Deaths of older Australians due to climate change not considered an important public health issue?

Apparently the prospect of deaths among the elderly due to temperature increases caused by climate change carry less weight than the prospect of deaths among younger people according to Adrian Barnett - whom I'm sure did not pause to think of how his words might be received by older Australians when he participated in this media release on January 16, 2012 concerning a recently published study he co-authored with the CSIRO's Dr. Xiaoming Wang and others:

Queensland University of Technology (QUT) in conjunction with CSIRO has conducted a world-first study into the potential impact climate change will have on 'years of life lost' in Brisbane.
Associate Professor Adrian Barnett of QUT's Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation (IHBI) said while many other studies had examined death rates on hot and cold days, this was the first study to examine years of life lost.
"The results are startling," Professor Barnett said.
"Temperature-related deaths currently account for 6,572 years of life lost per year in Brisbane, which is more than the annual number of years of life lost to breast cancer of 3,733.
"The figure is so high because Brisbane has a very narrow comfort zone of a mean temperature between 20-25°C, on days when the temperature is above or below this range we tend to see an increase in years of life lost."
Years of life lost sums the life expectancy of all deaths according to age at death, so it gives more weight to younger deaths.
"We wanted to use years of life lost because we suspected that many temperature-related deaths were in the elderly, which would reduce the public health importance of temperature compared with other issues," Professor Barnett said.
"In fact we found the opposite, with a surprisingly high years of life lost figure."
Professor Barnett said things would only get worse as Climate Change continued.
"A 2°C increase in temperature in Brisbane between now and 2050 would result in an extra 381 years of life lost per year in Brisbane," he said.
"A 2°C increase in temperature is the figure the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says is dangerous but could be reached unless more aggressive measures are undertaken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions."
Professor Barnett said should temperatures increase beyond the 2°C mark the results would be catastrophic.
"A 4°C increase in temperature would result in an extra 3,242 years of life lost per year in Brisbane," he said.

In Cosmos Online on January 16, 2012:

Commenting on the study, Colin Butler of the Australian National University in Canberra said, "The 'years of life lost' approach is the real breakthrough in this paper," adding that he wishes he had thought of the idea himself. "They show that heat waves have a bigger effect on mortality in younger and middle-aged people than we would expect."

Abstract of the study The impact of temperature on years of life lost in Brisbane, Australia:

Temperature is an important determinant of health. A better knowledge of how temperature affects population health is important not only to the scientific community, but also to the decision-makers who develop and implement early warning systems and intervention strategies to mitigate the health effects of extreme temperatures1, 2. The temperature–health relationship is also of growing interest as climate change is projected to shift the overall temperature distribution higher3, 4. Previous studies have examined the relative risks of temperature-related mortality, but the absolute measure of years of life lost is also useful as it combines the number of deaths with life expectancy. Here we use years of life lost to provide a novel measure of the impact of temperature on mortality in Brisbane, Australia. We also project the future temperature-related years of life lost attributable to climate change. We show that the association between temperature and years of life lost is U-shaped, with increased years of life lost for cold and hot temperatures. The temperature-related years of life lost will worsen greatly if future climate change goes beyond a 2 °C increase and without any adaptation to higher temperatures. This study highlights that public health adaptation to climate change is necessary.

Twitter tweeters are not just pretty faces and amusing avatars

fill me up with.info reveals the political nature of Australian tweeters:

The research used two twitter profiles with embedded requests to complete the survey instrument.

One profile contacted active twitter users posting using relevant hashtags (#auspol, #qldpol, #nswpol, #actpol, #vicpol (excluding policing references), #taspol, #sapol (excluding Philippines references), #wapol, #ntpol), who used the words "Gillard" and "Abbott" in posts and users with "Australian politics" including in their bios (through the search engine tweepz.com). n=225

The second profile contacted a geographically disbursed group of Australians using the tweepz.com search tool to identify Australian Twitter users based on location. The survey research was undertaken between 14 December 2011 and 12 January 2012. n=110

Member for Clarence's website: an update

The lads at the local watering hole have started a tipping competition involving three local event. All that's required to enter their competition is to provide the dates when the following three events will occur.

1. Completion of the dual carriageway for the Pacific Highway,

2. The Member for Clarence, "Steve" Gulaptis' webpage is finished (a copy of it as it currently appears is shown below), and

3. The former and disgraced Member for Clarence appears in court in relation to his falsification of THAT statutory declaration.

One of the first really bad ideas of 2012?

From ABC TV AM program on January 13, 2012:

STEVEN GAINES: Scientists determine what the maximum sustainable harvest (of whales) could be and then the maximum quota. Shares for that quota would be allocated around to both countries and interests that want to whale and countries and interests that want to see whaling ended. Then it becomes a tradable market.

The article which raised this idea again - Whales for Sale

ABC TV News relocated Tabulam: can its residents seek relocation allowances?

The 7.00pm news on ABC TV provided a giggle at our place last night. In the weather report Tabulam, which we had been very confident was located on the upper Clarence in northern NSW, was reported to have had the heaviest rainfall in NSW with 70mm. That in itself wasn't earth-shattering news but the next bit was! According to the ABC, Tabulam is in the Hunter valley!

See Tabulam's latest weather observations here, courtesy of the Bureau of Meteorology.

Betcha Joe Hockey has to get someone to tie his shoe laces for him

Spooner's piece in Saturday's Age was a genuine gem.

Credit: The Age, 14/1/12

Turtles stranded on NSW north coast beaches

Forty dead or dying turtles stranded themselves on beaches between Tweed Heads and Ballina during November-December 2011. Australian Seabird Rescue's Kathrina Southwell said they were mostly "critically endangered" hawksbill turtles, and the amount was normally representative of a year's strandings. (Colin Gilmour, Tweed Daily News)

TDN's editor, Ron Goodman, added:

The loss of 40 turtles might not be an environmental disaster but it cannot be a sign that all is well and it should prompt some action from the State and Federal Governments to ensure that anything that can be done to protect them is being done.

The human and economic impacts of the flood disasters of 12 months ago are well known but it is becoming increasingly apparent that there are other environmental effects that could take years to see the ultimate outcome of.

It is beholden on us to keep watch, and to act where necessary.

Read TDN's report  here.

Source: TDN, 14/1/12

And mainstream media wonders why it is shown so little respect......

The Oceania region traditionally consists of Australia, Fiji, Kirbati, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, New Zealand, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu and a number of territories and dependencies of these countries. It is a physically wide and culturally diverse group.

On 7 January 2012 The Lancet magazine published a study* by Prof Louisa Degenhardt PhD and Prof Wayne Hall PhD  (Volume 379, Issue 9810, pp55 – 70) which estimated cannabis use across Oceania in 2009 as between 9.3%-14.8% of 14 to 64 year olds in the total combined populations.

The study noted a number of countries in which cannabis use had stabilised or decreased and Australia was mentioned in this context.

Professor Degenhardt’s university issued a media release which covered the global prevalence of the use of illicit drugs. Professor Wayne Hall in an interview with 3AW Radio pointed out that Australia and New Zealand has similar cannabis use levels and, in fact, levels had been in Australia falling for a number of years. Hall also pointed out that alcohol abuse was a very real issue in this country.

One print journalist actually stated a truth:

The study leader, Louisa Degenhardt, of the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre and the University of NSW, said Australia and New Zealand's similarity in drug use patterns pushed Oceania figures so high.

''There are some countries with similar use to Australia, but combined with other countries in their region their average decreases,''

So we have research which apparently shows Australian and New Zealand societies as not alone in their relatively high cannabis use and, that in the case of Australia at least this use has been declining over a number of years.

What headlines did the Australian mainstream media run with – the fact that we are one country among many with high use levels or that we are using less cannabis than before?

No, these are the headlines Australia woke up to on 6 December 2012:

High society - Australia tops list of drug users

Australians biggest users of marijuana and speed

AUSTRALIANS are world-class dopes

Australians biggest cannabis users in world: report

While New Zealand’s press managed a rousing:

NZ's world-high drug use no surprise - Experts

* Full transcript of Extent of illicit drug use and dependence, and their contribution to the global burden of disease  (sign-in required)

It's official, Mr. Gulaptis, CSG mining chemicals can enter groundwater bodies. When are you going to act on mining in the Northern Rivers?

In response to complaints by domestic well owners regarding objectionable taste and odor problems in well water, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency initiated a ground water investigation near the town of Pavillion, Wyoming under authority of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. The Wind River Formation is the principal source of domestic, municipal, and stock (ranch, agricultural) water in the area of Pavillion and meets the Agency's definition of an Underground Source of Drinking Water. [Investigation of groundwater contamination near Pavillion, Wyoming, December 2011]

On 8 December 2011 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued this media release:

(Denver, Colo. –December 8, 2011) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today released a draft analysis of data from its Pavillion, Wyoming ground water investigation. At the request of Pavillion residents, EPA began investigating water quality concerns in private drinking water wells three years ago. Since that time, in conjunction with the state of Wyoming, the local community, and the owner of the gas field, Encana, EPA has been working to assess ground water quality and identify potential sources of contamination.

EPA constructed two deep monitoring wells to sample water in the aquifer. The draft report indicates that ground water in the aquifer contains compounds likely associated with gas production practices, including hydraulic fracturing. EPA also re-tested private and public drinking water wells in the community. The samples were consistent with chemicals identified in earlier EPA results released in 2010 and are generally below established health and safety standards. To ensure a transparent and rigorous analysis, EPA is releasing these findings for public comment and will submit them to an independent scientific review panel. The draft findings announced today are specific to Pavillion, where the fracturing is taking place in and below the drinking water aquifer and in close proximity to drinking water wells – production conditions different from those in many other areas of the country.

Natural gas plays a key role in our nation’s clean energy future and the Obama Administration is committed to ensuring that the development of this vital resource occurs safely and responsibly. At the direction of Congress, and separate from this ground water investigation, EPA has begun a national study on the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources.

“EPA’s highest priority remains ensuring that Pavillion residents have access to safe drinking water,” said Jim Martin, EPA’s regional administrator in Denver. “We will continue to work cooperatively with the State, Tribes, Encana and the community to secure long-term drinking water solutions. We look forward to having these findings in the draft report informed by a transparent and public review process. In consultation with the Tribes, EPA will also work with the State on additional investigation of the Pavillion field.”

Findings in the Two Deep Water Monitoring Wells:
EPA’s analysis of samples taken from the Agency’s deep monitoring wells in the aquifer indicates detection of synthetic chemicals, like glycols and alcohols consistent with gas production and hydraulic fracturing fluids, benzene concentrations well above Safe Drinking Water Act standards and high methane levels. Given the area’s complex geology and the proximity of drinking water wells to ground water contamination, EPA is concerned about the movement of contaminants within the aquifer and the safety of drinking water wells over time.

Findings in the Private and Public Drinking Water Wells:
EPA also updated its sampling of Pavillion area drinking water wells. Chemicals detected in the most recent samples are consistent with those identified in earlier EPA samples and include methane, other petroleum hydrocarbons and other chemical compounds. The presence of these compounds is consistent with migration from areas of gas production. Detections in drinking water wells are generally below established health and safety standards. In the fall of 2010, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry reviewed EPA’s data and recommended that affected well owners take several precautionary steps, including using alternate sources of water for drinking and cooking, and ventilation when showering. Those recommendations remain in place and Encana has been funding the provision of alternate water supplies.

Before issuing the draft report, EPA shared preliminary data with, and obtained feedback from, Wyoming state officials, Encana, Tribes and Pavillion residents. The draft report is available for a 45 day public comment period and a 30 day peer-review process led by a panel of independent scientists.

For more information on EPA's Pavillion groundwater investigation, visit: http://www.epa.gov/region8/superfund/wy/pavillion/index.html

A pilot coal-seam gas well run by Metgasco on a private property outside of Casino [Northern Rivers]. A pump is pictured fenced in the foreground while burning gas is pictured in a flare in the background. (Samantha Turnbull)

"The NSW Nationals went to the last election with a strategic land use policy that ensured the primacy of aquifers, surface water and agricultural lands. It was the policy then and it is the policy now"  [Nationals Chris Gulaptis MP speaking during the Clarence by-election campaign,November 2011] 

Can we take a minute to celebrate Wikipedia?

There are two solid facts about Wikipedia that one can be sure of:

i) primarily the content is organically driven by the Internet community; and

ii) while the entire body of content is not error free, it is a marvellous springboard for further investigation of almost any topic to which one could turn one’s mind.

As one can drown under a global cyber-tsunami of astroturfed, biased or bizarre websites (often littered by outrageous advertising graffiti) while searching for legitimate sites, perhaps it’s time to pause and give thanks for the philosophy behind Wikipedia.

Doomsday is a minute closer now according to atomic scientists

Doomsday Clock moves to five minutes to midnight

10 January 2012

It is five minutes to midnight. Two years ago, it appeared that world leaders might address the truly global threats that we face. In many cases, that trend has not continued or been reversed. For that reason, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is moving the clock hand one minute closer to midnight, back to its time in 2007.

Nuclear disarmament

Despite the promise of a new spirit of international cooperation, and reductions in tensions between the United States and Russia, the Science and Security Board believes that the path toward a world free of nuclear weapons is not at all clear, and leadership is failing. The ratification in December 2010 of the New START treaty between Russia and the United States reversed the previous drift in US-Russia nuclear relations. However, failure to act on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty by leaders in the United States, China, Iran, India, Pakistan, Egypt, Israel, and North Korea and on a treaty to cut off production of nuclear weapons material continues to leave the world at risk from continued development of nuclear weapons. The world still has approximately 19,500 nuclear weapons, enough power to destroy the Earth's inhabitants several times over. The Nuclear Security Summit of 2010 shone a spotlight on securing all nuclear fissile material, but few actions have been taken. The result is that it is still possible for radical groups to acquire and use highly enriched uranium and plutonium to wreak havoc in nuclear attacks.

Obstacles to a world free of nuclear weapons remain. Among these are disagreements between the United States and Russia about the utility and purposes of missile defense, as well as insufficient transparency, planning, and cooperation among the nine nuclear weapons states to support a continuing drawdown. The resulting distrust leads nearly all nuclear weapons states to hedge their bets by modernizing their nuclear arsenals. While governments claim they are only ensuring the safety of their warheads through replacement of bomb components and launch systems, as the deliberate process of arms reduction proceeds, such developments appear to other states to be signs of substantial military build-ups.

The Science and Security Board also reviewed progress in meeting the challenges of nuclear weapons proliferation. Ambiguity about Iran's nuclear power program continues to be the most prominent example of this unsolved problem — centrifuges can enrich uranium for both civilian power plants and military weapons. It remains to be seen how many additional countries will pursue nuclear power, but without solutions to the dual-use problem and without incentives sufficient to resist military applications, the world is playing with the explosive potential of a million suns and a fire that will not go out.

The potential for nuclear weapons use in regional conflicts in the Middle East, Northeast Asia, and particularly in South Asia is also alarming. Ongoing efforts to ease tensions, deal with extremism and terrorist acts, and reduce the role of nuclear weapons in international relations have had only halting success. Yet we believe that international diplomatic pressure as well as burgeoning citizen action will help political leaders to see the folly of continuing to rely on nuclear weapons for national security.

Nuclear energy

In light of over 60 years of improving reactor designs and developing nuclear fission for safer power production, it is disheartening that the world has suffered another calamitous accident. Given this history, the Fukushima disaster raised significant questions that the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists' Science and Security Board believe must be addressed. Safer nuclear reactor designs need to be developed and built, and more stringent oversight, training, and attention are needed to prevent future disasters. A major question to be addressed is: How can complex systems like nuclear power stations be made less susceptible to accidents and errors in judgment?

Climate change

In fact, the global community may be near a point of no return in efforts to prevent catastrophe from changes in Earth's atmosphere. The International Energy Agency projects that, unless societies begin building alternatives to carbon-emitting energy technologies over the next five years, the world is doomed to a warmer climate, harsher weather, droughts, famine, water scarcity, rising sea levels, loss of island nations, and increasing ocean acidification. Since fossil-fuel burning power plants and infrastructure built in 2012-2020 will produce energy — and emissions — for 40 to 50 years, the actions taken in the next few years will set us on a path that will be impossible to redirect. Even if policy leaders decide in the future to reduce reliance on carbon-emitting technologies, it will be too late.

Among the existing alternatives for producing base-load electricity with low carbon dioxide emissions is nuclear power. Russia, China, India, and South Korea will likely continue to construct plants, enrich fuel, and shape the global nuclear power industry.
Countries that had earlier signaled interest in building nuclear power capacity, such as Vietnam, United Arab Emirates, Turkey, and others, are still intent on acquiring civilian nuclear reactors for electricity despite the Fukushima disaster. However, a number of countries have renounced nuclear power, including Germany, Italy, and Switzerland. In Japan, only eight of 54 power plants currently operate because prefecture governors, responding to people's opposition to nuclear power, have not allowed reactors back online. In the United States, increased costs of additional safety measures may make nuclear power too expensive to be a realistic alternative to natural gas and other fossil fuels.

The hopeful news is that alternatives to burning coal, oil, and uranium for energy continue to show promise. Solar and photovoltaic technologies are seeing reductions in price, wind turbines are being adopted for commercial electricity, and energy conservation and efficiency are becoming accepted as sources for industrial production and residential use. Many of these developments are taking place at municipal and local levels in countries around the world. In Haiti, for example, a nonprofit group is distributing solar-powered light bulbs to the poor. In Germany, a smart electrical grid is shifting solar-generated power to cloudy regions and wind power to becalmed areas. And in California, government is placing caps on carbon emissions that industry will meet. While not perfect, these technologies and practices hold substantial promise.

Yet, we are very concerned that the pace of change may not be adequate and that the transformation that seems to be on its way will not take place in time to meet the hardships that large-scale disruption of the climate portends. As we see it, the major challenge at the heart of humanity's survival in the 21st century is how to meet energy needs for economic growth in developing and industrial countries without further damaging the climate, without exposing people to loss of health and community, and without risking further spread of nuclear weapons.

The challenges to rid the world of nuclear weapons, harness nuclear power, and meet the nearly inexorable climate disruptions from global warming are complex and interconnected. In the face of such complex problems, it is difficult to see where the capacity lies to address these challenges. The political processes in place seem wholly inadequate to meet the challenges to human existence that we confront.

As such, the Science and Security Board is heartened by the Arab Spring, the Occupy movements, political protests in Russia, and by the actions of ordinary citizens in Japan as they call for fair treatment and attention to their needs. Whether meeting the challenges of nuclear power, or mitigating the suffering from human-caused global warming, or preventing catastrophic nuclear conflict in a volatile world, the power of people is essential. For this reason, we ask other scientists and experts to join us in engaging ordinary citizens. Together, we can present the most significant questions to policymakers and industry leaders. Most important, we can demand answers and action. As the first atomic scientists of the Bulletin recognized in 1948, the burden of disseminating information about the social and economic "implications of nuclear energy and other new scientific developments rests with the intelligent citizens of the world; the intense and continuing cooperation of the scientists is assured."

Few of the Bulletin's recommendations of 2010 have been taken up; they still require urgent attention if we are to avert catastrophe from nuclear weapons and global warming. At a minimum these include:

• Ratification by the United States and China of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and progress on a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty;
• Implementing multinational management of the civilian nuclear energy fuel cycle with strict standards for safety, security, and nonproliferation of nuclear weapons, including eliminating reprocessing for plutonium separation;
• Strengthening the International Atomic Energy Agency's capacity to oversee nuclear materials, technology development, and its transfer;
• Adopting and fulfilling climate change agreements to reduce carbon dioxide emissions through tax incentives, harmonized domestic regulation and practice;
• Transforming the coal power sector of the world economy to retire older plants and to require in new plants the capture and storage of the CO2 they produce;
• Vastly increasing public and private investments in alternatives to carbon emitting energy sources, such as solar and wind, and in technologies for energy storage, and sharing the results worldwide.

The Clock is ticking.

Science and Security Board, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
Editor's note: The audio recording of the January 10, 2012 news event can be found here.

Electronic Frontier Foundation soldiers on with Jewel v National Security Agency et al

This case is one of many arising from claims that the federal government, with the assistance of major telecommunications companies, engaged in widespread warrantless eavesdropping in the United States following the September 11, 2001, attacks. At issue in this appeal is whether Carolyn Jewel and other residential telephone customers (collectively “Jewel”) have standing to bring their statutory and constitutional claims against the government for what they describe as a communications dragnet of ordinary American citizens.

In light of detailed allegations and claims of harm linking Jewel to the intercepted telephone, internet and electronic communications, we conclude that Jewel’s claims are not abstract, generalized grievances and instead meet the constitutional standing requirement of concrete injury. Nor do prudential considerations bar this action…… [Jewel v NSA et al, No. 10-15616 3:08-cv-04373- VRW M:06-cv-01791-VRW]

Electronic Frontier Foundation article on 29 December 2011:

Justices Find that Spied-On Telephone Customers Have the Right to Sue

San Francisco - The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals today blocked the government's attempt to bury the Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF's) lawsuit against the government's illegal mass surveillance program, returning Jewel v. NSA to the District Court for the next step.

The court found that Jewel had alleged sufficient specifics about the warrantless wiretapping program to proceed. Justices rejected the government's argument that the allegations about the well-known spying program and the evidence of the Folsom Street facility in San Francisco were too speculative.

"Since the dragnet spying program first came to light, we have been fighting for the chance to have a court determine whether it is legal," said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. "Today, the Ninth Circuit has given us that chance, and we look forward to proving the program is an unconstitutional and illegal violation of the rights of millions of ordinary Americans.".

Also today, the court upheld the dismissal of EFF's other case aimed at ending the illegal spying, Hepting v. AT&T, which was the first lawsuit against a telecom over its participation in the dragnet domestic wiretapping. The court found that the so-called "retroactive immunity" passed by Congress to stop telecommunications customers from suing the companies is constitutional, in part because the claims remained against the government in Jewel v. NSA………

Today's decision comes nearly exactly six years after the first revelations of the warrantless wiretapping program were published in the New York Times on December 16, 2005. EFF will now move forward with the Jewel litigation in the Northern District of California federal court. The government is expected to raise the state secrets privilege as its next line of defense but this argument has already been rejected in other similar cases.

Jewel v NSA et al  full opinion 29 December 2011

Proud local indigenous man says, "It's a shame that we are all classed as the same. "

Responding to a letter to the editor published in Wednesday's Daily Examiner, a local indigenous man from Yamba says, "It sounds like everyone, as a community, is painting the indigenous community with one brush".

Wednesday's letter appeared above the title "Name and address supplied". In other words, it was the work of Anon Y Mouse.

Here's the young indigenous man's letter:

Regarding the passage in the article "Ngaru Village", "the local indigenous population either doesn't care or couldn't be bothered to fix this major problem"... it sounds like everyone, as a community, is painting the indigenous community with one brush.

I have completed my HSC and have several jobs around town.

I plan on joining the NSW Police Force later this year.

As an indigenous local Yamba man it sounds like it can't be done, throughout the eyes of wider Yamba.

It's a shame that we are all classed as the same.

Jordan Walker, Yamba 

12 January 2012

And here's the letter written by  "Name and address supplied":

In Friday's paper we read about a police car having a window smashed leaving Ngaru Village when they were in search of three offenders who were hiding there after committing crimes. We read about persons from the village attacking golfers on the golf course.

The place in general looks like a ghetto, slum, or whatever, and it is disgraceful.

Believe it or not, there are people responsible for managing this area (the local land council) and it is blatantly obvious this is self-determination and governing has gone very wrong.

We need Housing NSW to come in and take over this embarrassment.

The local indigenous population either doesn't care or couldn't be bothered to fix this major problem.

They can't keep getting handouts all the time to fix their problems.

The rent these properties should be earning should be the money to upkeep the properties to a respectable standard.

You can bet your life tenants in Ngaru have major rent arrears and property damage issues that are not being addressed by their local land council.

Surely there must be a government body supervising how these land councils are using taxpayers' money.

Are they being audited as they are using taxpayers' money?

The land itself is a gorgeous piece of property and for the local indigenous population to treat the land this way is somewhat surprising, as they are supposed to have special attachments to the land.

Name and address supplied

10 January 2012

Is the Japanese whaling fleet refusing to obey a lawful direction to leave Australian territorial waters?

Since at least 11 January 2012 the Government of Japan-sponsored whaling fleet operating in the Southern Ocean has failed to obey a lawful direction of the Federal Government to quit Australian territorial waters surrounding World Heritage listed Macquarie Island - which also form part of the Australian Whale Sanctuary and the wider International Whaling Commission-endorsed Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.

One has to wonder why the Japanese Government imagines it has a right to ignore Australia's sovereignty in this manner.

Should it continue this intransigence then the Federal Government would be well within its rights to withdraw the credentials of the Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Japan, His Excellency Mr Shigekazu Sato.

The Australian Whale Sanctuary has been established to protect
all whales and dolphins found in Australian waters

The Sydney Morning Herald 12 January 2012:

A JAPANESE whaling ship has defied high-level Australian complaints to stay in the waters of World Heritage-listed Macquarie Island.

The harpoon-equipped whale hunter Yushin Maru No.3 was still there late yesterday, hours after the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, said the ship was leaving.

''I'm aware that there has been one vessel which I'm advised has been in Australian territorial waters and I'll advise that it will leave Australian territorial waters,'' Ms Gillard said.

The Australian embassy told the Japanese government on Tuesday that whaling vessels were not welcome in the country's waters, repeating earlier complaints.

But the Japanese ship was photographed yesterday within a few miles of the coast of Macquarie Island, which is part of the state of Tasmania……

ANU professor of international law Don Rothwell said if Yushin Maru No.3 was staying close to Macquarie Island it was violating the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea which would normally allow a ship to proceed though these waters.

''The actions of Yushin Maru No.3 are not consistent with the right of innocent passage,'' Professor Rothwell said.

The Greens leader, Bob Brown, said the ship's presence was illegal and called for a naval vessel to be sent there.

Yushin Maru No.3 stayed just off the coast of Macquarie Island yesterday.

Photo: Carolina A Castro/Sea Shepherd

Page MP welcomes new national personal property register

Page MP Welcomes New National Personal Property Register

Page MP Janelle Saffin has welcomed a new national register for personal property securities (PPS) which will help Australian consumers and businesses ensure the property they buy doesn’t have a security interest over it.

The Federal Government has announced the new register will open for business on 30 January 2012. Stakeholders, including the major banks, have confirmed that they are ready to proceed.

“The new register will allow you to check that the goods you are considering buying, like a car, boat or machinery—almost anything except real estate—doesn’t have a security interest over it,” said Ms. Saffin

“Nobody wants to goods they have bought in good faith to be repossessed. This new register provides easy and affordable access to information before you purchase.

The new register will also provide additional protection for businesses that lease or supply goods, in the event that a debtor defaults or goes bankrupt.

“The national register will replace more than 70 different Commonwealth, state and territory acts and registers used to regulate personal property used as security,” said Ms. Saffin.

“The simplification of all these different registers will help make secured financing more accessible and reduce transaction costs, making lenders more willing to accept different kinds of personal property as security for loans.”

The existing registers transferring their data to the new register include the ASIC Register of Company Charges, the State Registers of Encumbered Vehicles (REVS) and Vehicle Securities Registers, and various other Bills of Sale, stock mortgage and crop lien registers.

Businesses and individuals that hold security interests will have up to two years to register their security.   

“Business can get ready to use the national register before it opens for business on 30 January by setting up their accounts from now until 15 January,” said Ms. Saffin.

Prior to the reforms commencing on 30 January, the Government will continue to communicate with business and consumers about the changes through advertisements on national radio, online and in print media.

Further information on PPS reform and access to the new register is available at http://www.ppsr.gov.au/ or by calling 1300 007 777.

6 January, 2012

Label says "organic" and "non genetically modified"? Buyer beware!

Like many people over the Christmas-New Year holiday season, I had occasion to hunt for items which met the dietary preferences of visitors. In this case a vegetable cheese made from non-genetically modified produce.

With limited time at my disposal I failed to practice what I preach (and actually do adhere to) for the rest of the year – I only read the front label and put the so-called organic non-GM soy cheese in my shopping basket.

Silly me. On arriving home and reading the back of the cheese packet this is what I found:

Omega 3 Soycheese

Product Specifications

Unit Weight: 200g

Pack Size: 70mm wide x 105mm long x 30mm deep

Ingredients

Water, Vegetable Oil (Canola 70%), Soy Extract (18%), Casein (Dairy Protein), Mineral Salts (339, 511), Salt, Food Acids (320,260), Flavour, Colour (Annatto Extract).

So what I had purchased was only 18 per cent soy ingredient, contained an unspecified amount of animal product and, possibly up to 17 per cent of GMO sourced, non-organic canola oil - because the labelling makes no claims at all about this oil.

Australian Eatwell Pty Ltd  (sometimes called DALICH PTY LTD) using the label Simply Better Foods should be ashamed of themselves for a front label that is misleading at best.

Eat well indeed! I won’t get caught like that again.

A reminder of the 2008 Federal Court of Australia ruling against Japanese whaling in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1519 OF 2004

BETWEEN: HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL INC

Applicant

AND: KYODO SENPAKU KAISHA LTD

Respondent

JUDGE: ALLSOP J

DATE OF ORDER: 15 JANUARY 2008

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

1. THE COURT DECLARES that the respondent has killed, injured, taken and interfered with Antarctic minke whales (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) and fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) and injured, taken and interfered with humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the Australian Whale Sanctuary in contravention of sections 229, 229A, 229B and 229C of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth), (the “Act”), and has treated and possessed such whales killed or taken in the Australian Whale Sanctuary in contravention of sections 229D and 230 of the Act, without permission or authorisation under sections 231, 232 or 238 of the Act.

2. THE COURT ORDERS that the respondent be restrained from killing, injuring, taking or interfering with any Antarctic minke whale (Balaenoptera bonaerensis), fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) or humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the Australian Whale Sanctuary, or treating or possessing any such whale killed or taken in the Australian Whale Sanctuary, unless permitted or authorised under sections 231,n232 or 238 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth).

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

Reasons for Judgement

Ramifications of Judgement

It's a new year and time to go to war agin wimmin

Grab your guns boys – it’s time to hunt the sheilas according to A Voice For Men:

“We’re going to have to shift to a war mentality….If you’re new to the Men’s Rights Movement, or you’re a feminist, or just stupid, you might need a bit of background to appreciate the need for this article’s content. A summarized background is provided for you here. This is a war waged against human rights, and those of us who identify as MRAs are a tiny minority fighting an establish mainstream. The past and present attempts to personally smear and destroy individual men seen so far are just the beginning of a fight that we should expect to get ugly. While we must and do continue to adhere to strictly truthful rhetoric and ethical tactics, our opponents don’t, and we should not expect them to. There’s money to be made is denigrating masculinity, and we directly threaten the income of war profiteers.”

“It appears now that 2011 was just a warm up for 2012.

Over the next several days you will find a series of articles on this website regarding an assault on human rights that will sweep the Australian continent. The scope of a planned campaign by the Australian government (The National Council’s Plan for Australia to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children, 2009-2021) is so far reaching that presenting it without overwhelming readers has been a significant challenge for myself, Kyle Lovett and John the Other. The sheer volume of the content, as well as the staggering loss of civil rights that Australian men are about to suffer is formidable…..

These machinations have now reached the stage of action, and are about to be implemented. They involve, but are by no means limited, to the following:

• The systemic enabling and promotion of child abuse by mothers and other women.
• The Australian government suppression of research that implicates women as child abusers.
• The legal redefinition of domestic violence to include acts such as making purchases without consulting your wife, not listening to your wife or even disciplining your dog.
• The legal redefinition of domestic violence to exclude male victims from that legal definition.
• Arresting and holding men in prison, without bail, on the accusation alone of domestic violence.
• Summarily evicting men from their homes while forcing them to maintain financial responsibility for those homes on nothing more than an accusation from their wives or girlfriends.
• Shifting the burden of proof on domestic violence from the state to the defendant. The accused will be forced to prove he did not commit an act of violence.
• The legal redefinition of rape, and subsequent shift of the burden of proof onto a defendant to prove the he obtained specific kinds of verbal consent for sex.”

Pure crazy comes to you courtesy of:

Snaphot from Whois

Il Papa speaking in doomsday code in 2012

CODE:

“Among these, pride of place goes to the family, based on the marriage of a man and a woman. This is not a simple social convention, but rather the fundamental cell of every society. Consequently, policies which undermine the family threaten human dignity and the future of humanity itself.”

TRANSLATION:

Gay marriage = Armageddon.

Oi, Bennie! A gay couple saying “I do” is not about to stop babies being born by the millions, cause ethnic genocide or result in mass extinction of the human species.

Whale Wars 2012: Sea Shepherd alleges Japanese whaler Yushin Maru 3 has entered Australian territorial waters

The Sydney Morning Herald
Whalers chase activist ship into Australian waters: Sea Shepherd
9 January 2012

Sea Shepherd Organisation on 9 January 2012:

The Yushin Maru #3 is presently (at 1400 Hours AEST) 5 nautical miles off the beach at MacQuarie Island. The Sea Shepherd ship Bob Barker was attempting to shake the tail of the Yushin Maru #3 at MacQuarie. According to a 2008 order of the Australian Federal Court, Japanese whaling vessels are prohibited from entering the territorial waters of Australia.

 * Macquarie Island: a Tasmanian State Reserve managed by the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service.

UPDATE

From The Age online 11 January 2012:

THE Gillard government has complained to Japan after a whaling vessel went deep into Australian territorial waters in pursuit of a protest vessel.
Hours after Japan said yesterday it would release three Australian protesters who illegally boarded a whaling security ship, it emerged that another vessel of the Japanese fleet went as close as four nautical miles to Tasmania's Macquarie Island in pursuit of the activists' long-range ship Bob Barker.
This brought the Japanese ship, the whale catcher Yushin Maru No. 3, inside Australia's 12 nautical mile territorial limit, where domestic laws ban whaling.
A spokesman for Attorney-General Nicola Roxon said the government had complained to Japan about the incursion.
''We have asked our embassy [in Tokyo] today to reiterate to the Japanese government that whaling vessels are not welcome in Australian territorial waters,'' the spokesman said.

Kyodo News states three protesters aboard the Shonan Maru 2 to be transferred to Australian custody

Headline in Kyodo News online on 9 January 2012:

Japan to transfer custody of 3 antiwhaling activists to Australia

ABC News reports on 10 January:

Three Australian anti-whaling activists being held on a Japanese ship after they snuck onboard at the weekend will be transferred to Australian custody, Japan's Kyodo news service is reporting. According to reports, Japanese government sources say criminal charges will not be laid against the three men because they did not cause injury to crew members of the Shonan Maru 2 or to the body of the ship.
Japanese government sources say they will consult with the Australian Government on the transfer of the three men.

Could it possibly be that the Government of Japan, besides objecting to the boarding of its own coast guard-manned ship, the Shonan Maru 2, was also less than impressed with the fact that this ship had decided to leave the whaling fleet as it approached the Antarctic killing grounds and come so close to mainland Australia in order to harass the MY Steve Irwin?

UPDATE:

According to the Japanese newspaper Asahi Shimbun on 9 January 2012:

Attorney General Nicola Roxon said she hoped a deal could be reached with Japanese authorities to release the three.
"We are representing our views most strongly that they should be released promptly and returned to Australian soil," Roxon said.
In addition, the attorney general also said the ministry patrol ship, which is providing security to the whaling vessels, is not welcome in Australia's Exclusive Economic Zone.
"The ship, people need to remember, is not directly involved in whaling activities, but it is clearly providing a support role, and that may give us some other options if it was trying to come into our territorial waters," she said.