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.

Monsanto & Co. begins 2012 in court - again

The Charleston Daily Mail, 27 December 2011:

CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- Several hundred Nitro area residents gathered Tuesday at the Charleston Marriott as attorneys attempted to forge a mediation in a class action lawsuit against the former Monsanto Company.

Representatives of the West Virginia Supreme Court mass litigation department and the attorney's law firms would not allow media access to any of the plaintiffs, saying those settlement discussions were confidential.

The case is scheduled to begin trial Jan. 3 in Putnam Circuit Court before specially-appointed Circuit Judge Derek Swope. If a settlement is not approved before then, jury selection is expected to begin next week and the trial is predicted to take up to six months.

The mass-litigation mediation involving 193 cases of alleged personal injury and wrongful death is being presided over by Circuit Judges Booker T. Stephens of McDowell County and Circuit Judge Alan D. Moats of Taylor County…..

The Charleston Gazette, 3 January 2012:

As jury selection began Tuesday in the class-action lawsuit seeking medical monitoring for those who may have been exposed to hazardous chemicals produced at Monsanto's former Nitro plant, the judge expanded a gag order on the lawyers prohibiting comments to the media.

"No lawyer is to discuss anything about the case," said Mercer County Circuit Court Judge Derek Swope. "If asked, you are to have no comment, end of story."

Swope's comments came after Monsanto lawyers filed a motion Tuesday asking him to hold lead plaintiff attorney Stuart Calwell in contempt of court for comments he made concerning the case to the Gazette and other local media outlets.

The judge did not immediately rule on the motion, but indicated he would hear arguments and rule later.

Swope was appointed to hear the case after Putnam Circuit Judge O.C. Spaulding was diagnosed with Lou Gehrig's disease and retired at the end of the year…….

Background

Court rejects Monsanto’s attempt to hide behind government contractor defence, 28 September 2011.

* This post is part of North Coast Voices' effort to keep Monsanto's blog monitor (affectionately known as Mr. Monsanto) in long-term employment.

What looks suspiciously like crudely constructed Japanese propaganda concerning the Forest Rescue protesters boarding of Shonan Maru 2

The YouTube legend accompanying the two videos shown below state that they were created by the Institute of Cetacean Research:

These videos were provided by Japan's Institute of Cetacean Research (ICR)

The first video shows boats launched by Sea Shepherd's vessel MY Bob Barker (between 4-6 January 2012) engaging with the Yushin Maru No. 3 which forms part of the Japanese Government-sponsored whaling fleet operating in the Southern Ocean.
Yet it is tiltled Three Australians board Japanese whaling ship.

If the video origin statement is correct, then it is a clumsy attempt by the whaling industry or its supporters to imply that the three Forest Rescue protesters - who boarded the Shonan Maru 2 in waters off Australia's west coast on 7 December 2012 - were involved in a physical confrontation with that ship.

The Australian protesters were many hundreds of miles away from the MY Bob Barker and were not engaged in anything but peaceful protest when they boarded the Shonan Maru 2.


http://youtu.be/GELv0KXv6zA

The second video titled How To Slow Down A Japanese whaling research vessel SS Style attempts to equate the crew of the Bob Barker with Third Reich SS personnel - who ironically were former allies of the Government of Japan during World War II and, presumably much admired by them then.


http://youtu.be/wCHmXkDjE_U

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott gets his industrial relations figures muddled yet again

On 6 January 2012 The Australian reported:

Speaking in Brisbane yesterday, the Opposition Leader said the rate of industrial disputation had increased since the government changed and the Fair Work Act was brought in and it was important the review of the act ordered by Workplace Relations Minister Bill Shorten addressed these problems.

On the same day The Sydney Morning Herald also reported:

THE crop of industrial disputes across the nation has been described as run of the mill by the Workplace Relations Minister, Bill Shorten.

Mr Shorten said the rate of industrial disputation was far lower in Australia than a decade ago - a claim challenged by the Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, who spoke of his pride in the Howard government's record on industrial relations.

In Australia the Federal Coalition Government under Howard was in power between the federal elections of 2 March 1996 and 24 November 2007. The Federal Labor Government under Rudd and Gillard has been in power from 3 December 2007 to the present day.

Work Choices was enacted over the period 14 December 2005 to 27 March 2006 and the Fair Work Act was enacted over the period 7 April to 26 May 2009.

So who is right, Abbott or Shorten? I am giving the point to Shorten.

Firstly because there was an equal rise and fall in the annual instances of industrial relations disputes in the four years since Labor gained government and disputes only rose in one year out of three since 2009 – Tony Abbott was in error in seeing an increased rate directly related to the 2009 Fair Work Act. Secondly, because Abbott misrepresents industrial relations disputes under the Howard Government - in those eleven years dispute instances randomly rose in five years and randomly fell in six years.

Thirdly, the industrial relations landscape was varied enough between 1996 and 2011 for Shorten’s overall assessment to be accurate.

According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS):

1996

http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/free.nsf/0/B66FAAFB13622C15CA25722500073791/$File/63210_1296.pdf

1997

The number of working days lost in 1997 was 528,800, a decrease of 399,700 (43%) from the 1996 calendar year.  The number of disputes  reported in 1997 (446) was 18% less than in 1996, with the number of employees  involved decreasing by 46% to 312,700.

1998

There were 518 industrial disputes reported in Australia in 1998, 71 more than the previous year according to data released today by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. This is the first increase in the number of disputes for a calendar year since 1995.

Nationally the number of disputes (514) and number of employees involved (347,000) increased by 15% and 10% respectively in 1998 compared to the previous year.

1999

There were 717 disputes during 1999, the highest number since 1992 (728). The number of employees involved in industrial disputes (459,900) and working days lost (649,600) were the highest since 1996.

2000

There were 691 disputes during 2000, a decrease of 5% compared with 1999 (731).

The number of employees involved in industrial disputes decreased by 30% to 324,800 during this period.

2001

During the twelve months ended December 2001, there were 675 disputes, 23 less than in the twelve months ended December 2000 (698).

2002

During the twelve months ended December 2002 there were 766 disputes, 91 more than in the twelve months ended December 2001.

2003

During the twelve months ended December 2003, there were 642 disputes, 124 less than in the twelve months ended December 2002.

During the twelve months ended December 2003, there were 439,400 working days lost, 180,400 more than in the twelve months ended December 2002.

2004

During the year ended December 2004, there were 691 disputes, 48 more than in the year ended December 2003.

During the year ended December 2004, there were 379,800 working days lost, 59,600 less than in the year ended December 2003.

2005

During the year ended December 2005, there were 472 disputes, 220 less than in the year ended December 2004.

2006

During the year ended December 2006, there were 202 disputes, 270 less than in the year ended December 2005.  

2007

During the year ended December 2007, there were 135 disputes, 67 less than in the year ended December 2006.

During the year ended December 2007, there were 49,700 working days lost compared with 132,600 in the year ended December 2006.

2008

During the year ended December 2008, there were 177 disputes, 42 more than in the year ended December 2007.

During the year ended December 2008, there were 196,500 working days lost compared with 49,700 in the year ended December 2007.

2009

During the year ended December 2009, there were 236 disputes, 59 more than in the year ended December 2008.

During the year ended December 2009, there were 132,700 working days lost compared with 196,500 in the year ended December 2008.

2010

During the year ended December 2010, there were 227 disputes, 9 less than in the year ended December 2009.

During the year ended December 2010, there were 126,600 working days lost compared with 132,700 in the year ended December 2009.

2011

During the year ended September 2011, there were 197 disputes, 36 fewer than in the year ended September 2010.

During the year ended September 2011, there were 214,400 working days lost compared with 144,100 in the year ended September 2010.**

** December 2011 ABS industrial dispute statistics should be released in March 2012.

Battle of the Blogotariats

In the dying last quarter of 2011 that terrific Australian blog aggregate site, Blogotariat, decided to change its format and content and I’ve been groaning ever since.

Now before you rightly mutter than I’m a geriatric blogger who dislikes change which challenges my ability to read or negotiate a website easily, I have to say I’m not alone in my groaning – Maud up the Street is fair choleric over its metamorphosis into Punch & HuffPo Downunder (or any combination of the commercial media-owned ‘blogs’ you like to name) and she is not the only one.

But never fear, for those who liked the old Blogotariat (which actually promoted Aussie blogs) there is still hope of ol’ Bloggo goodness being read here.

Whale Wars 2012: Forest Rescue boards Japanese vessel Shonan Maru 2 off West Australia coast

Approximate position of Shonan Maru 2 on January 5, 2011
MarineTraffic.com
Click on map to enlarge

Statement from Forest Rescue on January 7, 2011

We have come from the forests of Australia to defend the whales being slaughtered in Australian territorial waters.

We are Australian citizens and we have boarded the Japanese flagged Shonan Maru #2 in Australian territorial waters at a position of (32 degrees zero minutes south and 115 degrees 21 minutes east) We have taken this action of boarding the Shonan Maru #2 to protest the fact that this vessel is part of a whaling fleet that is operating in contempt of the Australian Court and is in Australian waters in defiance of the Australian Federal court ruling and the will of the Australian people.

“We are onboard this ship because our government has failed to uphold its pre-election promise to end whaling in the Southern Ocean.” Said Simon Peterffy.

Forest Rescue has decided to take action to prevent the Shonan Maru #2 from tailing the Steve Irwin back to the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.

Forest Rescue is making a stand to assist Sea Shepherd Conservation Society in their campaign to end illegal whale poaching in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.

We are taking this action to remind the Australian government of their obligation to enforce existing laws pertaining to the prohibition of whaling ships in our waters.

We as Forest Rescue are insulted and disappointed in our government for allowing the transit of whale poaching vessels in Australian waters.

Forest Rescue Contact: Michael Montgomery 0451058005

Forest Rescue Media Contact: Amy Flee 0428048632

File photo of the Shonan Maru 2 from Sea Shepherd archives

Watching the watchers watching NSW North Coast concerned citizen groups

It would appear that the Australian Federal Attorney-General Nicola Roxon (like her predecessor) is rather interested in protests which may be occurring around Australia.

Of course that also means that from time to time she is interested in concerned citizens living on the NSW North Coast.

Particularly those who organize and/or attend community meetings, rallies, protest events concerning water and food security - eg. keeping the Clarence River system undiverted and unpolluted, stopping hazardous mining in the upper reaches of the Nymboida River, protecting agricultural land from the negative impacts of coal seam gas mining, saving remnant rainforest and koala habitat from being destoyed by urban or industrial development.

Her department has employed a private surveillance company National Open Source Intelligence G  aka Global Edge Group Pty Ltd or National Open Source Intelligence Centre since 2007 and its current contract (worth est. $16,500 annually) is in effect until 20 June 2012.

This Victorian-based group, allegedly jointly owned by Jody and Amanda Lambden, specializes in the provision of protective security intelligence and actively monitors the Internet, television, radio and print media for its clients. In the case of the Attorney-General’s Department it will supply protest alerts.

Resources and Energy Minister Martin Ferguson, who requested the additional surveillance, has been prompted by energy company lobbying to urge stronger criminal penalties against protests that disrupt critical energy

On its Australian website it states:

NOSIC seeks to identify and provide both information and intelligence on upcoming events in Australia and abroad that require consideration of a visual police presence or implementation of protective security measures.

NOSIC also provide tactical intelligence support in response to spontaneous events and incidents where knowledge of issues can be of use to decision makers to neutralise or minimise disruption.

In 2006-2008 the company had a rather more expensive contract with the Australian Federal Police to monitor the internet communications and websites of anti-war campaigners, environmentalists, animal rights activists and other protest groups.

According to The Age on 7 December 2012:

NOSIC also provides services relating to specific events. These include a $15,400 contract with the AFP for "information services" between October 24 and November 17 last year ....

When monitoring cyberspace it appears to use Queensland-based servers in IP ranges 202.125.32.0 - 202.125.47.255 and 202.148.128.0 - 202.148.159.255.

The group's headquarters is said to be in this residential block in Hewish Street, Croydon, Vic:

* Images from Google Images and The Age

That's it! Kraft's off the menu on Australia Day

At first I thought April Fool’s Day had come early this year, then I remembered that we’re talking about Kraft here.

The company that wants to celebrate Australia Day by defacing an Aussie icon in the lead up to 26^th January 2012.

“VEGEMITE is taking its national iconic status to a whole new level - it's changing its name to "Australia".

Why stop there? How about giving the Eureka Flag a design makeover, rechristening Ned Kelly, banning Sunday barbies and dyeing tap beer pink for the rest of the month?

Drongos!