Mood:  special

And we tips our hat to both Brett Solomon and their "170,000" online activist subscribers, and to The Australian editorial decision on placement in their newspaper today 5th April 2007:

Because a page 7 spread hits home more than say a page 6, 8 or 12. And yet there it was on page 7. That's quite a few more thousand$ in premium location, which tells you something about the Big Meeja displeasure with bogus gag orders on David Hicks, convicted of material support for terrorism. At this rate John Howard who appeared on 7.30 Report last night will be glad to leave politics. But let Get Up! tell it

Former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser also has a bit to say about the legal travesty here: Politics Overrides the Rule of Law

Perhaps of even more damaging significance for the Howard Government's re-election prospects is this economic criticism in the same edition of The Australian: Kevin Rudd: Howard ignores the big picture

Posted by editor at 1:34 PM NZT

Updated: Thursday, 5 April 2007 5:03 PM NZT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  a-ok

When SAM's editor travelled around the world in 2002 we noticed even in shaky democracy of Chile they allowed a building size mural of Che on a main street.

Then in Berlin there was this moving artwork on that symbol of dictatorship the Berlin Wall, as below.

Yet the Blue Moutains council are getting a reputation for authoritarian officiousness when it comes to public political messages here in May 2006

Che mural removed! Condemn Blue Mountains Councils' censorship of art!

and according to abc radio this morning and no doubt elsewhere in the meeja over a Your Rights at Work poster http://www.rightsatwork.com.au/.

And we feel it's not just up there, but rather a creepy chill all over Howard's Australia:

Below are some enlarged posters of the Berlin Wall to read the text, and further below murals in fraught Northern Ireland city of civil rights demo in Derry/Londonderry, where they seem to cope. I've sneaked in some happy snaps at bottom left of Morocco market place and Gibraltar. All images taken 2002

And there is this poster below being sold in the main square in Santiago in 2002. Get the picture? Free speech is supported worldwide even in shaky democracies let alone NSW, Australia.

Posted by editor at 11:25 AM NZT

Updated: Thursday, 5 April 2007 1:04 PM NZT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  not sure

The ‘Big Media’ as this blogger in the ‘5^th estate’ likes to refer to, being the old established print tv and radio establishment, is a “cartel” say the new online media experts. Of course they are right.

The corporations with their big wages have fixed power in Big Politics and Big Media in a well worn revolving door. Naysayers, contrarians and downshifters pointing out the economic growth model has whiskers, that the emperor has no clothes, need not apply. The gate keepers will spot you a hundred miles away …. protect their big fat wage… their family well being … indeed the spoils of ecological warfare at the peak of the industrial/ technological/ information revolutions, right now in 2007.

One hopes the online activist media will not travel the same path as it's power grows.

Online activism at least will ameliorate this fix on democracy surely? The new breed of inheritors of 60ies radicalism free of the madness of legal and illegal drug cultures will seek to not only tune in, but also take over our media to implement progressive idealism, surely? Well maybe. Or maybe that in fact is a naive view of human nature.

Brett Solomon founder of Get Up (pictured inset at right above) says the goal of his “movement” of some 175,000 (?) email/web subscribers is a “progressive Australia … economic fairness, environmentally sustainable”. Just call Brett a Green or ALP Left I guess and amen to that.

"But what will he and Get Up do about the ALP support for expansion of uranium mining?", asked one older cynical questioner at this forum held today

 The Impacts and History of Internet Activism

Free lunchtime talk in Sydney CBD, On Wednesday 4^th April from 12.30pm join Dr Matthew Arnison (www.active.org.au & www.indymedia.org co-founder) in conversation with Brett Solomon (Executive Director, www.GetUp.org.au ) & Tom Dawkins (Founder of www.vibewire.net) as they discuss the internet and its use as a tool to create a more democratic society.

From online activist planning, e-petitions and emails to MPs to citizen journalism this discussion will look at the effects of the internet on the Australian political landscape.

Brett Solomon states “New technology has given Australians a whole new way to influence the political and social landscape they operate in. Now it’s up to us all to use it to best effect.”

Dr Matthew Arnison sees online collaborations “like Wikipedia, YouTube and MySpace bubbling over with stories from the trivial to the profound. Yet Australian politics and government is still a top-down broadcast.” He asks “How do online activists affect mainstream politics?”

Tom Dawkins sees the internet as a space “with enormous democratic potential. By its very nature it’s a conversational rather than broadcast medium, and this opens up the opportunity for citizens to participate in this public space, express themselves on the issues that matter to them, tell stories and uncover issues ignored by the mainstream media, collaborate on campaigns, share information and better scrutinize political decision-makers.'

Media contact: Brett Solomon 9264 4037 or 0407 419 320 brett@getup.org.au

Tom Dawkins 0416 099 534 tom@vibewire.net Colleen Woods 9262 7300 or 0410 325 913 outreach@sydneymsa.com.au

So getting back to the question what will Brett do about the Labor Party embrace of uranium mining at their April Conference despite the clear problems with proliferation, waste, historical accidents and no doubt others? Well Brett answered by turning the question around JFK like – what are you going to do mate? I didn’t quite see his jaw jutting out but it might have been. And the clue to the real answer is here anyway:

http://www.getup.org.au/blog_details.asp?blog_post_id=131

To give Solomon his due he is a great speaker, diplomatic and strong. No doubt idealistic. But he appears captured too – he concedes he relies on rich folks specifically  people like Evan Thornley – rich entrepreneur and Upper House MP Victorian Parliament for the ALP. Also refer Evan Thornley - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So Get Up literally today are promoting this worthy campaign and staying quite clear of nuke expansion issues so far:

----- Original Message -----

From: GetUp

To: xxxxxxx

Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 10:37 AM

Subject: Don't let them stop you from voting

Dear friends,

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 new 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 in the next two weeks - before new changes and extra red tape come into effect on April 16 making it even harder!

www.getup.org.au/campaign/DontLetThemStopYouFromVoting

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. 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. And if you've been overseas for more than 3 years and you're not on the roll, you're still not allowed to enrol from abroad.

The effect of this law - the Orwellian-inspired "Electoral Integrity Act" - is to stop people from voting. Our purpose 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

Thanks for taking urgent action to spread the word,

The GetUp team

PS: GetUp has taken your calls for climate action directly to decision makers, at the weekend's National Climate Summit. We told leaders from politics, industry, science and the business community they have a mandate for bold action to fight global warming, and presented Kevin Rudd and Peter Garrett with our Action Agenda and 75,000-strong Climate Action Map petition. For details and photos, click here.

……………………….

So if Get Up arguably is packaging of existing blocks of political capital roughly of the centre left ALP/Green kind more or less but in a new form, what about the other online activist organisers?

Are they decentralising power with this thing called the net? Or are they equally politically constrained gatekeepers too?

The thesis we found most impressive was from the Vibe Wire speaker Tom Dawkins that the internet grew out of democratic pressure to side step the Big Media/Politics cartel, allowing for suppressed stories, suppressed voices, keeping stories alive that Big Media then pick up. He said it with conviction and for his youthful constituency who are always given the leftovers from older generations.

Our understanding of the internet bares this thesis out: The US military industrial complex may have invented it but the Chinese had something going 17 years ago in the non western masses to sidestep the dictatorship there. My housemate in the suburb of chilly Downer, in Canberra in 1990 the year I lived on $4,500 dollars while doing my Legal Workshop solicitor's accreditation prior to moving to Sydney later that year, surprised me with printouts of data from off the phone via his computer.

But when I went to the online activism forum above, 17 years later, and then went on my way I spent the next hour thinking about why everyone in the room got to ask their question except me, sitting in the back row notwithstanding. Here was a mini cartel of another kind. 

The explanations are deep and not that comfortable for the organisers or for me, which is of course why they didn't take my signal, the first hand up and the last one down, the clock run down on me. These net experts like their own comfort zone, just as Big Media do, not realising dissent is the essence of the democracy they are sworn to save.

[Not vexatious dissent, but considered rational concerns, as per the question in the postscript below which was censored from the forum.]

Online activism decentralising power? I wonder. It comes down to human nature, whatever the medium. In my old fashioned book learning English Literature course in year 12 high school I studied The Leopard by Giuseppe de Lampedusa and what a revelatory story it was. In one hallowed section it refers to the introduction of the new system of Parliamentary Democracy in Italy supposedly replacing the Royal system of nobless oblige but in reality opening the door to a nouveau rich who cared even less for the humble classes. There is a deeply disturbing section where 3 votes in the village to keep the Monarchy, out of 300 for change, are fraudulently altered. The essence of democracy namely dissent is murdered, in a seemingly trivial housekeeping way for the clean unanimity desired by the agents of change. The new powermongers.

So I was intrigued why I could not get to ask my question. The facilitator looked at me again and again but no banana. You see I have history with the online activist ‘establishment’: From Mike Carlton or Pred (RIP) who invented Sydney Indy Media (SIM) and fraudulently sought to co opt my share of a commercial lease at Turrella activist centre in 2003 after I gave them free rental space, forcing me into the NSW Supreme Court to get justice. And then the expose of one Stacy Scheff on the Sydney indymedia collective who tried in that same year to kill rival old community media Sydney City Hub that employed me, and spent the next 3 years or so it seemed doing her best to censor and smear me off the Sydney web news site. The whole grim power game is discussed here: Turrella centre

The irony was that my content was keeping that website alive until I finally generated my own www.sydneyalternativemedia.com/blog outlet here in January 2007 in frustration at their latest crash. Now I notice my post of 23rd March on the old SIM is still the 5th most recent local news story after 10 days.

4 new local stories in 10 days. No wonder I felt like I was keeping the thing alive with content. By comparison the Melbourne equivalent site www.melbourne.indymedia.org is much more vigorous. Seems others got the mesage too and have been skipping SIM. At least with my own blog I know my work is appreciated: Not in 10 years roughly of contributing to  Sydney IMC as a writer or otherwise can I recall any encouragement or support. Must have been a slow learner or unrealistically idealistic, but I've learned good and proper now.

So the point is even in so called decentralised open publishing there is on the one hand mindless unedited blatherings and on the other hand edgy genuinely independent yet confronting voices that get oppressed. Incompetence is far more acceptable than weighty critique of a defensive IMC reviewer.

We recall the episode of the West Wing tv series where the CJ character recalls the Heisenberg Principle whereby the act of observing changes that being observed. This is true for example the presence of a tv camera eggs on people to be melodramatic. Similarly there should be a word for powermongering inherent in the creation of a new facility for decentralised democracy. There is always a gate keeper clique effect for who is and isn’t allowed through the door at the margins: Voltaire may have said he would give his life to defend his rival's right to free speech, but it’s a very rare creator of an online facility that eschews new found status and influence not to even a few scores or seek the odd perk.

There is always a clique and always a powermongering gate keeper in any medium. It’s human nature. Even in the non profit community sector. Indeed the currency there is not money but influence and emotional violence are usually the tools of trade not profit or meritocracy. All of this came to me as I travelled home from the online activist forum like some latter day brooding Cassandra. I was grateful that one insightful chap from www.projectaustralia.org.au also noticed the apparent snub and offered me his brochure. But it would have taken way too long to explain all of this above.

These are tricks of access and patronage the old media are most expert at, and which I spend a lot of time exposing like the story about Tony Koch earlier today from The Australian smearing The Wilderness Society.

Another recent example was James Woodford in the Sydney Magazine http://thesydneymagazine.smh.com.au/ published by Fairfax 29th March 2007 and oddly related to the Koch atrocity in Big Media.

His story at p56 about “unsung heroes” of the green movement presents people who are already in the sphere of ALP govt or so wishy washy it doesn’t matter. Take John Connor now employed by the Climate Institute with Bob Carr ex ALP Premier with a big history of woodchipping behind him as their patron and aligned to the Australia Institute on the ALP patronage drip. There is a Taronga Zoo employee, an ACF loyalist (group that produced Peter Garret as ALP Shadow minister), a govt catchment body, govt funded environment education person, a fishing industry person in favour of refuges which government supports but recreationalists don’t, and national parks advocate trained up by a govt agency. The so called ‘guardians’ are all worthies to some degree but also lap puppies.

Posted by editor at 8:08 PM NZT

Updated: Thursday, 5 April 2007 3:10 PM NZT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  sharp

Tony Koch is no “Journalist of the Year” if his latest feature is any guide.

But first some credit where it’s due: On p2 24th March 2007 of The Australian, which is known for its 4 page paid propaganda Special Advertising Reports for the resources industry, their paper lauds Koch like this

“Our man wins Journalist of the Year award”

“…Koch, a three-times Walkley award winner and legendary figure in Queensland journalism, won the $20,000 award sponsored by The Age newspaper for his exceptional coverage of the death of Mulrunji Doomadgee on Palm Island.”

That’s a big rap for Koch. But then consider this latest feature yesterday 3rd April 2007:

Rough passage | Features | The Australian

It’s about “Queensland's white environmental establishment has sidelined traditional owners in the quest to protect the wild rivers of Cape York, writes Tony Koch”

Trouble is it looks like a big fat resource industry lie by their mouthpiece The Australian using their most credible star reporter in a hard fought federal election year where Queensland is a big battle ground state.

Examples of the resource industry financial pumping of the viability of The Australian’s big fat pay packages can be found here:

Engineering & Resources/A Special Advertising Report 24-25 March 2007 – all 8 pages of it.

And then this is this one: Paydirt uranium conference A Special Advertising Report pages 38-39 March 19^th 2007.

So what is the evidence? Well when you read the story at the link above you are impressed by the three courageous Aboriginal protesters against the might of the Qld Govt and white greenie establishment. Small but brave they win support from other local Aboriginal dignatories.

Trouble is the feature airbrushes these easily obtained statements on the web from leading Aboriginal voices who you might consider to be even more representative:

The Carpentaria Land Council and The Wilderness Society call for protection of Gulf of Carpentaria Wild Rivers in Queensland

The Carpentaria Land Council Aboriginal Corporation
The Wilderness Society Queensland Inc

Media Release
23 June 2006

The Carpentaria Land Council Aboriginal Corporation (CLCAC) and The Wilderness Society today called on the Queensland Government to honour its 2004 election commitment to protect the rivers of the Gulf region under its Wild Rivers initiative.

The CLCAC and The Wilderness Society have been lobbying the Government this week in the lead up to an important cabinet discussion next Monday, 26 June 2006, which will determine the future direction of the Wild Rivers initiative.

In recent weeks, mining interests and the National Party have called for the scrapping of proposals to protect several Gulf region rivers including the Gregory River and Settlement Creek.

CLCAC have consulted closely with all of the traditional owner groups - the majority of people affected by the proposed declarations. They have expressed their overwhelming support for the protection of their rivers.

Murrandoo Yanner, a Gangalidda traditional owner said, “Healthy rivers are the lifeblood of our people – everything depends on that. Water for drinking, fish for eating – we have to protect this for our children’s children. We’ve talked with the Government and we thought we were on the same page – we want the Settlement and Gregory Rivers declared – the Government shouldn’t cave in to the scare-mongering of those mining and agriculture mobs”.

The Wilderness Society has also called for immediate declaration of the four Gulf rivers. Larissa Cordner, wild rivers spokesperson, said, “The only thing that is required now is a Cabinet decision that accurately reflects the Government's election commitment – we expect these rivers to be protected”.

Anthony Esposito, The Wilderness Society Indigenous program manager, said, “The support of the traditional owners is essential to the success of the Wild Rivers initiative on the ground, and the Government has it. The Beattie Government should honour its election promise to protect the Gulf rivers and not bow to the outrageous demands of the Queensland Resources Council and the National Party”.

For more information, please contact:

Larissa Cordner
Wild Rivers Campaigner
Email Larissa Cordner
Workphone: 07 3846 1420
Fax: 07 3846 1620

[bold added]

What happened to Tony Koch’s reportage of other Black voices apart from the pro big industry ones?

As they say in South America, not every Indian is a good Indian, not every tree is a good tree. There are developer Blacks and conservationist Blacks just like white society, and you know what Tony Koch? It’s racist to suggest otherwise.

Declaration: This writer was employed as an advocate for The Wilderness Society in 1993-4 including their pioneering Land Rights Policy which strongly recognised the traditional owners of heritage land.

This included meeting with traditional owners here in NSW as well as land council representatives including the NSW Aboriginal Land Council in Parramatta, and at conferences convened by the Environmental Defenders Office.

Our law honours thesis in 1989 was entitled A Legal Foundation for Aboriginal Land Rights, and predicted the native title decision in 1992 of the High Court Mabo Case from precedents in South Africa, India, PNG, and Canada, as well as the writings of Henry Reynolds.

Posted by editor at 1:38 PM NZT

Updated: Wednesday, 4 April 2007 2:05 PM NZT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  irritated

Item #1 via google: Date: 6th February 2007 BBC NEWS | World | Middle East | Iran envoy 'abducted in Baghdad' 

Item # 2 via google Date: 6th Feb 2006 Iranian diplomat may have been arrested in Iraq - CNN.com

Item # 3 via google Date: March report of Jan 2007 kidnapping Published on Friday, March 30, 2007 by Inter Press Service : Fate of Five Detained Iranians Unknown by Khody Akhavi, WASHINGTON - As the Western media turns its attention to the fate of 15 Britons detained for allegedly trespassing into Iranian waters over the weekend, the status of five Iranian officials captured in a U.S. military raid on a liaison office in northern Iraq on Jan. 11 remains a mystery. ......
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/03/30/192/

Posted by editor at 12:14 PM NZT

Updated: Wednesday, 4 April 2007 1:10 PM NZT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  a-ok

We are gradually growing as a  www.sydneyalternativemedia.com/blog

 The figures for 2007 are now

January 2800

February 5,372

March 6,684

For this we are pleased.

And if the axiom of good reporting is that it's a story that someone somewhere doesn't want published then this received today should fit the bill:

2 April 2007 

Tom McLoughlin

xxxxxxx

Dear Tom,

Re: Public Comments about the Addison Road Centre 

The Board has directed me to write to you about your comments on your blogsite. I am asked to officially warn you about making public comments which undermine the reputation of the Addison Road Centre.  

The Board instructs you to desist from making public derogatory comments about the Centre and its members. 

The Board further understands that you have concerns you wish to express. The Centre has adopted a Grievance Procedure, which is available to you, or any other staff member, or member of the Centre, which you should follow to air your concerns. The Grievance Procedure has been circulated to you. The appropriate step in that process is a formal complaint which can then be investigated.

This is an official warning. If you engage in further public comment in this vein, then the Board may consider disciplinary action.  

Yours sincerely,  

Ian Laird, General Manager

..........................

We have responded to refute the assertions in this letter with various legal argument and feel pretty good about our position in this situation.

The two stories complained of are here:

Saturday, 31 March 2007

Building Addison Rd Community Centre healthy democracy* beyond influence peddling, self interest

under topic local news and

Sunday, 18 March 2007

Our work ban on errant community centre tenant

again under topic local news

We stand by both these stories for being soundly in the public interest as well as our personal interest, and well sourced based on our lawyerly instincts for evidence based assertions. We are happy to apply a corrections policy where it can be shown we have strayed from any fact or reasonable comment.

We reject outright in the strongest possible terms that this damages the reputation of the ARC - which has a certain reputation all of its own and it would be dishonest to suggest otherwise. Also we include many positive aspects about the ARC which is we are not only happy to report but also have helped actively to achieve.

Further we note the precedent of the Local Government Act (NSW) which positively encourages outreach, information and education of the public about the situation regarding public bodies (in that case local councils) which we think the Addison Road Centre is quite comparable in terms of community service function.

Lastly we were always employed as an independent contractor until recently at the ARC when the centre urged this writer recently to become an employed staff member, with a pay rise. But that can't be at the cost of my democratic right to  free speech.

Postscript #1 3rd April 2007:  We don't compare ourselves with the gag order on David Hicks, or Mr Peek of Tristar allegedly sacked for speaking to the meeja, but we think the community is heartily sick of authoritarian bully boy censorship tactics.

Lawyer Greg Barnes wrote this in ezine crikey.com.au today of the implied constitutional right to political communication as here in the context of the abused Hicks:

"Since 1992, in a case involving the former Labor MP Andrew Theophanous, the High Court has determined that there are implied rights to free speech and communication when it comes to discussion of issues about government and politics, particularly in the context of elections. This is known as the implied freedom of political communication.

Surely the circumstance of the detention of Mr Hicks is a matter concerning politics or government. His arrest and detention has been the subject of heated political discourse. If the media publishes an interview with Mr Hicks about these matters are they simply not utilising that implied freedom? "

Amen to that as regards this humble blog reporting background to an ARC general meetings under their constitution. The attempted gag letter from the ARC board should be treated with the contempt it deserves.

Posted by editor at 10:00 PM NZT

Updated: Tuesday, 3 April 2007 3:52 PM NZT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  incredulous

Picture: Phil Koperberg MP, Senator John Faulkner, ex MP Sandra Nori, Paul Gibson MP

Posted by editor at 3:33 PM NZT

Updated: Monday, 2 April 2007 4:01 PM NZT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  down

This is the newsagent banner for The Australian newspaper October 7th 2005. It refers to a $4M sweetheart deal with the logger union in Tasmania and the Howard federal government, as a pay off for their support in the 2004 federal election.

This is the union that Michael O'Connor in the news today says deserves the right to log where ever and whatever they want despite the urgency of climate change, the urgency of threat to biological diversity in an increasingly exhausted natural world, as per this report:

Rudd facing union backlash on forests

KEVIN Rudd is facing a backlash from the union that helped sink Mark Latham's 2004 election campaign, amid fears Labor's new forestry policy will cost Tasmanian jobs.

This is the same logger unionist who is implicated as an apologist for political terrorism at Wandella near Cobargo on the NSW South Coast, and in Victoria before that:

6th Dec 2006 - Logger terrorism under the Howard federal government

Posted by editor at 2:15 PM NZT

Updated: Monday, 2 April 2007 2:37 PM NZT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  special

Picture: The super bright Fran Kelly matches wits with big thinker Mal Turnbull MHR this morning.

The serious political analysis from Michelle Grattan (AO, Adjunct Professor ) every morning on radio national abc radio (576 AM on your dial in Sydney) is usually just before the 7.45 am news on the higher rating 702 abc radio.

It usually clashes with the classy simper of Virginnia Trioli, the thinking man's crumpet prefacing her morning show. Suffice to say I turn to Michelle's probing reminiscent of a George Smiley guru, because she has the real JUICE on federal election prep.

But even Big Michelle gets it 'wrong' sometimes - Hicks gag is in the context of a criminal style legal process whereas confidentiality provision is far more appropriate to a CIVIL matter. So to quote a legal saying res ipsa loquitur - the matter speaks for itself the gag is a civil mechanism for political protection, not administration of criminal justice. The Howard/Bush regime are guilty as charged of perverting the administration of justice because it should be seen and heard to be done, not gagged.

So sorry Michelle your ad lib misfired there. Indeed Fran Kelly tackles Mal Turnbull MP on this very gag - Turnbull who in an earlier life was involved in the  famous in the Spy Catcher free speech fight: SPY CATCHER by Peter Wright which we once found dumped outside the old Surry Hills library and devoured

Mal sidesteps the free speech issue and as Kelly points out he will be free before 1 year sentence here in Australia.

Robert Richter QC a defence and human rights advocate says its unique that USA Bush regime agent Susan Crawford of their Defence Dept cut the Hicks deal rather than chief prosecutor Mo Davis. In our view that's in effect perverting the administration of justice like the whole rotten operation.

Another broader concern for the long suffering ABC consumers is that Fran Kelly does her cutting edge media work in the shadow of the 7.45am news on the sister station because it seems it's not safe to be heard at a higher rating time on these critical issues.

Indeed as I write Richter confirms my view commercial contests often have confidentiality, but not the Hicks type of case: An illegal gag in the USA legal system. So are the Australian and USA government's saying his witness will actually damage their intellectual justification for the War on Terror. It sure looks like it.

It is true you can go to the the Radio National morning show website to download the story,

 http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/brkfast/index/default.htm

as wonk Christian Kerr of ezine crikey.com.au is also known to do but its not quite the same and damn annoying switching the dial between two stations.

This morning I missed most of the story about (dodgy process for?) a  Visy plantation fed pulp mill stage 2 at Tumut (a $450 million expansion, state significance wave through by Minister Sartor) set to expand pine plantations by 30,000 ha or so, with very serious landscape and water catchment implications, we having attended the first Commission of Inquiry for stage 1 in the late 90ies:

27/3/98...Visy pulpmill Commission of Inquiry for the NSW Planning Minister based on exotic plantations in the local region.

 A quick few phone calls and I found that it was advertised locally for a month in February in the shadow of the state election prep, and got a very few submissions according to Moira Shields of ABC Wagga. I referred her to the Environmental Defenders Office and quickly gave a brief to principal solicitor Jeff Smith too - good to see him at work at 8.15 am on Monday.

 This is what recently retired and highly respected Commissioner Kevin Cleland said in his prescient final report in 1998 on the stage 1 Commission of Inquiry process regarding stage 2 in the news today 9 years later:

"The pine plantation resource in the Tumut region will require supplementing to ensure timber is available to the mill over the next 60 years. This is not part of the development application for the mill. Nevertheless, an additional area of 30,000 hectares is required  for the Stage 1 and a further 40,000 hectares for stage 2. These areas  are substantial and compliance with the relevant Codes of Practice will be essential to ensure adverse environmental impacts do not occur. To accord with the National Forest Policy Statement these additional plantations need to be established on largely cleared land with only incidental clearing. Some parties [eg local property owners, green groups] are concerned for the social implications of changing land use from agriculture to forestry monoculture  over such large area. I recommend preparation of a strategic plan."  [bold added]

: Kevin Cleland, extact of executive summary of report to NSW Planning Minister June 1998.

Here's betting London to a brick, there is no "strategic plan" for massive regional landscape change in the political shadowlands of the Southern Slopes of Tumut, Cootamundra, Wagga area during the incompetent and corrupt Carr-Iemma government.

Here's betting the critics like local property owners are being bought off (according to advice) as the defacto method of good land use governance here on planet ALP aka NSW, and other civil society voices like this one are being studiously ignored.

Who indeed will even take the bet?

Posted by editor at 9:44 AM NZT

Updated: Monday, 2 April 2007 2:32 PM NZT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Mood:  caffeinated

Ch 10 Paul Bongiorno is back Turnbull reacting to ALP Rudd climate change forum in Canberra with heavy science hitters and ‘serious’ business people.

Panel is Michelle Grattan Sun Herald/Age of Fairfax, Brian Toohey Financial Review (Fairfax).

MG – bouncer re equity richer countries do the main action. Blah blah blah answer.

 

Picture: Moir in yesterday's Herald echoes the religious dimension to Garrett's public  presentation, compared to his policy rival Turnbull actually pressing the heavy intellectual buttons, of a global climate problem about actual mechanisms of cause and solution. Turnbull is wrong but Garrett is not meeting him with ALP rednecks tying one hand. This cartoon critique can resonate because Garrett is known as a 'convert' to 'non denominational Christian, anti communism'  and convert to ALP Big Party politics, so he better get his policy skates on, and take on the ALP red neck thugs too, or he will be just another flaky brand.

2nd guest Human rights law Julian Burnside QC admit involved in researching prosecution for rendition for torture (possibly Mamdouh Habib in Egypt)

[Intriguing reference to punch ups with the ALP Left given this writer’s experience on election day avoiding same.

Also intriguing reference by Ramsey in Herald yesterday Stop the presses: the story Rudd tried to kill (last line) to Rudd’s glass jaw - a term I use to describe a power broker at the Addison Rd Community Centre, associated with … the ALP Left). The Ramsey story could have been headlined “Let Rudd be Rudd” to borrow a phrase from "Let Bartlet Be Bartlet" the 19th episode of The West Wing:

Meaning the PR spin merchants that concocted Bob Carr’s political career also destroyed his currency until he simply fell over as a laughing stock and ran to daddies arms (Macquarie Bank). It would be a tragedy for Australia/Rudd professionally and personally to let such as over weight spinner Walt Secord etc do that to our country. The lesson is contained in Leunig's rather beaut cartoon also yesterday in Fairfax press - the pies of life - can't obtain a copy, but it reads "

The pie of life

Is hurled into your face

Every day,

But that is no disgrace. 

A life worth living

Gets splattered on your shirt -

And though you're shocked

And rather hurt;

These pies of life

Which fly out of the blue

You're made for them

And they were made for you.]

Very odd legal gag on David Hicks discussed [especially from the land of free speech, govt politicisation of legal process is an attempt to pervert the administration of justice?]

Insiders 2

Cassidy leads in with ‘does Rudd have a glass jaw?’ as per Ramsey story, Cassidy being in that story text.

Costello treasurer is guest of honour. Sounds pretty flat and tired. Lacks ‘virility’ to borrow Ruth Ritchie description of Vinnick character in tv review yesterday again from West Wing series. Shows a bit more vigour on hypothecation of tax repeal with GST payments.

Creepy Costello quietly laying the foundations for raised GST risk of ALP hegemonic governments state to federal. “kicking a goal from fullback”? asks Cassidy with wit.  No within 10 metre square says Costello. [Time will tell.]

Costello right about Rudd packaging being unsustainable, [let Rudd be Rudd is the longer term sound strategy, minders trying to over engineer his media coverage is fundamentally undemocratic].

Every person focus group in little tinny ie boat re climate credibility gap for govt, for science, for the future.

Bolt lies about destruction of old growth helps greenhouse by planting a tiny seedling.

Senator Bob Brown on live, sounds earnest, shut out of ALP forum yesterday. Setting the agenda says BB. Handles the googlies from Milne very deftly too on energy/climate change. Saint Bob again.

Strong debate by panel, and good tv actually honourable mention to Karen Middleton. Milne says Hicks subject to perjury in USA if returns with different story.

9 Sunday

………………

10 Meet The Press extract transcript 25^th March 2007 lifting CBS America morning after NSW election day – secretary of defence of USA Robert Gates:

25/03/07 - Joe Hockey and Robert Gates

CBS EVENING NEWS PRESENTER BOB SCHIFFER: Is there any indication so far that this latest addition of troops is making a difference or having an effect?

US SECETARY OF DEFENSE ROBERT GATES:  I think that the way I would characterise it is so far so good. It's very early. General Petraeus, the commander out there, has said that it will probably be summer before we know whether we're being successful or not. But I would say that the Iraqis are meeting the commitments that they have made to us, they have made the appointments, the troops that they have promised are showing up, they're allowing operations in all neighbourhoods. There is very little political interference with military operations. So, here at the very beginning, the commitments that have been made seem to be being kept.

BOB SCHIFFER: But the violence seems to go on. While there has been something of a downturn in the violent events in Baghdad, where we're putting these additional troops, we're seeing more violence in the outskirts. Obviously we've changed our strategy but it appears the enemy is changing its strategy as well?

ROBERT GATES:  Actually, General Odierno, the ground forces commander out there and General Petraeus, the overall commander, both warned that as the surge took place into Baghdad and as we cleared people from Baghdad that there would be kind of a squirting effect, that some of these people, particularly the al-Qa'ida and the insurgents, would begin to operate in other places and try and still bring off spectacular attacks in Baghdad and so that's why we have to wait and see what kind of trendline appears over the next weeks and few months.

BOB SCHIFFER: This week in the House of Representatives there'll be another vote on a bill that will seek to put constraints and set up some sort of a timeline for bringing the troops home. You have been against that. Give me your best argument about why we shouldn't do that.

ROBERT GATES:  Well, first of all I think it's very important for people to know that I believe everybody involved in this debate is patriotic and looking for the best thing for America. I think most people agree that across the political spectrum, that leaving Iraq in chaos would be a mistake, a disaster for the United States, and so we're all wrestling with what's the best way to bring about a result that serves the long-term interests, not only of the Iraqi people, but of the United States, and I think everybody is wrestling with that problem on all sides of the issue. With respect to the specific bill in the House, the concern I have is that if you have specific deadlines and very strict conditions, it makes it difficult, if not impossible, for our commanders to achieve their objectives and, frankly, as I read it, the House bill is more about withdrawal regardless of the circumstances on the ground than it is about trying to produce a positive outcome by incentivising the Iraqis. The issue that we're all trying to figure out is how best do you get the Iraqis to reconcile their differences because after all this is not going to be solved by the military, it has to involve political reconciliation in Iraq among Iraqis. We're basically buying them time, that's the whole purpose of this strategy, and they're going to have to step up to the plate and we can help them by giving them the time to do that and to make their military forces able to carry the burden by themselves.

BOB SCHIFFER: Let me just challenge the conventional wisdom here. The President said that if we leave they're going to follow us here. This appears to me to be a civil war. Why would they stop fighting each other, which is what they seem to be doing now, why would they take a break in that and decide to try to challenge America somewhere down the line if we leave?

ROBERT GATES:  This Washington game of "Is it a civil war or isn't it?" I think is a problem - this characterisation is a problem, because it oversimplifies. The reality is that stoking sectarian violence is a very specific strategy on the part of al-Qa'ida and the insurgents. That was behind the bombing of the Samara mosque, it's behind their efforts today, and they make no bones about the fact that it's their strategy, so you don't have thousands of Shia and Sunni falling in on each other or attacking each other. You have hit squads going around the city. So this is a purposeful strategy. It seems to me that there is the opportunity to create a political environment in which these issues can be sorted out among the Iraqis themselves and that's basically what we're trying to do.

BOB SCHIFFER: I want to shift just a bit. I read that you are now writing personal letters to every family who has lost someone in Iraq. Why did you decide to do that? It must be a very difficult thing.

ROBERT GATES:  This is what I do, unfortunately, virtually every evening, and I guess it's because I feel a personal responsibility for each one of these men and women who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our country, and it's just - it's a small gesture to the families that I personally am involved and that I personally very much care and have great sorrow over the sacrifice that their son or daughter or husband or wife has made.

Posted by editor at 10:49 AM NZT

Updated: Monday, 2 April 2007 12:27 PM NZT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink