America, UK, Australia and New Zealand security agencies are part of the greatest human rights fraud perpetrated on English speaking countries January 25, 2008

The US, UK, Australia, and New Zealand are part of the greatest human rights fraud being perpetrated on English speaking countries. This week it was announced in Australia that we had been invited to participate in the FBI’s criminal and terrorist data base – The Age. In the UK the FBI demanded that the UK data base be available to the FBI- The Guardian.

Okay, let’s slow down. Let’s ask the questions. Don’t we already have Interpol to do exactly these things and doesn’t that include the police forces of European countries? Strangely enough the very week that the FBI announced their need to enter our data bases the head of Interpol was charged with taking bribes. Gee, I guess that means Interpol is no longer viable. So why haven’t our police forces been disbanded and sidelined when our state police commissioners have been found to be corrupt?

But we already have the secret UKUSA (UK USA) organisation that includes all the English speaking security agencies in the already listed countries. This organisation was exposed by Professor Desmond Ball in his book, The Ties That Bind. The operational head of UKUSA is the director of the CIA out of Langley. It’s sort of cosy isn’t it? You see George Bush senior was director of the CIA before he was President. UKUSA was regarded as the organisation that brought together all the countries that agreed with and participated in the first Gulf War. Note how different it was for George Bush jnr in the second Gulf War. In the CIA there was also the Bush League, a group of agents who worked to have George Bush snr elected president.

So why is the FBI now pretending that they want access to all the data bases and insist that we increase the quality of our criminal and terrorist information (Please note that the security laws were used again the protesters at Heathrow airport some months ago, so into the data bases go those who are dissidents but not criminals or terrorists – The Guardian). Why could that be? My speculation is that as the environment of the planet worsens there will be stronger protests against government policies that favour the polluters and not the ordinary people who now save water and power. Aren’t we all doing that saving?

Well, no we’re not. The big polluters are going to be fined or receive hefty levies, or trade the right to pollute, to compensate for their polluting ways. That’s what Kyoto and Bali was all about. Problem is corporations always pass on the tarriffs they have to pay, or the interest to the banks, or their oil and transport costs to you and I, the consumer. Look how the banks who made disastrous subprime investments raised their interest to cover their losses.

But let’s get back to the main theme of this story. With the FBI raiding our information that our security people have collected on innocent people we are reasonably accepting. Imagine if they had blatantly said it was UKUSA, run by the CIA that wanted the information. Slowly there would develop considerable unease for the CIA have been behind the murder, torture and kidnapping of innocent people in following their rendering policies. The CIA have used countries friendly to America to aid them in carrying out the horrible rendering process. UK plane watches broke the story that the CIA planes were using the UK airports for their illegal deeds. Naturally they would have used other countries that were subservient to America and the CIA. And naturally UKUSA will receivedthe FBI information collected from other security agencies around the world for the director of the CIA controls UKUSA which controls the FBI.

An offer of resignation if the Bay is destroyed by dredging should be on Brumby’s table January 24, 2008

Premier Brumby should offer to resign if  his vision of bay dredging destroys Victoria’s (and Melbourne’s) recreational grounds. One of the reason we haven’t had too much angst from the monied class is that they go to the ocean for their summers.

However a resignation offer would really test his sincerity and belief in the process that led to Bay dredging.

One aspect that belies his belief is that there has been no speculation on the release of carbon and other warming gases from the dredging.

Premier Brumby can’t lie straight in bed and Port Phillip Bay is going to pay for his spin on dredging January 24, 2008

On the question of the dredging of Port Phillip Bay Premier Brumby can’t lie straight in bed. His blather is filled with copious lies. Today on the John Fain show he said the Port of Melbourne Authority was the proponent of dredging for larger ships. The POM are a government body and I can just see them going ahead with a proposal without government approval. Come on Brumby we all know how government works these days. You’ve been driving this vision for close to a decade.

Brumby blithely says we’ve had environmental reports, as though they agreed that there would be no damage to the Bay. The first report, and the most accurate, held fears for the sea grass (it hasn’t returned to Corio Bay after dredging there), the danger of toxic water to the dolphins, and those who fish and use the bay as a recreational ground. There was even mention of an unholy stink for several years. How about decades after the giant ships are gone and Port Phillip Bay can’t take the next wave of even larger ships no matter how much dredging.

No panel has ever considered or debated the Exxon Valdez scenario for the Bay despite pilots, and Captain Frank Hart, a former harbour master saying there will be a disaster of those dimensions. The pilots who used the navigational gear on the bigger ships all ran aground and there have been no further tests to publicise a success of such an exercise.

People of Melbourne be warned, you’re lifestyle is about to be ruined.

Our deluded banks and governments are dunces when it comes to inflation and rising interest rates January 23, 2008

It’s uplifting that interest rates are going up because the banks and governments are adhering to the traditional tenets of capitalism. The banks put up their charges and have it added to the inflation figures (yes, bank charges are part of our expenses that are  causing inflation) so they can charge us more interest.

The government put up their petrol tax at the same rate that petrol rises (diesel the least refined fuel is more expensive because the government doesn’t like those who use it getting more kilometres for their litre) and so the cost of fuel is added to the group of  expenses the average person incurs.

On top of that the real reason that food is going up is because our traditional farmers don’t have much to sell, BUT it is not them that scores the money – it’s the supermarkets and greedy retail and wholesale outlets. And on top of that it is not the wage or salary earner who is making the money from the raw materials that are placing us as a wealthy nation, it is the miners, their subsidiary transport companies, and the government.

Using the government’s principles behind inflation rising interest rates why don’t they all get more money from the banks and themselves (the governments)? Or is that logic too complex for our deluded leaders

On Port Phillip Bay dredging Premier Brumby proves himself a lightweight January 22, 2008

Today Premier Brumby proved himself a twit over the dredging of Port Phillip Bay. His logic was frightfully flawed. He said it was better for traffic flow in and around the CBD to have large cargo ships discharging cargo than thousands of smaller ones.

Anyone who has been in a traffic grid lock knows that waiting for a large anything to unload is going to create more waiting time than a small anything to unload. And again the small ships are usually owned by small operators who are not part of the monolithic corporations who have already helped ruin the planet with their over production of everything.

For a start we don’t have thousands of small ships unloading because we don’t have huge imports like the rest of the countries on the Pacific rim. We also don’t have a large amount of manufactured products leaving our shores because they’re all being manufactured in China and India.

Many transport operators have advised the investigative panels that the ships we are dredging for can already enter our Melbourne port because by the time they reach us they will be close to empty, having visited all the other Pacific ports before us. However these transport experts have not factored in oil tankers – the most dangerous creatures to Port Phillip Bay – for they will enter fully laden (see previous posts).

Who should you blame for the diseases that effect you? Dumping toxic waste into Port Phillip Bay is the work of political hooligans January 22, 2008

Dumping the toxic waste from the dredging back into Port Phillip Bay is far the most irresponsible act a State government could sponsor.

Apart from the global warming gases released – often twenty times the strength of CO2 – the toxic subtstances will remain in the Bay forever as they climb through the food chain to reside with us. Their cancer causing capacities are legendary. So, who will you blame when your relatives, off-spring or yourself develop such symptoms?

Hardy paid out on asbestos because they knew at the time they were producing it that it was dangerous. The State government and individuals who are pushing this craziness know the properties of arsenic and cyanide and the many heavy metals that will be released from the river once dredging and dumping begins. They will be as responsible as any asbestos producer because they know the properties they are allowing to be released.

Loving Port Phillip Bay enough to use UN legislation for criminal negligence to the environment if dredging destroys the Bay January 21, 2008

I am personally appalled that the dredging creates the slightest risk to Port Phillip Bay’s environment. From the late forties on I was on the sand at the edge of the sea during the summer months. I witnessed with delight the snapper boats hauling in their catch in the early morning. I saw dolphins up close, I was in clinker built rowing boats fishing for flathead and I was in yachts that skimmed the Bay waters. Later I spied on lovers in the sand dunes. My experience of life was moulded by the Bay.

It is a unique Bay and it has unique creatures, including the dolphins who evolved in the Bay. The Port Phillip Bay dolphins don’t occur anywhere else on the planet. And if you imagine that the pod of sixty couldn’t disappear when the toxic water becomes their habitat ask why researchers can no longer find the pod of sixty odd dolphins that once inhabited the Gippsland lakes before blue-green algae.

As the average person (yes, farmers, gardeners and all those who understand our climate is changing) is stricken by the possibility that life on earth is about to turn dangerous, our politicians and bureaucrats, who overule our wishes are oblivious to the amounts of CO2 created by the dredging. It has not even been calculated with due accuracy. It is no longer a metaphor that Brumby fiddles with his own deluded profit oriented mind set while Rome burns, the burning is happening. How can anyone have such a criminally negligent attitude to our Bay? Don’t they realise that they may be sued for criminal negligence under the proposed United Nations draft legislation currently being considered. The legislation provides a framework of laws by which those who have been hurt by those who have thwarted the correct processes for development and created global warming gases, may be gaoled for their trangressions. Brumby certainly can’t claim ignorance of what he is doing for that is not a defence in a criminal matter. He has done his best to circumvent impartial investigation by decreeing the dredging shall go ahead regardless of evidence.

Yes, and the CSIRO with its new charter, developed under a Liberal government but not addressed by the new Labor government, can be brought to account for their self-interested, bodgy business plan for the Bay.

I ‘ll be the first aboard such an action against Brumby and the others who have displayed no respect for their environment.

The CSIRO stumbles with the dredging of Port Phillip Bay – it’s changed its charter January 20, 2008

Let’s be quite straight about the CSIRO and the dredging of Port Phillip Bay. The CSIRO were not part of the genuine investigating panels that were first set up by the Brack’s government. They were told by government they were not to be part of the process. Nevertheless several individuals spoke up about the bad effect that dredging would have on the Bay. Those individuals no longer work for the CSIRO.

In the making of the documentary, The Last Good Summer, I was in contact with several members of the CSIRO who were warned not to speak to the media. In fact one found himself on an extended overseas tour.

There was a superficial and unresearched paper that was delivered to the third, bogus investigating panel that was pressured by Brumby to find in favour of dredging. They strangely found that there were no problems associated with the dredging. The previous panels found frightening pollution problems that were smoothed a little with the general conclusions drawn.

Why the difference? Well, the CSIRO became a promoter of products rather than a respected research organisation (see a previous post). Now the CSIRO carries no weight for it works to discover exactly what its funding corporations want found.

We must understand that the deception and political sleight of hand over this elephant in our Bay has been driven by greed and we will lose our Bay for all recreations, including swimming, fishing, boating (the water will stink, as well as spread sickness in all its inhabitants) and living beside.

Why isn’t the dredging of Port Phillip Bay to be world’s best practice? January 20, 2008

Why isn’t the toxic dredging muck from Port Phillip Bay to be disposed of according to  world’s best practice?

It’s simple. It’s dangerous and expensive.

One of the world’s best practice criteria is dumping it far out in the ocean. Aside from the fact that this is such a corrupt way to go as far as environmental degradation is concerned, taking the spoil out through the heads (RIP) is dangerous. The barges transporting the spoil are not capable of taking on the currents and tides experienced in the Rip (Yes, it was once called the Rip, right up until the Port of Mebourne began lobbying for the channel dredging), the currents occasionally running at 14 knots or more.

An alternative is removing it from the sea altogether. Unfortunately this is very expensive and there are many safety regulations governing inland dumping, not the least of which is the air based pollution. The Port of Melbourne has therefore chosen to hide such a problem under water.

They casually say they will cap the spoil underwater, but they don’t say in which year. Is that a year after the dredging has begun, or after it’s finished? That would make it a minumum of seven years. In fact the spoil would begin to dissolve throughout the bay the moment the big tides hit it. maintenance spoil dumped in the bay has spread rapidly throughout the whole area of the Bay. And what will they be capping it with, concrete? Sorry guys your whole story is bodgy, half-baked and and cynical.

Port Phillip Bay dredging is not world’s best practice, despite earlier claims it would be January 15, 2008

Dredging in Port Phillip Bay is not being performed at world’s best practice. To do that the toxic spoil should be removed from the water. Of course the government is not claiming world’s best practice now, although they said at the beginning of the panel hearings that it would be conducted in that manner. The whole dredging exercise has been overlayed with media spin from the Port of Melbourne Authority.
Now the spoil, which is hundreds of times that dumped by any maintenance dredging, will be spread throughout the Bay by the volatile currents that exist in those waters. The Bay is notorious for its weather conditions and spoils that have previously been dumped have not remained in position. Incidentally the dredging of Corio Bay wiped out all the sea grass and it hasn’t regenerated. Snapper breeding grounds have been decimated.

Evidence has been given by scientists that the Bay will be destroyed forever. And please note that the government didn’t call on the CSIRO to deliver information and data they have been collecting on the Bay for decades. Without the CSIRO, on such an environmentally threatening exercise the government cannot claim impartiality – or lack of hypocrisy and bloody-mindedness. Remember it has been pushed from the start by Brumby as treasurer, and his supporters at the Melbourne Club.

Nothing is being said of the unique dolphin species that has evolved in the Bay over thousands of years. They will undoubtedly disappear like the dolphins of the Gippsland Lakes (great government we have – it’s never respected the environment).

But saving the worst to last, the dredging of a deeper channel opens the bay up to larger ships that cannot safely negotiate the entrance to the southern channel. There will be an Exxon Valdez style disaster is the opinion of Captain Frank Hart, a former harbour master of Western Port Bay. he’s done the figures and as there is no safety margin now for regular size ships ( an average of 3 have grounded every year since 1974 – it hasn’t yet been too much of a problem because they’re of a depth of keel that can scrape over the Great Southern Sands (and rocks) but the bigger ships will gouge their way to disaster.

Having to enter the Bay at an angle, against currents that run to 14 knots and more, in order to reach the southern channel , they can be up to 140 metres wide and they entering a channel entrance of just over 200 metres wide. “It’s not if there’ll be an Exxon Valdez,” says captain Hart, “it’s when.”