. To add salt to that injury to AFP/Immigration minister near fatally injured credibility, the ABC radio news have come over the top this morning via intrepid Raphael Epstein that Haneef's SIM card was not in the Glasgow bomb car at all though it was held by one of the arrestees.

All of this is subjudice contentious evidence that belongs in a court not in the general news but the case is being run through the media no doubt now. Indeed spilt milk, toothpaste out of the tube.

The Australian editorial bangs on about public interest (to sell more newspapers?) and then with grand impertinence calls for the transcript #2 (the one likely to be most revealing for Dr Haneef at his most fragile after more days of solitary) to also be released. No surprises there - sell more newspapers public interest or not.

So how "operational" in terms of national security is transcript #2? Or even future potential interogations? Shanahan above, seen as a strong ally of this federal govt, warns balancing national security concerns is serious and real.

We say as per the Herald reference to the federal govt seen as crying wolf, the power of that fable and metaphor is the general understanding that a wolf does exist. In this context, the Tube bombings happened. Madrid too. Bali. Others facing terrorism charges right here or even convicted.

(Why they do terrorism is another debate again. Many say ideological religion like Chris Hitchens in The Australian recently. We at SAM see a deeper concern allied to religion as an opiate for inequity and geo politik/economic grievances. Religion including extremism as psychological salve for damage done. We choose Gandhi's courageous peaceful protest to transcend that spiral of tit for tat violent damage. But we are not so naive to observe that in this world many don't.)

A great irony in the news today - the column by William Maley, an academic at ANU, is that he correctly criticises the reliance of Minister Andrews on an AFP summary for his visa deliberations rather than the original transcript which is intrinsically selective, but doesn't notice the publication on Wednesday last of the guts of the transcript #1 in the paper version of The Australian was itself arguably selective, especially given absence of ...transcript #2.

We say all the chest beating and self justifications, which are all fertile veins of Big Media coverage content filling the hungry 24 hour cycle (not least a platform for an expanded 4 page legal reportage empire of Chris Merritt every Friday now at The Oz, though to be fair no Haneef stories today there) are not probitive of the content of transcript #2. So again we say how operational is it? Should it be published at all? Voyeuristic curiousity and Big Media sales imperatives don't seem to me a safe way to run national security when the wolf is real (leaving open whether Dr Haneef is one of the innocent sheep or not).

And that is allowing for the criticism of Antony McClellan about hypocrisy of the authorities  (in The Media section yesterday of The Oz, also abc 702 Trioli spin doctors)  identifying AFP leaking for the govt/prosecution here, with info NOT provided to the Qld magistrate. Ouchy:

We write all of this, not fully ready to concede an absolute right to the presumption of innocence in the context of a terrorism threat, in anticipation of the Sydney leg of the APEC conference. Not for the world leaders of variable moral quality but for the street full of average citizens, the 18 year old uni student peacenicks, socialist agitators and labour activists, not least greenies, as well as average workers.  I don't want any of these to become another Madrid, or Tube slaying. Similarly if Dr Haneef is no more or less than one of these he has my vote too.
I look to a functioning democracy across all 4 estates free of selective politiking to accurately decide which. Indeed as an editorial of The Australian carries in a headline public safety trumps political opportunism everytime.
Postscript #7 [Press releases]
Thursday, 19 July 2007

Howard's double standards on judiciary

The Howard government is engaged in an unprincipled attack on the
judiciary, Greens Leader Bob Brown said today.

"The Howard government has changed the dividing line between the
judiciary and the parliament in an unforgivable way," Senator Brown

"The Howard government has condemned the granting of bail to Dr Haneef.
It has also attacked Dr Haneef's barrister, Stephen Keim SC, for
releasing transcripts of police interviews with Dr Haneef, but leaks
from the government in this case (and in a series of previous episodes,
such as the leaks against former ONA officer Andrew Wilkie) have been
welcomed with silence by the Prime Minister."

"The standard of public life is being eroded under this government, but
there are wider consequences. The vilification of Dr Haneef is damaging
Australia's standing in India and around the world."

"The Prime Minister is trading political advantage for national loss,"
Senator Brown said.

Further information: Ebony Bennett 0409 164 603

Detention of Dr Haneef has unravelled: Greens

20 July 2007

Continued detention of Dr Haneef has become untenable with revelations
that the case against him is falling apart, Australian Greens Attorney
General spokesperson Senator Kerry Nettle said today.

"The case against him appears to be unravelling at the seams," Senator
Nettle said.

"British police have revealed that the SIM card alleged to be owned by
Dr Haneef was found hundreds of kilometres away from the UK terrorist

"Minister Andrews should review his decision to cancel Dr Haneef's visa
particularly as it appears that the information he has used to do so is
flagrantly incorrect.

"Dr Haneef has maintained all along that he did not reside with any
terrorism suspects.

"At best this is a stuff up.

"Minister Andrews claimed he has cancelled Dr Haneef's visa and liberty
on police advice that he posed a threat to Australians. It's now clear
that the case against him does not appear to be objective or accurate.

"Minister Andrews must fix his mistake and return Dr Haneef's visa."
Senator Nettle  said.

More information Kristian Bolwell: 0411638320


Postsrcipt #8 early Monday 23rd July 07
Some things become apparent. Via David Marr at the SMH feature on the weekend that defence solicitor Peter Russo was at the interrogation of Dr Haneef for the unreleased transcript #2. We didn't realise this before and it tells us many things - Russo is maintaining his legal strategy of a full defence, he is participating in public meetings and general media. This tells us there is not much in transcript 2 versus the already released #1 of any incriminating nature.
Thus we saw the Saturday Telegraph hide the Haneef case back on p9 after the centre sports section, while the other press put it front and centre.
Similarly some nasty bogus "leaks" incriminating Haneef which have been repudiated by the defence as you might expect, but by the so called source - the senior levels of the Australian Federal Police, who reportedly (quality media abc tv, radio) have directly contacted the defence to say it rubbish and not from them. The story ran in the Sunday Mail in Brisbane with echoes in the sister paper of the Sydney Telegraph. Looks like a deliberate fraud on the public.
Now Premier Beattie is cranking on radio national abc as we write the failure of systemic governance around this determined breach of subjudice rules as promoted by the Howard govt lobby in the Big Media for cynical PR reasons.
And Howard loyalist Alexander Downer is on 702 news 7.50 am as we write attacking Beattie for 'doing the work of Rudd' which even if true doesn't change the logic of Beattie's critique - the political farce is bringing anti terrorism measures into disrepute and that is bad (that's right ear piece for one station (702), another radio for the other brand of abc (576 national), and typing too!).

Postscript # 9 July 29th 2007

Dr Haneef is free, charges dropped, work visa not renewed though, 60 Minutes has paid him for an interview to be broadcast tonight as per Sydney front page Sunday press today:



Posted by editor at 11:32 AM NZT
Updated: Sunday, 29 July 2007 9:13 PM NZT

Newer | Latest | Older