JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



In Australia if you try to clear a firebreak on your land you could go to gaol

Maxwell Szulc

As Greens blame coal miners and SUV drivers for contributing to firestorms that destroy houses, ponder that one man tried to reduce the risk of fires and cleared firebreaks on his property in WA in 2011 and is currently in jail for it, serving a 15 month sentence. Most of the cleared land had been cleared before in 1970 or 1983. This was mere scrubby regrowth. He was trying to separate his property from DEC (Dept of Environment and Conservation) managed land with a 20m wide fire-break. He is due out of jail sometime around Feb 10th, though his government minders have not even fixed that date (are they having trouble calculating “15 months”?) He had previously been jailed for three months in 2010 for a similar action.

This was true civil disobedience. He knew what would happen. He felt someone had to protest and I gather he felt that at 62 and without children or a wife to support, it was his duty.

Szulc cleared his land as a protest. He was in contempt of court, he is in contempt of the DEC.

Some will say that Maxwell Szulc is technically not in jail for clearing his land, but for contempt of court. He deliberately went against a court injunction that forbid him from clearing more land. Many will write him off as a nutter who should have filled in the management plan that the DEC asked him too.

But this is the key. Szulc is a conscientious objector, and cleared the land as a protest against laws he sees as completely unjust.

Szulc believes that his land is his land, and that he should be able to manage it without asking permission from anyone. Those “management plans” sound innocent, but as other farmers (like Matt and Janet Thompson and Sid Livesey) have found out, the management plan is an insidious form of  creeping fascism.

Why should a landowner need to get permission to clear firebreaks on his own property? Land clearing is expensive, and top-soil in Western Australia is a precious commodity (we have the poorest and oldest soil in the world, and fertilizer costs money). No land-owner would want to overdo the clearing or lose that thin layer of top-soil. The owner stands to lose the most if the land is badly managed. That is the point of the free market and ownership by individuals.

Turning into a fascist state?

In a western democracy we all assume that it’s One Law for Everyone. But what if a government department made every business put in a separate management plan for approval? Isn’t that just fascism by any other name? The government department is then free to approve, deny or delay approval on a case by case basis. This pits individual farmers against the state and each other, and puts them under the direction of the state. Sure they “own” their land, but they have to do what the state says — that’s fascism, where the state allows private ownership but commandeers property at will (under communism you neither control nor “own” property). Corruption can’t be far behind.

If the bureaucrat doesn’t like the farmer, they can make life tough. They can selectively enforce the rules. Farmers know that, which is probably why they have been so silent as other individual farmers have either been jailed, or driven to bankruptcy by bureaucrats who don’t have to answer to anyone. Who wants to stick their heads up over this parapet?

Who stands up for them? Their ABC — the love media — agrees in spirit with everything the environment department does (unless it’s not “green enough”). The ABC are missing-in-action when it comes to standing up for the farmers who are forced to pay tax to keep the billion dollar big-government propaganda-machine running.

It’s as if there were a mass of urban regulators, who know nothing about real production or the land, demanding to be in charge of everything, governing everyone down to a micro level from their air-conditioned offices in the comfort of the cities, safely re-elected by the urban majority who only know what the regulator’s mates in the media tell them. A modern version of Rome, with an urban mob pacified by bread and circuses that provides the power base for a class of parasites who controlled everything and in the process just happened to ensure their own lives were comfortable and well-remunerated. Not sustainable of course; there are limits, and maybe we are starting to bump into them now.

Unless the media expose the Kingmaker status of the DEC, voters won’t be demanding their elected officials stop this awful rot. If the media would just do their job…

The Thompsons and Sid Livesey did the opposite to Szulc. They obeyed every order, and jumped through every hoop. For that they stayed out of jail, but lost their properties and businesses, and face bankruptcy. What kind of “freedom” is that?

 

The background to his protest

This has been discussed at length on JustGrounds.

From Janet Thompson on JustGrounds August 2010

A battler, Mr. Szulc, 62, shore sheep and worked the mines, developing his (or what he THOUGHT was his) block of land near Esperance in WA as time and money permitted. He cleared regrowth on his land, most recently 40 hectares of fire breaks, after an injunction was sought by DEC to keep Mr. Szulc from using his property. It was this 40 hectares of firebreak that landed Mr. Szulc in prison.

The department said Chief Justice Martin issued the injunction in October last year after the DEC demonstrated to the court that it had exhausted all reasonable avenues of engagement and regulation to stop Mr Szulc from unlawfully clearing native vegetation on his property.

“The DEC said Mr Szulc had cleared a total of 345 hectares of native vegetation from the property without authority but that it was the 40ha Mr Szulc cleared after the court injunction that landed him in jail.”

 

Matt Thompson on August 3, 2010 at 9:47pm

We met Maxwell today in gaol, and just made it back. I am sure you will get a much more complete report soon. We were impressed with Max who is a very honest and courageous soul. He was very upbeat. Astonishing amount of security as he is currently in the gaol that everyone starts out in, until they sort them out.

I just couldn’t stop thinking, as we were going through the whole process through maximum security complete with retina scans and elaborate security measures to be allowed in to see this dangerous criminal, about his horrible “crime”.

His crime. Pushing over 46 hectares of scrub on his own property to make a twenty meter wide firebreak in a bush fire prone area between DEC controlled scrub. The land is not native bush and one third was legally cleared before he owned it, and he legally chained the rest in 1983 save about 250 acres which is still virgin bush. The land is owned by Max and has been since the 1970′s.Max immigrated from Germany (Szulc is Polish spelling sounds like Schultz) as a youngster and always dreamed of owning a farm. He was able to purchase his block off of his own work as an underground miner. He had to work the mines to earn more money to keep his place during bad years. The bush regrew while he was working mines. When mining went bad the last year, he got laid off and wanted to work his farm again. He is now 62, divorced, street wise and not afraid of gaol.
Unlike Matt and Janet he was smart enough to realize that management plans were a trick and he refused to submit such a plan for his own property. Like Matt and Janet, he is a vocal climate sceptic.

 

Matt Thompson on August 4, 2010
We provided lots and lots of management plans and paid consultants to develop them. Every time we did, DEC used information we provided against us. Providing the plan ALWAYS made our situation worse. Even though we were only doing what we said we were going to do. If they are so good at evaluating plans why don’t they just do our job… The point is that common law and justice are turned on its ear. We should not have to prove that we are not damaging OUR OWN property (proving a negative is not possible anyway). They should have to prove that we are.

Of course in reality the time frames involved in getting them to approve or allow an edit of a management plan, make normal operational management of an agricultural enterprise impossible. Conditions change way before the bureaucracy approves of plans. DEC has sat on our plans for over a year before deciding they were no good before. This management plan thing is an evil trick and I advise everyone that is required to submit such a thing to say no. It serves only to increase the power of bureaucrats to use permits and licenses as a political tool, and line the pockets of consultants. Environmental management plans approved by government results in serious harm to the environment.

Also, although there is a process for clearing permits WA, in actual practice almost none of them are granted after investing in years of time an expense in developing and presenting the plan.

Maxwell is willing to devote the rest of his life to raising awareness of the unfairness of this law. Maxwell bought the land partially cleared with the understanding he could legally clear the rest which he did. The government subsequently changed the rules and took his land without compensation which is not legal under the Australian Constitution.Maxwell does not want compensation, he wants his land and his dream he worked his whole life for back!

The Sid Livesey story (from a speech the Funeral for Property Rights)

“If you want to meet a true conservationist … a real environmentalist, come and shake this man’s hand. Sid has a property north of Albany in the Porongurups. For seven long years he fought the Ag. Department and the Soil Conservation Commission to be able to manage his land the way he deemed necessary. He finally won. Then DEC came in and took him back to square one. After spending over $300,000 in legal fees, consultancies, reports, time and effort, AND after getting a win, Sid still cannot use his land.

Do you know that the Southwest of Western Australia is a UN-declared “biodiversity hotspot?” I ask you this: If property owners are so bad, how could we possibly have such a diversity of flora and fauna in the southwest of our state when it has been held in and managed by private hands for the last 130 years? Sid lays a wreath today for the negative impact of “Biodiversity Corridors” on Private Property Rights.”

Basic Timeline

Szulc gave notice of intent to clear land in 1990 to the Commissioner of Soil and Land Conservations. Approval was given, provided he put in a management plan. He chose not too. DEC issued a Soil Conservation Notice in 1994. By 2008 they told him not to clear any more. In Sept 2009 they posted a cease and desist notice, which he disobeyed. He spent three months in jail. He was jailed again in 2010 for fifteen months which which end in February.

Szulcs appealed but lost the appeal in July 2012.

This is pure civil disobedience

I don’t recommend anyone break the law. There are better ways to protest, but note the difference between Szulc and Moylan — the Green who fraudulently issued a press release and trashed the share price of a coal miner. Szulc hurt no one, he was protesting with his own property. That is civil disobedience. Moylan did not profit, but he caused economic damage to some innocent and law abiding citizens — they paid the price for his protest. The coal industry will also now find it just a little bit harder to raise capital. That’s not civil disobedience, that’s sabotage.

As long as farmers and their associations allow them to be divided up  with individual “plans”, the culture of fear will keep each individual producer silent, afraid to speak up, and the DEC can pick the protestors off one by one. If all farmers stood together (just as all miners should) the tables would be turned. Farmers are crazy if they think being quietly obedient to such inherently undemocratic and unfair laws will make the problem go away — acquiescing just encourages the parasites to flourish.

Janet Thompson can reel off the names of other farming families who are struggling…

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.0/10 (121 votes cast)
In Australia if you try to clear a firebreak on your land you could go to gaol, 9.0 out of 10 based on 121 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/aj76eah

281 comments to In Australia if you try to clear a firebreak on your land you could go to gaol

  • #
    Kevin Lohse

    Let me get this right. It is a legal duty to burn off undergrowth in WA at certain times of the year. Turning the undergrowth into soil improver doesn’t cut the mustard, Right? It is illegal to cut firebreaks in WA on your own land. Why?


    Report this

    350

    • #
      John Brookes

      Which is very confusing, because when I lived in Darlington (Perth hills), we were required to have a fire break around the edge of the property.


      Report this

      35

    • #
      Kevin Lohse

      John. Thanks for replying. My son’s in-laws live just off the Great East Road in the Perth hills. They have to burn off, but don’t have firebreaks Having walked through the area there don’t seem to be any firebreaks anywhere.
      As far as I can gather from your answer, nobody knows why the code is so chaotic. As a staunch defender of Gaia in all her aspects, can you add anything else to clear matters up a bit?


      Report this

      20

  • #
    Sean

    Once I considered emigrating to Australia for my retirement, but then after reading your media I realized that you had become just another screwed up left wing hole run by the Labour fascists.

    Not sure what happened to that famed/now extinct Aussie spirit, but your Orwellian govt seems to have weeded it out for the most part.

    If there is a spark of it left somewhere, I suggest what you need is a revolution, so get started [snip... not so graphic with the jokes eh? - Jo]


    Report this

    513

    • #

      The Aussie spirit is not extinct. Not by a long shot. We may be showing extraordinary patience, however, just waitin’ for the election to come around. Watch and see… :) :) :)

      Rioting in the streets, by the way, would probably just give Julia the excuse to suspend democracy and cancel said election – something she would love to do – and we can’t have that, now can we? So, patience it is. :)


      Report this

      503

      • #
        gary turner

        When being sarcastic, you should clearly mark it as such — or be more obvious about it. Maybe that’s what you intended with the smileys.

        Actually, from what I’ve seen of your politicians, both ins and outs, all the election might do is change the faces; new bosses same as the old bosses. To do the job correctly, the politicos and bureaucrats should fear the citizenry, as they once did in my country. It’s even written into our constitution, roughly “Thou shalt not disarm the people”.

        That said, I get pissed when furriners try to tell us ‘Mericans how to run our business. So, I apologize.

        cheers,

        gary


        Report this

        80

        • #

          Not being sarcastic, mate, I meant exactly what I said. We Aussies are pretty laid back but that doesn’t mean we cave in easily. Cheers to you, too! Oh, and the smiley faces were because I’m looking forward to the election, as are many people here.


          Report this

          170

      • #
        David

        Do you really expect the Lib/Nats to change things? Look what happened to us in Victoria – we got Timid Ted and we are left with the watermelon legislation brought in by Labour. Ted went missing. O’Farrell in NSW doesn’t seem to be much better. I keep my fingers crossed that we don’t end up with a Timid Tony but I’ll believe it when I see the Nanny State legislation being repealed – but I’m not holding my breath. As for Tasmania if you are on the dole with a Tassie address it should be stopped immediately – the mendicant State.


        Report this

        140

        • #
          Cookster

          It gets worse David. In NSW “Conservative” Premier Barrie O’Farrell wants to strengthen anti discrimination laws because not enough people have been convicted under the current laws(?).

          Likewise, Federal Attorney General Nicola Roxon has just introduced a draft members Bill to the Lower House to extend national anti discrimination laws. This includes reversing the onus of proof onto the defendant and extending the definition of discrimination to not “offending” people (refer linked story).

          Both examples, if enacted, will require a further bloating of the Bureaucracy and place further strain upon both Federal and State government budgets. No prizes for guessing who’s taxes will need to pay for all this ‘essential’ legislation.

          Who are these people trying to protect?

          No this is not China, North Korea or Nazi Germany but Australia 2013. On the radio yesterday a man born in communist Poland called in. He was genuinely worried that the fascist world he left behind is rapidly coming to Australia. Whether it be Maxwell Szulc, the Thompson’s or restricting freedom of speech, the ruling classes need to be stopped – thou shalt not pass !

          http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/racial-hatred-bill-offers-open-slather-to-obnoxious-20130113-2cnf1.html


          Report this

          60

        • #
          Maverick

          Steady on David about Tasmania. Tasmania is the test bed for all the anti-civilisation green loonies. Remember the Franklin dam? The Greens’s shut that down with the help of Bob Hawk. So we swapped the earth moving and construction jobs and the export of hundreds of millions of clean electricity for one boat trip a day up the river carrying 20 tourists and 2 helicopter flights a day carrying 4 tourists. Now they are shutting down forestry in Tasmania with the help of another labor federal government. Until federal government’s stand up for development and industry in Tasmania, they will get what they deserve – having to meet the welfare payments for Tasmania. David I can assure you that most Tasmanians do not want welfare, we want jobs, economic growth, standard of living paid from the development of our own resources and value adding of those resources.


          Report this

          40

      • #
        Lars P.

        Exactly. There is need of a throughout clean-up.
        And more to it, I would say that one of the biggest dangers for democracy comes from bureaucracy, if it is left to run amok.
        This is why it needs refresh. Maybe a good point would be to allow for a limited time of work in any bureaucratic work – lets say 5 years contract, 10 years max for life.


        Report this

        40

    • #
      Angry

      I totally agrre.

      Nothing short of a revolution/civil war will bring our once great nation back to common sense.

      Australians have had a gutfull of these ahole traitors !!


      Report this

      305

      • #
        John Brookes

        OMG! Revolution! Civil War! Who would have believed things were so bad?


        Report this

        111

        • #
          J.H.

          So you agree with a Government and a system that sends a man to jail for clearing vegetation on his own land? In effect, a man who dared use his own land for his own purposes.

          In Syria they are having a Civil war because of the price of heating fuel and a political system that oppressed those who would complain about it…… Do not mock the will of angry men nor the apparent triviality of the cause.

          At the moment it only affects the few…. When oppression affects the many, then there is revolution…… But it could have been long avoided if those past few had been listened to and the problem recognized…..

          So where do you stand John. Does the State own the land?… or does the individual who purchased the property rights?

          How willing are you to be a crony for the Assad’s of this world.


          Report this

          40

    • #
    • #
      jorgekafkazar

      Alas, too many wustralians, too few Szulcs.


      Report this

      202

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    TASIGREENSPIN

    It was interesting to hear the Tasmanian Chief Fire Officer discussing the reason for the fires when he was adamant that the fires had been so bad because:

    rough quote: ” 80% of land in Tasmania is privately owned and most private owners do not carry out hazard reduction burns”.

    That’s all I recall of his statement but a number of important points arise from his comment and his behaviour.

    1. He appears to be an employee of the State Government.

    2. His comment implies that the Tasmanian Government carries out the necessary Hazard Reduction Burns meticulously.

    3. He implies that Private owners are Free and Unencumbered to carry out Hazard Reduction Burns (HRBs).

    4. He implied that the damaging fires were due to inaction or laziness or unenlightened behaviour by the private landowners.

    5. He implied that the Tasmanian Government had done the right thing but been let down by unconcerned private owners.

    Work it out for yourself.

    This is nothing but a Green government caught with its pants down and then trying to change reality with spin.

    The Tasmanian Government, like all Australian State Governments, has made it almost impossible to clear dangerous vegetation and create a safe environment for people, property and native wildlife.

    We need changes to our Government accountability mechanisms.

    It’s not as though people are unaware of what is needed, the Chief CSIRO fire person, now retired, has clearly detailed management procedures but has been canned by politics.

    Politicians, for electoral gain and hence access to the Tax Coffers, have willfully IGNORED the representations of the person who is nominally the best qualified person in the land.

    That needs fixing; badly.

    KK


    Report this

    512

    • #
      Allen Ford

      It’s not just the CSIRO Chief (ret), but too many coronial and other enquires to count. It is the Greens that need to be held to account. Make them responsible, financially, for the consquences of their own stupid thought bubbles, no excuses.

      It is more than time that we called their loud mouthed bluff.


      Report this

      221

  • #
    Peter Miller

    Bureaucrats.

    The greatest drag on the western world’s economies are bloody minded, self-important bureaucrats. They are almost untouchable, they can never be fired or criticised and the concept of being “reasonable and rational” is totally alien to far too many of them, especially when it comes to anything do with the environment or climate.

    My own experiences of dealing with bureaucrats in project development is that it’s all about having to deal with the 10% who have the bolt missing from the side of the neck; they are the ones which cause the problems.

    In the instance quoted here, my guess is that this is all about a grudge held by a pissed off bureaucrat, who experienced some criticism. Alternatively, it might just be another case of “Ecoloons rule!”


    Report this

    352

    • #
      Cookster

      Absolutely correct Peter. Plus elected politicians from both sides of politics who feed these Bureaucrats. As for the Greens, The Soviet Union and China are two examples of tightly state controlled nations, yet their environmental records are abysmal. How does increasing government power and control = better environmental outcomes? Good question.


      Report this

      50

    • #

      I had a dream. I had a dream that farmers who recognise Max’s service in a war that was not of his choosing decided to keep an eye on his property just as good neighbours have done whenever good men and women have been away serving their country.

      I dreamed that they would, of their own volition, spend a few days camped at Max’s place from time to time so they can fix anything that needs attention. And I dreamed that they would each reflect on the role played by the rick burners of old who went to the gallows to protest the hated enclosure laws that allowed wealth landholders to buy up all the property around someone’s farm and deny them right of passage to and from with a view to a forced sale at a fraction of real value.

      And I dreamed that after reflecting on these and other supreme sacrifices that paid for our property rights, that some of these farmers then spent a moonlit night quietly ringbarking trees that DEC have tried to appropriate through fraud and misconduct.

      And I dreamed that upon his release, Max would return to a cleared farm that he cannot possibly be held responsible for. Australian’s were like that once, they knew what needed to be done and just went ahead and did it. And I sometimes wonder if we might have lost a bit too much of that DNA in Flanders fields.

      100

  • #
    Geoffrey Cousens

    The Greens have admitted it themselves;they do not want people living in remote areas.


    Report this

    311

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Well, of course not.

      The majority of Greens live in Urban areas, and are totally unaware and ill informed about life on the land.

      They are dimly aware that there are lots of things that can kill you in the Australian bush, so they safely stay within 10 minutes walk (on sealed pavement) from the nearest latte.

      And if that is what they do, then it must be the right thing to do, and so everybody should be doing it too, and if it they are not, then they will be made to conform.


      Report this

      473

    • #
      Angry

      The greens (COMMUNISTS) have an agenda to murder Australians living in the bush by not allowing them to backburn/construct fire breakes and then burning to death in bushfires that in some cases the eco nuts light themselves!!

      They are terrorists and should be treated as such!


      Report this

      274

    • #
      amcoz

      That’s because it’s easier to control dependent, unresourceful, weakling suburbanites than the more self-reliant, assertive resourcefulness of the bushie.

      The Greenies can go and rot in hell for all the good they think they have done in protecting the flora and fauna, anywhere. Just ask the bushies, who have lost everything recently, because they’re not allowed to back-burn before a bushfire, but they can when there is.


      Report this

      314

    • #
      Jon

      Its about Agenda 21 society, actually Catch 22 society, and according to that the aim is no kapital, private property and etc etc.


      Report this

      102

  • #
    Ian George

    We country folk are governed by people who live in cities. They have already removed the trees and grasslands in their living space; built, tarred and cemented over the natural landscape; diverted or built over the streams and gullies; eliminated the natural fauna; polluted the rivers, harbours and air around them and created a massive carbon footprint for which we all have to pay.
    And they tell us what we can do and what we can’t do. Wow!


    Report this

    532

    • #
      Angry

      Reminds me of the classic song by Joni Mitchell “Big Yellow Taxi”……….

      They paved paradise
      And put up a parking lot
      With a pink hotel *, a boutique
      And a swinging hot spot

      Don’t it always seem to go
      That you don’t know what you’ve got
      Till it’s gone
      They paved paradise
      And put up a parking lot

      They took all the trees
      Put ‘em in a tree museum *
      And they charged the people
      A dollar and a half just to see ‘em

      Don’t it always seem to go
      That you don’t know what you’ve got
      Till it’s gone
      They paved paradise
      And put up a parking lot

      Hey farmer farmer
      Put away that DDT * now
      Give me spots on my apples
      But leave me the birds and the bees
      Please!

      Don’t it always seem to go
      That you don’t know what you’ve got
      Till it’s gone
      They paved paradise
      And put up a parking lot

      Late last night
      I heard the screen door slam
      And a big yellow taxi
      Took away my old man

      Don’t it always seem to go
      That you don’t know what you’ve got
      Till it’s gone
      They paved paradise
      And put up a parking lot

      They paved paradise
      And put up a parking lot


      Report this

      141

    • #

      Unlike the USA, Canada, Brazil and many other nations, we have no “farm states”. All our states follow the Anglo/French model of a dominant metropolis lording it over a serially abused regional minority. The notion that Chicago had some god given right to rule the Dakotas, Wyoming and Idaho would seem as crazy to any urban american as it would to anyone in the farm states. And try telling folks in Saskatoon that they would be better off being run from Toronto with out finding yourself just over the provincial boundary picking off tar and feathers.

      But here in Aus the metrocentric media and leftard academia employ all the tools of the serial wife abuser to undermine regional confidence and pour scorn on any notion that a region might be better off without metrocentric “tough love”. You see, it is all our fault, we shouldn’t provoke them, but it must be ‘our little secret’.


      Report this

      171

  • #
    Dave

    .
    Tasmania was no different.

    This is from a Gympie man about the fires in Tassie:

    “Another problem is the forest industry collapse.”

    “Forestry Tasmania has all but closed down and they had a lot of equipment that is not there now.

    “All the fire fighting effort is relying solely on the Tasmanian Fire Service,” he said.

    “They’re finding the forestry roads haven’t been maintained and a lot of the country is inaccessible.”

    This story is repeating itself across Australia – because the Bureaucrats are in charge.


    Report this

    550

    • #
      Amfortas

      Every time Forestry Tas tried to do a ‘back-burn’ to clear undergrowth, even miles from anywhere, the same old renta-mob of greenies flooded into town to lobby Parliament to stop them. And another ‘swat-team’ of greenies would hoist themselves into the trees in a well publicised ‘Protest’ and wreck nearby fire fighting machinery.

      But Tasmoania is governed by a small clique of Greenie-Feminist-Socialist wreckers who are consitently supported in the polls by the ignorant and the dole-bludgers.


      Report this

      141

      • #
        Jon

        When my neighbors approach me to get one ore more of my trees cut down, to get more sunshine, I often say that if I do that’ I am afraid the fu** for Forrest group will come and demonstrate on my property. Mostly we agree that that would be a bonus for cutting trees down.:-) Do you remember the make love not war movement, 68′s gain without pain movement?
        That today would be named fu** for peace, by the way, well it’s the same people that are mostly responsible and central for Agenda 21, UNEP national Environ depts and etc.

        They can’t cope with reality so they need more problems that are not real in order to have a living?


        Report this

        50

  • #
    Mark

    Siding Springs almost lost to fire. Fire raging to the south of this asset with a southerly change imminent! Why do the authorities wait till after the change to “Panic and evacuate” why not protect the asset BEFORE the threat gets on your doorstep. I watched the aftermath of a wind change in the Black Sarturday fires in Strathewan…why did the authorities wait to so long to warn the locals BEFORE they became trapped when their main way out was blocked.

    Here, we have a proactive farmer protecting his and the states assets and he goes to gaol for contempt. The wrong person was charged for contempt.


    Report this

    382

  • #
    handjive

    Slightly o/t but relevant.

    Their ALPBC starts a week long series of “specials”:

    “This is the first in a five-part series by Sarah Clarke on climate impacts.
    Rising seas may put $300b of property at risk: scientists

    Still to come:

    Part 2: What effect will climate change have on agriculture and food production? (Coming Tuesday)
    Part 3: What effect will climate change have on health in the Pacific? (Coming Wednesday)
    Part 4: How will climate change affect biodiversity and ecosystems? (Coming Thursday)
    Part 5: How will climate change affect Australia’s oceans and reefs? (Coming Friday)

    The propaganda machine is working overtime @ ALPBC.

    Still no mention that Australia is OFFICIALLY drought free.


    Report this

    242

    • #
      Allen Ford

      I think this “initiative” by their ABC is more worthy of a thumbs down than up, and have voted accordingly!


      Report this

      70

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      I’ve got a UFO documentary at home that uses introductory titles to each chapter much like those. It’s a great watch too, constantly asking open ended questions as though the question was the answer.


      Report this

      30

    • #
      rukidding

      Never let the truth get in the way of a good image.The waves washing over fort denison couldn’t be a bow wave from a boat.See in background the prop wash from a boat.The ecotards never stop.


      Report this

      50

  • #
    amcoz

    The DEC (Dreaded Environment Cops) are the nearest thing in Australia to Hitler’s SA, later to become the SS and more recently, the USSA’s FEMA (F@ck Everyone More Aggresively).


    Report this

    161

  • #

    Timing is everything in life and these sort of abominations have gone on for far too long in this country.
    The lunatics have been running the asylum for too many years and people like me and all of you people that read here- want to help but can’t get a critical mass or media hearing.With Max due out in a month – this is the opportunity to get this up in lights nationally. WA has a state election a month later- the DEC and the EDO must be bought to book over these inhuman actions that they have overseen.
    The whole country is going up in smoke and mainly the uncontrolled fires are crown land and national parks. I think that it would be powerful if we could contact all the victims to some “online ” martialing point and get an honour roll so joe public can vent their outrage on the perpetrators.
    Eg Max can be the symbolic martyr and Sid and Peter Spencer and the many others who have put their lives on the line for the rest of their peers( Matt and Janet of course even though they were forced to return to the US). It is such a big empty country but if we could all work together to compile a “voice” and have the identities available for media- this would elevate what seems a WA problem but is common in every State and Fed dept across Australia. WE must ACT and put these pathetic green idealogues back in their own headspace and out of our lives!


    Report this

    221

  • #

    The Regime of the Eco-Greens is pure Fascism. The aims and results are identical.
    Szulc is a conscientious objector in the war. He cleared his land as a sensible hazard precaution as all land owners should and the action became a protest against laws that are completely unjust.


    Report this

    262

  • #
    Thumbnail

    Thank you Joanne. Great story. Nice to know that DEC officials in WA were found to be “Extremely Incompetent” with a prescribed burn near Margaret River in 2007, which killed three truck drivers and destroyed 39 buildings.

    Mr Commins stood down from his DEC post after the inquest but was reinstated last year by the department’s Director-General Keiran McNamara, who has said he stands by that decision.

    Read more: http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/fire-decisions-linked-to-wa-govt-official-20111126-1nzyh.html#ixzz2Htc1SFx9

    This story broke around the same time Max Szulc was put into the slammer for clearing a fire break (oopsie – contempt of court).


    Report this

    233

    • #
      John Brookes

      Unless I’m terribly confused, the truck drivers were not killed in the Margaret River fires, and the Margaret River fires did not happen in 2007. But apart from that, I’m sure everything you say is correct.


      Report this

      110

  • #

    Shocking, Nicholas’s comment contains the key to cracking this – mass ignoring of the unjust law is the way to stop it; it will effectively become uninforcable as the cost to enforce it will exceed the budget that can be allocated to it. Also in this situation it will be likely to get the law overturned.

    If you keep respecting an unjust law, it is assumed you want it by the fact you are enacting it and making it work. Laws are not set in stone, they can be changed and the key enabler to this is how ‘practical’ it is to enforce.


    Report this

    222

  • #
    Tim

    Miranda Devine said it all:

    “Whenever a major bushfire catastrophe occurs in Australia, the victims are essentially told to shut up.”

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/lets-tell-the-burning-truth/story-e6frezz0-1226552629947

    242

    • #
      Angry

      The victims voices MUST be heard LOUDLY far and wide !

      What are they going to do if they are not quiet?

      Maybe throw them into a gulag……..


      Report this

      103

    • #
      ianl8888


      the government agencies are protected by statute and don’t have to pay compensation.

      Therein lies the entire issue – by statute, there is NO accountability


      Report this

      211

  • #
    Angry

    Sorry to be OT but this is about the high priest of the global warming CULT al gore…….

    Al Gore sells his CurrentTV PayTV channel to …… An OIL Sheik!!!

    WHAT A HYPOCRITE !!!

    “Of course Al didn’t show up,” said one high placed Current staffer. “He has no credibility.
    “He’s supposed to be the face of clean energy and just sold [the channel] to very big oil, the emir of Qatar! Current never even took big oil advertising—and Al Gore, that bulls***ter sells to the emir?”

    http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/tv/current_situation_XLE3W50v6I9Gbyqe6Z4pFP


    Report this

    72

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      The channel has been sold to Al Jazzera.

      It appears to be purely a financial transaction, as part of a wider restructuring deal.

      If you can step around the understandable American Islamophobia, this channel is no worse (and for some news better) than Reuters or Associated Press.

      All of the editorial decisions are made by the bureau offices in each country and region.

      The benefit for the USA is that Al Jazzera will now presumably open a US bureau office, which will give a different editorial slant to the group-think and sound-bite approach of the existing news services, biased as they are, to the political parties.

      At the end of the day, It is better to know what people are saying about you, than have them talking behind your back.


      Report this

      142

      • #

        Whether or not this provides America with better news is irrelevant. Al Gore is a HYPOCRIT. He took $100 million from an oil country–an industry he has done his utmost best to vilify and destroy. It is NEVER okay to take money from oil people when you claim the fossil fuel industries are killing the planet and you are saving the planet from them.


        Report this

        111

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          Qatar (the country) gets a lot of its money from sources other than oil; banking for instance – it underwrites a lot of projects in the developing world from loans that must be repaid with interest. Money is money, and it does not carry a unique DNA to show where it comes from.

          You are quoting an article written by Linda Stasi (interesting surname*) who is the New York Post TV Critic. She does not attribute the article to anybody else, so it is she who is repeating a comment from “one high placed Current staffer” who is probably worried about loosing his or her job. Given that they are on different coasts, the interview will have been done by telephone (or possibly Skype), so she would have had trouble confirming that she was talking to the person she expected to be talking to.

          The other telling point is the statement, “The most left-leaning group … weren’t buying what Al Jazeera was selling”. That implies that at least some of the people who work for Current do so for political reasons, and have had the ideological rug pulled out from under them. Both Linda Stasi, and the person quoted, feel that their beliefs have been betrayed on an existential level. No wonder they are annoyed.

          By the way, Al Jazeera’s slogan worldwide, is “Inform, Inspire, Entertain” (in different languages, of course). I am surprised that people who work in the media industry were not aware of that.

          * The Stasi were the Ministry of State Security – the Secret Police – in East Germany. I am tempted to suggest the whole article is a bit of a send-up.


          Report this

          103

          • #

            Then it would be fine if Greenpeace sold a boat to whalers because the group also used it for tours?


            Report this

            60

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            I think it would be fine if Greenpeace bought a whaling boat, and used it for tours.

            It would also be fine if Greenpeace then sold the whaling boat to somebody else, to use for tours.

            If Greenpeace owned a whaling boat, it might for purely moral rather than commercial reasons, decline to sell it directly to a whaling company – their choice.

            But they could sell it to a third party to use “for tours”, in inverted commas, who could then flick it on directly to a whaling company. In which case Greenpeace would stand to miss out on the extra profit by going through the third party – their choice.

            Al Gore could have sold Current to me, and I could then have on-sold it to Al Jazeera. All I would need is two contracts and a back-to-back finance arrangement.

            The whole thing is just hand-wringing, with people having attacks of the vapours.


            Report this

            71

          • #
            Kevin Lohse

            Rereke. As far as I know, muzzies don’t do interest. Obviously there’s a payback, but it’s not obtained from usury.


            Report this

            00

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            Kevin,

            Good spot. I was using “interest” in the wider sense that some additional benefit is generated from the the transaction. Sloppy thinking on my part. The concept of “good will” would have been more appropriate. Thank you for pointing it out.


            Report this

            00

      • #

        My bad: My question should have read: Then it would be fine if Greenpeace sold one of it’s boats to whalers who promised to also use it for tours, in addition to whaling? You imply it would be okay if a third party were in the middle–is that like committing vandalism using a cat rather than destroying your neighbor’s yard in person?

        Do you care if people who claim to be against spoiling the planet then proceed to do exactly that while forcing you to follow their rules? Are you okay with others telling you what to do and then not doing it themselves?

        You have no problem supporting causes you don’t believe in? Or do you simply not believe in anything, allowing you to profit at will? (I’m okay with the last one–if your believe only in profit, then I understand why you think it’s okay for Al Gore to profit from oil while preaching against it.)

        Should it turn out you don’t have ethics, figure anyway to make a buck is okay and preaching what you don’t believe while making millions is okay, that clarifies things for me. If not, where would the line be between okay and hypocritical?


        Report this

        41

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          Let us not make it personal. We don’t need the ad hominem overtones.

          You imply it would be okay if a third party were in the middle

          Whether I think it is OK, or not, is immaterial. If I am not in control of a situation, my opinion is actually worthless.

          Let me use a different analogy. I get on really well with my neighbours. I like them a lot, and they are good friends. But my job is taking me elsewhere, so reluctantly I need to sell my house. I contact an agent, who inspects the house, and tells me what I can expect to receive for it. I say, fine go ahead, and we draw up an agreement for the agent to sell my house for me.

          A few weeks later the agent phones and says he have found a buyer for more than the asking price, and the papers will be in the mail to me the next day. The papers duly arrive. I sign them, and send them back. Deal done.

          I then find out that my beautiful home has been purchased by a bikey gang with a reputation for dealing in drugs, fencing stolen goods, and engaging in various other things my mother would not have approved of.

          What do I do? I have signed a binding contract. The house is sold. My ex-neighbours are not at all happy about the situation. But I have no control over how this panned out.

          That is the reality of large business transactions – the deal will almost certainly have been set up by a broker – and Al Gore, for all his faults, may not have known who the purchaser was. I have seen no real evidence that he did know. Have you? Neither of us actually know how the deal was done.

          As I said before, it is just hand-wringing. People don’t know the facts, so they just assume, and make up ‘evidence’, and find quotations from unidentified people, in order to support their assumptions.

          So yes, I have problems in supporting things that I don’t believe in. I have problems supporting positions for which I have no facts, and therefore nothing to believe with.

          But ask yourself this question: “How much control do you really have over the big things in life?” Al Gore has come out of it looking like a hypocrite. He might be a hypocrite, for all I know. But on the other hand, he may just have been a victim of circumstance. Without hard facts, one way or another, I am in no position to judge. Why are you?


          Report this

          82

          • #
            ExWarmist

            RW. Well said.

            This is a clear example of sceptical methodology in action by RW.

            When faced with a lack of evidence – don’t be drawn to unsupportable conclusions by your own confirmation bias – just because it feels good…


            Report this

            12

          • #
            Ross

            RW

            I accept your argument to a point. It is true we don’t know exactly if Gore knew the buyers but in this size of transaction and Gore being a major shareholder it is unlikely he did not know who the buyer was. Also Glen Beck and his associates tried to buy the asset months before but Gore said he didn’t want to sell to him because of his “political / climate change” beliefs. So if he knew the details in that case he was following any sale closely.


            Report this

            40

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            You make a good point, Ross.

            We assume that Gore would not want to look the hypocrite, because we would not want to be tarred by that brush. However, that sort of concern does not seem to worry other politicians, so …?

            But you are right. Gore is the sort of man who would want to micromanage the deal if at all possible. So, something else was a factor in the deal, that overrode his concern about his reputation and his stated belief system.

            One could have been (pure conjecture here), that Al Jazeera insisted on total anonymity until the deal was done, and were prepared to pay a premium for that privilege. These are known as “blind broker” deals.

            Another could have been (even bigger conjecture), that Gore has seen the writing on the wall, and realises that the climate is no longer sticking to the script. In which case, the temptation to get ahead of the wave, and cash up as quickly as possible would be very strong.

            But, as I say, it is all conjecture, and we don’t, and can’t know.

            Also, the reason presented for his refusal to sell Current to Glen Beck et al, may have had no relationship to the real reason why he did not want Beck to own the channel – again, we just don’t know.


            Report this

            30

  • #
    Bite Back

    If asked for a prediction at this point I would say, your next election will not solve your problems. In fact, compulsory voting will force people to the polls who will probably vote against the long term interest of Australia and their own as well.

    Neither a democracy nor a republic will work when it’s assumed that the government will take care of you through life.


    Report this

    140

  • #
    André van Delft

    From the Guerilla Open Access Manifesto by Aaron Swartz, July 2008, Eremo, Italy:

    There is no justice in following unjust laws.

    RIP Aaron (1986-2013)


    Report this

    40

  • #
    graphicconception

    By coincidence I have just posted this in another forum only minutes ago. Remember the fires in 2009? I may be the other side of the world but this story still angered me …

    Link to full article.

    In 2002, Liam Sheahan, a resident of Reedy Creek in Victoria, was prosecuted for disregarding local laws and bulldozing approximately 250 trees on his own property to make a fire break next to his home.[7] Council laws prohibited Mr. Sheahan from clearing trees further than six meters away from his house, but he went ahead with his decision to create a 100 meter fire break. During the resulting prosecution, bushfire expert Dr. Kevin Tolhurst testified on Mr. Sheahan’s behalf, telling the court that the clearing had reduced the fire risk to Mr. Sheahan’s home from extreme to moderate. According to Mr. Sheahan, “The council stood up in court and made us to look like the worst, wanton environmental vandals on the earth. We’ve got thousands of trees on our property. We cleared about 247.” Mr. Sheahan’s prosecution cost him $100,000 in fines and legal fees, but when the bushfires swept through his town in February 2009, his actions were vindicated — his home was the only property left standing in a two-kilometer area, while neighboring properties were destroyed. His disregard for environmental laws saved his home and the lives of his family.


    Report this

    521

  • #
    Ace

    I wouldnt have the balls to do what this guy did. He is a hero.

    As I say all the time, I think all this crap is only going to get worse, and worse, and worse, and worse, and worse, and worse…. and worse…and wor…and….

    Until something really bad happens.

    Then the legions of legislative twerps will be out of work and there will be no cash, police, beaurocrats or will any longer to enforce the mountains of laws enacted in this, the dying decades of our civilisation.

    Then after some centuries, quite probably, folk like this guy will pepper the annals of a bygone crazy age as the few heroes who stood up. It’ll be like looking back on the age of witch trials and persecution heretics of is to us.

    Oh wait, basically this IS the persecution of a heretic.


    Report this

    204

  • #
    A C of Adelaide

    This article from Quadrant is a “must read” for any one interested in this topic

    “Green Philosophy burns bright once again”

    Roger Franklin in Quadrant

    As a life member of the CFS I can recommend it


    Report this

    160

  • #
    Robber

    Bureaucrats at work. After a royal commission into the bushfires in Victoria of 2009, a recommendation was made to amend the Victoria Planning Provisions to require that, when assessing a permit to remove native vegetation around an existing dwelling, the responsible authority and the Department of Sustainability and Environment, as referral authority, take into account fire hazard and give weight to fire protection purposes. Further, The State fund and commit to implementing a long-term program of prescribed burning based on an annual rolling target of 5 per cent minimum of public land.

    However, when it comes to implementation, rather than allowing local country fire officers to decide when and where to undertake pre-summer burnoffs around country towns, all requests must be submitted to head office in Melbourne. That causes delays on suitable days so that rather than start at 8am, it may be after 11am before approval is received. Net result, less than target burnoffs are achieved, all to satisfy another bureaucrat.


    Report this

    180

    • #
      inedible hyperbowl

      bureaucracy don’t work with burnoffs. The timing window can be very narrow. Not too much wind, Not too hot, humidity, etc.
      The decision needs to be left to land owners


      Report this

      70

  • #
    Linda

    The last LIBERAL to have an opinion on PROPERTY RIGHTS was the now corrections minister MURRAY COWPER. It was not long ago in FARM WEEKLY, it is ironic that as soon as he voiced a strong and reasonable opinion on PROPERTY RIGHTS , he was given a plum job as Minister for corrections.
    Last week in WA a serious sex offender was released into the community, from the judges prior stance the recomendation was NEVER TO BE RELEASED.
    A person who hurts no-one and what he has done will grow back, yet a person who inflicts violence against humans and trauma for years is free .
    THE LIBERAL PARTY WHO PROMISED AND ISSUED A PROPERTY RIGHTS POLICY IN 2008.
    Best of luck to MAX, and a timely reminder from JO with ELECTIONS coming up.


    Report this

    150

    • #
      Angry

      Here is some recent info regarding Peter Spencer.

      Peter Spencer Still Fighting Government For Australians Land Rights……..

      http://sosnews.org/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&cntnt01articleid=222&cntnt01origid=70&cntnt01returnid=70


      Report this

      20

    • #
      Ralph

      Obviously Murray Cowper was one of the lucky ones silenced as other members of Parliament who seek justice for deprived land owners are relegated to a back bench or not endorsed for re-election as criticism of its oppressive Property Rights policy is not accepted.
      In WA the governments agenda is to develop vast amounts of public open space for massive financial returns (it even has its own extensive development arm) and to replace the developed land with land resumed from private ownership knowing that the majority of owners are unable to contest the pittance paid. A scheme that puts the biggest thugs in business to shame.
      The policy is applauded by the socialist Greens as a contribution to protecting the environment.
      The hypocrisy is that the few environmental activists that may have been affected have had their properties mysteriously excluded.
      Billions of dollars are spent to protect the human rights of overseas citizens from their dictatorship governments but Australian governments are prepared to ignore the rights of its own citizens whilst taxing them to financial destruction to provide the overseas aid. Where is the sense in this ?


      Report this

      31

  • #
    Bob Massey

    When you plant your own trees on your own property and then have to seek permission to remove those trees to your Local Council.

    How is this not Fascism ? My Trees, My Land and still you can’t do what you want.

    Similar case if the Mining Industry is interested in your land forget any rights you may think you have, they are all gone.


    Report this

    141

  • #

    The DEC and the court have acted accordingly and probably precisely in accordance with the law, Mr Szulc appears to have acted in dishonor and paid the price for contempt of court.

    Folks need to realise that you do not own your land. You have the equitable title and the state had the legal title.

    Maybe as a suggestion, there’s in fact another way to clear the land and have the DEC be in full agreement? Could Maxwell not run a private administrative process with the DEC where they would (if done correctly) be in full agreement?

    Hmmm, I think the law has many remedies to be explored so that we always remain in honor.


    Report this

    432

    • #
      Rob H

      You are a typical socialist. “Equitable title”? You either have title or you don’t. Do you have title to the goods you have bought? Do you have “rights” other than what the government deigns to give you?
      Ultimately you believe the individual is secondary to the collective. This is why you are a slave.


      Report this

      302

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Well some things never change and your comment very ably confirms the truth that while “The Law” is being correctly upheld; That Law does not have to be confirmed as being based on any morality or common sense.

      The truth or value or justice of any law is basically irrelevant and the “Government” can enact any law it wants which it finds beneficial to its’ cause regardless of the absence of community benefit.

      That’s the situation as it stands now and it stinks.

      KK


      Report this

      130

    • #
      Ace

      This Wavey bloke is a train spotter.


      Report this

      80

    • #

      The responses above are usually typical as it appears most cannot fathom how law is implemented today and used, let alone understanding split titles. One’s reaction here appears to want to “fight” the “system” but yet not to understand, contract with and be in harmony with it. I contend – understanding precisely how the “system” affects you and working to ensure remaining in honor with your contracts will see you as the authority. Plenty of info on how one can effectively use contracts to resolve such situations with a little knowledge and privately.

      I particularity like this statement: “…any law is basically irrelevant and the “Government” can enact any law it wants…”

      This statement implies that contracts are irrelevant, are you sure? Is there not a maxim of law that states: The contract is the law.

      Today, Contracts are everything.


      Report this

      213

      • #

        shh you’ll hurt their feelings. I’d add to this a misunderstanding of where politics and law intersect and the role of each in creating and overseeing law.

        Why do those that get process wrong and who don’t understand the system then blame the system? Actually I know the answer to that, I was just momentarily infected with the rhetorical baseless assertion disease prevalent on the comments here.


        Report this

        210

      • #
        PeterB in Indianapolis

        Why would anyone want to be “in harmony” with a system which does not function?


        Report this

        60

      • #
        PeterB in Indianapolis

        OzWaveGuy,

        A Law is NOT a Contract between a government and an individual. Therefore, your comment makes no sense.


        Report this

        80

      • #
        Ace

        The struggle for freedom in millennia of Judaeo-Christian culture, the Rennaissance, John Stuart Mill, Hegel, Marx, revolution, civil war, strife worldwide in the cause of liberty….it all counts for nothing to Wavey guy for whom: “Contracts are everything”.

        You can hear the nasal train spotter whine as he tells us he significance of the 209.b6 narrow gauge in relation to its large gauge cousin the B209.6: “Conracts are everything”.

        What a trouser-press!


        Report this

        20

      • #
        Maverick

        Not only is the law not a Contract between a government and an individual as PeterB states, but also the government is determined to pass retrospective laws. When Szulc got title to his land did it say he could not clear fire breaks on it. I bet you it did not. But then along comes a law after the event, so its application to his land is retrospective. Recently the Feds have passed retrospective laws with regard to outstanding PAYG tax. They do it all the time and laws that are retrospective in effect are against fundamental human rights.


        Report this

        10

    • #
      Angry

      “OzWaveGuy”, you would be more happy in communist North Korea.

      Do us all a favour and move there asap !


      Report this

      92

    • #
      Amfortas

      You ain’t waving: you are drowning – in your own socialist crap.


      Report this

      81

    • #
      Bite Back

      OzWaveGuy,

      Frankly, screw the nonsense idea that you can somehow work within a dishonest system. It cannot be done unless you lose and the system wins. You are fooling yourself if you think otherwise.

      If your statement that,

      Folks need to realise that you do not own your land. You have the equitable title and the state had the legal title.

      is true then you are nothing but serfs on your own land and need to put up the fight it takes to change the situation to one in favor of individual rights instead of state’s rights.

      In any case, there is no hope that you can work with a dishonest system. The system must change and you must do what it takes to change it.


      Report this

      30

  • #
    Catamon

    Congrats Jo, on a pure outrage driver of a post exploiting the bushfire situation.

    So what is the clearing situation this guy is in jail for? Is it actually fire-breaks?

    The Supreme Court first issued an interim injunction in October last year (2009) after the department had exhausted all “reasonable avenues of engagement and regulation to prevent Szulc unlawfully clearing land”.

    It was put in place after department warnings were ignored and Mr Szulc had cleared 345ha without approval.

    Mr Szulc, who has owned his 930ha Munglinup farm since 1974, will face another hearing regarding land clearing in February.

    So we are talking about 37% of a property under fire breaks??

    This is pure civil disobedience

    Nope, this is a bloke who figures he is above the law, and who seems to have repeatedly flouted it. Of course the courts have given him jail time.

    And to suggest this is all about fire breaks to try and generate outrage at the Greens among your grumpy fanbois and goils, pretty contemptible really.


    Report this

    245

    • #
      Rob H

      Why should the government have the right to require the “owner” to clear his land, to not clear his land or do anything else with his fee simple title? How dare you demand the right to direct his use of land acquired lawfully and at his cost.


      Report this

      244

      • #
        Greg Cavanagh

        There are a great many encumbrances that could be on any given property.

        Flood prone land, cyclone area, heritage listed site, building or area, neighbouring flora/fauna reserves, wetlands, drainage deficient areas, slip prone areas, fauna travel corridors, species habitats, and lots more.

        While I’m sympathetic to fire vulnerable areas, at the same time one must remember that that’s where they bought their property. There are a lot of houses beneath the tree canopy at the top of steep bushy slopes. If you wanted a more dangerous fire trap, it would be hard to top that.

        There is obviously a lot more background to this story than is being presented. And Mr Szluc apparently didn’t attempt to work within the law (even if the law is an ass). It’s a protest by him sure, but I have little sympathy for him as from what I can understand, he didn’t put much effort into working with the agencies to find a solution.


        Report this

        86

    • #
      Otter

      Future slave, you are. The mentality is already in place.


      Report this

      123

    • #
      Thumbnail

      The clearing that landed Max Szulc in jail was the 40 ha clearing for a firebreak between his farm and the DEC controlled land adjacent.

      Anyone who has survived a firestorm knows that there is a clear and present danger in the build up of fuel in State managed land.

      Here is another story of yet another WA farmer, for clearing 3 ha of land!

      This is an abuse of power, plain and simple. Who is Matthew King hurting by carrying out good farm management?

      The DEC approved a prescribed burn which killed three people and destoryed 39 properties.


      Report this

      282

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      catamon is still here.

      He obviously is not concerned by bush fires as he has 10 coffee shopppes interposed between his dwelling and the nearest scrub.

      KK :)


      Report this

      153

      • #
        Angry

        The “catamon” troll should be forced to live on an overgrown, bushfire prone property without firebreaks, and not allowed to leave when a bushfire approaches……..


        Report this

        72

    • #
      John Brookes

      Stop it Cat! Using facts is not fair. If they say the clearing is just for firebreaks, then you have to believe them!


      Report this

      19

    • #
      Bite Back

      Catamon,

      Screw your nonsense opinion also. You are so low there’s nothing else left to say to you.


      Report this

      11

  • #
    Rob H

    The land title granted by the Crown as “fee simple” goes back to the Magna Carta. It has become meaningless. As the “owner” you have no say on the use of your land, you must use it as prescribed by government, you must pay the government taxes for your “ownership”, and the government may change the conditions of use, taxation and also expropriate your land at its sole will.
    The idea that people think they “own” their land is laughable since they are aware of all these things and accept it.


    Report this

    60

    • #
      John Brookes

      Except, Rob, its a hell of a lot better than renting :-(


      Report this

      18

    • #
      Patrick G

      “The land title granted by the Crown as “fee simple” goes back to the Magna Carta.”

      Actually, the granting of fee simple rights in English Law came into existence in 1290. Not 1215.

      “It has become meaningless.”

      No it hasn’t. The rights conferred by an “estate in fee simple” are still in existence and are exercised every day by registered proprietors who sell or otherwise dispose of their land as they see fit. This is the sole right that an estate in fee simple confers – the power to sell or otherwise dispose of an estate without restriction from the Crown. Your understanding of the term “fee simple” is incomplete.

      “As the “owner” you have no say on the use of your land, you must use it as prescribed by government, you must pay the government taxes for your “ownership”, and the government may change the conditions of use, taxation and also expropriate your land at its sole will.”

      Exactly. This is because under the English common law system under which all Commonwealth “realms” operate, the ultimate owner of ALL land in Australia is the Crown, and by extension its agents, i.e, STATE governments and those agencies it delegates authority to. It is the Crown who rightly determines the ultimate fate of a parcel of land – because IT is the ultimate owner. Now, if the readers of this blog don’t like that and want to call me out as a “trainspotter” or a “socialist” for raising an uncomfortable truth, then so be it. Like it or not, in Australia, at this present time, we are all subjects of the Crown.

      “The idea that people think they “own” their land is laughable since they are aware of all these things and accept it.”

      Not laughable if it is born out of ignorance. The overwhelming majority of Australians (perhaps Mr. Szulc is one of these) are completely UNAWARE of the true extent of privileges conferred by “ownership” shown on a land title…until such time as those “rights” clash with the REAL rights of the Crown.

      Mr. Szulc is almost certainly one of that crowd of people who go around saying “my land, I should be able to do what I like with it”. No. You. Can’t.

      Mr. Szulc appears to be an obstinate fool. That being said, I am in full agreement with some of the commenters to this story who make the point that local and state government officials are often the most bone-headedly stupid people currently in existence and often work at cross-purposes. My own experience with clearing native vegetation (“significant” trees) from “my” land is a frustrating and ongoing experience. The Green movement has been very successful at capturing power at the local government level where I live. I would urge every one who is unhappy with the current state of affairs to GET INVOLVED with local politics.


      Report this

      00

  • #
    Rob H

    If you have no right to property you cannot have any rights.


    Report this

    81

    • #
      John Brookes

      Sounds a little simplistic. Property rights, are a terribly useful thing to have if you want a society to thrive. But like everything else, they exist to serve society, so they are not absolute.


      Report this

      19

      • #
        ExWarmist

        Hi JB…

        But like everything else, they exist to serve society, so they are not absolute.

        Is your right to life a relative right? What about the right to life of your children – is that relative aswell???

        Just asking – as I think that you have not really thought through what you just wrote.


        Report this

        40

      • #
        PeterB in Indianapolis

        John,

        NOTHING exists to “serve society”. EVERYTHING exists to serve INDIVIDUALS. “Society” is merely an abstraction. It does not have any real, definitive, definition.


        Report this

        40

      • #
        Bite Back

        You have it backward John Brookes. You think people’s rights exist to serve society. The truth is the other way around. Society exists to serve the people’s rights. Society has a very great interest in treading very lightly on such things as property rights because those who abuse the property of others can reasonably expect their own property to be abused in return.

        A society in which it works any other way can only stay that way when the system has become dishonest.


        Report this

        40

      • #

        In the sense that nothing in politics is really absolute, and circumstances do change, property rights will change. This should be done very cautiously. In one instance in the US, a lawmaker voted to change the eminent domain laws then the angry people whose land was taken found a way to do the same to the lawmaker. In addition, conflicts, including armed ones, have broken out over land issues. People find having their land taken is something they are willing to fight against. I’m not saying it can never be done, I understand zoning laws, etc, but extreme restraint should exist in all of this.


        Report this

        40

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          Sheri,

          Maybe I should point out to our Aussie friends how bad it can get.

          In Norfolk Virginia the city council has succeeded in taking private property under eminent domain and giving it to a private developer to put in a shopping mall.

          This is clearly unconstitutional. The language is not possible to read any other way. Property may only be taken for “public purpose”. To give it to a private citizen, no matter the rational, does not meet this test. Nonetheless our Supreme Court upheld this taking under eminent domain as constitutional.

          The city’s justification for all this was simply to increase its tax base for increased revenue. They got away with highway robbery.

          Guard your property rights as dearly as your life. If you don’t you’ll get the short end of the stick every time.


          Report this

          30

  • #
    Crakar24

    I have a story that kind of relates to this, i live in the Barossa Valley in SA and whilst i live in a small town (standard house block) it is in a very high fire risk area so we have certain rules that apply to trees around our house.

    We have two very large gum trees one within ten meters and the second about 16 meters within our house, the council rules are that any tree within ten meters in low fire risk areas can be cut down and any tree within 20 meters of the house in a high fire risk area can be cut down so by any rule we could cut the trees down and these trees are a pain in the arse due to leaf drop and the odd branch dropping.

    The closest tree to my house is full of borers, see

    http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/32924/Number_17_Longhorn_beetles_1.pdf

    Kino is running everywhere, the tree is under severe attack, so we contacted the council and they said “there is nothing wrong with the tree”, “we wont help you financially to cut it down” and “i should not be telling you this but you can cut the tree down or prune it back if you want”.

    The bottom line is that the council wont fork out the cash to do their job, this was a financial descision by them and nothing more so we got a guy out to have a look. He quoted $1500 to prune the whole tree back and if we did this we may save the tree, the tree is on our boundary so i approached the neigbhour to go halves in the cost but he was not interested.

    In the end i spent $1000 in pruning back four branches overhanging my house and i got a lot of grief from some neigbhours with statements like

    “Did you get council approval”

    “You cant do that im ringing the council” etc etc etc.

    These morons do not even know what are their rights, they are shit scared of council, they view them as some demi god of all things environmental, they think you cannot touch a tree, utter stupidity.

    Anyway in the end two weeks after i pruned the tree on my side a really big branch fell into the neigbhours front garden it is only a matter of time before this borer infested tree drops a big branch on his head.

    The take home point here is that whilst some areas of WA might be full of ecotards when it comes to clearing/chopping down trees this may not/is not the case for the whole country.


    Report this

    141

    • #
      Mattb

      Why would a Council pay to cut down your tree? Or is it on COuncil land in between two properties?


      Report this

      39

      • #
        Crakar24

        One tree (the sick one full of borers) is 2 meters wide and about 3 stories high, less than ten meters from my house is right on the boundary. 50% on coucil land and 25% on my land and 25% on my neigbhours land, the second tree is on council land, this tree dropped a branch over xmas, the branch straddled my driveway and the road.

        I pay 2K a year in rates and i get nothing in return…..oh wait i get garbage collection which i pay for from a contractor and my septic pumped out every 4 years both could be contracted directly by me.


        Report this

        110

        • #
          Mattb

          The probably also look after all your roads. Run the library. Run your local sports ground. http://www.barossa.sa.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/What_Does_Council_Do.pdf

          That said – our parks guys would have your tree down in a flash. It is almost too far the other way where the faintest sniff of risk associated with a Council tree that has been identified as “sick” means we cut it down. HOwver if it was in any way a Council tree there is no way you’d be allowed to do it yourself, so I’m surprised that they’d let you do it if it were their tree on their land.


          Report this

          71

          • #
            Mattb

            They do also claim that “The Council’s tree trimming programme is ongoing and assists in maintaining street tree assets in a healthy and vibrant state, aesthetically pleasing to the community and beneficial to the environment.”
            : http://www.barossa.sa.gov.au/page.aspx?u=397


            Report this

            46

          • #
            Crakar24

            The probably also look after all your roads. Run the library. Run your local sports ground.

            Roads are a mess with potholes everywhere, the libraries in the local area are pathetic not what one would call a library in the real sense of the word and yes they mow the grass now and then at the local sports ground to get them to scarify it is another problem, ask them to fix the cricket nets and they so NO, ask them to build a dedicated athletics track and they say NO, ask them to level the ground around the pitch area for safety reasons and they so NO, they hassle the local footy team because they make more money letting people put a tent up on the oval than to let them play footy on it.

            Sorry MattB but the council is pathetic, they are nothing but a hinderance, they crap on about the environment but then allow a 500 home subdivision to go through and chop down hundreds of trees to do it, go peddle your back slapping bullshit somewhere else.

            They do also claim that “The Council’s tree trimming programme is ongoing and assists in maintaining street tree assets in a healthy and vibrant state, aesthetically pleasing to the community and beneficial to the environment.”

            This is the process, some dweeb from the council that knows nothing about trees (probably similar to yourself) looks at the tree takes a photo of it with his Ipad, then emails it to his mate, 5 minutes later his mate says “there is nothing wrong with the tree”.

            Once again we see ones fantasy clash with reality.


            Report this

            90

        • #
          Treeman

          Crakar, you should write to the council and ask them to indemnify you against damage from their 50% of tree A and 100% of tree B. Ask your neighbour to write the same letter. Better still get a lawyer to write the letter.

          Councils do not like being asked to indemnify against damage.


          Report this

          110

          • #

            Treeman-
            Exactly! I wrote to the Roma Regional Council(Maranoa) and listed all the registered vehicles I and my family own and stated that ANY road or person related trauma arising from their dangerous disgusting dirt roads ( and a lot of the potholed bitumen ones too) and I will be submitting a repair invioce to them. Tyres, suspension, rock damage is about 10 times worse out here than on the interstates or city roads. I haven’t claimed yet but won’t hesitate if it is legitimate.


            Report this

            10

        • #
          Bite Back

          And these council members don’t get voted out of office?

          Do stir up sentiment against them wherever you can.

          BB


          Report this

          10

    • #
      Catamon

      The bottom line is that the council wont fork out the cash to do their job

      Craker, if the tree is on your property, why should the council pay to have it removed?


      Report this

      19

      • #
        • #
          Catamon

          So its on council land then. Yup, they should remove it if its a danger.


          Report this

          63

          • #
            John Brookes

            Except that any time anyone wants a tree removed, they just say that it is sick, or dangerous, and it gets removed. There are people who are experts in trees, who you can pay to say that a tree must be cut down.

            In sunny Perth, councils have planted trees near the Swan River. These trees often end up poisoned by nearby landowners who think that their property rights extend to views of the river. It doesn’t even have to be trees planted by the council – any inconvenient tree can suddenly find itself dead.


            Report this

            07

          • #
            Catamon

            These trees often end up poisoned by nearby landowners who think that their property rights extend to views of the river.

            Have heard of that and a few people who have been busted over the years.

            I’d assume that the council would inspect, hopefully using someone who know their stuff.


            Report this

            02

    • #
      ExWarmist

      Crakar24 says…

      The closest tree to my house is full of borers, see

      http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/32924/Number_17_Longhorn_beetles_1.pdf

      Where’s Maxine – surely this borer infestation is evidence of man made global warming…


      Report this

      41

  • #
    Nic L

    Some twenty years ago I lived in Texas and visited Big Bend National Park.

    They had just changed their policy on forest fires; they welcomed them and did not struggle to put the fires out.

    Their position was that fires were natural (caused by lightening for example). If the brush was allowed to burn it did little harm to the trees. They could could cope with a little scorching. If the brush was allowed to build up over the years it would create the conditions for a much fiercer fire which was very damaging and would destroy the trees.

    So their position was that regular small fires should be allowed and would thus prevent the build up of brush that would cause a catastrophic fire every twenty years.

    Brush clearing or regular controlled burns promote a healthy forest.


    Report this

    120

    • #
      Catamon

      Generally works as far as protecting property which is the priority in many areas.

      Brush clearing or regular controlled burns promote a healthy forest.

      From a commercial forestry point of view for sure. And quite possibly from the perspective of northern hemisphere forests. My only experience of these is in Europe and the under-story biodiversity there was remarkably low compared to W.A.

      One of the effects of too regular burning (at least in W.A.) is that in some areas of the SW it has markedly changed the makeup of the under-story vegetation. By burning often you actually select for species that regenerate quickly after a fire and then you have to burn more often as you fuel load increases faster……

      A nasty cycle that also has a deleterious effect on the biodiversity. We also have a long term drying trend happening in the SW of W.A. which doesn’t help.

      Finding a balance on this is hard and there is a lot of diversity of firmly held opinion.


      Report this

      04

      • #
        Bite Back

        The problem is that this kind of policy carried out in Southern California allowed the brush and forest to get too thick before a natural fire came along. Dead trees (burn like a blowtorch) were not cut down; brush on public land near homes (burns like gasoline when dry) was not cleared; then came the fire.

        You can guess the result I hope. But in case you can’t, the damage was counted in the billions before the policies were modified.

        Perhaps there’s something to the tried-and-true after all?


        Report this

        10

  • #
    Harry

    Curious that there’s been articles in the newspapers about Victoria a couple of years ago… people there rebuilding are complaining about the new rules which require trees to be cleared 20 m from a property. They don’t want to clear and grumble because they are not given permission.

    As for Tasmania – I’m completely over the whining from idiots who had no insurance. I won’t even be donating any money to red cross bushfire appeals.

    These people CHOOSE to live in bushfire prone areas and keep on voting in pollies who support greens policies of no logging. Strangely enough this leads to a huge fuel build up and then there are terrible fires. Well, what a surprise.

    The best way of dealing with Tasmania is to allow limited logging which creates employment and an export industry, and reduces bushfire risk. Turning it into a green shrine, populated by hippies, basket-weaves, and ex-loggers on the dole who can’t or won’t insure their houses is just socially and morally irresponsible.

    Until the Tasmanian population (one of the poorest in Australia) and their imbecilic politicians come to their senses, though, there won’t be any sympathy from me. It’s all gone past the stage of feeling for people who should know better. Time they solved their own problems.


    Report this

    181

    • #
      Maverick

      Harry, as a Tasmanian, a right wing one, a hardworking one I can agree with about the basket-weaving loonies with no insurance who choose to live in the bush

      However, the pro-economic development among us just simply cannot compete with the tide of environmental and socialist loonies that beat us every time. They beat us every time, because they are the federal government of Australia and we are but 60,000 people employed in the private sector. Tasmania’s population is just 500,000, about 50% are children or retired and there is 7% unemployment. This leaves just 250,700 working of which a staggering 190,000 are employed in the public sector. Sixty thousand people who depend on sustainable economic growth for continued employment can’t compete with a Federal government who is brokering the shutting down of our forestry industry to appease the anit-civilisation loonies. And remember this has been going on since the Franklin dam, when Hawk shut that massive project down for a few votes. Our foresty workers have been disrupted every week for 30 years. The State government let a timber mill to be sold to green activists or closed it. We cant do a a canal style subdivision to protect a muddy water’s edge. We can’t build a pulp mill. We could not build mill 20 years ago in the electorate that got Christine Mill elected. We can’t mine here and we can’t mine there.

      It does not help that those that work for the public by and large feel obliged to nod their head in agreement at all the socialist crap that is rammed into their heads by their public service employers and a media who act like that the Ministry of Communications and propaganda.

      Then to add to our helplessness we have a hare clark voting system which dooms us to minority governments. And because the conservative government’s will not deal with the green loones that we are left with ineffective Labor/Green alliances where the to hold onto power the Labor governments just down the blue collar industries of the people that voted them in.


      Report this

      20

  • #
    Mattb

    “I don’t recommend anyone break the law, but…”


    Report this

    05

  • #
    Ace

    All this yabba jabba about rights, title property, blather lather yada yada yadfa is IRRELEVANt. The issue here is that Green assholes value dead brushwood over human life.

    Thats it.

    End of story.

    Patently.


    Report this

    132

    • #
      Ace

      …BUt, these train spotters have shown up to distract everyones eye from the unambiguous ball. Half of us have fallen for it. All you need to say to such peckers is DONT TRY TO CHANGE THE FECKIN SUBJECT!


      Report this

      81

  • #
    janama

    Most people seem to relate the Greens to being communists or socialists. I don’t believe they are either.

    The Greens are the party of the alternative lifestylers (Hippies) which is why there are so many around Nimbin, Byron Bay and Tasmania where the alternative life style movement took hold in the 70s.

    Their key lifestyle choices are:

    1. They are predominantly vegetarian (or try to be) which is why they object to mainstream agriculture as they believe everyone should grow their own food and agribusiness is the enemy. Farmers are uneducated backwoodsmen who destroy the land with chemicals and are cruel to animals. The more extreme ones believe pets, sorry, companion animals should be banned.

    2. They believe in so called “self sufficiency” for food and energy so solar, wind and geothermal are the only answer and all coal production should cease. (aka Bob Brown) Everyone should ride a bicycle instead of using a car and Energy and Mining companies are evil.

    3. They are consumers of alternative medicine and are anti pharmaceutical companies, vaccination etc. Doctors are fascists who do the bidding of large Pharma so they can both make lots of money.

    4. They reject traditional religions yet worship the Dali Lama and practice any trendy form of Yoga and eastern Meditation and frequent self improvement classes etc. We are all part of a living breathing Gaia who is angry with us for exploiting her resources and chopping down her trees.

    5. They are conservationists therefore they object to any land clearing or hazard reduction burns. National Parks should be closed to the public permanently. Any agriculture in “the outback beyond the black stump” should be closed down immediately and the whole of the northern territory should be cleared of cattle and returned to it’s “natural” state.

    6. Fishers are exploiting the oceans and all the oceans should be declared marine parks, some even believe recreational fishers should be banned. Seafood should not be part of anyone’s diet full stop!

    7. And finally they believe global warming is real and man is creating it. Man is guilty of destroying the planet by burning fossil fuels and land clearing and if we don’t stop now we will become extinct.

    This is the mindset that runs the Greens, not Socialism or Communism or even Marxism. It’s an entirely new phenomena created in the past 40 years and frankly I have no idea how we can solve the problem it creates. I know many of them and they don’t see how blind and blinkered they are – they believe they are the new hope for mankind as they are the true sons and daughters of Gaia.


    Report this

    153

    • #
      Ace

      My friend you are describing superficial attributes of SOME “Greens” and generalising them to the entire millions-strong global partei.

      Thats like saying “Mammals around here have four legs and stripes so I think its fair to say Zebras reflect what it is to be a mammal”.

      Do you see the flaw in that reasoning? That reasoning is not based upon fundamental defining criteria among all mammals, not just zebras but humans too, who by and large dont have stripes although one of my acquintance often does when her clients are finished with her. Its a generalisation of someone whose never seen any mammals but zebras.

      What many of us on such blog discussions as this try to do is discern the underlying structurally fundamental character of a Green. We try to ignore the superficialities, style, affectations and window dressing you are stuck on.

      To take the above analogy, Aristotle defined mammals as animls that engage in live birth. Although he wasnt much of a biologist (he thought the brain was a radiator for excess heat) he was nearly right. If I recall correctly the defining feature of mammallian life is possession of a placenta.

      Now if we apply this approach to Greens we find that what they have in common is very far from the happy clappy flower people you refer to. Moreover, digging down you find said pansies are also in possession of these fundamental Green traits (those Green folk among them that is): What defines Greens is the belief that they know better than everybody else and have some kind of right to impose their lifestyle predilictions on everybody, by force if necessary. the very term “Green” comes largely from “Greenpeace”, an outfit that basically are the stormtrooper schwarzstaffeln of the Neo Environmentalist Partei. They are totally defined by “direct action” ie imposing their will by force.

      Now what does all this sound like. Hmmm, which partei am I alluding to.

      Meanwhile the post-utilitarian ideology of Green is underpinned by concepts that derive directly from Marxism. This is the basis of comparisons between the system they seek to create and the USSR.

      Where does the word “Fascist” come from? It refers to the fascine, the bundle of twigs that was the emblem of Rome. It means one twig weak a bundle in union strong. This is EXACTLY the operating principle of Green Fascism.

      They are indeed the true embodiment of the spirit of Fascism.

      And BTW, try applying your definition of Greens on the black uniformed, hooded, club wielding anarchist Greens who smash up town centres wherever theres something by way ofan excuse to rallyaround. Itdoesnt fit. These boys and girls are very definitely fascists.

      Whats more, theyve been quietly adopting the anti-semitism of their fore bears as well.

      Dont forget, no matter how wellmeaning they may mean to be, most of the folk who voted for Hitler and did his bidding thereafter, zealously, were just ordinary well meaning people.

      That is the nature of evil.


      Report this

      60

      • #
        Ace

        …BTW I am a flower power pansy too, but Im not a feckin Fascist.


        Report this

        10

        • #
          janama

          Ace – Yes, Greenpeace was started by the “Flower power” group you mention – it became the fascist eco-warrior group YOU refer to much later which is why it’s founder resigned and why I personally stopped supporting them via donation.
          Sure there are eco -fascists who are greens but they are not the majority of the voters – the dillheads I refer are the majority and if you accused them of what you accuse them of in your previous rant they would look at you wide eyed and ask innocently “what’s your problem?”


          Report this

          60

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      janama,

      … the mindset that runs the Greens, [is] not Socialism or Communism or even Marxism. It’s an entirely new phenomena created in the past 40 years ….

      It is not new. What you describe is very similar to the philosophy of the National Socialists in Germany during the 1920′s and ’30′s. They also were into conservation, and a healthy life style. Many, including Hitler, were vegetarian. They accepted the principle of private ownership of the means of production (unlike the Communists), but invested in a huge bureaucracy to enforce their views on how those private production facilities should be managed and used, for the benefit of all.

      After the collapse of Germany at the end of the war, the German bureaucracy (or what was left of it) simply shifted gear to accommodate the different demands of the occupying countries, but the basic philosophy remained. This was evident in the smooth reunification of Germany when the bureaucracies simply went back to doing what they were doing before the war started.

      The Green movement re-emerged in Germany, not from the downtrodden workers, but from Upper Middle Class professionals who make up the core of the bureaucracy, and the bulk of academia.


      Report this

      130

      • #
        KinkyKeith

        Interesting viewpoint.

        KK


        Report this

        30

      • #
        janama

        Rereke – I understand why you see a similarity between the group I mentioned and the national socialist party of Germany but may I suggest they are chalk and cheese.

        The National Socialists were extreme right wing racists that emerged from the worker groups to fight communism. The vegetarianism, conservation aspect was a sideline compared to the major goal of eliminating communism, Jews, homosexuals and gypsies.

        The people I refer to are the middle class latte sipping bourgeoisie who are the exact opposite and would willingly open our borders to all comers as expressed by the Green’s current immigration policies. They support same sex marriage, racial and sexual diversity.


        Report this

        51

        • #
          Ross

          Janama

          I posted this article by Martin Durkin the other day
          ( probably abit late in the thread for most to pick up) , but it is a very interesting historical perspective on what you and RW are discussing

          http://www.martindurkin.com/blogs/nazi-greens-inconvenient-history


          Report this

          20

        • #
          Ace

          Janama…again, you are just fixating on superficialities. You havent shown any acknowledgement of my earlier response to this.

          To say Greens are not fascists because they are not “right wing” but the NAZIs were is to fall into a circular application of the silly one-dimensional distinction “right wing / left wing”. Its an absurd way of reducing all human attitudes to less than even a stereotype (which would be two dimensions).

          The NAZIs were not blanket “racists” (a specifically Marxist concept and a term invented by Trotsky) but specifically persecuted Jews (and a few other groups). They embraced Arab culture and Islam wholeheartedly. The SS even had an entire division…Al Hanjar…composed ENTIRELY of Muslim soldiers.

          They loved Islam and persecuted Jews. Who in todays world does that sound like? Oh there are plenty of Jewish Greens too but there were also plenty of Jews who helped the NAZIs. These are the “Kapos” I referrred to in an earlier thread. And the Greensdont say Jews they say “Zionists”. But the blood libel and the EldersofZion bullshit isalive and well times ten in Green / Eco/ Leftist literature.

          But more to the point, you completely disregard the historical meaning of the word “fascist” which I carefully explained to you. Simply on semantic grounds, the Greens are defined by their “direct action” policy as fascists. This is just applying the word according to its text-book meaning. Whether they are or are not like OTHER fascists is another matter (I think they are).

          If you define a thug by his thuggery, the fact that some thugs support one gang in particular does not mean that anyone who does not support that gang cannot necessarily also be a thug. There are thugs in various gangs just asthere are fascists in various political perspectives.

          Thats the same error of logic you are making throughout andwhich I explained to you with my example of zoological categories.

          I guess you either didnt read it, or didnt read it properly with comprehension.


          Report this

          20

      • #
        Treeman

        Rereke, The WWF have been infiltrating Queensland grazier organisations, one of my oldest mates told me at Beefweek last year. There has been more than a degree of infiltration across the environment spectrum.

        An Excerpt from Confessions of a Greenpeace Dropout: The Making of a Sensible Environmentalist is most enlightening…Martin Durkin is one of my favourite writers on the subject.


        Report this

        110

        • #
          Dave

          .
          Good article Treeman.

          The biggest problem facing pastoral leases in QLD is not the restrictions – but the surrounding Federal National Parks. Fire breaks along common fence lines is the problem.

          The pastoralist does the right thing in clearing fire breaks according to the Delbessie agreement, the Fire Service, Derm and all the other state bodies and the Federal National Parks have fuel all along their own fnce lines. Quite often graziers have to put up a second fence due to neglect of the boundary and no action by National Parks. The requested increase in fire break width is often refused. The pastoralist wil abide by this and there is no responsibily for the NP to do the same. The best fire breaks are along the power lines – but often not on boundaries.

          The actions of some graziers to clear illegally on the NP side, or increase the size of his own fire break is sometimes justified. The main thrust of this article by Jo is concerning rural properties – not some little suburban block in a city.

          The NPs are also the biggest source of reinfestation of animal pests and weeds. Many leaseholders spend hundreds of thousands of dollars just in these two areas.

          It’s about time something was done to contain the spread of National Parks and also to start maintaining existing ones along similar lines and conditions imposed on freehold or leasehold pastoral and agriculural land holders.


          Report this

          110

          • #
            KinkyKeith

            Yes Dave

            One rule of law for the People and another for the Government.

            You are talking about Land management in farming/ National Park areas.

            A similar problem, or anomaly exists with rental property in the private sector.

            Invariably private owners are held to a much higher standard of maintenance
            (and that’s not always a bad thing to have a well maintained property) than Government housing which can be in absolutely appalling conditions.

            In both cases, and no doubt many others, the Government has a duty and obligation TO LEAD BY EXAMPLE.

            If it doesn’t it will be seen to be a hypocrite.

            KK


            Report this

            50

      • #
        Ace

        Rareke, German government social science research and personal experience (of mine) illustrate that even today, after generations of attempts to “educate” the young out of it, Germans are still largely a very Jew-hating people. Its leopards and spots with them.


        Report this

        20

    • #
      llew Jones

      I must admit to an indulgent smile when our fellow skeptics call the Greens Fascists/Marxists/Commos. Indulgent because these modern economy wreckers, who foist their nonsense on all of us when they get the sort of chance the ALP and Gillard has given them deserve plenty of abuse.

      No doubt the Nazis have a link to the Green movement through its worship of nature which had its origin in German Romanticism. My observation, consistent with your points, is that the whole human caused global warming ethos is nothing more than a modern version of Paganism in which the adoration of the entire ecosystem as a unity not to be tampered with by we humans is the driving motivation for not only the “official” Greens but even for the alarmist scientific community as well.

      Not sure where our trolls fit? They may not know.


      Report this

      111

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Good points Llew. Have a tick.

        Not sure where our trolls fit? They may not know.

        I think they are hired by Jo, to keep the rest of us from getting too complacent.


        Report this

        80

        • #
          ExWarmist

          The true believers (including our trolls) are always in the outer circle of any religion.

          The people in the innermost sanctum know it’s a scam.


          Report this

          40

    • #
      ExWarmist

      I think that Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore nails it.

      Since its founding in the late 60′s the modern environmental movement had created a vision that was international in scope and had room for people of all political persuasions. We prided ourselves in subscribing to a philosophy that was “trans-political, trans-ideological, and trans-national” in character. For Greenpeace, the Cree legend “Warriors of the Rainbow” referred to people of all colors and creeds, working together for a greener planet. The traditional sharp division between left and right was rendered meaningless by the common desire to protect our life support systems. Violence against people and property were the only taboos. Non-violent direct action and peaceful civil disobedience were the hallmarks of the movement. Truth mattered and science was respected for the knowledge it brought to the debate.

      Now this broad-based vision is challenged by a new philosophy of radical environmentalism. In the name of “deep ecology” many environmentalists have taken a sharp turn to the ultra-left, ushering in a mood of extremism and intolerance. As a clear signal of this new agenda, in 1990 Greenpeace called for a “grassroots revolution against pragmatism and compromise”.

      and

      Two profound events triggered the split between those advocating a pragmatic or “liberal” approach to ecology and the new “zero-tolerance” attitude of the extremists. The first event, mentioned previously, was the widespread adoption of the environmental agenda by the mainstream of business and government. This left environmentalists with the choice of either being drawn into collaboration with their former “enemies” or of taking ever more extreme positions. Many environmentalists chose the latter route. They rejected the concept of “sustainable development” and took a strong “anti-development” stance.
      Surprisingly enough the second event that caused the environmental movement to veer to the left was the fall of the Berlin Wall. Suddenly the international peace movement had a lot less to do. Pro-Soviet groups in the West were discredited. Many of their members moved into the environmental movement bringing with them their eco-Marxism and pro-Sandinista sentiments.


      Report this

      50

    • #
      Maverick

      And they are hypocrites. What do they think computers, the Internet, solar panels, wind turnines, bycucles, woolen beanies, leather sandals, gortex bushwalking jackets, camp fires, fry pans, their rolly papers, the planes and ships they travel on, the medicines they take and the xrays they have are made out of. Answer, gold, silver, iron ore, bauxite, uranium, copper, sand, petroleum and wood. Metals like aluminium which are a key component to solar panels are made using massive amounts of electricity. Electrolysis is als the process they use to make chlorine and flouride to deliver clean drinking water and keep disease away. Their sewage is pumped to electricity powered centers for cleaning, and their waste and recycling is transported on diesel burning trucks.

      Their hypocrisy is astounding. What’s even more astounding as they read this on the electricity powered internet on their laptop made of petroleum derivied polymers and precious metals they still will not get it.


      Report this

      20

  • #
    anticlimactic

    It may seem insane not to allow fire-breaks to be created freely, especially when risk of wildfire is so prevalent.

    BUT IF you want to create the worst wildfires possible as propaganda for ‘the cause’ it makes perfect sense.

    Remember when fighting for ‘the cause’ nothing and no-one else matters.


    Report this

    113

  • #
    Apogee

    Having lived in Tassie from 1947 to 78 and having been through the fire in 67 and saw the damage done then, I feel very sorry for the people who had to live through this one.
    But I never thought I would see the day when cretins pretending to be green politicians would
    manage to legislatively ban clearing and cutting fire breaks in Australia.
    Total stupidity.
    Can I respectfully suggest that instead of wailing about these clowns, you get together
    to rid the Nation of them at the next election. Concentrate on ridding the country of
    the “Greens” of any party in any parliament. It is the only way Australia will survive.
    And thanks to Jo for providing a great site.


    Report this

    151

  • #
    • #
      Dave

      .
      Martin:

      At last a scientist (who probably will be chastised) with the guts to tell the truth.

      The National Parks and State Forests are the biggest dangers in Queensland with huge fuel loads ready to ignite. I think more and more of these researchers are going to come out of the money closet very soon.


      Report this

      120

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Hi Martin

      Her comment was clear and definite: we are heading, still, in the wrong direction!

      KK


      Report this

      60

  • #

    The incompetence, money wasting beaucratic “INDUSTRY that this has become every summer is madness.
    I bore everyone near me stupid with the basic premise that if we must have virgin destocked national parks everywhere- we simple must gridlock the area concerned into portions and the breaks must be ( an intuitive guess 200 metres wide and free of standing timber. If this is unachievable due to steep gradients – then areas must be quarantined using common sense guidelines.
    No matter what area initially – about eight sections need to be prepared -THEN every year in winter when safe -this 200 metre medium strip must be burnt and then when the inevitable fire comes- it should be able to be held within one eight of the park. This would allow regeneration and the birds and wildlife can simply move across the break.
    The “Quadrant” link above of the film supports this brian dead simple idea perfectly and no Roadway should NOT be a fire break and those massive trees could be levelled of 80 metres each side of a road. I beleive that this would be enough to stop a canopy firestorm and would be far cheaper and less cruel than all this capital and waterbombing and manpower waste that is occuring now.

    Call me cynical but I would say that the Govts are happy to see this occuring as it is a red steer that is taking the “heat” off their hopelessness!
    Furthering this idea in a practical manner…………….
    Most of this would be stock route or council or crown land on most roads and highways. What we have now is the lock up and let it grow mentality on these areas and they are the worst offenders with trees overhanging and growing right up to a roads edge. A lot of this agenda is to count the trees on these areas for carbon kyoto units to get offset credits.
    Apart from the fire danger they pose a never ending threat of collission in the event of a blowout and they harbour wildlife that is a real threat to vehicle and driver and it makes road repairs and detours much more difficult.Also on many of these country roads there are blind corners and bends where many close shaves could be avoided. Imagine if we could wave the common sense wand and let the owners – council or crown or whoever- and let sawlog people harvest them ( very accessible to roads of course ) and sell them to the timber deprived millers around the country.
    On a national scale -this would give many REAL jobs, solve the fire and all the other issues – let revenue come to govt and profit and business to our millers……..
    oh well better stop day dreaming and go and do some work.
    Can just imagine the “airheads ” saying “oh how stark and open the country side is…blah blah
    It is going to look stark after it is all fried as well.


    Report this

    110

  • #
    Truthseeker

    Friends of mine who are “eco aware” lets say, built a new house in a new area that is dominated by native bushland and trees. They had a visit from the fire prevention officer of the local council telling them which trees had to be removed for property protection. They also had a visit from the environmental protection office of the same council telling them that they could not remove any trees for environmental protection. So, the left hand of the council was telling them to leave all the trees alone and the right hand of the council was telling them to remove certain trees to protect their property.

    The resolution was to get them both on the property at the same time, prove to the council eco guy that they knew more about the tree species that he did, which shut him up and agreed with the council fire guy with the absolute minimum trees to be removed to build the house. My friends had taken the decision that they were insured for fire loss and so wanted to leave as many trees as they could.


    Report this

    100

    • #
      Bill

      I have a similar problem. I live above the Queanbeyan township in a “lifestyle” estate. The NSW law about living in bushfire prone areas state you have to clear approx. 7m around your property and ensure that the remaining fuel load is minimised. However, because my property is classified scenic rural( because it forms part of the hills and ridges escarpment around the ACT) I am prevented from any clearing, as well as the usual local council environment laws which prevent me from so mush as minimising fuel load let alone felling trees. My solution was to ensure that my house insurance carried fire insurance with regard to bushfires and to ensure that the house itself is the least flammable I could build and also that any eucalypt or acacia which falls over during storms is quickly chopped up and replaced with an appropriate cold climate deciduous variety which doesn’t carry the volatile oil load.

      So whilst I have a mix of local species and exotics – with the abundant wildlife – I can now be reasonably assured of having done my best to minimise a potential disaster. Having an unlimited licensed bore also helps – so the gardens – all 2 acres are moist at all times of the year, something the wildlife really appreciate. Took a while to get all this in place – but worth the work around – for the pleasure it gives me.


      Report this

      70

  • #
    Mattb

    It is pretty much just part of life that owning land does not mean you can do what you want on it when you want to. I can’t decide to put a skyscraper on my property, and rural folks can’t just clear whatever they want. 15 months is pretty harsh but I guess if you ignore clear court decisions then that’s what happens.


    Report this

    511

    • #
      rukidding

      Yes you are right Mattb.If you don’t like the laws were you are then move to a place were the laws are more to your liking.


      Report this

      30

    • #
      Crakar24

      It is pretty much just part of life that owning land does not mean you can do what you want on it when you want to.

      So what you are really saying is that you dont own the land, you may have worked your arse off for 40 years in a shitty low paying job to pay the bank back the money you borrowed from them when you purchased the property but you will never actually own it.

      Is this the new Green philosphy MattB? Can the Greens now force their way into farming properties and take them from their owners in the name of saving the planet?

      The Greens now support financial fraud to ruin mining companies so i suppose it is only a small step to take over other peoples properties.

      Here is some food for thought, if Osama Bin laden had orchestrated a financial lie to bring down a company any and all those who assisted and supported such acts would now by a guest at Gitmo and would be facing charges of financial terrorism ergo the Greens are terrorists is this really the type of persons you want to be associated with MattB.


      Report this

      101

      • #
        rukidding

        So what you are really saying is that you dont own the land, you may have worked your arse off for 40 years in a shitty low paying job to pay the bank back the money you borrowed from them when you purchased the property but you will never actually own it.

        The short answer like it or not is YES


        Report this

        21

        • #
          Crakar24

          Since when? When did this legislation get voted through parliament?

          Since when has the government or some eco tard organisation had the right to come onto my property and tell me what i can and cannot do?


          Report this

          70

          • #
            rukidding

            Since when has the government or some eco tard organisation had the right to come onto my property and tell me what i can and cannot do?

            The exact date I don’t know but I think you will find they do.

            The irony of this piece where I live is I go to jail if I don’t install a fire break.


            Report this

            20

      • #
        Mattb

        “So what you are really saying is that you dont own the land, you may have worked your arse off for 40 years in a shitty low paying job to pay the bank back the money you borrowed from them when you purchased the property but you will never actually own it.”

        Look you own the land but that ownership does not come with limetless rights to do what you want. Here’s a quick list of things I can’t do on my land in my trendy inner city weatherboard cottage:
        i) open a brothel (or any other commercial activity)
        ii) play music above a certain level
        iii) own more than 6 chickens
        iv) allow stormwater to leave the property
        v) Build a building over 2 storeys and a loft
        vi) subdivide and sell the other block
        vii) install an advertising hoarding
        viii) open a meth lab
        ix) build a carport within the front setback
        x) human sacrifice

        Crakar until this thread did you really believe you were allowed to do anything you wanted on your own land just because you own it?


        Report this

        57

    • #
      Sonny

      By your logic I could add “not allowed to eat dinner with the family around a big table” at my house and you would accept it because there are other things I’m not allows to do like human sacrifice.

      You are an idiot


      Report this

      41

  • #
    jonahstiff

    The ruling classes have usurped and assumed powers they were never intended to have or deserve. Citizens being jailed without jury trials is simply tyranny.
    We have govt “courts” given Orwellianly benign names “family courts” that operate in secret, bereft of juries, committing the most horrendous crimes without any adherence to due process of the common law.
    So what are we going to do about it?


    Report this

    71

  • #
    jonahstiff

    Who was the flunkey who jailed this man? He should be prosecuted for ignoring our Consitution, (sections 80 &110) that stipulate no one shall face charges for an indictable offence without appearing before a jury of his peers.
    The whittling away of juries has enabled all sorts of crimes to be committed by “govt”. ” Family” courts are nothing of the sort; unconstitutional chambers whereby bureaucrats help themselves to the assets of legally unimpeachable individuals by imposing unwanted divorces. They get their leverage through other people’s children. A glorified kidnapping and extortion exercise.
    See “Stephen Baskerville”
    The ruling classes are now brazenly insolent with their abuses of power.


    Report this

    71

    • #
      Amfortas


      ” Family” courts are nothing of the sort; unconstitutional chambers whereby bureaucrats help themselves to the assets of legally unimpeachable individuals by imposing unwanted divorces. They get their leverage through other people’s children. A glorified kidnapping and extortion exercise.

      .

      Absolutely right. No Fault = his fault.


      Report this

      41

    • #
      Harry

      Sounds like he’s in jail for contempt of court. Not quite the same thing.

      Contempt of court gets you in clink at Her Majesties pleasure…. ie until the court decide to let you out.


      Report this

      30

      • #
        John Brookes

        Contempt of court. Basically failing to realise that you are not the boss. Failing to grow up. Just the sort of thing I might get in trouble for, being immature and all that…


        Report this

        26

  • #
    Dave

    .
    Forestry Tasmania in action:

    1. FT unveils its latest weapon against fires – but all they did was hire these two water tractor aircraft from Victoria when Musselroe fires were out of control in late November, early December. Very near the new Mussselroe Wind Farm (coincidence?) No fire breaks or any more equipment guys – just this:

    2. Forestry Tasmania’s first Carbon Flux Tower installed? What a great big useless tower of steel – as useless as a wind turbine. Still no news of fire prevention apart from the two aeroplanes.

    3. Wedge Tail eagle release. Probably relocated from Musselroe Wind Farm. :) Still no firebreaks or equipment.

    Forestry Tasmania has the statutory responsibility for the management of 1.5 million hectares of State forest land. This land contains 39% of the Tasmania’s forests. Yet in their vision, mission statement and corporate objectives – there is no mention of fire prevention.

    This is a big part of the problem with most National Parks and State forests Australia wide.


    Report this

    50

  • #
    rukidding

    Why should a landowner need to get permission to clear firebreaks on his own property?

    Because it is the law.

    You don’t realy mean that a land owner should be allowed to do what ever he/she likes on their land are you?.Or are you suggesting there should be one law for large land owners(farmers or miners)and one for city folks on quater acre blocks.Iam sure that if the property next door to yours was a rat infested health hazard you would want the authorites to do something about it.
    Like the people who argue there should be no censorship ok fine lets have cock fights and dog fights and child pornography if that is what people want to watch.Or maybe not
    We have a perfectly good system to get laws changed you vote for the person who is going to enact the laws you want.I happen to think some of the road rules are rediculous but there is no party proposing to change them so I am stuck with them.
    Going on your philosophy if I buy a car I should be able to drive it were ever I like when ever I like as fast as I like.
    Farmers have no more and no less rights then anybody else.


    Report this

    72

    • #
      ianl8888

      Because it is the law

      Yet Milne et al, a large contingent of the MSM and the warmistas here, think Moylan is a hero because he committed alleged forgery, identity theft and malicious property damage

      Szulc tried to protect his property from the threat of bushfire when the law would not permit him to do this

      Most people don’t mind being hypocritical, but they do mind it being pointed out

      Ho hum


      Report this

      140

    • #
      Winston

      While I agree with you that nobody should be a law unto themselves and infringe on the rights of others, or wantonly defile the landscape without regard for the consequences, the issue here is the mass of regulations that bear no consequence upon safety or public welfare or any even remotely sensible precautionary principle. Instead they are often regulations for regulations sake, are deliberately designed to ensnare the humble landowner in red tape to render him dysfunctional, and most egregiously the powers that be take no responsibility whatsoever for any harm these regulations cause in actuality.

      So, if you burn to death- not their problem. Will they review these regulations to ensure this doesn’t happen again to another unfortunate?- No, because then one would have to acknowledge one’s guilt or blame, and bureaucracies refuse to contenance that. And who do you complain to if these regulations place you or your family in danger through their lack of intelligent foundation? “Blow it out your a$$!” I hear them cry.

      You assume, RUK, the law is there to protect- it isn’t. You presume it is based on what is reasonable and fair and in the interests of the community- it isn’t. And that is the problem- and a quick survey of our resident counsellor MattB’s various responses to anything posted on this blog will highlight the problem for you in a nutshell- utterly oblivious to anything which doesn’t accord to his preconceived notions of reality- they are all the same.


      Report this

      50

      • #
        rukidding

        You assume, RUK, the law is there to protect- it isn’t.

        Winston I assume nothing the law is the law you either have laws or you don’t it is a bit like pregnancy to either you are or you arn’t.
        And once you have laws you either obey them or suffer the consequences.If you don’t like the laws where you live you currently, under Australias form of government,have two options get the laws changed or move to a place where the laws are more to your liking.
        From the federal government to local councils you have the right to vote.And every organisation from your local sporting club right up to the Australian government has the same laws rules and regulations you either follow them or leave town,so to speak.


        Report this

        23

        • #
          Winston

          I am a law abiding citizen to the nth degree, but…

          Your statement assumes there is some mechanism by which particularly country folk can complain about any regressive legislation and over-zealous ecocentric local councils on a power/ego trip. Just pray tell where does one go within Australia where such laws are not similarly enacted? Why should honest citizens have to leave their family home and established base because bureaucracy has gone mad, without any answerable consequences for their dubious regulations. The argument revolves around how many of these regulations are actually desirable or necessary, and how much of it is just bureaucracy perpetuating itself for its own amusement at the expense of taxpayers, landowners and ratepayers.

          Just for example, the regulations that govern my surgery entail that I am not allowed to have open windows due to fire safety regulations, because I presume that open windows would allow air to feed a fire should one perchance occur. Of course, since these windows would be my (and any patient I was consulting at the time) only avenue of escape in such circumstances does not occur to them, nor the fact that said window in such an instance would make no difference whatsoever to a fire’s hazard to life in limb whether open or closed. Needless to say I can either flout regulations and risk insurance liability issues should a fire break out, or just quietly burn to death like a good little sheep boy. Not to mention being unable to enjoy fresh air during a solid 10 hour working day.

          And then I have to pay $600.00 for some bod from the fire safety mob to check the tag on our fire extinguisher to make sure it is “in date”, a job which takes literally less than 1 minute of his time. Clearly that is an example of a necessary regulation being milked as a cash cow by the unscrupulous upon the productive.

          I no more believe in open slather lawlessness than you do, but when these regulations mutate to the extent they have then they are counterproductive, not to mention often counterintuitive, and eventually even downright dangerous, as is the case with firebreaks and proper land management as the current thread is discussing. The fact is that often regulations overturn a century of proper land management without scientific foundation and are a result of activism by lobotomised imbeciles who have a callous disregard for the safety of those they seek to regulate, and who are accountable to no one.


          Report this

          110

          • #
            rukidding

            Once again Winston you have two choices.Run for council office and overturn what ever regulations you don’t like.Or get like mind people to scare the bejeses out of your elected representive so they do your bidding.I suspect that the reason we have such authoritative bureaucracy and overbearing regulations is because people like you and me are to lazy to effect change,hell I have never voted in a council election.So I have nothing to complain about.The reason our coulcils have been taken over by the environmentalists is because they work night and day on their nefarious plans and until joe average is prepared to get off his backside they will get away with it.


            Report this

            32

          • #
            rukidding

            And on the subject how many people in Mr Szulc’s area agree with what he has done if the answer is very few then I am afraid Mr Szulc has to move on.You may not like it but that is our democracy in action.


            Report this

            24

          • #
            Winston

            Mr. Szulc may well be a ratbag who deserves censure for his actions. I doubt 15 month jail time is appropriate, and the actions of the same Dept toward the Thompsons doesn’t inspire one with confidence that a similar injustice isn’t being perpetrated here. If these bodies were renowned for their fairness and sensitivity to the needs of the community and the rights of property owners then I doubt whether this post would have even occurred. The fact that such bodies are renowned for their bloody-mindedness and wanton disregard for the people they serve makes it hard not to sympathise with Mr Sulcz’s cause on face value alone.


            Report this

            70

  • #
    Crakar24

    O/T,

    Has the penny finally dropped? well at least getting ready to?

    http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2013/08jan_sunclimate/

    A very good read about the “possibility” of a new maunder type event and how it may cause climate change.


    Report this

    70

  • #
    gbees

    I’m a landowner adjacent council open space zoned land. Well its not really open space! It’s forest and the deck is loaded with massive amounts of fuel including the bark which falls from the huge gums every year around this time. The Council isn’t going to clear the fuel any time soon. I feel like doing it myself. I may just do that and wear the consequences whatever they may be. Better than losing my family and/or home. I tip my hat to Mr. Szulc.


    Report this

    100

  • #
  • #
  • #
    william

    I understand everything’s bigger out West, and one would really need to see Mr Szulc’s land to get an appreciation of the extent of his clearing, but 327 hectares is around 790 acres in old money.For a Southern Victoriam country dweller, not a farmer,attempting to mitigate against bushfire damage on my tiny 19 hectare/44 acre bush block, for someone to actually clear 790 acres of trees does seem a little over the top. But I do agree that if one buys the land and pays all the government bulltish taxes and rates for sweetFA as I do, then one should be free to manage the land as one sees fit, within reason. The question is, was Mr Szulc’s handiwork within reason?


    Report this

    90

    • #
      Mattb

      Given he is the 1st to go to prison, and thus all other farmers in the state just live with the rules, then with no other knowledge of Mr Szulc’s case the apriori assumption is that his handiwork was not within reason. And the court had already told him this.


      Report this

      54

  • #
    Jaymez

    This says it all as far as the Greens policies and the restrictions on managing fuel reduction and fire containment lines:

    Fuel reduction burns make it possible to fight and control a fire; what happened here was uncontrollable,” Dunalley farmer Leigh Arnold told The Australian.

    Greenies who oppose such burnoffs, “care more about birds and wildlife than they do about people and farms,” he said.

    “But what’s the point of that now when the hills and trees they told me I couldn’t burn off, because there were protected eagles and swift parrots there, are now all burned and the fire it created was so hot we had dead swans dropping out of the sky?”

    No, the only permissible comment on a bushfire catastrophe is to say it was caused by “climate change” – that convenient get-out-of-jail free card for greenies, governments and the obstructive bureaucracies they jointly create.

    But we’ve heard it all before, and we’re not buying it.

    “It’s really simple,” says Brian Williams, captain of the Kurrajong Heights bushfire brigade, a veteran of 44 years of fire-fighting, in one of the most extreme fire risk areas of Australia, on a ridge surrounded by 0.75 million hectares of overgrown national park between the Blue Mountains and Wollemi.

    “Fires run on fuel. Limited fuel means limited fire.”

    Green tape and heavy-handed bureaucracy has made his job harder today than in 28 years as captain. Rather than needing six people to perform a controlled burn in the cooler months, now 40 are involved, to oversee biodiversity and so on.

    Williams managed to conduct just two of the five hazard reduction burns he planned before this fire season.
    http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/mirandadevine/index.php/heraldsun/comments/lets_tell_the_burning_truth_about_bushfires_and_the_alp_greens_coalition/


    Report this

    70

    • #
      rukidding

      When the CSIRO says something on climate change all the ecotards back it to the hilt.
      But when they say something sensable


      Report this

      50

      • #
        Jaymez

        Excellent reference rukidding!

        “Since European settlement, the total amount of fire in the landscape has declined.
        The bushland areas and particularly those around Sydney, New South Wales, have thickened and accumulated more fuel.
        As a result, the infrequent fires that now occur under extreme weather burn much more intensely and have a significant impact on the built environment.”


        Report this

        40

  • #
    bananabender

    Szulc is not a martyr. He is just a criminal who is in prison for disobeying a court injunction.

    No land-owner would want to overdo the clearing or lose that thin layer of top-soil. The owner stands to lose the most if the land is badly managed. That is the point of the free market and ownership by individuals.

    I’m guessing you didn’t grown up in the country Jo. [I did]. I can tell you for a fact that many farmers are actually complete imbeciles who have absolutely no idea how to manage their land properly.


    Report this

    36

    • #
      Mattb

      He probably could have recieved a suspended sentence though. I mean you can do a lot of shitty things involving direct physical harm to people and not get 15 months prison.


      Report this

      71

      • #
        Catamon

        From the sounds of it he had been told on numerous occasions to pull his head in. Jail seems to have been, really, the last resort. Still, if he wants to set himself up as a martyr thats up to him

        There was considerably more to this than simple fire security, regardless of how the OP has tried to spin it.


        Report this

        37

        • #
          bananabender

          There are three sides to every story – his, hers and the truth.

          I agree there is probably much more to this story. No one gets sent to prison for 15 months just for clearing a firebreak.


          Report this

          45

    • #
      Dave

      .
      Bananabender – you stated:

      I can tell you for a fact that many farmers are actually complete imbeciles who have absolutely no idea how to manage their land properly.

      This must be an amazing new study of Australian farmers. Can you list the article or paper you got this info from? Also does it include graziers etc?


      Report this

      81

      • #
        bananabender

        @Dave,

        I’m talking from personal experience.

        Unfortunately Australians have been brainwashed over decades into thinking farmers and graziers are wonderful, highly talented individuals who love their land. This is far from the reality.

        I’ve visited plenty of rural properties that are an absolute disgrace – rusted machinery and junk lying everywhere, overun with feral animals and weeds and paddocks that are dustbowls or so eroded they look like miniature versions of the Grand Canyon.


        Report this

        56

        • #
          Jaymez

          I agree with you bananabender I have had many farmers as clients. Some have been great farmers, others are just going through the motions. Personally I believe the large majority are hard-working, incredibly resilient and most are conservationists. But with a bad farmer one of two things happens. They either wise up to the damage they are doing and rectify it, or they go broke and leave the land and a more efficient farmer who looks after the land better takes over.

          The market does rectify the situation in the long run.


          Report this

          71

    • #

      To be a martyr, he would have to be dead.

      Does anyone understand the meaning of “civil disobedience”?


      Report this

      31

  • #
    Dave

    .
    Bananabender – you say:

    Unfortunately Australians have been brainwashed over decades into thinking farmers and graziers are wonderful, highly talented individuals who love their land.

    That is the biggest load of tripe (a food product) I’ve read. So you are saying farmers and graziers are imbeciles who hate their land.

    ABSOLUTE BULLSIHT – Bananabender. Goodbye.


    Report this

    62

  • #

    [...] or heat wave. However, the heat is not the only issue downunder, according to Amfortas who quotes Joanna Nova: As Greens blame coal miners and SUV drivers for contributing to firestorms that destroy houses, [...]


    Report this

    10

  • #
    bananabender

    Farmers and graziers are just people – not superhumans. Some are very capable and some are very incompetent. That’s the reality.


    Report this

    72

  • #
    Chris M

    This memory may be apocryphal, as it is so long ago, about 15 years. But I seem to recall looking down the slope from Siding Springs observatory, as a visiting tourist, and thinking what an untidy overgrown unattractive piece of bushland it was, a fire hazard for sure. Looks like the dumbos didn’t learn the obvious lessons from Mt Stromlo, just typical.

    My point being that while there are draconian laws against sensible land clearing thanks to the eco-fascists, public land including national parks, reserves, state forests etc. is hypocritically neglected so that the inevitable fires, when they do occur, are much hotter and more destructive than they could have been with proper hazard management. Another example of The Age of Stupid in Oz.


    Report this

    81

  • #
    rukidding

    Completely O/T but.
    Oh the woes when you are both and environmental activist and a environmental vandal

    Pity we can’t ban him.


    Report this

    20

  • #
    RoyFOMR

    Is it illegal to clear bush adjacent to WindTurbines?


    Report this

    30

  • #
    Adri

    Just another reason to never go to Australia again Dictatura run by a tiny politically correct bunch of cretinos


    Report this

    51

  • #
    realist

    Some direct observations of the system we now live in.

    1. Several decades ago government agencies used to be staffed by a higher proportion of professionals than now (not alluding to academic qualifications, but in the same vein as empirical scientific method is to activism portrayed as science). Many if not most staff came with highly practical and very experienced backgrounds, e.g farming and engineering to name just two, and formulated policy reflecting objectivity and balanced outcomes. They took their job seriously and expected to be held responsible for their work. They burnt land to provide protection to life and property, shot kangaroos when their over-abundance created problems to private land owners, and were part of the local community.

    2. Decades of change later, the public circus is now heavily staffed by many with a leftie–greenie-activist philosophy, and the wealth of corporate knowledge in the relevant agencies has been retired or made redundant. Now the “GAIA children” are “the new authority”, and can act without constraint, where egos and personal agenda get shoved down the throats of others with impunity. Now it’s a “brick wall” system of endless regulations allegedly designed to “protect the environment”, at all costs, whatever that means in the minds of the “enlightened”.

    3. Staff are able to hide behind the cover of the agencies they “work” for (the term is used advisedly) with anonymity in some cases and are not held personally and publicly accountable for their actions. No longer are they public servants. Now they are public prosecuters acting far too freely as the rhetorical judge, jury and executioner.

    4. The “Court” means individuals in positions of importance who wear the fancy dress of “high authority”. “Contempt” of Court is not obeying his/her “authority” in direction of behaviour. A “direction” has little if anything to do with logic, fairness, reasoning or, heaven forbid, justice. A legal friend once said; “one should expect to be dissapointed by the court system, it does not necessarily deliver the justice we expect of it; it merely dispenses determinations”.

    5. It’s often about personal ego and political leaning, being able to enforce an un-accountable application of force, rendered by the State via legislature drafted by bureaucrats, “debated” and approved by the “elected” lawmakers (voters choose politicians from a list of useful idiots selected by political parties). The system were live in/under is a direct reflection of the collective opinions of small time bureaucrats in “environment” and other departments and big time bureaucrats in the Courts wielding even bigger clout handing out punitve “justice” for non-compliance.

    6. An issue of considerable dimension is the lack of transparency and personal accountability (of those employed in the public circus), and an ability of the populace at large to have equity and justice: private indiviuals are required to obey directions from unelected individuls who often “hide behind the skirts” of the agencies they are employed by. Why should one individual (private citizen) have to be held responsible and accountable for their choice of behaviour and the other (public circus citizen) not?

    How to change the direction back towards sanity and a truly civil society, and away from creeping fascism (“soft” Socialism), is the challenge whole societies now face. Sooner or later all the “soft” chocolates (coercive entitlements) end up having hard centres.


    Report this

    50

    • #
      john robertson

      The Just-us cliche has all the authority we give them.
      You are correct, elected and appointed royalty is our current state.
      Parasites die when their host casts them off.
      It amazes me that people who have chosen to pursue nonproductive roles in the society they live off of, by seeking to join the bureaucracy, believe that they know best how to contribute to the good of society.
      More government is the answer for everything, but govt can’t organize a piss-up in a brewery. Their help keeps the zombie, destructive industries stumbling on and kills productive enterprises.
      Power requires responsibility, govt protects incompetence and dodging responsibility.
      Solution is already coming down the pipe, its called poverty for all.
      The parasites are overwhelming the host, hence those massive national debts.The vanishing value of our dollars.
      Welcome to Zimbabwe.


      Report this

      30

  • #
    Craig Ash

    Hey Jo, sorry to post alike this, computer connection up and down here, but you can always email me. Over the past 15 years after hydrology papers, more recent irrigation water isues of the Murray Darling Basin Plan issues, finally getting James Delingpole to sign a book, what an interesting read Watermelon. Issue is about the cataliyst for cloud formation, Ian Plimer attemps in Heaven and Earth, bringing the issues of astrology or in his words stardust, is on wikipedia, attempted to post my own finding and observation upon wikipedia, the connection between hydrology, stardust and where star dust did not explain the hydrology the simple goggle search found volcanology to be an explanation. It is a simple premise. Gas, Dust and Ash in the stratusphere evolve cloud, dry then wet. Cloud is the catalyst to rain, snow, ice and residual glasiers, ice shelfs and the like. Natural History and climatiology has becone an interest for us all, our lives, careers, our tax bills all depend upon it. The volcanology of Iceland was non human threat, did not kill anyone, displaced a few planes, but no deaths, if consider the deaths of the winter, rain, ice snow, chill then we get another figure. What it did do was fill almost every water dam in the world. Verification can be made connecting rain, after star dust and volcanology, more minor is bush fires and other gas, dust and ash occurances. Penny your thoughts.
    regard Craig


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Navy Bob

    The commissars have stolen his liberty and property? The simple solution – and the constitutionally guaranteed right of the people in the U.S. – is to [SNIP]. That’s why Americans have the second amendment – to preserve citizens’ power to resist government tyranny.

    [No Navy Bob we don't allow that] ED


    Report this

    31

    • #
      Catamon

      Whoop, Whoop, Dive, Dive!! Violent Loony Alert!

      Seriously Mods, you aren’t going to let a direct for violent response to a contempt of court matter stand?

      [Thanks for the signal] ED


      Report this

      23

      • #
        Navy Bob

        Simply paraphrasing America’s founding fathers and subsequent constitutional interpreters, including one of the leading lights of the US Democratic, i.e., socialist, party:
        “If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government”
        – Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28
        “What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.”
        – Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356
        “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally … enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”
        – Joseph Story, Supreme Court Justice, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, p. 3:746-7, 1833
        “Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms … The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard, against the tyranny which now appears remote in America but which historically has proven to be always possible.”
        – Hubert H. Humphrey, Senator, Vice President, 22 October 1959

        [You made your point but suggesting that kind of solution will get you snipped] ED


        Report this

        31

        • #
          Mark D.

          “Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms … The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard, against the tyranny which now appears remote in America but which historically has proven to be always possible.”
          – Hubert H. Humphrey, Senator, Vice President, 22 October 1959

          He was a left-of-left Democrat too.

          My how things have changed. J.F.Kennedy would look more like a Republican today…..


          Report this

          30

    • #
      Skitz

      As deplorable as those actions would be, it seems that it is the last avenue available to free men as our courts are insanely corrupt. We the good people view violence as abhorrent but the crimes that our duly elected officials have committed against the people are horrendous and many. How many deaths have they caused struggling families and individuals through the application of unjust laws ? How many deaths have they caused by participating in wars that we have no business being in ? Wars are fought not to protect our freedom or way of life but the protect the owners of wealth and power. IMO, [snip] them would be too quick – they should be drawn & quartered or publicly stoned. The world has completely run of the rails. Talk of the NEW WORLD ORDER would have gotten you branded as a crackpot 20 years ago – now those commies like Bob Brown talk about it on the national news ! The train has run off the rails BUT is still gathering steam at exponential rate. The crap that goes on in this country and which we have talked about on these pages is plenty is only the beginning. A most horrible shit storm is coming. The signs are on the wall.

      [please refrain from suggesting violence as a solution] ED


      Report this

      32

      • #
        Mattb

        hmm it does appear that the post clearly suggests violence as a solution?

        Skitz… oh dear mate. Is there anyone you can talk to for help?


        Report this

        13

        • #
          Skitz

          Who are you going to call for help when the cops are bashing your door down for no reason ? If you think if you do nothing wrong and nothing foul could become of you then you are deluded. It’s happened before – innocence is not going to stop you getting nailed by the coppers because they relied on some mystery dob artist that they will not identify. Our government is not above murdering it’s own citizens. Most of the time, they just do it over a longer time frame. BTW, I don’t suggest violence in any form or condone it – but I can see a time coming where we may just have to for our very survival. I am hoping I am long and gone before those days are upon us but as I witness the daily acceleration of the New World Order, my doubts increase. SO, Oh dear mate, I don’t need to talk to anybody but you on the other hand could do with some historical education.


          Report this

          30

  • #

    Does anyone know which prison he’s currently in? I’d like to drop him a note of support. Perhaps we all should.

    Pointman


    Report this

    50

  • #

    A few years ago in the annual California burning season, a person lost their house because while this person had defensible space, his neighbor’s yard was untouched by any cutting tools. The size of the fire on the uncleared land resulted in it jumping to the house next door and burning it to the ground. So who did what to whom here? This is where one of those “it’s my property” statements” generally pop up. That is okay–IF you can provide money or insurance to cover your neighbor’s land and house should your untrimmed look result in the burning of the house next door. I don’t know how it actually worked out–I would guess the homeowner with the burned home had use their own insurance.

    I’m curious why the government is assumed to be smarter than landowners. The government is made up of landowners chosen from the general population. How did they get the “knowledge” and “see the light” so they are so much smarter than individual land owners. Individuals effect only their own land and that near-by. Their mistake is limited. The government can massively err and result in monstrous damage to things. I’m not seeing the government as the best choice here.


    Report this

    40

  • #

    Max would not be in jail if he was judged by the people as in “Trial by Jury”

    The people said Peter Lawler -the leader of the Eureka Stockade was a free man but if he were tried here today – he would almost certainly have been hung! There is absolutely no separation of the judiciary and the State now – Just look @ Roxson Attorney General- bedmate of Shorten, handed the AWU file of Gillards and Slater and Gordon (to bury). Bernard Murphy – now a Fed Court judge- sat at a table 18 years ago when they were all young and “naieve”- with Gillard – known crook Wilson and Ralph Blewitt. The business at hand – dreaming up a groovy name to set up an Association to launder a few $ million. Absolutely corrupt but hear this morning that she is 12 pts above Abbott in some bs poll that has been done.
    We really do live in a STUPID country


    Report this

    70

  • #
    Angry

    Neville Chamberlain tried the policy of “appeasement” in his dealings with Adoph Hitler and we all know how that turned out………

    There is a time for talk and a time for action !


    Report this

    31

  • #
    Angry

    Here is an interesting web site regarding these eco nut jobs.

    Environmentalism is Fascism:-

    http://www.ecofascism.com/


    Report this

    31

  • #

    I went back to South Australia for December (moved to Melbourne a few years ago) and was lucky enough to speak to a cattle farmer about what has been going on with him.

    The next day I checked up on some of the things he had been saying and had a look through the legislation:
    http://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A/Natural%20Resources%20Management%20Act%202004.aspx

    Reading the Bill was a fright and a wake up call. I would be comfortable to say that every land owner in Australia is comfortable with the concept of sustainability if it’s a voluntary goal to head towards and is based on good science and common sense. The above Act, to me, was written with the assumption that the time and money of all landowners in South Australia is worth nothing and can be used as a tool for Green ideology.

    Luckily I met another guy called Peter Manuel (http://www.flagaustralia.org/index.html) who has been vocal on these issues. Hopefully there are more people out there that are doing the same…

    I wonder what Bills they are putting through now?


    Report this

    50

  • #
    Ralph

    The various comments relating to private property rights make some interesting reading. In others it is unless you are affected who cares.
    Graham Kierath in 1998, the then WA Minister for Planning in the Liberal State Government, introduced the Bushplan legislation as a final attempt to gain the Green vote to support his re-election campaign, which he lost. In his Bill he classified for resumption a massive amount of outer urban land for public parks some of which land was vacant and others had modern homes. The Bill ignored all affected land owners rights, a completely inequitable situation.
    To indicate his ability to continue as a prominent member of the Liberal party it was recently reported that in a drunken binge Kierath called the police that stopped him when driving “arseholes” refusing to take a breath test, was visibly intoxicated and unable to form a sentence.
    Excellent credentials and why affected landowners are still suffering from his earlier inadequate legislation.

    In another recent instance the WA Planning Commission (WAPC) chairman, Garry Prattley, is having his travel expenses investigated after media revelations. Apparently he had been engaged from Canberra and allowed generous travel back to his family who remained there. He has also amassed more than $230,000.00 in travel expenses in less than three years. I understand with this publicity John Day MP the Minister for Muddling (or Planning) had no alternative than to terminate his services.
    Excellent credentials considering his department are only paying 25% of the market value of nearby unaffected land, for the land they are resuming.
    It is interesting that the WA Chief Justice Wayne Martin, who presided in the Max Szulc prosecution gave a presentation to a group on the unaffordability by the middle class to engage legal representation.
    I wrote to him supporting his view and cited several land owners who did not have the financial resources to contest the pittance offered by the WAPC for their resumed land and had no option but to accept this amount.
    I received a reply that was so far removed from my letter that I had to respond to it accordingly.
    In another instance the WA Auditor General prepared a favourable Report on the operations of the WAPC. It was so substandard that I raised 34 questions with him as to how he arrived at his conclusions as the report had no substance. He could not answer one of them. I came to the conclusion it was a fabrication to enhance the department and deceive the public.
    Who, if anybody, cares about their fellow citizens who are being harassed and persecuted by big bureaucracy who continue to support their existence and make token public comments to appease the gullible public.
    There has never been such repulsive action by bureaucrats, approved by government, than that against Matt and Janet Thompson, Max Szulc, Sid Livesey and others subject to the resumption by theft of their land and residences.


    Report this

    100

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      This sort of appalling behaviour by politicians and the power hungry is only possible because the media either Will Not, Cannot or just Doesn’t Know or Care.

      AARRRGGHHHHHHHH

      KK


      Report this

      70

    • #

      And it will continue as long as there are insufficient numbers of people standing up to this. Politicians get power by taking–a little here, at little more till they have it all. People convince themselves none of the changes will affect them personally (like in America, where “no tax increase on the middle class” suddenly became the reality of “My paycheck is SMALLER. What happened?’) and when it does, they convince themselves it’s not really that bad. The best similar action I know of is why lobsters sit in a pot and get boiled without protest–start with cold water and slowly heat. It works people, too. Sadly, this often leads to non-amicable solutions if the persons realize they are sitting in boiling water before they’re actually cooked. Socialists, liberals, whatever you call them are willing to take this chance. Responsible, producing people don’t usually find this tactic palatable. Expect more land to be taken etc before anyone realizes the water has started boiling….


      Report this

      70

    • #
      Barry

      Ralph, it is so scary, isn’t it. But just remember all of these laws and the bureaucracy are the creation of or are maintained by the current socialist WA government. There is no hope for this country. The Left have won. They are laughing their heads off at us. The last Liberal federal government had 11 years to undo the oppressive laws of Labor and they did nothing – absolutely nothing. The next Liberal federal government will be no better. And we now have the Liberal government in New South Wales expressing its dismay that no-one has yet been jailed under the Left’s censorship laws in that state.

      It is astounding when you think that someone can be jailed for clearing a bit of scrub from their land. And probably in every shire in this country you can be fined for trimming a tree.

      A new sub-species of the Left has emerged amongst environmental activists. I call them Native Nazis. They obsess over ‘native plants’ to a point that is so absurd it can only be regarded as a form of mental illness. As with everything the Left do, you have to identify their particular mental illness to find the root cause of their beliefs. Native Nazis most often are people who like the social power afforded them when they hold ‘preserving native plants’ up as being something highly virtuous. It boosts their sense of self worth and feelings of social power when they have an opportunity to remonstrate against devil native plant destroyers like us. Yes, most human behaviour is driven by the need for self-esteem, and, yes, their thinking really is that pathetic. And anyone can be tempted by the power that comes with being a Native Nazi. When I was unfortunate enough to be living in Canberra my house was located just down the road from a licensed club. I would have a regular procession of alcohol and gambling dependent individuals passing my place at most times on weekends. Once I was out front digging a few holes for new plants when I spotted a familiar face heading down from the club. This emaciated fellow had aged well beyond his years from long-term alcohol abuse. Normally he doesn’t speak to me but on this occasion he stopped to talk. I soon determined the reason for this was that he was at that tipsy sweet spot where you are happy and uninhibited. He asked what I was doing and I told him I was planting some deciduous trees to block the summer sun. He immediately came back at me saying in an accusing voice, ‘You should be planting natives.’ Wow, he must have felt so virtuous superior to me. You have to laugh, don’t you: a half-tanked alcoholic playing the role of a Native Nazi. But, sad as it is, that is the nature of the species.

      But how has our country ended up like this? There are so many people who do not want our society to be like this and yet a handful of mentally ill leftist extremists are wielding all the power. The reason is simple and disappointing: the Liberals are too scared to undo the apparatuses of oppression the Left have created. They know that to do so will kick over a hornet’s nest and they will have to take on and defeat the leftist media, the courts, academia and the public service. It is much easier for them just to get into bed with the Left and allow the Left’s instruments of oppression to remain in place. That way they have an easy couple of terms in parliament before the numbers catch up with them and they have to move on and collect their very generous superannuation and free travel card.


      Report this

      10

  • #
    J.H.

    I like to think of our political classes as Gollum from Tolkien’s ‘Lord of the Rings’…. and the accumulated power of Big Government over time as the, ‘One Ring to rule them all’.

    From this comic analogy you get an insight into the scope and scale of the problem. Like Gollum, you will find that Politicians are unable to cast their precioussss power away. They will not do it. Any of them. Even if it means the utter destruction of all…… With every layer of legislation, they have engraved their souls into it.

    Both Liberal and Labor are Smeagle and Gollum, and together they are a single creature enslaved and twisted by the power they wield and supplicate to.

    Only those whose interests lay outside the influence of “the ring” can understand the damage that it does and who either fall, enslaved before it, or rise against its awful effect.

    … usually by the power projected through the barrel of a gun and wielded by angry men…. but in doing so, this “ring of power” is not destroyed, but merely passed to someone else. A new tyrant arisen… or lost until conditions are right for it to reappear. When rights, once fought and earned, have become inherited and inconvenient…. That sacrifice, over time forgotten.

    … Well that has been the human condition throughout history to date… So much so that even simple children’s books understand the concepts at play. The entropy of the generations. The rise of evil and the complacency of the good.

    So, will the LNP and Abbott cast away their power, even some of their power, into the fiery abyss upon the event of their successful acquisition of it?

    They promissssse ussss they will…. But they isss all tricksssy Ssssmeagle. ;-)


    Report this

    40

  • #
    2dogs

    If we want a civil disobedience campaign, what we should have is a clandestine group which sends out fake DEC approval letters.

    Anyone charged by the DEC merely presents a fake letter which they have innocently received.

    The law would become unenforceable.


    Report this

    70

  • #
    Andyj

    Where the old guy went wrong.
    The court injunction stated HE must not clear the fire breaks on HIS land.
    Which reminds me of an old joke…

    Two lawyers eating eating their butties in a pub. The landlord angrily comes up to them and forcefully reminded them of the house rule; you cannot eat your own food in my pub! The two lawyers looked at each other and swapped their food.

    The old fella should of cleared his neighbours firebreak and his neighbours should of cleared his. And when he went to court, he should of dropped a counter claim against the DEC for a remedy against attempted murder, willful destruction of property and that any and all claims will be personally directed (under common law) to those persons who enforced this statute to pay our of their person. Including EVERY OFFICE-R with no exceptions.


    Report this

    60

  • #

    I liked your Hobbit analogy J.H. …very good :)

    “Nearly all men can stand the test of adversity, but if you really want to test a man’s character, give him power.”
    — Abraham Lincoln

    Running with your analogy, how do we help Mr Frodo? how do we take the preccciousss from Golem?

    From my perspective there are two sides to it.

    One is somewhat inward looking, that sense of self/ego that becomes corrupted by power, how do we wittle it down? The only thing I am aware of is breath meditation (or vipassana) hence the reason for heading to Thailand for a few months this Sunday.

    The other side is watching and thinking about the Bills they are putting through.

    Had always assumed that having to read Bills and decide which way to vote would be suicidally boring. But the NRM Act 2004 from SA (which probably has some kind of equivalent in WA) wasn’t too hard to read or too boring. Last week had a go at looking through some current Bills before the House of Reps that haven’t been voted on yet (http://www.taxpayers.net.au/b4-the-house/b4-the-house-political-forum/) . Turns out it’s a lot more interesting than reading the state and national rags because there is no where for them to hide. Media statements, public interviews, question time is all fluff compared with the just looking at the rules they are trying to make. If we start looking under the kings clothes and arguing with them about the Bills that have just gone through a first reading in parliament and we can back up our arguments, before they have voted on it and without using the usual public pressure tactics, if the team doing that do it at a high level of quality, I believe the ring would then be in Frodo’s hands.

    Long journey full of monsters and goblins obviously but am sure most 9 to 5′ers would be up for some adventure ?!

    Vested interest groups funding the main parties has to mean at some point their deal shows up as a few innocent sentences in a Bill about something trying to sound really boring. If we had a group of people practicing how to find those little innocent sounding sentences before they vote on each Bill I am sure some fun could be had.


    Report this

    10

    • #

      Good point David.
      I tried exactly that around Aug/Sept 2011 re -there being a Carbon Tax under a govt I lead afterall! Peter Spencer’s Discovery docs of 20 years Govt fabricating the entangled web via ngo’s and and every leftard socialist come enviro nazi that had infiltrated the public service depts …
      I have seen many many docs that are pure fantasy fabrications(CSIRO) and all modelling and measuring and many lifetime high paid jobs – tying the rules for the new worldwide board game. Of course the mug voters had no idea of what was in store. The Commonwealth of Australia has an account with 2.99Billion kyoto carbon units. I have seen the doc and the letterhead etc and this is the free permits and what they are using to sell to the 500 “big polluters”. The “Australia clause” written in at one minute to midnight at one of those COP talkfests (done so ,so they could go home with at least some agreement for the next year)- gave Howard and Hill a free pass to PLAY the game.
      Get the Feds to secretly bribe the states( NSW and QLD had the most trees left) to “Lock up” native vegetation and empose restrictions on maintenance to ensure regrowth- then use their groovy new greenhouse accounting measuring formulas to give tonnes of CO2 which may be absorbed to become a credit in the game. Every tree in the country is measured for this game- national parks, local council areas stock routes and this is a big part of the current – “You can burn in hell but don’t touch a tree” mentality.
      Spencer still hasn’t been heard in the Federal Court yet but all he has to do is prove that the Feds colluded (bribed ) Carr and Beattie to legislate the “Lock up” with out compensation.For many years this whole thing seemed too whacky for a casual observer or media type to get involved in- but when the stolen goods end up in a bank account valued @ $23 each – this is a $69 Billion theft for the green mantra on one hand and the salavating bankster ‘s like Turnbull’s Goldman sachs etc. on the other.
      There was a huge irony in that the rules and currency for the new board game got snuck through on the farmers watch. 4 Bills made up the Carbon Farming Initiative. I had all the Hansard and detail up on my site and titled it- the “Engine room for the Carbon trading Scam!” All sounded innocent enough and I could not get a pulse out of the totally asleep at the wheel National Farmers Federation. They endorsed it all!
      We were going to put an injunction to the High Court to block the bills till the Spencer case was settled but our lawyers let us down!!@#$%^. The 18 Clean Energy bills that followed were contingent on these first 4 being in place. We certainly tried but the forces against us are staggering in there power and wealth!


      Report this

      40

  • #
    Ian H

    And yet there are two sides to every story. How would you like to be the neighbour of this guy currently hiding in Australia to escape charges of storing over a million used tyres on his property. How can one address such situations if property rights are absolute.


    Report this

    02

  • #

    At least your giving it everything you have Rob. Australian land owners could do with their own law firm right now. I am with Mike in believing that ultimately we can hold them to account simply with good logic and good arguments.

    A recent example is this guy: http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-farmer-who-exposed-power-game-20121021-27zl1.html

    Right now there is a Bill before the House of Reps on agricultural chemicals. Cattle Council of Australia and others have made submissions that show the Bill still needs a lot of work. The re-approval process section appears to be just another tax grab, which will eventually flow through to consumers as an increased cost for food, an obviously essential component of living costs.


    Report this

    30

    • #

      I’ve got sheep and Beef and kids 5th on same place. David the cost to consumers won’t go up as it is sky high already. Take sheep -lamb and mutton has halved since that Packistani fiasco of the live sheep. If it was a set up to destroy the production price -it certainly worked. On Wed this week I delivered fat hoggetts 600 kms and they averaged 52kgs lw and I got 84cents perkg lw. This is half what they would have got 12 months ago.
      Re the link to the power- It is very true that when a business (like mine) goes into “shock” mode – we don’t employ we don’t purchase anything – we just idle along treading water and wasting time on the computer.This of course is what the green mantra is all about – seding us back to the stone age! A truck/ fuel stop is a good barometer of the economy and the one @ Goondiwindi that I have been stopping at for years has NEVER been quieter!


      Report this

      40

      • #

        Rob, the extra compliance costs from having to regularly renew the licenses on chemicals shouldn’t have much of an effect on sheep and beef as I assume not too many chemicals are used. My uncle and auntie grow wheat etc over in Yorke Peninsula, S.A. and chemical costs are the biggest component of the business, at least 30% or so. Obviously up for debate whether the chemical companies pass on the extra cost to the farmers and whether the farmers pass it up through the chain. The point is we should be very careful about increasing any of the costs any-where along the food supply chain, simply in the interests of having low essential living costs.

        Regarding live cattle exports, there is a Bill before the house now waiting to be voted on, which was circulated by Andrew Wilkie.

        The text below is what I emailed him earlier in the week regarding his Bill:

        Dear Andrew,

        Livestock Export (Animal Welfare Conditions) Bill 2012

        The concern I have with this Bill is that it will compel the Secretary to shut down the live cattle export trade to a country where evidence of inhumane treatment has arisen, without having an accurate picture of which places and at which times inhumane treatment of Australian exported animals has occurred.

        The Secretary already has the power to make an order on an export licence holder to stop trade with a country (http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2012C00566 section 17 (3) (a) (iii) ) for no reason. However, currently, the Secretary is not compelled to make such orders.

        If you were a cattle farmer financially dependent on exporting your animals and the Secretary bans you from trade with your customers and you know your animals are being treated humanely, what power do you have to seek justice?

        According to The Australian your view on the issue is:

        “It’s way beyond time to wind up the trade”

        “Australia’s live animal export system is broken”

        http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/revolt-brewing-over-live-exports-as-labor-backbench-concerns-spread/story-fn59niix-1226511829565

        I agree that we have a moral responsibility for the humane treatment of our animals even though legally they become the property of persons from another country after export.

        However, I do not believe a serious attempt has been made at solving the problem, which would be needed, before shutting down the industry becomes an option.

        What about making a requirement that the holder of an export license has a responsibility to witness the slaughter of the animals at the customers place? Or to simply provide evidence that all animals were slaughtered humanely?

        By installing a web-cam that records the slaughter of animals in each abattoir overseas, everyone would be able to make more informed decisions, instead of unsubstantiated footage on Television. Instead of blanket bans, there could be small fines to holders of export licenses for each animal that was slaughtered inhumanely. A webcam that can record a few hundred hours of footage wouldn’t cost that much.

        Kind regards,

        David Collett


        Report this

        20

  • #
    gai

    As far as the elections go, do not forget what happened in the USA.

    It is not in the main stream media of course but the mutterings of voter fraud are getting louder and louder link


    Report this

    20

  • #
    Dave Sivyer

    1. Western Australia electricity costs.
    We are independent of the east coast grid, so it is a bit clearer to see our reasons for escalating charges.
    Two examples of waste:
    — Western Power contractors have made four recent visits to our property, as part of a major infrastructure upgrade plan. The first was to replace one pole and reinforce two others; second visit was to inspect and photograph all poles; third visit saw the GPS position of every pole on the line recorded to an accuracy of 1 metre ! Fourth visit marked several poles, including the reinforced items, to be replaced because of fungal attack.
    — A new 206 MW “Wind Farm” project near Merredin includes an 82 MW diesel backup!

    2.Bureaucracy in the bush.
    After the Stock Squad (anti-rustling police) was disbanded local police were given the duty of looking out for sheep duffers. One very keen young constable in our district pulled over a truck loaded with sheep and asked the driver for his way bill. This document details the animals being moved, their ear markings and tag mark along with details of who is the vendor & buyer of said animals. As it turned out the driver of the truck was a farmer who was moving some of his stock from one of his properties to another. The farmer indicated that he didn’t see the need for a way bill and therefore didn’t carry one. The young walloper was faced with two options. One, obtain the driver’s details and check out his story later or, two, book him for not having a way bill. He chose the latter. The result? A $300 fine and a twelve month good behaviour bond.
    So here we have an honest man going about his legal work being fined for NOT doing something required by a bureaucrat. Incidentally, when we move our sheep across a gravel road to our neighbours for shearing we also must have a way bill. This requirement we choose to ignore.


    Report this

    50

  • #
  • #
    lurker passing through, laughing

    The nature of bureaucracy is devolve from protecting the public into imposing power.
    The dangerous thing is you have a government committed to expanding the enviro-extremist machine by way of bureaucracy. Environmentalism is the new purity test. That many of the environmentalist policies are failures and even put people in harm’s way is unimportant to the ideologically committed. Environmentalists killed how many in the fires of just a few years ago? How many properties have been burned up due to enviro-extremists suppressing modest reasonable and effective land management practices?


    Report this

    40

  • #
    Hells Angel

    Old pointys wearing his club colors again. he’s not supposed to.


    Report this

    10

  • #

    [...] can see here and here and here and here how our legal and political system ignores and operates against law abiding [...]


    Report this

    10

  • #
    John Seip

    Hello friends & likeminders .

    There are questions to be answered on this GW rort which I thought to be basic & fundamental to a logical progress in the subject .Questions which no rabid preacher of SCIENCE has dared to answer.

    ! Assuming that when GW freaks use the word ‘carbon’ without monoxide or dioxide attached as qualifier they refer to only carbon &first question begins with the supposed weightlessness of Carbon assuming it is carried on air into the stratosphere as alleged when most of your readers know it is not,how isit weighed from a chimney stack with accuracy & integrity for valid taxing purposes ??

    2. According to Supreme Alarmists flooding from Ice melting could reach 10m –or 1 mm & they could not be [proven to be wrong — so where & what is the formula showing that the ice mass at the both poles above water level would provide sufficient water to cause such flooding over the entire Globe 10 metres over the entire Global Sphere ??

    PLease do not drown me in replies.

    John


    Report this

    10

  • #
    John Seip

    Further to my earlier comments as questions ,the alleged tidal encroachment on small pacfic islands make s no allowance that these islands may b sinking by erosion from the shoreline ,unless confirmed to the contrary by credible survey referred to a datum in orbit .

    Howard passing the Climate Issue to Turnbull was a way of protecting his own back on a subject he knew nothing about & the passage of a bill prohibiting the further import of incandescent bulbs is a curse Turnbull deserved to wear forever ,because at their retail prices & brief life cycle users have no hope of recovering extra purchase price in reduced current consumption .

    JUst for good measure — Coal Fired Power station engineers are more united than the GW alarmists in declaring the highefficiency of their installations.

    Finally we are informed from credible authority that the much revered Tim Flannery has a holidayhouse in the delta region of the mighty Hawkesbury River .we suggestthat wwhenthat is sold infear of 10 m floods we need take him seriously & not before .


    Report this

    30

  • #
    Andy

    Too many greenies and hippies. Total idiots.

    They don’t have the balls to fly to eastern europe to stop child slavery
    They don’t have the guts to go to africa and teach people about aids or rape
    They cant stomach getting on a ship and helping the sea shepards protect whales

    All they have is their parents house they live in rent free and no job or money with all the time in the world to load up on every drug known to man to fry their brains and protest that the trees on a piece of farmland down the road should never be cut down.

    Talk about a low level of existence and self justification of worth(lessness).

    Hippies and greenies are civil terrorists… [SNIP]


    Report this

    00