Archive

Archive for the ‘The EYE-BALL AdvocacyZone’ Category

EYE-BALL’s Herman on – Simplex –

May 24, 2013 Comments off
The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2
Links to Previous ‘Herman’ Posts:


- 19th May – The Tears of a Prime Minister -


- 24th Mar - An Example of bureaucracy gone mad -


- 10th Mar = The Carbon Tax – Post Election …


- 7th Mar – Wayne Swan – Please Stop


28th Feb – The Australian Labor Party View


- 6th Feb – Corruption


- 25th Jan – Anti Discrimination -


- 17th Jan 2013 – Atheism -


- 12th Nov - Hegemony


- 2nd Nov – A March early Federal election -


To see more EYE-BALL ‘Herman’ posts:

click here …


Title:
- Simplex -
| Author: EYE-BALL’s Herman O’Hermitage | 24th May 2013 |
T he very art of spin means too often the good guy gets painted black. Everything is just a hue.

n. simple, designed for a single element, the minimum number of dimensions (simpleks) antonym – complex

Socrates said all attempts at logic ultimately collapse on themselves. All rational ultimately becomes irrational. Being in sanity is itself insanity. Over belief. Oscar Wilde said about “Do unto others” how would any other know what I would like done to me? The absolute Socratic of all logic collapsing on itself, the bizarre with a modicum of justification. That may be termed argument.

Happiness and success is when one doesn’t rationalise too hard. They expresses thru their eyes what others know to be simple pleasures thereby tapping into the feel good factor (love of existence). Addressing adversity while remaining detached and don’t over complicate or sensationalise. Demanding rationality the ego becomes highly emotional in their own persona. Too often there is no answer.

There is no black and white, there are only hues, (or shades). Shades is also a synonym for filters.

We wish for our world a greater respect and transparency. A healthy ego without excess pride, arrogance or greed. The capacity to say what you think and then let go. We only see or hear a fraction of what is going on in the varying dimensions.

These thoughts have many applications in our world and the varying sectors of our social fabric, the tapestry we call existence.

Try Sport. The Sydney Swans won the flag last year, and Melbourne Storm won the NRL Telstra Premiership, Qld won the SOO. Then into the new year, what is left, history, hangovers and individual memories, conjecture and it is time to do it all again.

This year the hotshots are Essendon, then Geelong; Storm then Rabbitohs, throw in the Chooks and now there are just contenders. Ben Barba after winning the Dally M is in rehab. And so it goes. Who ran second to Hi Jinx in the cup of 1960? Who cares.

Take the car industry. In 1945 Ben Chifley wanted an Australian built car. It was part of the logics post world war II, we could not depend upon the pacific shipping lanes in wartime for supply, it was imperative we had that internal capacity and know how. Chifley negotiated with the British Motor Corporation, and General Motors and Ford. None were that interested.

Holden were originally South Australian saddlers who went on to build chassis for motors and drive train sourced from General Motors (Buicks and Chevrolets). It was finally agreed a new joint venture company, called General Motors Holden would stump up pounds 1,000,000 plus technology and the government would add 3,000,000 and by 1948 the first all Australian car was produced at the Pagewood production facility.

GMH was so successful that by 1963 Detroit had bought out the Australian Government, and had received dividends way beyond the initial 4,000,000 pound (or AUD8,000,000) so in 1961 Ford decided to build a locally made Falcon for the Australian market. Chrysler joined the rush with the Valiant. The first R model had a dash board sourced straight out of Detroit, adapted from left hand drive to right hand drive. The indicators were back to front.

The Japanese car industry was in its infancy. Toyota until 1948 only built trucks. Honda until 1961 only built motor bikes. My friend at school his Dad had bought a Datsun, and we all called it “Jap Junk”.

By the time British Motor Corp evolved to Leyland, they too decided to build an Australian car in the P76, and by 1974 were haemorrhaging money. My Dad worked at Holden til 1956 and then BMC til 1962.

In the summer of ‘73 I personally was building 16 carbies that were going into the first police pursuit Chargers. They were growth industries. By 1969 the Aussie straight six was exported extensively to the Middle East, much more suited to the dry hot and arid conditions than European or American built offerings. In the Federal election of October 25th, 1969 it was going to be close, and the Liberals were led by John Gorton, and their coalition partner then was John McEwen (black Jack) to his adversaries, and while Gorton promised to smash the monopolies (BHP in steel manufacture & ACI in glass), McEwen gave a blank cheque of protection to Ford and Holden to maintain the Aussie export of cars, still fighting the Pacific War.

The Bathurst 500 was the ultimate of car rivalry. Holden stretched the HT to manufacture the Brougham (which in time became the Statesman) to compete in the Middle East against the prestige machs (Mercedes and Rolls Royce). Ford introduced the Landau.

Holden imported a 327 cubic inch V8 motor from Detroit while they tooled up a locally built 307.

Ford matched them by first importing the Mustang 289 while tooling up in Australia for a 308.

Chrysler first had a 269 but smashed them all with a 366, and still couldn’t win Bathurst. (The brakes couldn’t perform as well as the motor, and most cars were out of the race within 100 miles). In history every decision is now seen as simple.

The choices get eliminated in history. Just a scintilla of conjecture. Disputing the facts.

Yet today as Caltex is closing the Kurnell petrol refinery, Shell will soon not distil petrol in Australia at all, Ford announces a 3 year plan to cease production of the Falcon, choices are not simple, they are complex! Or are they?

The above example could easily have been around Bitumen Oil Refineries Aust. Ltd (Boral) or it’s fraternal twin Australia Motorists Petroleum Oils Ltd (AMPOL) and Shell and Caltex and the petrol game.

I have skipped the Button plan, the floating of the Dollar, Quantitative Easing and a whole lot more. I want to stay simplex.

The government and the AMWU both promise answers into the future for whatever that is worth. There are definitely no easy answers to such upheaval, just worries.

It is just far easier to stay with happiness and its causes. All things will pass away.

Will the trench war that was WWII ever be fought again. Mounted troopers gave over to trenches to guerrilla tactics, and now to terror and improvised explosive devices. Do the shipping lanes matter?

How many key decision makers even understand how the Pacific War was largely fought on supply. None of this affects this year’s return on funds employed or the share indices.

The Diagnostic & Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders – 5 (DSM V) has just been released. The psychiatrist, who led the composition of DSM IV in the 1970’s, is now regretful of his earlier work and scathing on the mental health industry. He says that DSM IV had led to a plague of Attention Deficit Disorder, Autism and Bi-polar diagnosis.

All fuelled by the drug companies and their greedy share market returns. The Benzo group of drugs simply don’t work. After 3 months you need stronger doses and they are a terrible addiction. There are border line cases (self harm) who need lithium. There is schizo’s (people who hear voices) and a bit more, but too many depressions just need cognitive behavioural therapies (CBT) or other rational arrivals. Psychology only dates back to circa 1900.

Once more what causes happiness?

Fortune tellers have an unwritten rule of not foretelling of disaster or ruination. It can be self fulfilling.

Nostradamus while fun spoke of a pig man flying in a metal horse and dropping a mushroom, while all is interpreted because  all written in very obtuse and rarely spoken latin, so that today believers say this was a gas masked pilot flying the Enola Gay and dropping the H Bomb on Hiroshima.

Simplex! Believing in Sanity is insanity.

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please click your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story.Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


EYE-BALL’s ‘Herman’ …

EYE-BALL’s Herman on – The Tears of a Prime Minister –

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2
Links to Previous ‘Herman’ Posts:


- 24th Mar - An Example of bureaucracy gone mad -


- 10th Mar = The Carbon Tax – Post Election …


- 7th Mar – Wayne Swan – Please Stop


28th Feb – The Australian Labor Party View


- 6th Feb – Corruption


- 25th Jan – Anti Discrimination -


- 17th Jan 2013 – Atheism -


- 12th Nov - Hegemony


- 2nd Nov – A March early Federal election -


To see more EYE-BALL ‘Herman’ posts:

click here …


Title:
- The Tears of a Prime Minister -
| Author: EYE-BALL’s Herman O’Hermitage | 19th May 2013 |
T HIS IS TRULY AMAZING – AND WORTH THE EFFORT….MATH QUIZ: Reveals your favourite movie!!

I did it in my head, then on paper, and finally on a calculator just to confirm my numerical capabilities. Each time I got the same answer, and sure enough it IS my very favourite movie EVER!

You will be AMAZED at how scary true and accurate this test is.
To start – Pick your favourite number from 1 to 9, any number, then multiply that number by 3; and add 3 Multiply that number by 3 again; then your total will be a two digit number. Add the first and second digits together to find your favourite movie (of all time) in the list of 9 movies below:

Movie List:

  1. Gone With the Wind
  2. The Godfather
  3. Top Gun
  4. Star Wars
  5. Forrest Gump
  6. Easy Rider
  7. Jaws
  8. The Sound of Music
  9. The Gillard Farewell Speech of 2013

I received this joke by e-mail in mid February. The strangest part is the sender was a former ALP member and Candidate. Such is the disaffection for this government. On November 24, 2007 I worked with this fellow at Narraweena Public School in the seat of McKellar, passing out ALP how to vote info. To each person as they walked out I said “Have a nice night” and to those who took ALP paraphernalia off me, I commented “you will have a good night”.

Recently I have been asked to enter a sweep on election night what time will Julia make her concession speech?

At the last election I predicted that the result would be unknown at the time of closing the national tally room on the Saturday night, I predicted the result would be called mid Sunday afternoon. I was only out by 2 plus weeks, and I believed that Windsor, Oakschott and Katter would join a coalition government. As the Coalition won 73 seats, that appeared to be consistent.

For some time, I have been doubting this parliament will last until September 14. Now I am convinced it will. To hear Abbott last Thursday affirm September 14, means that the opposition are working to this schedule.

Therefore the polling stations will close on the east coast at 6pm, and meaningful data will be available from 7.30pm. By 8pm Central Australia polling stations will be showing a tiny glimmer of hope for the ALP, but by 8.30pm when the first data comes in from the West Coast the East Coast will have about 65% of votes counted, and a 9% swing in Qld, a 8% swing in NSW, and a 6.5% swing in Victoria and 5% swing in Tasmania will see the coalition already having won 75 seats. At that time in Tasmania the Coalition will have won 3 of the 5 seats. At that time it will be announced Julia Gillard is expected to address the nation in about 10 minutes. It will be about 9pm before the cameras finally cross to the PM.

There will be no tears. By that time our Julia will have cried herself out. She will be stoic, and composed. She will have been marginally conceded her own seat of Lalor in Melbourne’s Central Western suburbs with a reduced majority. Her current 1st preference vote is over 64%. Knowing she is to vacate the lodge, she will want to retire, and will definitely state she will throw open the ALP leadership. Wayne Swann will lose his seat of Lilley. Kevin Rudd will be regularly featured on Channel 7. Even for him it will be uncomfortable. He will refrain from saying I told you so, and he will be constantly asked if he will seek the leadership only to respond he will do what it takes to rebuild the ALP brand. What he really wants is to break the grip of the ACTU and several unions that include AWU, TWU and ETU.

Prime Minister Abbott will be an ally in that cause, at that time.

I bumped into John Murphy today. He is the ALP member for Reid. That seat is right in the coalition targets. I asked him how he is doing? He replied OK. He was betting on the gallops and while ever the politician that was his focus. He asked where I live, and I told him in Grayndler. He mentioned what Albo was up to. They always assume you are a stool pigeon.

This week parliament has been illuminating. On Tuesday Swan gave a rather commanding budget speech, but afterwards I felt very hollow. On Thursday I was truly shocked how Abbott turned his speech into a campaign launch. And it was so effective. His promise on conclusion to work for the people of Australia, looking straight into the camera. Simply so effective.

This brings me to the tears, and the sad part. For the next 4 months we are basically rudderless. A government only interested in improving their electoral stocks, an opposition hell bent on meticulous planning and no bad publicity, ipso facto by election day the only real issue is how can you cast a senate vote, so that the coalition is kept in check.

On Thursday morning our PM was nearly in tears talking about the NDIS in Parliament. It is to be her epitaph. Sorry Julia, as hard as people may try you don’t get to write your own history. It is hard to expunge the Schools Building program. We will go on giving a Gonski for decades to come. Most importantly, Disability care is still rather conceptual, and the detail is still to come.

On March 11, 1983 John Malcolm Fraser gave his concession speech to Bob Hawke, and nearly broke down in tears. Hey Mal, life wasn’t meant to be easy! So choke on it!

Thirteen years later Paul Keating knew his time was up, and his speech was so confident, it was even vain glorious.

That what I see for our first female PM. The tears will be in trying to turn things around. By 9pm on September 14th there will be no tears left.

John Murphy turns 63 in a fortnight. By September he will be just shy of 15 years as MHR. He can retire gracefully.

In late September Julia Gillard turns 52. She will have 15 years as a MHR and over 3 years as PM. She will constitute our 7th surviving former PM. 52 is just too young to retire. Any job offers out there?

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please click your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story.Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


EYE-BALL’s ‘Herman’ …

EYE-BALL’s Herman on – An Example of bureaucracy gone mad –

March 24, 2013 1 comment
The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2
Links to Previous ‘Herman’ Posts:


- 10th Mar = The Carbon Tax – Post Election …


- 7th Mar – Wayne Swan – Please Stop


28th Feb – The Australian Labor Party View


- 6th Feb – Corruption


- 25th Jan – Anti Discrimination -


- 17th Jan 2013 – Atheism -


- 12th Nov - Hegemony


- 2nd Nov – A March early Federal election -


To see more EYE-BALL ‘Herman’ posts:

click here …


Title:
- An Example of bureaucracy gone mad -
| Author: EYE-BALL’s Herman O’Hermitage | 24th Mar 2013 |
The following is an example of the due process involved when dealing with Public Service bureaucracy when a long-term unemployed and mature aged person applies for employment within the public service.

The ease at which rejection is decided upon by the HR Departments within the Public Service ranks leaves applicants with only a single course of action – that is to pursue discrimination options to force the HR personnel into a contest to justify their selection criteria and attitudes, and how the system protects from within.

What follows is a presentation of the documentary evidence needed to pursue such an anti-discrimination application.

Form 59: Rule 29.02(1)

Affidavit: No.  xxx of 2013

Federal Court of Australia

District Registry: New South Wales

Division: Human Rights

Name of Applicant: [John Citizen]

Name of Respondent: [Commonwealth of Australia, Department of Immigration and Citizenship]

Affidavit of:  John Citizen

Address:  14 Smith Street, Smithsville, New South Wales, 2999

Occupation:  Accountant

Date:  March 22nd, 2013.

Contents

I, John Citizen of 14 Smith Street, Smithsville in the State of New South Wales say on oath;

  1. I am the Applicant, in this Application before the Court; I am 55 years old born on before 1960.
  1. Oath relating to source of Evidence
  • The following I know to be true by virtue of attached documents, private records and other personal attribute(s) which may include recall of conversations, documents supplied to AHRC under discovery or prior knowledge and experience. Often emails are cut and pasted into this deposition rather than attached for reasons of flow, simplicity and efficaciousness. [Where this occurs, there is an alternation in text and colour].
  1. Background
  • I have not been in regular employment since September 1998, when I was employed as an executive manager as part of the ABC Banking Group. I have been actively seeking wholesome and fulsome employment since March 2002. Since January 2010 I have been intensively seeking regular employment in white collar work and applied for about 400 jobs. In the 3 years since January 2010 I have been employed sporadically for about 20 weeks essentially working on the Federal, State and Local elections.
  • In February 2008 my doctor ordered I stop doing manual labouring due to soft tissue degeneration in both wrists and elbows.
  • In September 2011 I graduated in a Master of Applied Finance, including the honour “with Distinction”. Attached by way of annexure is a resume marked Annexure “JC1” and an academic testamur marked Annexure “JC2”.
  1. Public Service Employment Applications
  • Above I mention approx 400 jobs applications (at lines 14 to 16) and of those approximately one third were in civil service, the other two thirds in private sector. In all I have been interviewed 5 times, twice in public sector, and 3 times in private sector.
  • In April 2010 I applied for 29 positions with the Department of Finance and Deregulation, often where several recruits were required. On March 31st 2010 I drove to Canberra from Sydney and back to attend an information briefing session. Of the positions applied for they ranged from clerical level APS2 to EL2. (see below for further definition of those acronyms, APS 2 extremely junior, EL2 executive). In total I have made 48 applications to Department of Finance and Deregulation.
  • Relating to those 29 applications made between the 5th to 8th of April 2010 on 27 occasions I received a standard email rejection which read; (see letter below cut and pasted from an email)

Dear John,

I refer to your application for the above position.

On behalf of the Department of Finance and Deregulation, I regret to advise that on this occasion your application has been unsuccessful.

Thank you for your interest in this position and the time spent in applying.

Yours sincerely

HR Operations (Recruitment), HR Services Branch – Department of Finance and Deregulation

  • The rejection letters were received from 2 weeks to 4 months after my application and in respect of the residual 2, no further correspondence was received. Of the other 19 applications one was as a casual driver for Comcar based out of Sydney, and that application too was routinely rejected.
  • There have been several employment applications to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission and several to Defence Materiel Organisation.
  • The only other interview in public sector arose in May 2012 recruiting for an APS 6 Accountant, with the Air Lift Systems Programme Office at the RAAF base at Richmond. That position was never recruited due to Federal Government budget cuts, last May.
  • To give meaning to the APS clerical levels (line 30 above) I have copied and pasted from the Australian Public Service Commission website a definition of employment band categories here from Fact Sheet 3. They are;
  1. ‘The level of APS jobs is based on the duties that are required to be performed. Jobs are classified and paid at different levels according to the complexity, responsibility and skills involved. The most common classifications used are as follows:
    1. APS 1 and 2—general administrative and service positions, cadetships and trainees
    2. APS 3 and 4—general entry level positions and general administrative, technical, project and service positions, and graduate positions
    3. APS 5 and 6—senior administrative, technical, project and service positions, which may have supervisory roles
    4. Executive Level 1 and 2—middle management positions
    5. Senior Executive Service Band 1, 2 and 3—senior leadership and management positions. More information is available at our SES page.
  2. Classifications grouped together, such as APS 1 to APS 3, are called broadbands.’
  • Each Australian Public Service Commission fact sheet has footnotes of which one can be perceived as direct age discrimination (maybe reverse discrimination). Directly quoted (cut and pasted on February 6th 2013) from Fact Sheet 1 titled “The Big Picture”
  • “Myth vs reality: APS managers are mostly men in grey cardigans.
  • Promotion to management positions is based on your skills and abilities, not your age, gender or how long you’ve worked in the APS. Forty-two percent of APS managers are women, and 35% of senior executives are women. Just over half of our managers are aged under 45
  • That is a culture of discriminating against mature aged men, and it has become a society acceptance, the concept of ageism, stereo typing age groups and therefore discriminating according to perceptive traits, rather than treating each case on its’ merits as required under APS merit considerations and Equal Employment Opportunity. Section 14 (b) (iii) of the Age Discrimination Act, 2004.
  1. The Non Ongoing Temporary Employment Register application made by deponent to respondent and basic timeline.
  • January 23, 2012 – My application was registered. It is attached and marked as Annexure “JC3”.  It is very scant, asking for contact details, employment history, education and name of referees. Please note well here the statement at question 1.8 on page 2 (cut and pasted, therefore directly quoted);
  • Please provide details of your previous employment for the last five years. As this is a separately assessable requirement, please do not refer to your resume details in completing this information.
  • A Resume is normally electronically attached to each Employment Application. That is already attached herein, the Annexure ‘JC1’. That resume was uploaded on the respondent application system on October 18, 2012 replacing an earlier version.
  • October 18, 2012 – At midday I was prevented from completing a different application due to time expiration at midday and requested that I be considered. As a consequence I was phoned by Ms Lily Chan. [The respondent website consistently calls noon 12pm which can widely be interpreted as midnight, noon is technically neither ante meridiem nor post meridiem].
  • October 19, 2012 – at about 3pm I was called by NSW HR Manager Mr Les Sweatman. Mr Sweatman conducted an initial phone interview in respect of the Non Ongoing Temporary Employment Registration. At one stage Mr Sweatman asked “Do you know what we do?” There were other totally contemptible questions,that made me feel like I was treated as an imbecile. I was asked when could I start and did I have any leave planned. An interview was arranged for the following Friday. The fact that I was granted an interview made me overlook all of the negative attributes.
  • October 26th 2012 – starting at 9.45am the interview was conducted by a selection panel made up of Ms Tina Oommen and Ms Julienne Jong Wah. I was met by Ms Lily Chan and shown to a room where I was told to prepare answers to selection criteria. As set out in the main court application (I was told to only use examples from the last 1 to 3 years despite that being discrimination under Section 15 of the Age Discrimination Act 2004) and Ms Chan took my driver’s licence and passport for photocopying to start the security vetting process. (This was despite me consistently saying I had already been granted security clearance by the Australian Government Security Vetting Agency on July 21, 2012). The interview proceeded particularly smoothly, where towards the conclusion I was asked if my referees were still current. I left just after 11am. I was very excited.
  • October 29th 2012 – On the following Monday, my wife asked if I had heard anything from the respondent. I had told her I had been asked when I could start and did I have leave planned. (Phone call at lines 101 – 107 above).
  • October 31st 2012 – When nothing had occurred by Wednesday I emailed Ms Chan asking when a decision might be expected. I was told in a fortnight. That worried me.
  • On November 13th 2012 I received by email’

Good afternoon,
I am writing to you regarding your application for a position with DIAC through our Non-ongoing Register.

Your claims to these APS 3 positions have been considered and unfortunately on this occasion your application has been unsuccessful.

Thank you once again for taking the time and making the effort to register your interest with our department.

Feedback
In general applicants who were unsuccessful in this recruitment exercise were unable to provide sufficient evidence that they were able to fulfil the capability requirements expected at the APS 3 level at interview. Information related to these capabilities can be obtained on the Department’s website at http://www.immi.gov.au/about/careers/

If you intend to apply for future positions with the Department, I would recommend that you also read the document titled “Cracking the Code – How to apply for jobs in the Australian Public Service”. This publication can be found online at http://www.apsc.gov.au/publications07/crackingthecode.htm

Kind Regards
HR Services Section NSW
Department of Immigration and Citizenship

  • November 14, 2012 – I asked for specific feedback in writing, and filed a complaint in the Australian Human Rights Commission under Australian Human Rights & Equal Employment Opportunity Act 1984 and Age Discrimination Act, 2004.
  • November 20, 2012 – An alleged e mail transmission from HR Service Manager Recruitment, People Services Network NSW (Mr Les Sweatman) that is not contained in my records whatsoever, that defines the merit principle. It is attached and now termed Annexure “JC4”. Discussed further at lines 301 – 302 & 359 – 367. On that same day Acting Director, People Services Network (Ms Patricia Torrens) contacted me to start an attempt at private conciliation.
  • December 11, 2012 – I received an email from the Acting Director, People Services Network on behalf of the respondent, that includes the sentence “As advised, it is the department’s policy to provide verbal feedback to applicants on the outcome of a recruitment/selection exercise and I advised that I was more than willing to set this up for you with the selection panel.” I maintained my stance I wanted the evidence set out in writing, due to the fact that over time too often the feedback is shown to be nothing but contempt.
  1. Subsequent Applications for Employment.
  • On December 4th and December 5th I made 2 further employment applications for work with the respondent.
  • Annexure “JC5” is a job description for recruitment (Respondent reference 60017949) titled APS Level 6 several positions, applied for on December 4th, 2012
  • Annexure “JC6” is a copy of my application. Again please note at Question 3.2 on page 3 the statement (identical to lines 90 to 92 above);

Please provide details of your previous employment for the last five years. As this is a separately assessable requirement, please do not refer to your resume details in completing this information.

Only your last 5 years of employment is relevant to their employment assessment.

In response on December 24th, 2012 I was informed by email,

Dear John,
I refer to your application for the above position. Your claims to the position have been considered in relation to the behavioural based questions against which all applicants were assessed.

I wish to advise that on this occasion, your application has been unsuccessful. If you wish to receive feedback on your assessment please contact me at Sofia.Basic@immi.gov.au and I will provide this feedback from 2 – 4 January 2013.

Thank you for your interest in this position and the time spent in applying.

Sofia Basic
Chairperson
DIAC

  • Further feedback as requested was received in writing by email on December 28th, 2012 and read;

Dear John,

Thank you for your application for the above position.

The panel received over 100 applications many of which were of a very high standard.

The panel has agreed that more succinct answers would strengthen your responses, and that you should attempt to answer the points provided in order to fully address the required selection criteria in future applications.

I wish you the best in your future career.

Regards,
Sofia Basic
Chair Panel Member

  • That feedback fails to mention how many potential recruits were interviewed or how many were indeed hired. The reference “The panel has agreed that more succinct answers would strengthen your responses” is a euphemism saying get someone else (an expert) to write your (or critique your) selection criteria responses for you. Once more it goes to the heart of Section 15 of the Age Discrimination Act 2004. Due to the fact that I have not previously worked in the public sector, I am often advised to pay a selection panel expert to write my selection criteria responses for me. On Annexure “JC6” at page 3 under Question 3.1 General Information or at page 9 Question 7.1 declaration, there is no mention of stating on oath the application is all of your own work. That is; not prepared by someone else in the shadows. In the above email it states “many of which were of a very high standard” and does that mean they are coached, insiders or indeed experienced at the process? I have consistently asked, and been constantly denied an answer, is there a system to check for plagiarised or near identical responses?
  • Annexure marked “JC7” is a second job description for several positions titled APS Level 6 (Ongoing and Non Ongoing). At that time the respondent reference used was 60029214. [A similar position is now being recruited respondent reference 60022771 applications closing on March 20, 2013, where that position location is limited to Belconnen ACT].
  • Annexure “JC8” is a copy of my application, relating to Annexure ‘JC7’. Once more; note well the statement at question 3.2 on page 3; (Previously highlighted above at lines 90 – 92 and 167 – 169)

Please provide details of your previous employment for the last five years. As this is a separately assessable requirement, please do not refer to your resume details in completing this information.

  • That discrimination is consistent. Verbally I am informed your resume is only considered or relevant when you are shortlisted.
  • Once more a standard rejection was received on December 13, 2012 and on January 4th, 2013 the following was received;

Hi John

Thanks for seeking feedback on your application. It was a very competitive selection process as we received 154 applications in total of which only 11 were shortlisted for interview.

The scores for your written application are below.

  1. Contributes to Strategic Thinking – Unsuitable
  2. Achieves Results- Unsuitable
  3. Supports Productive Working Relationships – Unsuitable
  4. Displays Personal Drive & Integrity – Unsuitable
  5. Communicates with influence – Requires Development
  6. Demonstrates Professional / Technical Proficiency – Requires Development

The Selection Committee felt that your examples were too basic and did not demonstrate your ability to perform at the APS6 classification. It would probably benefit you to review the Work Level Standards and Capability Development Framework to ensure the examples you are using are in line with the APS6 classification. Higher scores also would have been applied if your examples were more relevant to the advertised role (i.e. workforce planning or another HR field).

Your example for the ‘Supports Productive Working Relationships/Displays Personal Drive and Integrity’ criteria did not address the question asked. The Selection Committee also felt it was inappropriate for you to name departmental employees in your criteria response.

I hope this feedback is helpful to you.

Regards
Shannon Yates
Assistant Director
Workforce Planning & Org Management Section People Strategy & Planning Branch

  • In this instance Mr Yates has said 11 were selected for interview, but not how many were recruited. The fact that the position is now re-advertised is something more again. At the top of Annexure ‘JC8’ page 3, Question 2.12 there is a glaring hypocrisy where a similar function is now re advertised; “An order of merit may be created from this vacancy and used to fill similar positions in the future.”
  • The scoring of the responses at paragraph 2 (Lines 227 to 230 above) coupled with the lines 237 to 240 now reproduced ‘Your example for the ‘Supports Productive Working Relationships/Displays Personal Drive and Integrity’ criteria did not address the question asked.” Also goes to the heart of section 15 of the Age Discrimination Act 2004, a potential hire who has spent 3 years actively seeking work, and the respondent approach consistently fails under section 15 (2) of the Age Discrimination Act 2004. The selection panel’s authority is grandiloquent and acuminate. More broadly under the principles of Equal Employment Opportunity since September 2009 it is no longer a core virtue of Australian Public Service policy and therefore EEO is abused at will.
  1. Depression and Anxiety (Health Issues)
  • My regular doctor is Dr Q, of Practice (earlier mentioned at lines 18 to 19 herein). From winter 2003 to about 2008 Dr Q insisted I stop doing manual labouring. In February 2008 Dr Q referred me to a specialist unit of the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital to conduct tests on soft tissue injury to wrists and elbows on both arms. The results were long term non reversible damage without pain relieving surgery. From that time I have done minimal manual labouring and the inflammation has subsided. I have never been personally involved in any worker’s compensation claim or issue. Pins and needles are still commonly endured.
  • My wife Ms Jane Citizen is a Registered Psychologist, who works at St Pius Hospice in the Anxiety and Depression unit. Most lately she is specialising in Post Traumatic Stress programs mainly for the NSW Government. She also has a small private practice, where she knows personally the psychologists working at the Practice, and has had patients referred to her by that medical practice.
  • Due to issues of ethical standards the deponent needed to source an alternate referring doctor to find an unrelated psychologist. On November 19th 2010 Dr O of the second Medical Practice referred me to a Registered Psychologist; Ms M under the Federal Government’s Mental Health Care Plan to address work related issues. The most relevant consideration is that I don’t need treatment or chemical dependency I need sustainable work.
  • The central issue here is; each November/December I develop the onset of anxiety and depression as the holiday season approaches, due to the recruitment process being deferred until the new year, and the process of reflection that also occurs during the new year celebrations. This matter now before the court has been central to my thoughts during December 2012 and January 2013. Each passing year is 1 less year of prospective employment, retirement savings and achievement within a lifetime. This past holiday season since this dispute was referred to the Australian Human Rights Commission, the issues include on Christmas day I had a throbbing in my right ear akin to blood pressure. By the second week of January I had a bleeding in my right ear which I put down to an ear infection. Since then I have developed a blurred vision in my right eye. I am now referred to an ophthalmic surgeon.
  • Each time I have work to look forward to my health issues clear up miraculously.
  • My underemployment clearly affects my domestic relationships. My wife never expected to marry a house husband and often tells me “get a job or get out”.
  1. Merit applied to Integrity and Communication
  • The respondent consistently refuses to acknowledge there is a problem within what they term “merit based selection”. Indeed it is not merit, but designed to discriminate. Employment applications who display merit are perfunctorily and routinely rejected.
  • Under the Australian Human Rights Commission investigation of the facts, on January 13th, 2013 I received an e mail with 2 attachments. The first was;
    • Their response to my application, while the other was
    • 40 pages of attached documents numbering 14 attachments
  • Only 3 of those documents are annexed herein. They are Annexure ‘JC4’ introduced at lines 147 to 152, and 2 others now attached and described as Annexure “JC9” and “JC10”. The rest are extremely repetitive and would disperse from the central facts if reproduced.
  • Annexure “JC” is undated and unsigned. I verily believe this appraisal was written in late December 2012 from verbal communications. It relates to the interview on October 26, 2012 (evidenced at lines 108 to 118 above). It is written to address my constant request for feedback from November 13, 2012 onwards. (evidenced at lines 144 to 159 above).
  • Annexure ‘JC9’ misquotes me and thereby vilifies me. Several aspects of paraphrasing me are factually wrong.
  • Annexure ‘JC9’ fails to include how the interview panel (Ms Oommen and Ms Jong Wah) diminished the recruitment opportunity in terming it basically a call centre style position. This attached synopsis ‘JC9’ fails to mention how the interviewers claimed 19 out of 20 of the positions filled will be terminated at the end of 6 months. The document fails to mention how I said words to the effect “that is a challenge I readily accept”. It fails to mention how the interviewers asked me to confirm the contact details of my referees. Indeed most of the information is designed to fit the facts, as an afterthought.
  • The annexure termed ‘JC9’ was the 14th of 14 documents supplied by the respondent to the Australian Human Rights Commission under their investigation process (hence marked attachment N at top right corner).
  • Annexure “JC10” only adds to intrigue, and lack of decency, accountability and transparency. That document displays how the apparent author Ms Tina Oommen (sender) has blind copied it to 4 non-government and unknown e mail addresses. That may well constitute misconduct by Ms Oommen. Could it constitute evidence of attempting to hire known personal associates or give them advanced knowledge of what was transpiring?
  • At line 142 above of what was sent to me the authorship is accredited to “HR Services Section NSW” rather than Ms Oommen, again totally lacking any integrity, transparency or accountability.
  • Moreover when that document is copied 7 times for no good reason into the Australian Human Rights Commission investigation of facts, it has the effect of diminishing and dispersing far more critical evidence.
  • Annexure “JC11” is the last written communication I received through the Australian Human Rights Commission investigation process on February 6, 2013. Once more that document is undated and unsigned. I received it by E mail attachment of a forwarded communication from AHRC. The document only enhances the belief that the story has been designed to fit the facts. An attempt to reinforce the respondent’s central tenet, I the deponent do not meet the APS merit principle in verbal interview, where I maintain, a wholly discriminating perspective of merit as evidenced throughout. Their use of APS Merit principle fails under Section 15 (2) of the Age Discrimination Act.
  • The Merit principle is summarised in annexure ‘JC4’. At lines 147 – 152 I state my records show that I did not receive that document on that day. When you couple ‘JC2’ with ‘JC4’ and finally the conclusion contained in ‘JC11’ the preposterous nature of the respondent claims are exposed. It all swings on a series of clandestine verbal communications designed and practiced by the respondent, requests for evidence in writing by the applicant, and the claim “The non ongoing APS3 exercise in which you were recently a candidate was based on this principle”. (At line 23 of Annexure attached and now termed Annexure ‘JC4’). – (A document I claim I only received through the investigation process of the Australian Human Rights Commission).
  • As set out in the Federal Court Application thereafter the Australian Human Rights Commission suggested by way of conciliation;
  • If anyone was selected from the interviews of late October or early November with a similar age profile to me would I withdraw my complaint. Particularly in the light of the concealed blind copying of the document now called annexure ‘JC9’ and several other experiences; over many Australian Public Service employment applications,
  • I counter offered that I would agree to that provided the further caveat be added that showed those similar aged recruits were not former Australian Public Service who had been made redundant or taken early retirement.
  • That ended the Australian Human Rights Commission investigation and conciliation process.
  • No conciliation was conducted before a Delegate of the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission.
  • Therefore the notification was issued under Section 46PH (1) (i) of the Act.
Sworn / Affirmed by the deponentat Sydney in New South Wales onMonday the 22nd day of March 2013.Before me: )))))
   Signature of deponent

Signature of witness

[Name and qualification of witness]

List of Annexures – copies not provided:

Document Number Details Paragraphs Pages
1 Affidavit of John Citizen in support of an Application in the Federal Court under the Australia Human Rights Act and the Age Discrimination Act 2004 sworn in Sydney on March 22nd 2013 174 12
JC1 Annexure being an Employment Resume of the Applicant 17 3
JC2 Annexure being Master Degree Testamur of the Applicant 1 1
JC3 Annexure being the Non Ongoing Employment Register Application lodged with Respondent on January 23rd 2012. 12 3
JC4 Annexure being an Email of HR Manager NSW of the Respondent supplied to Australian Human Rights Commission that details Merit based selection policy of Australian Public Service Commission. 2
JC5 Annexure being a Duty Statement of an Employment Application between the parties. (Deponent Reference 60017949 -several positions) lodged during conciliation process. 3 4
JC6 Annexure being an Employment Application Summary for that position in ‘JC5′. (Deponent Reference 60017949 – Several Positions) lodged December 4th, 2012 9 steps  (7 critical questions at pages 5 to 9) 10
JC7 Annexure being a Duty Statement for another Position advertised by the deponent, (Deponent reference 60029214 Several Positions) lodged during conciliation process. 11 3
JC8 Annexure being an Employment Application Summary for that position in ‘JC7′ (Deponent reference 60029214 Several Positions) lodged on December 5th, 2012 9 steps  (7 critical questions at pages 5 to 7) 8
JC9 Annexure of Email by Selection Panel member that is blind copied to Non Government  adresses 1
JC10 Annexure being notes ascribing merit of the deponent in interview of October 26, 2012. 8 2
JC11 Annexure being the last communication between the parties when attempts to conciliate failed 5 1

Application to the Federal Court:

IN THE FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT

File number: XXXXXXX

OF AUSTRALIA

REGISTRY: Sydney

John Citizen – Applicant ……and

Commonwealth of Australia, Department of Immigration and Citizenship – Respondent

APPLICATION – Human Rights

Type of application

This application alleges unlawful discrimination under section 46PO of the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986.

First court date

This application is listed for hearing at (court location):

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Court date and time (registry staff to insert) at ………….. am/pm.

All parties or their legal representatives should attend this hearing. Default orders may be made if any party fails to attend. The Court may hear and determine all interlocutory or final issues, or may give directions for the future conduct of the proceeding.

 

(for) Registrar

Date: ………./………../…………..

Part A – Orders sought

 

  1. Final orders sought by applicant/s

State precisely each order sought by way of final relief. Examples of remedies include an apology from the respondent, employment or re-employment, and compensation.

 If you seek compensation you must provide details of how much compensation you are claiming and how the amount has been calculated; for example, loss of income

 

  1. A sum of $30,000 to compensate for lost potential wages, and
  2. A sum not specified to compensate for trauma and stress associated, and
  3. A sum relating to reasonable legal costs.

2.  Interlocutory, interim or procedural                orders sought by applicant/s

Complete only if interlocutory, interim or procedural orders are sought

 

  1. None

Part B – Grounds of Application

3. What discrimination are you complaining of?

The unlawful discrimination must:

(a)     be the same or substantially the same as the discrimination that was the subject of the complaint terminated by the Australian Human Rights Commission, or

(b) arise out of the same or substantially the same acts, omissions or practices that were the subject of complaint.

The applicant applied for work with the respondent on January 23, 2012 through their temporary non ongoing register.

The respondent interviewed the applicant on October 26, 2012 for a non ongoing APS 3 position, and rejected the applicant on November 13th, 2012 for employment claiming without proper specificity the Merit Principle of the Australian Public Service Commission (APS) prohibited further consideration.

This is demonstrably false. An APS 3 position is a graduate level entry position. Every critical evidence throughout is verbal or recollection of a verbal communication.

In that interview I was verbally instructed to confine my critical selection responses to examples in the last 2 -3 years despite Section 15 & 18 (1) (a) of the Age Discrimination Act. (2004). Full details in applicant’s deposition.

Those verbal responses led to one document being produced in conciliation which clearly misquotes me, and thereby diminishes and vilifies me.

When asked to give specific feedback, the respondent routinely does not respond and in AHRC relies upon non specific feedback, by reference to DIAC policy and procedure (including APS Merit standards).

In conciliation the Respondent offered under section 15 of the act to prove that potential hires, of a similar age to the applicant were indeed recruited in this process thereby not discriminating according to age.

Due to the consistent lack of accountability and transparency, the applicant asked the respondent to prove that those few recruits were not former APS employees who were returning to work after taking early retirement or redundancy, thereby distorting the appropriateness of that apparent data. Advanced Standing.

That request saw the conciliation process break down. The failure to address the merit based policy of APS employed and relied upon by DIAC that includes Equal Employment Opportunity.

4. Under what Act is the discrimination you are complaining of unlawful?

X  the Age Discrimination Act 2004

 the Disability Discrimination Act 1992

 the Racial Discrimination Act 1975

 the Sex Discrimination Act 1984

5. State all sections of the Act that are relevant to this claim

Section 14 through to Section 18 – Ageism

Part C – The applicant/s

6. Full name(s)
Attach extra page for any additional applicants

X  Mr

 Mrs

 Ms

Family name:

Citizen

Given names:

John

7. Home or contact address (incl postcode)

xxxxxxxxxx St,

xxxxxxxx    NSW  xxxx

8. Telephone/Fax No.

Business hours:

xxxxxxxx

After hours:

xxxxxxxxx

Fax no:

9. Are you over 18 years?

X  Yes    No

10. What is your first language?

This includes languages such as Sign and Auslan

English

11a. Do you need an interpreter at the  hearing?

11b. If yes, please state language or type

 Yes   X  No

12. Do you have any special requirements?

If yes, please give details; for example, wheelchair access,

hearing loop, presence of personal assistant or carer.

 Yes   X   No

Part D – The respondent/s

13. What is your relationship to the person or organisation against whom you bring this application?

  Employee of person/organisation

  Former employee of person/organisation

  Co-employee

  Customer of person/organisation

X   Other (please specify) Potential employee

Part E – Extension of time

14. Do you need an extension of time?

You must complete this section if your application and claim is made more than 60  days after the date of issue of written notice of the termination of the complaint by the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission. If yes, please provide reasons.

 

 Yes   X  No

Part F – Required documents

15. These documents must accompany your application and claim

X     A copy of your original complaint to the Australian Human Rights Commission (if available).

X     The notice of termination of complaint given by the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission

Signature of applicant/s or lawyer

Signed by (print name/s) John Citizen

X  the applicant/s or   lawyer for the applicant/s

Date: …………/…………/………..

IMPORTANT NOTICE TO RESPONDENT/S

To the respondent (name): Commonwealth of Australia Department of Immigration and Citizenship

of (address): 5th Level, 26 Lee Street, Ultimo, New South Wales. 2007

If there are two or more respondents, provide details: …………………………………………………………………..

You should seek legal advice about this application. You may file a response. If you file a response, you must file and serve the response within 14 days of receiving this application. If you do not file a response, you must file and serve a notice of address for service before the hearing.

Form approved by the Chief Federal Magistrate pursuant to Subrule 2.04(1A) for the purpose of Subrule 41.02A(1) – November 2009

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please click your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story.Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


EYE-BALL’s ‘Herman’ …

EYE-BALL Opinion – American Gun Laws – will to change is just not there for Legislators -

December 17, 2012 Comments off
The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2

Latest ‘EYE-BALL Opinion’ Posts:


- 15th Dec – “International men of Mystery” – An Australian modern-day Bank Heist story -


- 13th Dec – eBay Traders on welfare tracked – for income and tax investigations -


- 12th Dec – Roxon joins Gillard as Enemy of the State – The Slipper verdict 1s Justice denied


- 11th Dec – Gillard is Dividing A NATION – It’s not about Politics, but rightful entitlement -


- 6th Dec – Gillard’s Judgement again challenged – what she’ll do for any positive publicity  -


- 5th Dec – ALP Senator John Faulkner – Perhaps a dark horse for the PM job  -


- 5th Dec – QLD ALP Badguys land plum jobs – Gillard continues to add to the mediocrity -


- 3rd Dec – Bob Katter’s Australian Party – an alternative -


- 3rd Dec – Some ‘Carbon-Tax’ reality -
- The World is not listening to the real facts -


- 29th Nov – A Slithering, Slimy, Spitting Lizard – Part II – Gillard’s been hiding in the Tall Grass – A follow-up Story -


- 28th Nov - A slithering, slimy, spitting Lizard – Gillard’s been hiding in the Tall Grass – now exposed -


- 26th Nov – The Collective v the Abstract – Gillard is aware of her wrong doings -


- 25th Nov – Distressed Damsel Gillard’s Black Knight – Bruce Wilson’s 11th hour offer to defend Gillard -


- 24th Nov – The Jewish v Arab problem – A naive perspective -


- 24th Nov – Hedley Thomas plunges the knife – Gillard mortally wounded -


- 23rd Nov – Immigration and Asylum Seekers – What is the real answer -


- 20th Nov – Schoolies Week Starts – The Booze for Kids debate again heats up -


- 16th Nov – How Deep does the AWU corruption cover-up go? – An exposé on innuendo, evidence, hearsay and conjecture -


- 15th nov – Hedley Thomas exploding on Gillard – Gillard has a case to answer … -


- 14th Nov – Gillard behaves like a Guilty Person – Asks for allegations to be made -


- 14th Nov – The Australian Media – Lapdog’s at best – absolutely lost the plot on integrity, and their charter of responsibility -


- 9th Nov – Open Letter to “The Independents” Re: -
- Julia Gillard, Peter Slipper, and Craig Thompson, three MP’s who bring continued shame to our Parliament -


- 9th Nov – “Courage is an Angle” – the difference between a good day and a great day -


- 8th Nov – RUDD fires a broadside aimed at GILLARD – done under a burka to hide its true intent -


- 6th Nov – Gillard’s caucus and union support in revolt – her position becoming more untenable by the day -


- 5th Nov – Referendum Discussion Part 1 – Compulsory Voting – Eye-Ball’s – “None of the Above Campaign” -


- 4th Nov – Gillard Sunburnt – the flames of discontent begin to impact -


- 2nd Nov – A Montage of AWU Scandal Reports – Gillard to become “Open-Season” -


- 1st Nov – Education … A white Elephant – Politicising the future of young Australians -


- To see more EYE-BALL ‘Opinion’ posts:

click here …


Title:
- American Gun Laws -
- will to change is just not there for Legislators -
| Author: EYE-BALL Opinion | 17th Dec 2012 |
Every body is reeling and has an opinion on the recent mass shooting in Connecticut USA.  Another 27 people died including 20 children aged from 5-10, and the teachers who tried to protect them. The shooter and his mother, one of the teachers, also died.

‘People kill people’, the gun does not point or pull the trigger all by itself – this oxymoron statement is the standard response that comes out after each one of these mass shootings.

There has been 41 USA mass killings – [i.e. 4 or more deaths constitutes as mass shooting] -  since 1997 when Australia introduced its gun buy-back legislation.   Before that date, there were 25 odd mass shootings in America.

In Australia there had been 13 mass shootings before the 1997 Howard introduced legislation culminating with the Port Arthur shooting of 35 people.  There has been no mass shootings in Australia since that Legislation was introduced.

This is evidence that legislation has had an influence in Australia in reducing gun related mass shootings.  In the time since 1997 there have been family massacres where guns were not used … how can you have mass murders by guns when guns are not used – again a oxymoron type debate.

If guns were readily available would there have been mass gun shootings – of course … so in part the legislation is seen to have worked because it took guns off the streets and made it harder to obtain gun licenses.

American gun laws revolve around the US Constitution and the 2nd Amendment – the Right to bear Arms.

That Law states: [Wikipedia source - linked here.]

The Second Amendment (Amendment II) to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights.

In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court issued two landmark decisions concerning the Second Amendment. In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. In dicta, the Court listed many longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession as being consistent with the Second Amendment. In McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment limits state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government.

The Actual wording states:

U.S. Constitution – Amendment 2
Amendment 2 – Right to Bear Arms

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Notes for this amendment:
Proposed 9/25/1789
Ratified 12/15/1791

The ‘Bill of Rights’ (1689) and the ‘US Constitution’ are documents that most modern day society’s have adopted in part in the forming of their own Constitutions.  The defining reasoning in all those who have used the ‘Bill of Rights’ and ‘US Constitution’ – is they have removed the ‘right to bear arms’ clause and amendment.

Make no mistake, if America really wanted to rid their communities, the drug dealers, the gang-bangers, and the 200 million registered guns, assault weapons and the like, they would have done so.   The will is not there because to own a gun in America is a freedom of expression.  The crime rates dictate people want to protect themselves – you have a gun, I’ll buy a bigger or even two guns to fight back.

The Gun Lobby’s financial support to the Republican Senators who vote as a block on any move to amend the gun ownership laws have deep pockets, and the money made in the gun retail and wholesale business represents a massive chunk of American commerce.

Take tobacco as an example in this debate – Government’s worldwide have increased taxes on tobacco to astronomical levels to create a deterrent to stop people killing themselves. The medical expense for tobacco induced cancers reduce all the tobacco taxes collected to a negative sum – the rest of the community pays the shortfall.

Why not ban the product all together under the Drug Legislation because tobacco kills people – it’s a freedom and whilst the science in the last 40 odd years has connected cancer and tobacco – in all that time tobacco lobbyist’s have kept the tobacco industry alive despite the US$ billions paid out in compensation to dead and dying tobacco smokers.

If legislators really wanted to rid their communities of their guns – a first step would be to lift license fees, annual and initial, increase the cost of weapons via sales like taxes, make it so expensive to own a gun that people will hand them back if an incentive is involved – much the same as the strategy was for tobacco.  This has not been achieved with any effectiveness.

87 people die or are injured in gun related crime every day in America – that is day after day every day of the year … for a society to accept these numbers and go about their business as if unconcerned says much about where American values reside.  You then turn the American debate to abortion and the like and all of a sudden Americans are up in arms over civil liberties concerned with the ‘right to choose’.

The two debates, guns and abortions are opposites  – hence the conundrum that is the complex society America represents.  The gun ownership debate is as much about a freedom of choice as opposed to the death and destruction guns create.   The debate needs to be framed differently if it is to have any chance of success.

America is a brutal society – crime is rampant and even more so since the GFC impact – store ownership is an invitation to be robbed and so they take to defending themselves – with guns.  It is all an escalation equation based on a society where freedoms have turned the American morality and conscience to a level that threatens the very basic freedoms it was meant to protect.

Killing somebody is destroying all the freedoms and civil liberties that person was entitled to …  America is a society out of control and when the East looks to America and says ‘stay away’ … ‘we don’t want you infecting us with your lewd and morally depraved societal values’ – they are not wrong.

Porn, grotesque violence, suggestive video games, comic strips, music lyrics,  cult movies based on depraved psycho’s, all in the name of entertainment – for most it is just that – but for the twisted and confused mind it means a whole different thing and the message it gives provides the thought and mentally disturbed with options they carry out in real life.

Who committed the crime – the messenger delivering the concept, or the mentally disturbed person pulling the trigger?

I don’t have an answer – but while man fights wars with guns and the like – while he finds that killing people is acceptable, be it sanctioned via war, or law-abiding execution, or tolerance of drug dealers killing themselves and innocents caught in the cross-fire, man’s right to defend themselves will lead to revenge and like retribution killings.

It is as simple as it is complex – this kid who carried out these murders used his mothers guns who by all reports was an enthusiastic gun owner and user.   There is only the motive left to understand because access and opportunity was provided by third parties in a free and open society.

Could the mother have seen this coming – an unanswerable question … but when school grounds and classrooms become the battlegrounds where sicko’s target for whatever reason … there is something horribly wrong with our teachings and the societal examples being provided.

The parents of these children will never have another Christmas where they don’t have the sense of loss this tragedy has created.   In a week or so the media and people will have moved on and be thinking about their own Christmas and family – this is a hard issue for America and if Obama is to achieve anything in his second term of office – riding the streets and homes of assault type weapons would be a defining achievement.

 


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


The EYE-BALL Opinion …

EYE-BALL Opinion – “International men of mystery” – An Australian modern day Bank Heist story -

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2

Latest ‘EYE-BALL Opinion’ Posts:


- 13th Dec – eBay Traders on welfare tracked – for income and tax investigations -


- 12th Dec – Roxon joins Gillard as Enemy of the State – The Slipper verdict 1s Justice denied


- 11th Dec – Gillard is Dividing A NATION – It’s not about Politics, but rightful entitlement -


- 6th Dec – Gillard’s Judgement again challenged – what she’ll do for any positive publicity  -


- 5th Dec – ALP Senator John Faulkner – Perhaps a dark horse for the PM job  -


- 5th Dec – QLD ALP Badguys land plum jobs – Gillard continues to add to the mediocrity -


- 3rd Dec – Bob Katter’s Australian Party – an alternative -


- 3rd Dec – Some ‘Carbon-Tax’ reality -
- The World is not listening to the real facts -


- 29th Nov – A Slithering, Slimy, Spitting Lizard – Part II – Gillard’s been hiding in the Tall Grass – A follow-up Story -


- 28th Nov - A slithering, slimy, spitting Lizard – Gillard’s been hiding in the Tall Grass – now exposed -


- 26th Nov – The Collective v the Abstract – Gillard is aware of her wrong doings -


- 25th Nov – Distressed Damsel Gillard’s Black Knight – Bruce Wilson’s 11th hour offer to defend Gillard -


- 24th Nov – The Jewish v Arab problem – A naive perspective -


- 24th Nov – Hedley Thomas plunges the knife – Gillard mortally wounded -


- 23rd Nov – Immigration and Asylum Seekers – What is the real answer -


- 20th Nov – Schoolies Week Starts – The Booze for Kids debate again heats up -


- 16th Nov – How Deep does the AWU corruption cover-up go? – An exposé on innuendo, evidence, hearsay and conjecture -


- 15th nov – Hedley Thomas exploding on Gillard – Gillard has a case to answer … -


- 14th Nov – Gillard behaves like a Guilty Person – Asks for allegations to be made -


- 14th Nov – The Australian Media – Lapdog’s at best – absolutely lost the plot on integrity, and their charter of responsibility -


- 9th Nov – Open Letter to “The Independents” Re: -
- Julia Gillard, Peter Slipper, and Craig Thompson, three MP’s who bring continued shame to our Parliament -


- 9th Nov – “Courage is an Angle” – the difference between a good day and a great day -


- 8th Nov – RUDD fires a broadside aimed at GILLARD – done under a burka to hide its true intent -


- 6th Nov – Gillard’s caucus and union support in revolt – her position becoming more untenable by the day -


- 5th Nov – Referendum Discussion Part 1 – Compulsory Voting – Eye-Ball’s – “None of the Above Campaign” -


- 4th Nov – Gillard Sunburnt – the flames of discontent begin to impact -


- 2nd Nov – A Montage of AWU Scandal Reports – Gillard to become “Open-Season” -


- 1st Nov – Education … A white Elephant – Politicising the future of young Australians -


- To see more EYE-BALL ‘Opinion’ posts:

click here …


Title: – [Copied Story]
- “International men of mystery” -
- An Australian modern-day Bank Heist story -
| Author: EYE-BALL Opinion | 16th Dec 2012 |
The SMH Senior Reporter – Kate McClymont wrote a story last week about an ‘Ocean’s 11′ type Bank heist that is worthy of reading.   I for one had not heard of this ‘heist’ until I read the story and wanted to share – it’s a worthy piece of journalism by a quality writer …

Read story below:

International men of mystery


| Author: Kate McClymont | Date: Dec 13th, 2012 | Link to On-Line Story. |

[Photo Info - Ernst Hufnagl. Photo: Kate Geraghty]

They were the Aussie Ocean’s Eleven – no guns, no masks, no getaway cars. With the last of the crew behind bars, Kate McClymont details how a group of robbers staged one of history’s biggest bank heists – without setting foot in a bank. 

It’s lunch time on Christmas Eve 2003, and last-minute shoppers, jostling and rushing past to get everything done on time, pay scant attention to the two men entering a side door of Telstra’s phone exchange in Dalley Street, in the heart of Sydney’s CBD. Using his Telstra card to swipe himself through the security door, Barry Osborne, 42, a Telstra linesman, along with Ernst Hufnagl, 52, an underworld figure, confront a spaghetti-like network of phone cables covering a large swathe of the city.

[Photo Info - Barry Osbourne. Photo: Kate Geraghty]

Osborne knows exactly what he’s looking for. It only takes a matter of minutes for the wiring whiz to hack into cables connecting him to a special phone line at State Street Global Advisers (SSGA), an international financial outfit, housed in a skyscraper across town, that manages billions of dollars. Osborne needs this authorised line to send a fax containing investment instructions to JPMorgan Chase, another banking monolith located only a stone’s throw from the Telstra exchange. Once Osborne has hot-wired the line, and he has the two financial giants “talking” to one another, Hufnagl sends a five-page fax through to JPMorgan, purportedly from SSGA, requesting a $150 million transfer from account number 28966, belonging to the superannuation funds of federal public servants.

The first page of the fax goes through without a hitch. But when the remaining pages stall, there are several minutes of white-knuckle panic. After multiple failed attempts, and with precious minutes slipping away, the two are forced to switch to a generic Telstra fax line, figuring it will be the number on the title page that counts.

Over in a secure room at JPMorgan, a fax machine spits out the first page, then suddenly stops. Although a senior clerk puts in a call to SSGA about the missing pages, this is the day before Christmas, and no one calls back. And sure enough, soon the remaining pages roll out of the machine, full of dollar signs in stark black and white. A $150 million transfer, into four nominated overseas bank accounts. Two of the accounts are with the HSBC bank in Hong Kong: one, for a company registered in the British Virgin Islands used for depositing money into gambling cruises, is to receive $30 million; the other, for a company involved with gambling in Macau, is to get $20.6 million. The third account, in the name of a Richard Kurland at Switzerland’s Banque Cantonale Vaudoise, is to receive $26.7 million. The fourth account, in the name of Stylianou Georgios Ltd at Greece’s Laiki Bank, is to be injected with $71.9 million.

[Photo Info - Dallas Fitzgerald. Photo: Kate Geraghty]

Meanwhile, the two swindlers still have their biggest security hurdle to cross – the “confirmation call back”. Using the SSGA line that Osborne has hacked into, and posing as Craig Slater, an authorised signatory to the Commonwealth Super account, Hufnagl calls Greg Bourchier, an assistant treasurer at JPMorgan. In his best attempt at impersonating a banker, Hufnagl asks Bourchier, a pudgy, rather nervous man, to complete the “call back” to the designated line at SSGA, confirming that all details in the faxed instruction are correct.

Everything appears to be proceeding to plan. The two men are jubilant as they pack up their tool kit and gear. And there is a spring in Hufnagl’s step as he walks the short distance to a seedy strip joint on Market Street called Lady Jane’s, to report back to his boss, underworld legend “Teflon” Tony Vincent, who has masterminded the operation. In sheer daring, the Vincent plan is in a class with some of the best heist movies ever made – an Australian “Ocean’s Eleven”, if you like. But for now, all Hufnagl can think about is what he’ll do with his cut.

[Photo Info - Jamie Vincent.]

Later that afternoon, senior bank staff from JPMorgan return from their festive Christmas lunch, eager to get away on their four-day holiday. Despite noticing that the people from SSGA have mistakenly dated the fax November rather than December, they authorise the release of a colossal $150 million. Within minutes, four overseas bank accounts with next to no money in them – two in Hong Kong, one in Switzerland and one in Greece – are bursting with balances each in the tens of millions.

The tiniest of slip-ups

It’s now late on Christmas Eve 2003, and a posse of topless strippers in stilettos listlessly perform their raunchy routines for a sad throng of lonely, glassy-eyed men. In a private room at the back of the club, crime boss Tony Vincent, a bullet-headed brute of a man in his mid-60s, is nervously moving his blue-tinted glasses up and down the ridge of his nose. Word has come through that the whole sting, for which he had assembled a diverse crew of criminals of different nationalities and skills, and which promises to make them all rich beyond their wildest dreams, is at risk of becoming unstuck by the tiniest of slip-ups.

[Photo Info - Tony Vincent.]

A tiny, three-letter slip-up, to be precise. Some time earlier, when the bank manager of the Laiki Bank in Athens was going through his accounts on Christmas Eve – at that time of year, Greece is nine hours behind Australia – he was astonished to see $71.9 million suddenly deposited into the bank account of Georgios Stylianou, a man of very modest means. And so he called Stylianou personally. “Were you expecting such a sum of money?” he enquired. Stylianou declared he most certainly was. Apologetic, the bank manager explained that the funds could not be cleared because a “Ltd” appeared beside Stylianou’s account name. Stylianou would need to get JPMorgan to remit the funds to the correct account name – minus the offending “Ltd”.

After hanging up, the bank manager took the added precaution of sending a fax through to JPMorgan, double checking that such a vast sum was really meant for Stylianou’s account. Meanwhile, a panicked Stylianou was on the phone to Vincent in Sydney, informing him of the “Ltd” glitch.

But Vincent, knowing that the bank staff in Sydney have left for their Christmas break, and will not return until the following Monday, has time to plan a crisis strategy. He and the Ocean’s Eleven crew will have five days’ grace until the bank will be alerted to any kind of mistake, but it also means they’ll have to wait until Monday to send another fax purporting to come from JPMorgan. Sending a fax any earlier may be too risky, as the overseas banks will be suspicious as to why they are receiving a fax from a bank in Australia closed for the Christmas break.

Vincent immediately summons three of his loyal lieutenants to a crisis meeting at the strip club, including a man nicknamed “Mr Pink”. (In the film Reservoir Dogs, Mr Pink is one of the criminals planning a diamond heist.) Mr Pink is Dallas Fitzgerald, the 22-year-old son of one of the country’s scariest men, bikie boss Felix Lyle. Also at hand is Garry Peterson, nicknamed ”Fat Bastard” by his criminal mates, and Matthew Terreiro, who helped set up the fraudulent Greek bank account.

[Photo Info - High-seas rollers … Jian Ping Wang (third from right) with Alexandr Roizman (second from right) aboard the floating gambling den, Captain Omar III.]

Meanwhile, a bank account in Switzerland that has lain dormant for 10 years with the paltry sum of $90, is suddenly brimming with $26.7 million. The account belongs to Richard Kurland, a 56-year-old South African-born solicitor and fraud investigator who moved to Australia some 20 years earlier and settled in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney. Some months earlier, Kurland agreed to his Swiss bank account being used by a friend, Leon Kuris, who insisted he was about to receive a great deal of money from an investor. As Kuris was unemployed – and full of crazy get-rich-quick schemes – Kurland assumed it would amount to nothing.

So you can imagine his astonishment on Christmas Eve when he receives a call from Kuris asking him whether “the money” has arrived. He gets an even bigger shock when he rings to check his account balance at the Banque Cantonale Vaudoise in Lausanne. A bank staffer confirms that Kurland’s account is now bursting with $26.7 million. Kuris hastily explains that the money is from an “investor” named “Dallas O’Hara” (actually Fitzgerald), introduced to him by his old friend Alexandr Roizman. Kuris gives instructions to Kurland that the funds are to be immediately transferred to other accounts across the globe.

Because Kurland’s account has been dormant for 10 years, and is now awash with money that he immediately wants to transfer, the Swiss bankers want to ask a few questions. To buy time, they tell Kurland that because he wants to transfer such a large sum of money, he’ll need to come to Switzerland to do it in person.

[Photo Info - Bad company: (left to right) Jamie Vincent, Arkadi Drisner and Dallas Fitzgerald.]

While Richard Kurland is up for much of the night dealing with the Swiss, and trying to get the money transferred on behalf of his friend, over in Hong Kong other members of the syndicate are busy trying to launder the $30.5 million that has been sent to an account held with HSBC in the name of Hong Kong Power Limited. Kuris’s friend Alexandr Roizman, a 48-year-old invalid pensioner rumoured to be ex-KGB, is on his way to Hong Kong to spend the night on a gambling ship.

This is money laundering at its most basic. Gamblers deposit money into their account before the ship sets sail. Once on board, these funds are issued as gambling chips. At the end of the cruise the gambler’s funds are returned by way of a receipt, which can be easily converted into untraceable cash in Macau the following morning. On the night of December 29, having previously sailed rich American tourists around the Caribbean, the Captain Omar III is about to embark on its maiden voyage as an ocean-going gambling den.

By the time the ship sets sail at 8.30 that evening, the penniless Roizman has the astronomical sum of $30.5 million sitting in his gambling account. Gambling with him on this night is a friend from Sydney, 37-year-old Jian Ping Wang, who was a public relations liaison officer at a casino in Macau, before coming to Sydney to work as a cook.

Roizman and Wang have to wait 1 1/2 hours – until the ship gets into international waters – before the gambling begins in earnest. Roizman sips some of the fine cognac on offer and wolfs down food from the generous buffet. He pops his head into the mahjong room on deck 5, looks through the duty-free shops and whiles away some time watching a lame Las Vegas-style show in the bordello-red lounge room.

Unlike Roizman, Wang, a professional gambler, isn’t fazed by the croupier’s rapid-fire hand movements as she flicks the cards onto the green felt table. For hour after hour the pair gamble at baccarat. As dawn is breaking over the calm expanse of the South China Sea, the pair have lost a colossal sum – more than $3.4 million. But they don’t care. The receipt for the rest of their money is in excess of $27 million. As the Captain Omar III is cashless, all they have to do now is redeem their receipt at the famed Casino Lisboa in Macau.

The ship makes its way back to the Ocean Terminal in Hong Kong, at the southern tip of the Kowloon Peninsula. Although it’s still early, the wharf, flanked by an enormous modern shopping centre, is already busy. With his dark hair parted in the middle and tied back in a pony-tail, Dallas Fitzgerald stands waiting. He has a million and more reasons to be pumped with adrenalin, but the young man maintains his trademark inscrutability.

Armed with a receipt entitling them to collect $27 million, the trio catch a high-speed ferry for Macau, known as the Monte Carlo of the Orient, where the huge Stanley Ho-owned Casino Lisboa is located. They are about to be rewarded with the mother of all Christmases.

Any residual Christmas cheer among JPMorgan staff swiftly evaporates when they return to work on Monday, December 29. First, there’s the fax from Laiki Bank querying the multimillion-dollar deposit into Stylianou’s account. Then the JPMorgan people responsible for the Commonwealth Super fund are aghast when they discover account 28966 is catastrophically overdrawn. There are ashen faces all around as they trace the $150 million back into four overseas accounts, now converted into Hong Kong dollars, Swiss francs and euros.

The treasury staff ring Craig Slater, from SSGA, an authorised signatory to the Commonwealth Super account. When Slater says he doesn’t know what they’re talking about, there is rising panic at JPMorgan and they forward him the fax. To their horror, he swiftly declares it to be a forgery. The two financial institutions then check their phone records. JPMorgan has a recording of the call which Hufnagl, posing as Slater, made to Bourchier. But at their end, SSGA has no such recording. Clearly the voice is not Slater’s. And JPMorgan has no record of a ”call back” from their office to SSGA.

Facing the potential embarrassment of being the victim of Australia’s most audacious bank fraud, JPMorgan immediately contacts the foreign banks and puts a temporary freeze on the four accounts while the bank obtains the necessary court orders. Not long after, police from the nearest station, The Rocks, arrive.

While JPMorgan and SSGA engage in a series of crisis meetings, the Ocean’s Eleven syndicate is also busy. Osborne and Hufnagl are back at the Dalley Street exchange armed with a bodgied-up letter on JPMorgan letterhead to correct the ”Ltd” mistake on Stylianou’s account. But it’s too late. The account has been frozen by the bank.

Meanwhile, Fitzgerald, Roizman and Wang are making their early-morning dash to Macau, the pulsating neon-lit gambling mecca, their destination the once-grand Casino Lisboa. But when Roizman presents the receipt to withdraw the $27.4 million, the trio are informed the account has been frozen. Fitzgerald demands that the cashier try again. The answer is the same.

Fitzgerald immediately jumps on a ferry back across Victoria Harbour to Hong Kong’s business district, where he attempts to withdraw funds from the other Hong Kong account used in the sting. But to his dismay it, too, has been frozen. A series of tense phone calls ensues between Fitzgerald and Jamie Vincent – Tony’s son – back in Sydney. The normally taciturn Fitzgerald is beside himself. He screams down the phone complaining that the money can’t be accessed and that he is surrounded by “a bunch of angry f…ing Chinamen”. Minutes later, sounding deflated, Jamie rings back to say it is “all kind of f…ed”. The Ocean’s Eleven sting is dead in the water.

Organised crime’s dark heart

A fortnight passes, and as the mammoth, meticulous scale of the bank heist becomes more and more apparent, the Australian Federal Police is called in. The team leader assigned to the investigation, which becomes known as Operation Riparian, is Brad Kirwan, a fresh-faced 33-year-old, who has only been with the AFP for two years, after 14 years of service in remote outback communities and a stint as a detective on the Gold Coast. His deputy is Scott Miller, a tall 36-year-old, who worked in customer service for Telstra for 13 years and the finance sector until a mid-life crisis of sorts propelled him to join the police. As fate would have it, Miller’s background will be a perfect fit for the investigation.

But at this point both men are not to know that this case will take over their lives for the next two years, leading them into the dark heart of organised crime in Australia. The task for the pair of relative ”newbies” is daunting. Their main leads are a fax, which was sent from the Telstra exchange, and an unknown voice purporting to be SSGA’s Craig Slater’s saying, ”How are you going, mate? … Not too bad” as he confirmed the instructions regarding the transfer of the $150 million. Identifying that mysterious voice would be like looking for a needle in a haystack.

The investigation has two distinct arms: the actual fraud and the laundering of the money once it had been stolen. Kirwan and Miller slog away for more than a month before their first breakthrough: JPMorgan’s treasury officer. Greg Bourchier took the call from the fraudsters, and JPMorgan phone records indicate that he didn’t make the compulsory ”call back” to SSGA. When police trawl through his personal phone records, they discover an intriguing connection – and start joining the criminal dots.

Bourchier is a family friend of Garry Peterson, the former secretary-manager of Newtown RSL club in Sydney. Peterson is the ”Fat Bastard” on phone intercepts for another investigation under way, into illegal drug activity – Strike Force Westbank. Peterson is a close associate of both Dallas Fitzgerald and Tony Vincent. For the past 18 months, members of Tony Vincent’s criminal network have been the subject of a covert joint investigation by the NSW Crime Commission and the NSW police who suspect the group of being involved in large-scale drug distribution and money laundering.

As it turns out, on December 24, 2003, undercover police attached to Strike Force Westbank were at their posts watching and listening to Vincent and his crew, although they had no idea about the bank heist. They interpreted the panicked talk of cash transfers as referring to the importation of drugs.

After listening to hundreds of hours of telephone intercepts of Vincent’s crew, Kirwan and Miller hit the jackpot. There – on a call to Peterson – they listen to a voice saying, ”How are you going, mate? … Not too bad.” It is Ernst Hufnagl. More intercepted calls confirm that the phrase is Hufnagl’s trademark ”phone tic”. They now have the man who rang Bourchier at JPMorgan the previous Christmas Eve pretending to be Craig Slater.

Hufnagl’s phone records provide their next major breakthrough. As they match up all the numbers Hufnagl has phoned, they stumble across the number of Barry Osborne. ”Hey, that’s the Telstra guy!” Miller calls out excitedly to his colleagues.

The Telstra phone exchange just around the corner from JPMorgan was one of the first ports of call for the police. Although he had never worked as a Telstra technician, Miller’s time with the organisation makes him familiar with how phone lines worked, and he revisits the Dalley Street exchange line to determine just how a fax could have been sent from there. That’s when he makes another discovery: Osborne’s use of his Telstra swipe card to come in the side door. The exchange was being renovated at the time, so if the linesman had bothered to use the front door, there would have been no record of him in the building that day.

Mysterious figure

As the police team of 14 sift through material, they discover that Osborne didn’t work at the Dalley Street exchange, and on December 24, 2003 he was on a rostered day off from the Waverley depot, where he normally worked. Using the surveillance and intercept material from Strike Force Westbank, Kirwan and Miller are able to reconstruct the key movements of the gang leading up to the bank heist. And as they trawl back over surveillance records, they discover customs have secretly copied the contents of a bag owned by a mysterious figure suspected of being an international drug trafficker.

Arkadi Drisner, an Israeli citizen who is on Interpol’s intelligence reports, but has no convictions, first turned up on intercepted calls on Tony Vincent’s phone in May 2003. In September of that year, customs officers at Sydney airport searched Drisner’s luggage and copied everything they could find. Among the documents in his bags were faxes on JPMorgan letterhead relating to foreign-currency bank accounts. There were also handwritten notes about how to transfer money around the world. The notes also had some dates identifying public holidays in Australia and overseas.

When Kirwan checks the handwriting on these faxes, he identifies it as that of the strangely anxious Bourchier – he has found the insider at JPMorgan. Then another big break: they obtain footage from an earlier search, on a drug-related matter, of Dallas Fitzgerald’s inner-city apartment. Fitzgerald has JPMorgan documents lying on a table, again with Bourchier’s handwriting plastered all over them.

In August 2005, after 20 months of a painstaking investigation that has led them through a maze of international money laundering and local mob activity involving drugs and sex parlours, Kirwan and Miller have amassed enough evidence to get the Feds to swoop. By this time, however, many of the Ocean’s Eleven crew are already in jail for unrelated offences.

If there is any lingering doubt about the sheer cunning and bold planning of the whole Ocean’s Eleven sting, it’s swiftly dismissed by police following the first wave of arrests. Sitting in a paddy wagon are Osborne and Hufnagl, who although plainly anxious about what lies ahead for them in criminal charges, manage to swap some friendly small talk. Opposite them sits a clearly agitated man, the bank insider Bourchier. The pair have no idea who this frightened man is.

What happened to the “Ocean’s Eleven”

■ ”Teflon” Tony Vincent was already doing a six-year-stretch for drug supply when he was charged with the Ocean’s Eleven offences. He was given a three-year sentence, which he served at the same time as his drug matter.

■ Dallas Fitzgerald, who told the jury he was called “Mr Pink” because this was his favourite colour, received a three-year sentence in November last year for his role in the money-laundering aspect of the heist.

■ Alexandr Roizman was sentenced to a five-and-a-half-year minimum sentence in February 2010 for dealing in the proceeds of crime.

■ Gregory James Bourchier, the JPMorgan insider, was given a two-and-a-half-year minimum jail sentence in 2008.

■ Jamie Vincent was jailed for 20 months in 2010. He had only been out of jail for a short time, having already served five years over drug offences.

■ Barry Osborne Ernst Hufnagl received minimum jail terms of three years in 2008.

■ Matthew Terreiro was arrested for his part in organising the Greek bank account. The charges against him were dropped in April 2009.

■ Jian Hua Chen, a well-known gambler at Sydney’s Star casino, received a three-and-a-half-year sentence for helping to set up one of the Hong Kong accounts.

■ Jian Ping Wang, who along with Roizman gambled away $3.4 million on the Captain Omar III, received a six-and-a-half-year jail sentence in 2010.

■ Richard Kurland, who had the dormant Swiss bank account, had charges dropped after the court ruled he didn’t know the funds were from the proceeds of crime.

■ Leon Kuris also had charges dropped on the basis he did not know the funds were derived from fraudulent activity.

■ Arkadi Drisner flew out of Sydney on Christmas Day 2003, the day after the fraud. He hasn’t been seen since.

… Read more on-line …

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please click your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story. Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


The EYE-BALL Opinion …

EYE-BALL Opinion – eBay Traders on welfare tracked for income and tax investigations …

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2

Latest ‘EYE-BALL Opinion’ Posts:


- 12th Dec – Roxon joins Gillard as Enemy of the State – The Slipper verdict 1s Justice denied


- 11th Dec – Gillard is Dividing A NATION – It’s not about Politics, but rightful entitlement -


- 6th Dec – Gillard’s Judgement again challenged – what she’ll do for any positive publicity  -


- 5th Dec – ALP Senator John Faulkner – Perhaps a dark horse for the PM job  -


- 5th Dec – QLD ALP Badguys land plum jobs – Gillard continues to add to the mediocrity -


- 3rd Dec – Bob Katter’s Australian Party – an alternative -


- 3rd Dec – Some ‘Carbon-Tax’ reality -
- The World is not listening to the real facts -


- 29th Nov – A Slithering, Slimy, Spitting Lizard – Part II – Gillard’s been hiding in the Tall Grass – A follow-up Story -


- 28th Nov - A slithering, slimy, spitting Lizard – Gillard’s been hiding in the Tall Grass – now exposed -


- 26th Nov – The Collective v the Abstract – Gillard is aware of her wrong doings -


- 25th Nov – Distressed Damsel Gillard’s Black Knight – Bruce Wilson’s 11th hour offer to defend Gillard -


- 24th Nov – The Jewish v Arab problem – A naive perspective -


- 24th Nov – Hedley Thomas plunges the knife – Gillard mortally wounded -


- 23rd Nov – Immigration and Asylum Seekers – What is the real answer -


- 20th Nov – Schoolies Week Starts – The Booze for Kids debate again heats up -


- 16th Nov – How Deep does the AWU corruption cover-up go? – An exposé on innuendo, evidence, hearsay and conjecture -


- 15th nov – Hedley Thomas exploding on Gillard – Gillard has a case to answer … -


- 14th Nov – Gillard behaves like a Guilty Person – Asks for allegations to be made -


- 14th Nov – The Australian Media – Lapdog’s at best – absolutely lost the plot on integrity, and their charter of responsibility -


- 9th Nov – Open Letter to “The Independents” Re: -
- Julia Gillard, Peter Slipper, and Craig Thompson, three MP’s who bring continued shame to our Parliament -


- 9th Nov – “Courage is an Angle” – the difference between a good day and a great day -


- 8th Nov – RUDD fires a broadside aimed at GILLARD – done under a burka to hide its true intent -


- 6th Nov – Gillard’s caucus and union support in revolt – her position becoming more untenable by the day -


- 5th Nov – Referendum Discussion Part 1 – Compulsory Voting – Eye-Ball’s – “None of the Above Campaign” -


- 4th Nov – Gillard Sunburnt – the flames of discontent begin to impact -


- 2nd Nov – A Montage of AWU Scandal Reports – Gillard to become “Open-Season” -


- 1st Nov – Education … A white Elephant – Politicising the future of young Australians -


- To see more EYE-BALL ‘Opinion’ posts:

click here …


Title:
- eBay Traders on welfare tracked -
- for income and tax investigations -
| Author: EYE-BALL Opinion | 13th Dec 2012 |
The Department of Human Services have become the new ‘jackboots’ in Gillards Nazi like approach to welfare recipients doing some on-line eBay trading.   The Dept now has the ability with new laws now allowing them to track eBay traders responsible for threshold trade limits.  It can also match these people with the Centerlink database to catch out undeclared incomes.

Read story below:

Wheeler-dealer eBay sellers pinged for $230k as the hunt for welfare cheats goes online


| Author: Patricia Karvelas | Date: Dec 13th, 2012 | Link to On-Line Story. |

A CRACKDOWN on welfare recipients using eBay to make undeclared money has led to 71 investigations, with six cheats found to owe a total of $237,861, but so far only $725 has been recovered.

In the first tangible results from the trial run by the Department of Human Services, eBay has been forced to reveal the identities of about 15,000 people who sold more than $20,000 worth of goods on the site in a year.

The Australian can also reveal that 337 welfare recipients — 15 of them on child support — have been spied on using optical surveillance to check if they are receiving income they are not declaring, to keep their welfare payments. This compared with 588 — 22 child support — investigations in 2010-11.

Human Services Minister Kim Carr said while many people were honest, online trading was a growing problem.

“Unfortunately, there is a small minority who may seek to exploit online trading at the expense of the social security system,” Senator Carr told The Australian.

“The rapid growth of global online trading forums such as eBay has created more opportunities for people to earn income, in some cases without declaring it.

“This kind of activity, where fraudulent, has been met with a highly effective compliance program.”

Senator Carr said if the eBay data matching pilot continued to produce results, it could become a permanent part of the department’s compliance armoury.

“If the pilot is successful, the eBay data matching program may be used in the future as part of our broader compliance program,” he said. “Overall, our compliance program has shifted over the past year towards early intervention — to help people avoid getting behind with reporting, and free up resources to enable a more personalised service to those most in need.”

The government emphasised the trial was in its early days, but first results were encouraging. The department secured the 15,000 eBay user records in September last year after a privacy protocol was agreed to with the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner.

Since then the department has methodically cross-checked those 15,000 records against Centrelink’s records to find people who were Centrelink recipients as well as big eBay earners in the 2010-11 financial year.

The nine debts worth $237,861 pinned on six customers on November 8 represent the first tangible results from this trial.

An assessment of the trial’s future will be made once the results from the initial 15,000 records have been produced.

In a sure sign that the Government is in a revenue crisis – eBay sales and or purchases by people on welfare are now being targeted as a new source of welfare savings.

The welfare system has a program where recipients can become eligible for credits, or work a number of hours and not have their pension offset.  All designed to supplement the welfare payment which is grossly inadequate.   What is this message telling welfare recipients?

What the above story does not tell us is what types of pension these people were receiving, except for the small numbers quoted as earning ‘child-support’ benefits.

Surely with the ‘tax minimisation’ schemes operating that effectively reduce the tax paid by high net worth individuals through Trusts, and off-shore registrations, the Tax office could come up with better ways to use the Human Resources investigators to catch larger fish.

This Government is so desperate for positive news during thus AWU hiatus, the Department Minister Senator Carr,  believes this is a big enough story to warrant national broadcasting – if they wanted to really catch people why broadcast the technology?

Genuine welfare cheats are a problem – but if you are a middle-income earner and work on commission incentives – estimating incomes forward to allow Social Security to make child-support payments can be a tricky business.   Under and over estimates happen all the time – what is the Dept telling those on child-support welfare – declare your eBay trades.   That is a stone best left unturned – because then ‘losses’ can become a part of the equation with tax offsets.

If one was to compare the taxpayer cost of say – former Speaker in the House of Representatives Mr Slipper and his ‘rorts’ and overseas ‘junkets’, it would take how many welfare cheats to cover what Slipper has ripped out of the ministerial expense system?   The latest report had Mr Slipper spending $300k on parliamentary expenses since he stood down as Speaker.  This included $100k worth of overseas trips for himself and family – see linked story here.

Slipper cried foul recently and declared he would go bankrupt if he had to pay his own legal costs to fight the Ashby case.   The Judge did him a favour yesterday by giving him a favourable verdict – see story here.  EYE-BALL wrote a post on this story and it can be read here – the point being is that income accountability shout start at the highest level – if Slipper can escape punishment with ‘pay-back’ deals if he gets caught, why would he not continue to test the system for all he can rip off..

I’m a little on the fence on this subject – unemployment benefit is less than $400 a week – where is the Human Resources Dept targeting – child support type welfare, disability, or single mother support welfare.   Rents around Australia are pushing $300 a week in rural areas, and 4-$500 in metropolitan zones.   How can the unemployment benefit allow anyone to survive.

Rent assistance has not been increased on any index basis since the early 2000′s.   In that time rents in some areas have more than doubled.   Advocates have argued for years about the inadequacy of the welfare payment to genuine applicants.   It is a political football – the perception in giving welfare increases to unemployed persons over and above normal indexing is always a negative poll trigger.   Targeting disability and middle-income child support type welfare is a vote winner.

There are many mixed messages in this announcement.

Tax evasion is a National past-time for everybody – if someone is arbitraging eBay buyers and sellers good luck to them – what is the margin/profit being made … if turnover is the benchmark criteria, not all sales would be profitable.

These traders are paying GST on new store items sold/purchased on eBay – many bored home makers do eBay trading whilst at home taking care of their children.   Would the Government rather them be watching TV, or down the pub playing the pokies … if they are intuitive and smart enough to make good use of the time and make a few bucks doing it – why should the Government want to intercede and try and make a case to have child-support welfare removed, reduced and/or paid back.

Where is the incentive in life when the Government has its hand in you pocket all the time.   The GST is supposed to take care of the tax on these types of items … second-hand goods don’t attract GST nor should they.

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please click your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story. Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


The EYE-BALL Opinion …

EYE-BALL Opinion – Bob Katter’s Australian Party – an alternative -

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2

Latest ‘EYE-BALL Opinion’ Posts:


- 3rd Dec – Some ‘Carbon-Tax’ reality -
- The World is not listening to the real facts -


- 29th Nov – A Slithering, Slimy, Spitting Lizard – Part II – Gillard’s been hiding in the Tall Grass – A follow-up Story -


- 28th Nov - A slithering, slimy, spitting Lizard – Gillard’s been hiding in the Tall Grass – now exposed -


- 26th Nov – The Collective v the Abstract – Gillard is aware of her wrong doings -


- 25th Nov – Distressed Damsel Gillard’s Black Knight – Bruce Wilson’s 11th hour offer to defend Gillard -


- 24th Nov – The Jewish v Arab problem – A naive perspective -


- 24th Nov – Hedley Thomas plunges the knife – Gillard mortally wounded -


- 23rd Nov – Immigration and Asylum Seekers – What is the real answer -


- 20th Nov – Schoolies Week Starts – The Booze for Kids debate again heats up -


- 16th Nov – How Deep does the AWU corruption cover-up go? – An exposé on innuendo, evidence, hearsay and conjecture -


- 15th nov – Hedley Thomas exploding on Gillard – Gillard has a case to answer … -


- 14th Nov – Gillard behaves like a Guilty Person – Asks for allegations to be made -


- 14th Nov – The Australian Media – Lapdog’s at best – absolutely lost the plot on integrity, and their charter of responsibility -


- 9th Nov – Open Letter to “The Independents” Re: -
- Julia Gillard, Peter Slipper, and Craig Thompson, three MP’s who bring continued shame to our Parliament -


- 9th Nov – “Courage is an Angle” – the difference between a good day and a great day -


- 8th Nov – RUDD fires a broadside aimed at GILLARD – done under a burka to hide its true intent -


- 6th Nov – Gillard’s caucus and union support in revolt – her position becoming more untenable by the day -


- 5th Nov – Referendum Discussion Part 1 – Compulsory Voting – Eye-Ball’s – “None of the Above Campaign” -


- 4th Nov – Gillard Sunburnt – the flames of discontent begin to impact -


- 2nd Nov – A Montage of AWU Scandal Reports – Gillard to become “Open-Season” -


- 1st Nov – Education … A white Elephant – Politicising the future of young Australians -


- To see more EYE-BALL ‘Opinion’ posts:

click here …


Title:
- Bob Katter’s Australian Party -
- an alternative -
| Author: EYE-BALL Opinion | 3rd Dec 2012 |
There is an alternative if you like your Politics Nth Queensland style. Bob Katter is winning friends in Queensland politics with LNP defections.  His numbers look set to rise after last weeks turmoil involving QLD Premier Campbell Newman.

Talk is that Clive Palmer is looking to form an alliance to take on Newman and see him forced out of the LNP Leadership.  Just how they do that up against a 75 odd seat majority is still an unknown.

Perhaps Bob’s ‘Australian Party’ is worth a look.

The following was sent as a promotional ‘tongue in cheek style’ message.

Well AT LAST A POLITICIAN WHO SPEAKS THE TRUTH!!!

On the basis of this email, the day will come when the ANZAC Day Parade will be banned, RSL’s will close and Australian soldiers will wear a different uniform.

As Bob Katter says below, the Australian flag is already forbidden in some public areas. Sometimes I wonder if we can still call this place Australia – it’s already owned by many foreign countries now with huge investments in place.

Whether you love him or hate him, he hits a raw nerve!

Bob Katter …. Saying it as it is:

“… My great, great, great grandfather watched as his friends died in the Boer War. My grandfather watched and bled as his friends died in World Wars 1&2. My grandfather watched as his friends & brothers died in the Depression of 32. My father watched as his friends died in Korea. I watched as my friends died in Vietnam, East Timor & Desert Storm. Our sons and daughters watched & bled as their friends died in Afghanistan and Iraq .

None of them died for the Afghanistan and Iraq Flag. Every Australian died for the Australian flag.

At a Victorian high school foreign students raised a Middle East flag on a school flag pole. Australian students took it down. Guess who was expelled … the students who took it down.

160 West Australian high school students were sent home, because they wore T-shirts with the Australian flag printed on them.

Enough is enough.

This message needs to be viewed by every Australian; and every Australian needs to stand up for Australia.  We’ve bent over to appease the Aussie-haters long enough.  I’m taking a stand.

I’m standing up because of the hundreds of thousands who died fighting in wars for this country, and for the Australian flag.

And shame on anyone who tries to make this a racist message.

AUSTRALIANS, stop giving away Your RIGHTS!

THIS IS OUR COUNTRY!

This statement DOES NOT mean I’m against immigration!

YOU ARE WELCOME HERE, IN MY COUNTRY, welcome to come legally:

  1. Get a sponsor!
  2. Learn the LANGUAGE, as immigrants have in the past!
  3. Live by OUR rules! Dress as we Australians Do.
  4. Get a job!
  5. Pay YOUR Taxes!
  6. No Social Security until you have earned it and Paid for it!
  7. NOW find a place to lay your head!

If you don’t want to forward this for fear of offending someone, then YOU’RE PART OF THE PROBLEM!

We’ve gone so far the other way … bent over backwards not to offend anyone.  Only AUSTRALIANS seem to care when Australian Citizens are being offended!

WAKE UP AUSTRALIA!!!

If you do not pass this on, your fingers deserve to cramp!

“Made in AUSTRALIA & DAMN PROUD OF IT!!!!!”

AMEN …”

Written by Bob Katter

To get a better understanding of Bob Katter and his family values – his support for his daughter during her ‘assault’ charges hearing, arising from a physical altercation with her children’s kindergarten teacher earlier this year – shows Bob has raised interesting children.

Bob stood outside the courtroom distributing flyers about the injustice and read to the attending press a statement of support.   It speaks volumes for Bobs committment to family … see linked story with video here -

To find out more about Bob Katter and his policies and what he stands for – use this link to visit – Bob Katter’s ‘Australian Party’

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please click your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story. Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


The EYE-BALL Opinion …

EYE-BALL Opinion – The Case for A Beheading – A Requiem – What’s good for the Goose is good for the Gander -

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2

Latest ‘EYE-BALL Opinion’ Posts:


- 29th Nov – A Slithering, Slimy, Spitting Lizard – Part II – Gillard’s been hiding in the Tall Grass – A follow-up Story -


- 28th Nov - A slithering, slimy, spitting Lizard – Gillard’s been hiding in the Tall Grass – now exposed -


- 26th Nov – The Collective v the Abstract – Gillard is aware of her wrong doings -


- 25th Nov – Distressed Damsel Gillard’s Black Knight – Bruce Wilson’s 11th hour offer to defend Gillard -


- 24th Nov – The Jewish v Arab problem – A naive perspective -


- 24th Nov – Hedley Thomas plunges the knife – Gillard mortally wounded -


- 23rd Nov – Immigration and Asylum Seekers – What is the real answer -


- 20th Nov – Schoolies Week Starts – The Booze for Kids debate again heats up -


- 16th Nov – How Deep does the AWU corruption cover-up go? – An exposé on innuendo, evidence, hearsay and conjecture -


- 15th nov – Hedley Thomas exploding on Gillard – Gillard has a case to answer … -


- 14th Nov – Gillard behaves like a Guilty Person – Asks for allegations to be made -


- 14th Nov – The Australian Media – Lapdog’s at best – absolutely lost the plot on integrity, and their charter of responsibility -


- 9th Nov – Open Letter to “The Independents” Re: -
- Julia Gillard, Peter Slipper, and Craig Thompson, three MP’s who bring continued shame to our Parliament -


- 9th Nov – “Courage is an Angle” – the difference between a good day and a great day -


- 8th Nov – RUDD fires a broadside aimed at GILLARD – done under a burka to hide its true intent -


- 6th Nov – Gillard’s caucus and union support in revolt – her position becoming more untenable by the day -


- 5th Nov – Referendum Discussion Part 1 – Compulsory Voting – Eye-Ball’s – “None of the Above Campaign” -


- 4th Nov – Gillard Sunburnt – the flames of discontent begin to impact -


- 2nd Nov – A Montage of AWU Scandal Reports – Gillard to become “Open-Season” -


- 1st Nov – Education … A white Elephant – Politicising the future of young Australians -


- 30th Oct – How do you awake a slumbering nation – Politicians – the most empty of vessels -


- 30th Oct – Whistleblowers – love ‘em’ or hate ‘em’ -


- 29th Oct – Polls pressure Abbott’s Leadership – Worst PM ever holds lead and flaunts her position -


- 28th Oct – Eye-Ball’s “YUCK FILES -1” – ABC’s “Insiders” – Barry Cassidy -


- To see more EYE-BALL ‘Opinion’ posts:

click here …


Title:
- The Case for A Beheading – A Requiem -
- What’s good for the Goose is good for the Gander -
| Author: EYE-BALL Opinion | 1st Dec 2012 |
The weeks review of events in the Gillard verses the Australian public can only point to her continued survival.

There is much debate and bluster over her continued denial to answer direct questions – the upshot is that the burden of proof is with those trying to prove she has done something wrong.  All else is conjecture, supposition, and conspiracy theory.

During the week that was, a week that – ‘will live in infamy’ to use Winston Churchill like rhetoric, Gillard has survived – be it with a mortal legacy that has cast a toxic pail all over and around her.  Those standing close to her have also become toxic.   One might say Gillard is ‘a dead woman walking’ – and the longer the ALP caucus align up behind her – the damage to the ALP brand name become bigger and ever looming large as we approach an election year.

Some of the Gillard wounding during the week was internal – the defeat of the PM by the Cabinet and the Caucus over the UN Security Council vote on Palestine wounded her more that anything the Opposition threw at her during Question Time.  Out of that Caucus defeat a new contender has emerged – Bob Carr staked his claim … and for Bob Carr his narrow ego will now be unstoppable.

One has to take stock after a week like we have just had – a review process and acknowledgement of just how much has been won, and what was the political cost in gaining the ground achieved.

Firstly – The Opposition:

Abbott’s absence from the dispatch box for the first two days was tactical and obvious.  He emerged and ask a question on the UN Security Council defeat of the PM on Wednesday,  and then on the Thursday, he spoke to a special suspension of Standing Orders to allow a 15 minute debate on Gillard’s criminality.   The rating for the Opposition for the week was 5 out of 10 – it was a mixed bag or results.

Another way to weigh up the week is to say that the Opposition landed light-weight blows in the latter part of the week – but Gillard had them covered all week.

A more detailed summation:

  • Mr Abbott is intimidated by the PM – he shy’s away from the ‘gender’ debate and the misogynist tirade has impacted on his confidence – he is afraid to be seen taking Gillard on in the ‘sexist’ debate because he fears an electoral backwash.  Gillard played a great card when she went this route – it was desperate and gave her breathing space within her own Party.  The morality of the ‘sexist’ card from a women PM will not endear herself to women across Australia, and the polls will reflect a downturn for Gillard on this week’s performance.
  • Ms Bishop [Julie] had an outstanding week – her demeanor when compared with the PM’s performance demonstrates the gap between Honourable and dis-Honourable.  Gillard’s performance highlighted by her continued dance around all the questions being put to her – has bought the Parliament great shame.   Gillard held the whole of Parliament in contempt with her performance.   But who is going to call her on it – The Speaker fail to do so.
  • For the most part the Opposition was well-behaved and restrained … exceptions were Sophia Mirabella and we all get that she has issues and finds it hard to keep her mouth shut … Bronwyn Bishop had a good week, Christopher Pyne was restrained and cognisant of the importance of staying in the chamber,  and that was about all we heard from the Opposition Front-Bench and back-benchers.
  • The Oppositions tactics bore fruit on the last sitting day of the week – Thursday – but the opportunity to nail Gillard came from an outside source.   Gillards former lover and partner in the AWU fraud Bruce Wilson, in responding to the attacks on his ‘damsel in distress’ – offer up his first interview since this matter began.  The ‘7:30 Report‘ aired Wilson’s interview on Wednesday and during that interview Wilson spoke about the letter written to the WA Corporate Affairs Commission by Ms Gillard arguing the case for the registration of the AWU Workplace Reform Association.  From that ‘letter’ exposure to the WA Corporate Affairs Commission came a waiver that allowed further text from the ‘exit interview’ Gillard gave S&G to be released.

The ‘text’ of that interview was reported in EYE-BALL’s previous post – “A slithering, slimy, spitting Lizard – Gillard’s been hiding in the Tall Grass – now exposed” and – linked here.

Secondly – The Government:

It was a roller-coaster ride for the PM and the Government – full of fire and brimstone – Gillard came out on Monday fully prepared for the declared WAR the Opposition had promised.  In one foul swoop – Gillard destroyed the Oppositions options – she held her Press Conference and answered another marathon barrage of questions.  The Press gallery was again under prepared and intimidated – and they did what they always do … soft pedal …

  • The PM’s performance was again commanding – you might not like her but you have to acknowledge that she has the ability and presence to perform at her best when it is needed – and perform she did.   Her Monday Press conference an hour before Question Time took all the wind from the Opposition’s sails. It was tactically perfect in its execution and timing.  The Opposition had to wait until Wednesday before they saw the PM bleed any blood – and as stated that was a self-inflicted wound on the PM by her own party over the UN Security Council decision.
  • The PM danced up and down all her previous answers out side the House when responding to Bishop’s Question Time assault. The PM’s use of the quote – ‘I am on the record on these matters – I refer you to those previous answers’ – to help her obfuscate her answers allowed her to never answer a question directly.
  • Her minder – the fool and often court jester Albanese proved yet again that he is more deserving of a place in pre-school as opposed to being called ‘The Leader of the House’.  Surely he must review his performance and for him to think that what he offers in the House does not come from a ‘Jekyll and Hyde’ comic strip suggests his proper place is somewhere other than a Member of Parliament.
  • Mr Rudd sat in the bleachers and not a peep was heard – nor a camera shot … but the whole front bench hung on every work Gillard had in response – were they looking for a sip, a misspeak, or were they being engorged by the PM’s performance?

The week is best summarised by Paul Kelly and his ‘Editor at Large’ story in the ‘Weekend Australian‘ – it is reproduced below:

Finally, the real Julia


| Author: PAUL KELLY, EDITOR-AT-LARGE | Date: Dec 1st, 2012 | Link to On-Line Story. |

THE final parliamentary week of 2012 was dominated by the stunning political persona of Julia Gillard – fierce, feminist and unrestrained – whose will-to-survival is Labor’s last, best but highly dangerous hope.

The real Julia is unleashed in her self-righteous fury and calculated aggression. Her voice now bounces across the summer landscape invading homes, hotels and workplaces. Her arch opponent, Tony Abbott, is traduced as sexist, relentlessly negative and an agent of smear as the nation divides between those who applaud Julia and those appalled by her.

Gillard has summoned up all the hostility and prejudice directed towards her and thrown it back in the face of her accusers with added venom. At the dispatch box her vituperation assumes a shocking, sharper edge precisely because she is a woman, yet it disappears when she momentarily falters in the chamber consumed by grief and compelled to reference the death of her father whom she loved deeply.

While the media is obsessed about Abbott’s less than complex character and personality it seems struck dumb by Gillard who, in her transformation as Prime Minister, is the much more challenging psychological and political study. Was it as recent as the 2010 campaign the public got confused between real and fake Julia?

Gillard has resolved the confusion by the projection of a deeply polarising though tenacious persona, using her sex to attack her opponent, having to endure the humiliation of her past choice of male partners put on public display and recruiting a series of causes from disability to school education to entrench a true believer-caring identity.

The biggest political story of 2012 is how Gillard turned weakness into strength. Facing a primary vote in the 28-30 per cent death zone, Gillard began to operate on the assumption she was strong, not weak. It was a psychological defiance of reality and became the year’s great drama. The upshot is that she intimidated Kevin Rudd, abused Abbott as a misogynist, patronisingly told business it had nothing to complain about, loaded the budget with unfunded true-believer Labor policies and accused virtually anybody who raises the AWU slush fund affair of “sleaze and smear”.

The trap in this psycho-political drama is overreach. Has Gillard gone too far? Has she overreached on each front? Will her initial poll improvements disappear when reality strikes back? There is an irony in such questions because, of course, for the past six months Gillard has nailed Abbott for proven overreach in his exaggerations about the carbon tax, an overreach that damaged Abbott’s credibility.

But this week, Gillard did go too far. She claimed as PM an authority she did not possess. It was a mistake neither Bob Hawke nor John Howard would have made. Sitting in cabinet on Monday night Gillard, after only two ministers backed her and upwards of 10 opposed her, said her view would prevail and Australia would vote against UN recognition of Palestine’s non-member state observer status.

This transferred the issue to caucus. Gillard fought to muster the numbers but was undone by the NSW Right. She retreated only when confronted with defeat and certain damage to her leadership. It was a stark demonstration of her will to dominate and tenacious determination to impose her authority.

It is the same mindset she brings to the “war on character” against Abbott. It is the mindset that has seen Gillard erode Abbott’s public standing, expose the limitations of his tactics, provoke fresh doubts about his durability and instil hope into Labor ranks.

Both leaders are pledged to win the 2013 election by making the other unelectable. The personal poison in the Gillard-Abbott confrontation will only intensify because, on both sides, it is embedded in the character issue.

While Abbott came slowly to embrace the AWU slush fund accusations against Gillard, he is now a believer. This week, he crossed the threshold. He will run the issue against Gillard until voting day and use it as a hook to prosecute Labor from office if he wins.

The two most unexpected political events of the year were Gillard’s playing of the misogyny card and the Coalition’s year-end resurrection of the AWU slush fund from Gillard’s time as a solicitor. They are linked in an elemental fashion – the first as Gillard’s character strike against her opponent and the second as Abbott’s character strike against his opponent.

All week Abbott outsourced the attack to his female deputy, Julie Bishop. This was essential – because Abbott is a man, it is too politically dangerous for him to lead the attack on Gillard’s past.

The week ended in a stalemate. The Coalition wounded Gillard but there is no sign it has evidence that will jeopardise her leadership. Gillard, however, cannot dispose of the issue because she cannot eliminate the doubts the attack raised of alleged professional misconduct as a solicitor.

The central charge by Abbott is that Gillard as a lawyer gave misleading information to the West Australian Corporate Affairs Commission in establishing the Australian Workers Union Workplace Reform Association acting on advice from her client and boyfriend, an AWU official, Bruce Wilson, who then used the entity to extort monies from companies.

Abbott told the parliament: “The Prime Minister’s involvement in it was this: she gave the advice and she made the representations that enabled the association to be incorporated; that facilitated the fraud.”

His second charge is that Gillard later stayed silent, which meant that funds that belonged legitimately to the AWU were siphoned off from the entity by Wilson and his bagman, Ralph Blewitt.

Abbott said Gillard’s actions were improper and unethical. On Thursday morning, going further, he said Gillard had broken the law by giving misleading information. He accepted that Gillard did not know at the time about Wilson’s fraudulent use of the fund.

But Abbott finished with an assault on Gillard’s character: “So the question for members sitting behind the Prime Minister today is: is she a fit and proper person to hold the prime ministership of our country?”

In reply, Gillard went for Abbott’s jugular. Abbott, she said, “was calling for my resignation on the basis that I had committed a crime”. He was a “rash man” and “a man who clutches for negativity and sleaze whenever he can”.

In parliament and at her press conferences, Gillard said her only role had been to advise on the incorporation of the fund. She had no role in its management nor did she operate its accounts. Explaining why she did not later alert authorities to the fraud, Gillard said she did not know about it.

Under WA law, the association could be incorporated only for limited purposes of a charitable nature.

Its declared purpose was to promote safer workplaces. However, at her August media conference, Gillard said she knew at the time of its creation the association’s purpose was “to support the re-election of a team of union officials”.

This, presumably, is why she later called it a “slush fund”. What, therefore, does the re-election of union officials have to do with workplace safety?

The link, Gillard told that press conference, is the team of union officials would stand on “a platform for change” because “they were committed to reforming workplaces” to promote safety.

This is a tortured effort to reconcile the real purpose with the declared purpose. Gillard later resigned as a salaried partner of Slater & Gordon. The firm lost its substantial account with the AWU. The association was used for large-scale fraud and this was possible only because it was registered with the name “Australian Workers Union” in the title.

In acting on behalf of Wilson, Gillard did not create a file, apparently did not tell the firm and did not believe it was necessary to get further consent of the AWU to use its name as Wilson was an AWU official.

Section 8 (1) of the relevant WA law says “the commissioner shall not incorporate an association” if its name is “likely to mislead the public as to the object or purposes of the association”.

This is why Abbott raised the breach of law. Gillard denies any such breach. Abbott’s mistake this week was to make the claim without having a fistful of legal opinions to this effect. They should be not be hard to acquire.

Is Gillard being excessively penalised for actions she took 20 years ago? Probably.

But that comes with the prime ministership. Does she deserve to lose her job? No. Will she be damaged? Yes. Will the issue disappear? No. Does Abbott run a political risk persevering with this character issue? Almost certainly.

But Abbott this week also framed the issue as an example of Labor ties to trade union corruption and lack of proper accountability.

By calling for a judicial inquiry, Abbott signals he will seek an election mandate for follow-up action in office. That might be limited to this AWU case or, more appropriately, have wider scope.

It will be seen within Labor and the trade union movement as a declaration of political war. Abbott has taken a critical decision – he will go to the next election with an aggressive pledge not on industrial relations reform but on trade union accountability.

At the 2007 election, the unions did an immeasurable service to Labor with their anti-Work Choices campaign.

Abbott now gambles that, at next year’s election, he can make trade union accountability an issue and, in the process, keep Gillard in the “AWU slush fund” frame.

The mutual character assassination is guaranteed to intensify.

Paul Kelly has a well-respected and highly regarded reputation. His Wikipedia profile can be read using this link.

The above piece is unbiased and a true appraisal of how most disenfranchised ALP supporters might feel.  They largely agree Abbott is not the alternative … they agree Gillard has Leadership skills … but they also agree she is not their elected Leader.  Collectively – these disenfranchised ALP supporters, when joined by the Coalition supporter base – all agree that this PM has a past that dishonors the Office of the Prime Minister – she is not a ‘fit and proper’ person to serve as our Prime Minister.

Do you think she would want a do-over – hardly given the way she is clinging on in a desperate attempt to right a sinking ship.  Too many Ministers have hooked themselves to her hip and connected to the ships anchor – they have all vowed to go down with the ship with her.   Time will tell how committed they are to self-sacrifice.

This continued daring and recklessness by a Government fully committed to supporting a PM with a criminal past,  is too big to admit it’s error.   Replacing Rudd was when it all started from the electorate’s perspective – but the Union plan and strategy to replace Rudd was years in the making.  Rudd was but the puppet to win Government from Howard – his fate was sealed the first day he took office – it was just a matter of time before the Unions aligned the circumstances before they acted.

Gillard represents the face of Unions – allowing Craig Thompson to continue to serve as an ALP endorsed MP was evidence of that.  His becoming an Independent was a disguise and stunt to give Gillard deniability in that she could continued to allow him to serve in her caucus.

That is an evil that has embraced this Government and the Independents who hold the balance of power know it all to well.

The AWU revelations thus far are but a scratch of the surface – the Unions are corrupt to the core.  This whole exercise started with Rudd’s assassination and Gillard just could not say no when her loyalty was tested and she was offered the PM role by the assassins.   The Unions will rue the day their collective decision was to purge themselves of Mr Rudd and go with Gillard.

The Union Mantra:

Let’s go with full disclosure here – the concept of a Union being representative of the workers and fighting for the rights of the workers is the stage setting the Unions want everybody to see.

Behind that setting is another story that has been exposed and talked about for decades.  Employers, i.e. the Corporate world have for ever done deals with Union boss’s to free up their workplace and make them free of industrial actions.  The way this has happened is by payments disguised as ‘workplace safety’ and the like, as in the AWU scandal case.

These payments are made to Union Boss’s and the corrupt Boss’s within the Union Management – i.e. the likes of Wilson and Blewitt, turn these ‘slush-fund’ type payments into their own personal expense treasure to do with as they want.

The employer gets a bona-fide tax deduction to boot, and if the money trail was followed – as with the AWU scandal – these funds will never see the light of day – they disappear through laundered transactions to turn them into personal wealth or expended in lifestyle choices.  The Mike Williamson HSU fraud is estimated at some $20 million over his time in charge – remember he was the National Secretary of the ALP at one stage.

Another fact – the 1.8 – 2.2 million Union members across Australia depending on who you listen to – pay over $1 billion in membership dues in a single year – only the members get a financial statement of how those funds are accounted for.   There is no regulatory requirement to account for the expenditure of those members funds other than to the members … a $billion dollars a year of members subscriptions – where does it go?

Now if an employee was to embezzle funds from an employee and is caught – it is a crime and they will do time.  For Unions to extort/blackmail funds from Contractors to secure ‘strike-free’ work zones – can they be deemed the same if those funds are not reported to the Union, or are kept off-book for alternative purposes?  Do the members have entitlement to these funds – is this theft by deception?  If the funds are returned for the benefit of members – is there still a crime visa viz the extortion/blackmail aspect of the transaction?

Now look again to Mike Williamson, and Craig Thompson’s Union activity – both were Union boss’s who are now facing criminal proceedings for their personal use of funds from these types of transactions.   If it was just a rorting of the Members funds that is clear embezzlement.   But to set up a complicated scam where Associations are registered, Bank accounts opened to received the cash, and all this wass done in the AWU case, under the nose of the primary AWU through the same Law Firm.  Wilson used his girlfriend to argue a case to allow the Association to be registered after being first refused – surely the ALP caucus are not fools.

Their problem is that they are all neck deep in it – they dump Gillard they risk her turning on them all and putting them all in it.  This is the crux … Gillard having had her past cleansed by the Union thugs intimidating the connected people, she can now turn on them if they leave her like a shag on a rock.

This corrupt Union exposure has a long way to go and it will involve many of Australia’s largest Corporate employers.   Thiess for example – it was Wilson’s brother-in-law that made the cash/cheque payments to the ‘AWU Workplace Reform Association.

What was the split – did the brother-in-law get a kickback for the contribution, and did the ‘Schools Rebuilding’ program managed by Gillard during the GFC cash injection, and the $100′s millions of contracts handed to Thiess have links to Gillard and the Thiess connections from 1992-95?

Now consider this scenario and look again to the AWU scandal – Wilson was king in WA,  yet he needed Gillard his girlfriend to help him set up the scam.   The firm Gillard worked for – Slater & Gordon – a well known ALP law firm – do you not think that as lawyers they would be aware of how to launder funds – and in particular these lumpy and large monies paid by Corporate employers and contractors.  This has to have been a well-tried and tested practice for decades, if not centuries.

This is the heart of the matter before all Australia now – have the Unions and their declared workforce representation now turned into a buggering of those workers so they can use the membership loyalty to leverage site payments from the contractor to guarantee ‘strike-free’ work zones, and then use those payoff’s as personal funds for personal use?

It is time to find out once and for all – and nothing less than a Royal Commission to investigate every Union in Australia, their books, their site management records, and the forensic investigations of the Contractors to find out who paid the money, and how that money was used and who it was used by.

This is what Gillard and her Union cronies are worried by – it is plausible to consider that Peter Gordon’s silence was purchased with his appointment to the High Court – if that is the case how high does the corruption go?

What lawyers do at the bequest of their clients is privileged – if it is knowingly unlawful or intended to defraud – what is the lawyers responsibility?

A lawyer can not knowingly be associated or connected with the committing of a crime, in its setup, its operations, and in the disposal of proceeds from crime.   Many are and their defence is to challenge others to prove the wrong doing – how is Gillard’s defence any different to this.  Lawyers who are involved on the shady side of life are very clever in protecting themselves and covering their tracks.

Hedley Thomas files a story today titled: “Time for union inquiry, says Michael Costa” – can be read below:

Time for union inquiry, says Michael Costa


| Author: Hedley Thomas | Date: Dec 1st, 2012 | Link to On-Line Story. |


SIXTEEN years after he opposed a call for a royal commission into union corruption and fraud, one-time union leader and former NSW treasurer Michael Costa has declared Australia now needs a public inquiry.

Mr Costa told The Weekend Australian yesterday he was in “total agreement” about the need for a high-level inquiry run by a serving or retired judge to investigate the management of unions, following a series of scandals.

“I believe that Julia Gillard should look at an inquiry into a range of allegations across the union movement,” Mr Costa said.

“There is a need to clear the air for trade union members over union administration generally, particularly after what we have seen in the HSU (Health Services Union).

“In fact I would go further and ask why union executives and management committees are not held to account in the same way as company executives. Unions collect money and ought to be regulated to the same extent.”

In 1996, Mr Costa was said to have been “horrified” and determined to shut down the efforts of the then national leader of the Australian Workers Union, Ian Cambridge, who was seeking a royal commission into the union’s fraud scandal.

Details of Mr Cambridge’s August 1996 diary entry, documenting strong resistance to a public inquiry into the AWU’s corruption, emerged as Tony Abbott pledged to set up a royal commission to investigate matters including the Prime Minister’s role in the same scandal.

The Weekend Australian has obtained the comprehensive diary of Mr Cambridge, a former joint national secretary of the AWU and now a commissioner for Fair Work Australia.

Mr Cambridge wanted a royal commission in 1996 after his discovery of significant corruption involving Bruce Wilson, who was Ms Gillard’s boyfriend and client when she was a salaried partner at the law firm Slater & Gordon.

His diary for August 1996 describes a meeting at the Labor Council building in Sydney, which included Mr Costa, then assistant secretary of the Labor Council; and his colleagues John Robertson (now NSW Opposition Leader); Mark Busby; and AWU NSW secretary Russ Collison.

The meeting occurred amid investigations by West Australian police, who were urged by Mr Cambridge and AWU national president Bill Ludwig to bring criminal charges for fraud over a slush fund, called the AWU Workplace Reform Association.

Neither Mr Ludwig nor Mr Cambridge knew then that the AWU’s solicitor at Slater & Gordon, Ms Gillard, had given legal advice to her boyfriend in 1992 that helped lead to the incorporation of the association.

Ms Gillard has repeatedly and strenuously denied wrongdoing and said she had no knowledge of the operations of the association.

“Fairly quickly, the discussion at the meeting moved to the question of the internal conflict within the AWU,” the Cambridge diary entry states. “(Michael) Costa mentioned a number of matters.

“Costa specifically indicated he thought that the current ‘war’ in the AWU was causing serious damage to the Right faction and that there needed to be some sort of solution established fairly quickly … to limit the damage.

“In particular, Costa said that he was horrified at the public call that I had made for a royal commission and that he was further alarmed by the subsequent calls that (union leader Steve Harrison) had recently made in respect of a (National Crime Authority) investigation.

“Costa said he thought that these sorts of things were the last thing that the faction and the movement needed and that the idea of having pecuniary interest exposures and things of that nature was just crazy.

“He then went on to say that there would be no royal commission into these things and at this point I suggested to him that I could possibly guess as to why he was so confident. Costa then openly replied that he was aware that the (federal workplace relations) minister, Peter Reith, had been spoken to about these issues and that therefore there would be no further inquiry into these matters.”

Mr Costa said yesterday his view then was that police were best positioned to get to the bottom of the fraud allegations.

“I would have strongly supported a full police investigation,” he said. “But a royal commission is something extraordinary, it wouldn’t have been justified at that time.”

Mr Reith said if he had known then of the corruption, he would have set up an inquiry.

Evidence remains the key – the AWU scandal has two missing files that would sink Gillard – the file she set up off-book when she was a partnered lawyer at Slater & Gordon, and the file containing the letter Gillard wrote to the WA Corporate Affairs Commission in support to have them reverse their decision and allow the new Association to be formed.

Without the evidence contained in those files – Gillard can carry on posturing and not answer the direct questions being asked.  Until someone has hard evidentiary proof Gillard knows she is safe.

The aftertaste is bitter for all who want her gone.  All Australia know something happened here – whether it will ever be fully exposed is a countdown exercise with reset buttons all in the ALP’s favour.

Hedley Thomas wrote a second story in today’s Weekend Australian on his thoughts for a Judicial enquiry.  His story appears below:

Information at hand for a sharp, short judicial inquiry


| Author: Hedley Thomas | Date: Dec 1st 2012 | Link to On-Line Story. |

THE judicial inquiry that Tony Abbott pledges will unpick the Australian Workers Union fraud scandal if he becomes prime minister can be short, sharp and inexpensive.

Much is on the public record in statements by Julia Gillard and others. Banking records first obtained when the AWU’s national leadership called for a royal commission into this scandal in 1996 remain readily available.

There are affidavits sworn by union officials who will need to stand behind what they said back then or risk perjury charges.

The documentary material includes the transcript of Gillard’s interview with her firm in 1995, and more than 160 pages of contemporaneous diary entries by Ian Cambridge, the AWU’s cleanskin national joint secretary, now a commissioner for Fair Work Australia.

Investigating lawyers in a formal public inquiry will not take long to understand the anatomy of the scam.

Senior AWU and Labor Party figures who have known these facts since the mid 1990s hope that some of the media commentators continue to plead ignorance.

A judicial inquiry, however, will dig out the truth. It will do it quickly because the scam that permitted Bruce Wilson and Ralph Blewitt to rip off hundreds of thousands of dollars is not very complicated. Information kept from the AWU permitted the scam to start in June 1992.

Secrecy and a lack of transparency allowed the scam to embezzle about $400,000 of AWU funds over a few years.

At the start, the secrecy occurred on several levels. If there had been openness and transparency on one of those levels, the scam would have been exposed.

First, there was the failure to tell the AWU of the vehicle that would be used to perpetrate the scam. The vehicle was a legal entity registered under laws in WA as the Australian Workers Union Workplace Reform Association Inc yet the union itself had no idea it had been brought into existence.

If the union’s national leadership – or almost anyone with standing in the AWU other than Wilson or Blewitt – had been told then of this entity’s existence the scam would have collapsed before any money was misappropriated.

Lawyers familiar with union rules know they cannot create new entities that carry the union’s name, on the unverified say-so of the lawyer’s own boyfriend and his sidekick. Gillard argues she had no need to inform the union because her clients, Blewitt and Wilson, were elected union officials. But these sorts of decisions need to be properly debated and approved by committee.

Second, there was a lack of transparency within the firm of Slater & Gordon, where Gillard then worked as a salaried partner, attending to the legal work of Wilson and the AWU.

Gillard’s failure to open a file in relation to her legal work to help incorporate the association meant that for three years nobody else in the firm knew anything about it. Further, Gillard did not consult any of the other partners about her work that led to the incorporation of the association, notwithstanding the expertise of her colleagues in the area. Gillard has said it was not unusual to do minor legal work without opening a file.

Slater & Gordon has said it was bound by client confidentiality and could not tell the AWU about the existence of the association.

Third, there was a failure to inform the WA commissioner for corporate affairs, the public servant in Perth who was responsible in 1992 for ensuring people seeking to register entities were not attempting to sow the seeds of a scam.

The commissioner never knew what Gillard and her clients always knew – that the association was a union slush fund.

Any public servant looking at the actual application documents back then (and any member of the public who now reads those as well as the association’s elaborate “rules” that Gillard admitted writing) would reasonably conclude that it all purported to be about the promotion of workplace safety for AWU members on the job. Gillard says part of the association’s purpose was the election of union officials running on a workplace safety platform.

A judicial inquiry, if one is set up by an Abbott government, will hear of an overall pattern of omission from the AWU itself, within the law firm that employed Gillard, and from the government authority responsible for permitting the association’s registration with its misleading name and purpose and rules.

Gillard has repeatedly denied wrongdoing, saying she had no knowledge of the workings of the association.

But, once incorporated, the proper-sounding AWU Workplace Reform Association would issue invoices for fictitious AWU services in safety that were promptly paid by Thiess.

Hundreds of thousands of dollars flowed into the related bank accounts and even into a hole in the dirt in Blewitt’s backyard. The cash flowed into the purchase of a $230,000 terrace house in Melbourne for Wilson’s use. Gillard has denied the cash helped her pay for the renovation of her own nearby house at Abbotsford.

Neither Gillard nor Wilson has denied that $5000 was deposited into Gillard’s account as claimed in a statutory declaration by former union employee Wayne Hem. Although they cannot recall it. If the deposit occurred, it is unclear where the $5000 came from, and Wilson has denied Gillard received any benefit from the slush fund.

I am not in full agreement that a short judicial enquiry will fix or fully expose this Union mess and how far it encroaches into the political arena.  Any Judicial or Royal Commission type enquiry focused solely on the AWU, and perhaps the HSU as well, will represent a narrow reach.

The concept of Unionism needs a complete overhaul with any result needing to have accountability along the lines of Company Directors and the fiduciary responsibilities put in place.    In the short-term – the investigative journalist pursuing this story would love to hear from anybody who is in a position to assist.

It is time for a short break – this site will focus on much lighter matters over the next few weeks – some JOKE updates, some Movies and TV reviews, more GURU stuff, and perhaps a few days where the beach sounds good.   I wish to thank all who have supported the site over the past year and remind all that free speech is alive and well at this site.

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please click your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story. Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


The EYE-BALL Opinion …

EYE-BALL Opinion – A slithering-slimy-spitting-Lizard-Part II – Gillard’s been hiding in the Tall Grass – A follow up Story

November 29, 2012 Comments off
The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2

Latest ‘EYE-BALL Opinion’ Posts:


- 28th Nov - A slithering, slimy, spitting Lizard – Gillard’s been hiding in the Tall Grass – now exposed -


- 26th Nov – The Collective v the Abstract – Gillard is aware of her wrong doings -


- 25th Nov – Distressed Damsel Gillard’s Black Knight – Bruce Wilson’s 11th hour offer to defend Gillard -


- 24th Nov – The Jewish v Arab problem – A naive perspective -


- 24th Nov – Hedley Thomas plunges the knife – Gillard mortally wounded -


- 23rd Nov – Immigration and Asylum Seekers – What is the real answer -


- 20th Nov – Schoolies Week Starts – The Booze for Kids debate again heats up -


- 16th Nov – How Deep does the AWU corruption cover-up go? – An exposé on innuendo, evidence, hearsay and conjecture -


- 15th nov – Hedley Thomas exploding on Gillard – Gillard has a case to answer … -


- 14th Nov – Gillard behaves like a Guilty Person – Asks for allegations to be made -


- 14th Nov – The Australian Media – Lapdog’s at best – absolutely lost the plot on integrity, and their charter of responsibility -


- 9th Nov – Open Letter to “The Independents” Re: -
- Julia Gillard, Peter Slipper, and Craig Thompson, three MP’s who bring continued shame to our Parliament -


- 9th Nov – “Courage is an Angle” – the difference between a good day and a great day -


- 8th Nov – RUDD fires a broadside aimed at GILLARD – done under a burka to hide its true intent -


- 6th Nov – Gillard’s caucus and union support in revolt – her position becoming more untenable by the day -


- 5th Nov – Referendum Discussion Part 1 – Compulsory Voting – Eye-Ball’s – “None of the Above Campaign” -


- 4th Nov – Gillard Sunburnt – the flames of discontent begin to impact -


- 2nd Nov – A Montage of AWU Scandal Reports – Gillard to become “Open-Season” -


- 1st Nov – Education … A white Elephant – Politicising the future of young Australians -


- 30th Oct – How do you awake a slumbering nation – Politicians – the most empty of vessels -


- 30th Oct – Whistleblowers – love ‘em’ or hate ‘em’ -


- 29th Oct – Polls pressure Abbott’s Leadership – Worst PM ever holds lead and flaunts her position -


- 28th Oct – Eye-Ball’s “YUCK FILES -1” – ABC’s “Insiders” – Barry Cassidy -


- To see more EYE-BALL ‘Opinion’ posts:

click here …


Title:
- a slithering-slimy-spitting-Lizard-Part II -
- Gillard’s been hiding in the Tall Grass -
- A follow-up Story -

| Author: EYE-BALL Opinion | 29th Nov 2012 |
The Australian’s Hedley Thomas has filed his story on the revelations contained in the transcript of the S&G ‘exit interview’.  The story refers to the ‘letter’ Gillard wrote to the WA Corporate Affairs Commission advocating the intentions for the Incorporated Association.

That story appears below:

Proof: PM told firm what she won’t tell parliament


| Author: Hedley Thomas | Date: Nov 29th, 2012 | Link to On-Line Story. |

JULIA Gillard admitted during a secret internal probe to writing to a government department to help overcome its objections to the creation of an association for her then boyfriend and client, union official Bruce Wilson.

The revelation, contained in a document released today after 17 years, comes after days of stonewalling by the Prime Minister, including in parliament, on the question of whether she had personally vouched for the Australian Workers Union Workplace Reform Association.

The document, a record of interview between Ms Gillard and her law firm, Slater & Gordon, in September 1995, reveals the association was initially regarded as ineligible because of its “trade union” status.

Ms Gillard overcame the obstacle by writing to the Commissioner for Corporate Affairs in Western Australia in 1992 and arguing that the decision to bar it should be reversed.

Ms Gillard also wrote the association’s rules, which emphasised worker safety but made no mention of its true purpose of funding the elections of union officials.

The document reveals she “cut and pasted” some of the rules from her earlier personal work incorporating the controversial Socialist Forum, which she helped found at Melbourne University in the 1980s.

Ms Gillard has admitted providing legal advice to help Mr Wilson and his union colleague Ralph Blewitt set up the association, which was later used by the two men to defraud hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The Prime Minister later described the association as a “slush fund” for the re-election of union officials, but she has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing, saying she had no knowledge of the workings of the association.

But Opposition Leader Tony Abbott claimed Ms Gillard may have broken the law in arguing the case for the association to be incorporated.

“Plainly on the basis of the documentary evidence of the unredacted (Slater & Gordon exit interview) transcript, she gave false information to the West Australian authorities,” Mr Abbott told the Nine Network this morning.

“For a senior lawyer to make false claims to an important statutory body like this is a very, very serious matter… it’s in breach of the law I would think and it’s certainly very, very unethical.”

Manager of opposition business Christopher Pyne today called on the Prime Minister to resign.

“I think her position is entirely untenable and if the Prime Minister had any respect for the parliament, for the Australian public or for the Labor caucus she would resign as Prime Minister today and allow the Labor party to select a new leader and to move to put this sordid mess behind us.”

But Workplace Relations Minister Bill Shorten said there was “no smoking gun” in the fresh revelations.

“Let’s be really straight, what do you think it is that the Prime Minister has done wrong? What law has she broken?” Mr Shorten told Sky News.

“People just want to make this great fuss about a 20-year vendetta against the Prime Minister.”

In parliament this week, Ms Gillard has refused to answer repeated questioning from Deputy Opposition Leader Julie Bishop on whether she wrote to the West Australian authority to vouch for “the bona fides of the AWU Workplace Reform Association”.

On Monday, she told parliament: “The claim that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition has now made is a claim that appeared in The Age . . . The correspondence she refers to has never been produced, so the claim has been made but no correspondence has ever been produced.”

Yesterday she told parliament she had “dealt with these matters fully”.

“I have dealt fully with my role in providing legal advice on the incorporation of this association. I have provided detailed answers on this. They were provided in press conferences; they have been provided in this parliament,” she said.

Later she added: “Once again, we are in a situation where the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is asserting things she has got no sources for, except she read them somewhere.”

Last night, a spokesman for the Prime Minister said she had “no recollection of receiving or sending the claimed correspondence in this matter”.

The evidence that she did write to the West Australian body is contained in a section of transcript from the September 11, 1995, tape-recorded interview with Ms Gillard during an internal probe led by Slater & Gordon’s then senior partner Peter Gordon.

Some of the transcript was provided to The Australian in August.

The latest section of transcript is being released now by the firm’s former equity partner, Nick Styant-Browne, after Mr Wilson’s interview on the ABC’s 7.30 meant his legal confidentiality as a former client of the firm was waived.

In his 7.30 interview, Mr Wilson explained some of Ms Gillard’s role and legal advice in making “the necessary changes” for the association to be approved.

In the section of transcript from the 1995 Slater & Gordon interview that was released, Mr Gordon asked Ms Gillard about those changes: “Do you recall whether, when it was necessary to argue the case with the, with the relevant Western Australian authority, whether you consulted anyone else in the firm as to what would or would not get, become acceptable or appropriate?”

Ms Gillard: “I once again don’t recall talking to anybody else in the firm about it.”

Mr Gordon: “Beyond that, and it seems from the file, that after that letter it was successfully accepted as an incorporated association and duly was created and presumably accounts were set up.”

Ms Gillard told Mr Gordon she had nothing to do with the association’s accounts, and that she attended only to its incorporation.

Mr Gordon referred to Ms Gillard’s letter to the government authority and he stated that, “it appears from the file to be the letter arguing that it ought to be not construed as a trade union – did you have anything personally to do with that incorporated association afterwards?”

Ms Gillard: “No, I did not.”

It was unlawful under the Associations Incorporation Act for an association to be named in a way “likely to mislead the public as to the object or purpose”.

After the association was incorporated, about $100,000 from its accounts went towards the purchase of a $230,000 Melbourne terrace house in 1993 for Mr Wilson to live in. Ms Gillard went to the auction and witnessed a power of attorney document for Mr Wilson to buy the property in Mr Blewitt’s name, while Slater & Gordon managed the conveyancing and organised the mortgage.

The association issued invoices in its official-sounding name and received money for work that did not exist.

Neither Ms Gillard nor the firm of Slater & Gordon told their client, the AWU, about the existence of the association carrying the union’s name, resulting in further fraud and the draining of accounts amid police investigations into separate fraud allegations involving Mr Wilson.

Ms Gillard had not opened a file at the firm for her legal work for Mr Wilson on the association. Her legal partners were unaware of its existence until August 1995, when Mr Wilson’s separate Victorian slush fund was exposed and police were called in by the AWU’s national leaders to launch a fraud investigation. Ms Gillard’s conduct at the time and the firm’s internal review of her actions led to a breakdown in trust and relationships, resulting in her leaving.

Elsewhere in the newly released section of transcript, Mr Gordon was concerned that other partners at the firm might have been involved in the matter and the legal work that Ms Gillard had performed.

He asked Ms Gillard: “And last Monday I think you gave to (fellow legal partner) Paul Mulvaney a follow-up which demonstrates that Slater & Gordon had drafted model rules for, for that, had submitted those rules to the relevant Western Australian government authority; that there’d been a letter from the authority suggesting that it might be a trade union and therefore ineligible for incorporation under that legislation; and that we had prepared a response submitted on Wilson’s instructions to that authority suggesting that in fact it wasn’t a trade union and arguing the case for its incorporation. My recollection is that all of that happened in or about mid-1992. Is that right?”

Ms Gillard: “I wouldn’t want to be held to the dates without looking at the file, but whatever the dates the file shows are the right dates, so . . .”

Mr Gordon: “Yes. And to the extent that work was done on that file in relation to that, it was done by you?”

Ms Gillard: “That’s right.”

Mr Gordon: “And did you get advice from anyone else in the firm in relation to any of those matters?”

Ms Gillard: “No, I didn’t.”

Mr Gordon: “Did (the firm’s recognised lawyer on incorporations) Tony Lang have anything to do with the model rules or the drafting of them?”

Ms Gillard: “No, I obtained, I had just in my own personal precedent file a set of rules for Socialist Forum, which is an incorporated association in which I’m personally involved. And I’ve just kept them hanging around as something I cut and paste from for drafting purposes.”

Ms Gillard assured him Slater & Gordon had nothing to do with setting up bank accounts for the association and that nobody at the firm, including herself, had anything to do with the association beyond advising on its incorporation. Mr Gordon asked Ms Gillard: “Can I ask you then – following the last thing that we did to setting up the incorporation, which appears from the file to be the letter arguing that it ought to be not construed as a trade union – did you have anything personally to do with that incorporated association afterwards?”

Ms Gillard: “No I did not.”

Mr Gordon: “Right, to the best of your knowledge did anyone at Slater & Gordon?”

Ms Gillard: “To my knowledge, no one at Slater & Gordon had anything to do with it post that time.”

The Australian asked Ms Gillard’s office yesterday whether she had anything to add to her previous statements about her role. A spokesman replied last night that Ms Gillard “has no recollection of receiving or sending the claimed correspondence in this matter”.

“The Prime Minister sighted, witnessed, dictated and signed thousands of documents in the course of her legal career,” he said. “Any correspondence in this matter would have been received or sent in her capacity as a lawyer acting on instructions. As the Prime Minister has noted, the application to incorporate the (association) was lodged by its office bearer, Mr Ralph Blewitt. The decision to incorporate the association was made by the WA Commissioner of Corporate Affairs.”

Ms Gillard said on Monday, when asked why the AWU was not informed about her role in the incorporation of the association: “Did I need to separately advise the AWU this was occurring?

“Of course I didn’t. The people I was dealing with were elected officials of the AWU.”

Asked why she did not disclose the existence of the association to the AWU three years later, amid a police probe into Mr Wilson’s other slush fund, she said: “I did not have in front of me any evidence of criminality or wrongdoing but there was a lot of rumour about what was happening in the Victorian branch of the AWU at that time. In those circumstances, I came to a personal decision about ending my relationship with Mr Wilson and I did so.”

Additional reporting: Lanai Vasek

There is need to take a breath … in a world filled with challenges that are overwhelming Leaderships all over the World – there is an equally decisive battle being engaged in the evil our Leaders are involved with, verses the good being done by others opposing that political corruption.

That battle is a losing battle where political and corporate corruption abounds.   This AWU scandal has been a 20 year fraud and many attempts to expose it have failed.   Failed in part because those who run the Nation have influence and control over the cover-up.

One can now see a glimmer of light shinning brightly in the distance – indicative of a small victory in this AWU Scandal cause.  Gillard’s role has been exposed and her tenure is a matter of time, yet she is in a position to continue her denial because of the evidence having been ‘cleansed’, as a part of the cover-up.   There is a long way to go before the full extent is revealed – but the first crack has appeared.  Conclusions are easy – the hard evidence is hard and that small crack will prove defining.

For the MP’s on the ALP side who have known about this all along and hid behind the Union bullyboys – we all now get to watch who among you will come out over the next few days to continue their line to protect the PM.

The ‘evil’ is now exposed – the dam wall has burst and if justice be served – the flood gates will open up on new evidence.  Those who have known about this all along will perhaps re-appraise their position and fall into line, agreeing to whatever is necessary to fully expose the AWU Management’s handling of the cover-up of the fraud.

Rob McClelland needs to make his position clear – as does Nicola Roxon and the allegations that she took over the Gillard/Wilson file.

Bill Shorten is next and his explanation is required on why he as the ACTU Secretary did not pursue this matter given his knowledge of the fraud when he became the boss of the ACTU.  Paul Howes will be pressured as the ACTU boss to act as well …

Bill Ludwig needs to be asked under oath about his involvement  – as does Ian Cambridge and how his appointment to the NSW Industrial Commission came about.  Bob Carr will not escape his role, nor Graham Richardson.

What ever transpires in the House this afternoon – none of the Gillard supporters will enjoy their Xmas break.   How the Independents respond to this new tranche of evidence may see this Parliament dissolved some time soon – I won’t hold my breath!

Congratulations to all who have pushed this matter are premature, but today is a good day … and Hedley Thomas, Mike Smith, Pickering, Dowling, Bolt, Jones, and the many other bloggers and media editors who have given this story air – are entitled to champagne type celebrations.

Gillard and her minders will figure on a strategy to deal with this and the Australian people will be left to decide via polls and the like.

Gillard’s performance this afternoon will decide if she remains the PM into the new year.   This matter will continue and will gain coverage in the void of Parliament over the Xmas recess … speculation will become rampant – Ministers will go to ground on the matter as the caucus canvass’ numbers for alternative Leaders …

The odds on a Leadership change before the next election are now long odds on … when it happens is still the question.   Well done to all … but the fight continues,   we may have won a battle – but the War is still to be won.

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please click your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story. Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


The EYE-BALL Opinion …

EYE-BALL Opinion – A slithering, slimy, spitting Lizard – Gillard’s been hiding in the Tall Grass – now exposed -

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2

Latest ‘EYE-BALL Opinion’ Posts:


- 26th Nov – The Collective v the Abstract – Gillard is aware of her wrong doings -


- 25th Nov – Distressed Damsel Gillard’s Black Knight – Bruce Wilson’s 11th hour offer to defend Gillard -


- 24th Nov – The Jewish v Arab problem – A naive perspective -


- 24th Nov – Hedley Thomas plunges the knife – Gillard mortally wounded -


- 23rd Nov – Immigration and Asylum Seekers – What is the real answer -


- 20th Nov – Schoolies Week Starts – The Booze for Kids debate again heats up -


- 16th Nov – How Deep does the AWU corruption cover-up go? – An exposé on innuendo, evidence, hearsay and conjecture -


- 15th nov – Hedley Thomas exploding on Gillard – Gillard has a case to answer … -


- 14th Nov – Gillard behaves like a Guilty Person – Asks for allegations to be made -


- 14th Nov – The Australian Media – Lapdog’s at best – absolutely lost the plot on integrity, and their charter of responsibility -


- 9th Nov – Open Letter to “The Independents” Re: -
- Julia Gillard, Peter Slipper, and Craig Thompson, three MP’s who bring continued shame to our Parliament -


- 9th Nov – “Courage is an Angle” – the difference between a good day and a great day -


- 8th Nov – RUDD fires a broadside aimed at GILLARD – done under a burka to hide its true intent -


- 6th Nov – Gillard’s caucus and union support in revolt – her position becoming more untenable by the day -


- 5th Nov – Referendum Discussion Part 1 – Compulsory Voting – Eye-Ball’s – “None of the Above Campaign” -


- 4th Nov – Gillard Sunburnt – the flames of discontent begin to impact -


- 2nd Nov – A Montage of AWU Scandal Reports – Gillard to become “Open-Season” -


- 1st Nov – Education … A white Elephant – Politicising the future of young Australians -


- 30th Oct – How do you awake a slumbering nation – Politicians – the most empty of vessels -


- 30th Oct – Whistleblowers – love ‘em’ or hate ‘em’ -


- 29th Oct – Polls pressure Abbott’s Leadership – Worst PM ever holds lead and flaunts her position -


- 28th Oct – Eye-Ball’s “YUCK FILES -1” – ABC’s “Insiders” – Barry Cassidy -


- To see more EYE-BALL ‘Opinion’ posts:

click here …


Title:
- a slithering, slimy, spitting Lizard -
- Gillard’s been hiding in the Tall Grass – now exposed -
| Author: EYE-BALL Opinion | 29th Nov 2012 |
All week the  Opposition’s tactic has been to try to entrap the PM in a lie, or misleading the House.   The tactic has looked farcical at times with Gillard using return hubris to dump on the Deputy Opposition Leader, and the Opposition Leader.

The HOR Hansard record of Question Time events yesterday can be read using this link – HOR Hansard 28th Nov 2012 -

[Page 50 of the Hansard record, and page 66 of the PDF file record.   The link to the Hansard record of all sittings of the HOR this week is here.]

The arrogance shown all week by the PM does not carry the levity of say a Keating, or a Bob Hawke.  Howard could never behave like this and that was one of his strengths … but to see some of the facial masks Gillard has used this week, her tone changes turning her into whining, screeching, ‘bitch in heat’ type performances, and though she be the PM, she has never shown the Office she represents the respect it deserves.

This behaviour coming from a sitting PM – whilst playing down the woman aspect for fear of being labeled a ‘misogynist sexist nutjob’ … the performance of the PM all week and for her time in the job has and continues to makes one very uncomfortable.   Gillard’s performance in the House this week will be her undoing – the Australian people do not like bully’s – and Gillard has proved to what lengths she will go to prove she is a misandryst and will use her sex leverage to attack anybody who threatens her.

Australian women and men will judge her … the pride the women had in her becoming our first female PM will and is evaporating – all a result of the way she has behaved in the position of PM – and how her misandryst mantra is damaging women’s issues all over the world.

To add to this – how can anyone respect a ‘crook’ with a past that besmirches the integrity of the Office of the Prime Minister.

Close inspection by observers of body language inform the signs Gillard has put out this week is not all bravado.  She has wavered at times.

Just how close some of the Opposition’s questions have come near the mark can only truly be known by Gillard.   The body language observers confirm that Gillard is showing she has something to hide in her return fire.

Her tactic all week has been to counter-attack and for the most it has worked, as demonstrated by her early fire press conference an hour before Question Time on Monday last.

The Opposition has looked largely ineffective in their performance allowing Gillard to dance around the Deputy Opposition Leaders questions.  That was up until last night … the shit hit the fan and today’s House session will be defining.

On Lateline last night – the ‘smoking gun’ was revealed – or evidence that it did exist.  It’s existence was alluded to earlier that day when Shadow AG Senator George Brandis spoke in the Senate and labeled Gillard in a way that many have wanted to hear for a long time.

Mr Brandis’ Senate speech is presented below:  [Hansard record linked here - refer page 36 of the Hansard Record - and page 48 of the PDF file.]

Senator BRANDIS (Queensland—Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (13:29):

For more than a year, and increasingly over recent weeks, there has been growing concern over the scandal involving the Australian Workers’ Union Workplace Reform Association—described by Ms Julia Gillard as ‘a slush fund’—the use of the association to defraud AWU members and donors to the fund, and the role of Ms Gillard in the creation and operation of the fund. The Prime Minister’s response to the scandal has used every tool in the political spin-master’s kit. First she sought to discredit and professionally damage the journalists who broke the story. Then she ridiculed it. Pre-emptive press conferences were used as a device to avoid answering specific and detailed questions on the floor of the parliament. But, as new and more damaging facts have emerged on an almost daily basis, the Prime Minister’s attempts to portray the story as insubstantial and fanciful—to laugh it off and deride her accusers—have come to seem increasingly desperate and improbable.

The allegations against her are serious, they are made by experienced and credible people and they cannot be ignored. They come from both of the national newspapers, the Australian and the Australian Financial Review, as well as the other Fairfax titles, the television networks, including the national broadcaster—somewhat late to the party, it must be said, but nevertheless now pursuing the issue with vigour—and, now, virtually the whole of the Australian media. The journalists who have led the investigation include Hedley Thomas, one of Australia’s most awarded investigative journalists, with five Walkley Awards to his name; Leigh Sales of ABC’s 7.30; Mark Baker of the Age and Laura Tingle of the Australian Financial Review—hardly right-wing ‘nut jobs’. The reality is that the Prime Minister faces serious and specific allegations of improper conduct, and possible illegality, which go to her personal integrity and fitness for office. Her tactic of ridiculing her accusers and avoiding the issue only reinforces the growing public perception that she has something to hide.

Amid all the complexities of the various legal transactions and money flows, the central facts of the case are essentially quite simple. In 1992, the AWU Workplace Reform Association was established as a vehicle for fraud. In the course of the next few years, the substantial sums of money paid into the bank account operated by the association—both by innocent members of the AWU and commercial donors like Thiess, wishing to support its ostensibly honest objectives—were diverted to the personal use and benefit of two AWU officials in particular, Mr Bruce Wilson, then the Victorian State Secretary of the AWU, and Mr Ralph Blewitt, who has been described as his ‘close associate’. Among other things, $100,000 of those funds—effectively, stolen money—were used towards the purchase of a house at 85 Kerr Street, Fitzroy for the benefit of Bruce Wilson. In an interview on 7.30 last night, Wilson confirmed the use of moneys from the fund for that acquisition. For reasons which have never been explained, the property was purchased in the name of Ralph Blewitt under a power of attorney given to Wilson. The solicitor who drew the power of attorney was Ms Gillard. Ms Gillard was also involved in the conveyance of the property, and indeed attended the auction in February 1993.

The association was a sham from the start. It was set up on the advice of Ms Gillard, then a partner of the law firm Slater & Gordon, and she acted professionally in its establishment. The AWU was a client of Ms Gillard’s firm. At the time, Wilson was in a personal relationship with Ms Gillard. This fact itself raises issues of potential conflict of interest. It also demonstrates the implausibility of Ms Gillard’s attempts to characterise her involvement as an arm’s length professional transaction of whose nature and context she was unaware.

It is important to understand Ms Gillard’s knowledge of the nature and purpose of the AWU Workplace Reform Association, for that is a central issue in the case. This is how Ms Gillard described the association in her exit interview from Slater & Gordon on 11 September 1995:

It’s common practice, indeed every union has what it refers to as a re-election fund, slush fund, whatever, which is the funds that the leadership team, into which the leadership team puts money so that they can finance their next election campaign. … they can cost $10,000, $20,000—they’re not cheap. So the usual mechanism people use to amass that amount of money is that they require the officials who ran on their ticket to enter payroll deduction schemes where money each week or fortnight goes from their pay into a bank account which is used for re-election purposes from time to time. They also have different fundraisers, dinners and raffles and so on, to amass the necessary amount of money to mount their re-election campaign.

She went on to say:

” … The thinking behind the forming of incorporated associations is that it had been our experience that if you did it in a less formal way, you just had someone, say Fred Bloggs, say, oh look, I’ll just open a bank account and everybody can put the money into there, the problem developed that when the leadership team fractured, as relatively commonly happens, you got into a very difficult dispute about who was the owner of the monies in the bank account, so it was better to have an incorporated association, a legal entity, into which people could participate as members, that was the holder of the account.” …

So there is no doubt, no doubt whatsoever, that, at the time she was involved in setting up the slush fund, Ms Gillard knew what its purpose was—indeed, the choice of an incorporated association as the entity to hold the funds for union election purposes was Ms Gillard’s brainchild, her ‘thinking’, as she said.

However the objects of the association, set out in rule 3 of the rules, do not disclose that the purpose of the association was to be a holding entity for trade union election campaign funds. A variety of vaguely-expressed, rather innocuous objects are recited, declaring the association to be for the advancement of workers’ wellbeing and like purposes, not to finance the election of the ticket of a faction of officials within the union. On a fair reading of the objects clause, the conclusion seems inescapable that the provision is written to conceal, not to explain, its purpose. The concealment of the true purpose of the association is even more plain from an advertisement placed in the West Australian newspaper, which describes the purposes of the association as follows:

The Association is formed for the purpose of propagating and encouraging workplace reform for workers performing construction and maintenance work.

It is important to set out subclause 2 of the objects clause, which provides:

The property and income of the Association must be applied solely in accordance with the objects of the Association and no part of that property or income may be paid or otherwise distributed, directly or indirectly, to members, except in good faith in the promotion of those objects.
But that was not to be.

If it was Ms Gillard’s ‘thinking’ and Wilson’s and Blewitt’s intention to set up the association as a device for deceiving contributing members and external donors into believing that their donations would be used consistently with the objects of the association or, indeed, for a purpose associated with the broader objectives of the AWU itself, but in fact the money was to be used for their own private purposes—namely, their election campaigns—then, at that stage, there was a conspiracy to defraud the donors, and all persons who assisted in or facilitated the setting up of the organisation, with that awareness, were parties to the conspiracy to defraud.

In the extract from her exit interview which I have quoted, Ms Gillard in effect admitted that, at the time, she knew that the funds would be used not for the purposes indicated by the name and objects of the association but for the private purposes of Wilson and Blewitt. In other words, she knew the association she acted in setting up was to be used to deceive companies into donating money for a purpose alien to that which they thought their donations would be used for and members into contributing for a purpose alien to what they thought their contribution would be for. If that was the case, she was a party to a conspiracy to defraud.

One of the external donors, Thiess, actually says it was misled, and made a complaint to the police dated 22 August 1996. In the event that the Thiess funds were misapplied, there was a crime committed when they were paid—namely, the crime of obtaining money by false pretences. Furthermore, it was necessary, in order to obtain the registration of the association, for Ms Gillard, as the solicitor responsible, to certify to the Western Australian Corporate Affairs Commission that the association was being incorporated for a bona fide purpose consistent with the incorporating documents lodged. She did so. In doing so, she made a knowingly false declaration which appears to be in breach of section 170 of the Western Australian criminal code.

Furthermore, the certification provision, section 5 of the Western Australian Associations Incorporation Act, also requires the applicant to verify that the association has more than five members. Ms Gillard did so. However, the association, as Ms Gillard well knew, only had two members—Wilson and Blewitt. While there might be room for argument about the vagueness of the objects, there is no vagary about this: Ms Gillard falsely certified the association to be compliant in respect of its number of members. She knew it was not and, once again, appears to have breached section 170 of the Western Australian Criminal Code. As well, since one of Slater & Gordon’s principal clients was the AWU, Ms Gillard must be taken to have been aware of the rules of that union. She must therefore have been aware of the fact that the establishment of such an association would have required a resolution of the executive of the union. No such resolution was ever passed. Ms Gillard either knew that or neglected to inform herself of it. The certification to the Western Australian Corporate Affairs Commission of compliance seems also to have been false in that respect.

One thing which makes this matter particularly suspicious is that no file was created. Thus, Ms Gillard’s work was effectively concealed from her firm, an issue about which she was challenged in her exit interview, and which ultimately meant that she had put Slater & Gordon into a position of conflict between two clients—the association and the Australian Workers Union itself, which resulted ultimately in the loss to that firm of the AWU, one of its biggest and most lucrative clients—no doubt one of the reasons for Ms Gillard’s hasty exit from the firm. The AWU work went to the rival Labor-associated law firm Maurice Blackburn and, by a remarkable coincidence, the solicitor who took it over is none other than the person who serves as Attorney-General in Ms Gillard’s government, Ms Nicola Roxon. To add further intrigue to the affair, the file containing the original documents, which would reveal in more detail Ms Gillard’s knowledge and involvement in this matter, has mysteriously and inexplicably disappeared from the archives of the Western Australian Corporate Affairs Commission and cannot be located.

I do not have time today to explore the subsequent use of the Workplace Reform Association to defraud its members, in particular by the acquisition of the Kerr Street property and the cash payments transacted through the fund. I will deal with those matters on a subsequent occasion. But it is already clear that, from its inception, Ms Julia Gillard’s involvement in this matter has been characterised by concealment, deception, professional misconduct and, it would appear, several breaches of the criminal law.

These are explosive allegations under privilege and are based on the evidence trail.  This statement began to trickle into the media arena late last night which led to the Emerson v Pyne Lateline debate that further ignited the flame under Gillard.  [Link to Lateline Iview replay with transcript of the Emerson v Pyne debate.]

The Australian‘ published further extracts from the S&G Gillard ‘exit interview’ to use Brandis’ language – which confirms what he alleged in the Senate – that extract is reproduce below:

Young Gillard answers the boss


| Author: Not Credited | Date: Nov 29th, 2012 | Link to On-Line Story. |

This is an extract from the transcript of a meeting between Slater & Gordon senior partner Peter Gordon, general manager Geoff Shaw and salaried partner Julia Gillard on September 11, 1995.

PETER GORDON: All right, well, let’s talk about the AWU Workplace Reform Association Account. That account, as you’ve said, is an account which was the account belonging to an incorporated association by the same name which was incorporated by Slater & Gordon at (Bruce) Wilson’s, on Wilson’s instructions following your advice to him which you described earlier.

JULIA GILLARD: That’s right.

PG: And that happened in or about mid-1992.

JG: That’s right.

PG: And last Monday I think you gave to Paul Mulvaney a follow-up which demonstrates that Slater & Gordon had drafted model rules for, for that, had submitted those rules to the relevant Western Australian government authority, that there’d been a letter from the authority suggesting that it might be a trade union and therefore ineligible for incorporation under that legislation, and that we had prepared a response submitted on Wilson’s instructions to that authority suggesting that in fact it wasn’t a trade union and arguing the case for its incorporation. My recollection is that all of that happened in or about mid-1992. Is that right?

JG: I wouldn’t want to be held to the dates without looking at the file, but whatever the dates the file shows are the right dates, so . . .

PG: Yes. And to the extent that work was done on that file in relation to that it was done by you?

JG: That’s right.

PG: And did you get advice from anyone else in the firm in relation to any of those matters?

JG: No I didn’t.

PG: Did Tony Lang have anything to do with the model rules or the drafting of them?

JG: No, I obtained, I had just in my own personal precedent file a set of rules for Socialist Forum which is an incorporated association in which I’m personally involved. Tony Lang and I drew those rules some years ago. Tony more than me. And I’ve just kept them hanging around as something I cut and paste from for drafting purposes, and I obtained, I don’t quite recall how now but I obtained the model rules under the WA act and I must have done the drafting just relying on those two sources. I don’t have any recollection of sitting down with Tony or any other practitioner and talking through the draft of the rules.

PG: Do you recall whether when it was necessary to argue the case with the, with the relevant Western Australian authority, whether you consulted anyone else in the firm as to what would or would not get, become acceptable or appropriate?

JG: I once again don’t recall talking to anybody else in the firm about it.

PG: Beyond that, and it seems from the file that after that letter it was successfully accepted as an incorporated association and duly was created and presumably accounts were set up. I should ask did we have anything to do with the setting up of the accounts or was that done by the officers of the incorporated association?

JG: Slater & Gordon didn’t have anything, did not have anything to do with setting up bank accounts for that association. We attended to the incorporation.

The Smoking Gun reference:

PG: Can I ask you then following the last thing that we did to setting up the incorporation, which appears from the file to be the letter arguing that it ought to be not construed as a trade union, did you have anything personally to do with that incorporated association afterwards?

JG: No I did not.

PG: Right, to the best of your knowledge did anyone at Slater & Gordon?

JG: To my knowledge no one at Slater & Gordon had anything to do with it post that time.

The Opposition’s tactic yesterday and all week has been to draw Gillard into a lie or a misleading of the House – yesterday’s question was asking Gillard whether she signed the ‘letter’ alluded to by Brandis.

The question was asked four times and Gillard ‘danced-around’ the question each time.  The question was: [page 56 of Hansard record - page 72 of the PDF file record.

Ms JULIE BISHOP (Curtin—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (14:34):

My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the Prime Minister's answer in the House on Monday as to whether she had written to the WA commissioner for corporate affairs to vouch for the bona fides of the AWU Workplace Reform Association:

… the association is only incorporated if the … authority … is satisfied … Clearly, the registrar must have been so satisfied, or they would not have incorporated the association.

Given the Prime Minister's statement this week that she provided legal advice to establish the association and her failure to rule out writing to the commissioner on Monday, I ask the Prime Minister again: did she at any time write to the commissioner for corporate affairs to vouch for— (Time expired)

This question is different formats was asked several more times during the session - not once did Gillard give a direct response to the question.  It was obvious she was avoiding the answer because she knew that a truthful response would have her on the record and admitting her involvement in setting up the vehicle that was used to accomplish the fraud.

The evidence of the letter sent to the This WA Corporate Affairs has 'gone missing'.  The file has been reported lost, as has the S&G file where a copy of this letter would normally be held on file.

It is not hard to make a case that a protective 'cleansing' has happened to protect Gillard and goes to a larger crime - that is t cover up a crime and will involve a great number more people and their connections that have the ability to make files disappear.

The evidence of the 'letter in question' is a part of the 'dare-game' Gillard is playing - 'produce the letter or else it is all hearsay'.

She knows or has been advised by her puppet masters that the file has 'gone', and she can carry on the way she has in the House all week in the knowledge that all that she has to deal with is hearsay.   Should she get through today without losing too much more skin in the game, she will lead the Government into next year and perhaps beyond.

The Opposition need a defining day in the House today - a lot of it will play out before Question time happens ... but the Speaker - all week struggling with remaining unbiased - will again be tested.

Both Independents - Windsor and Oakeshott appeared on 'Capital hill' late yesterday afternoon and expressed their desire to see the Parliament run full term.  A 'vote of no-confidence' can be discounted on the comments they both made.

They still have stars in their eyes over their position of importance in this minority Government.  This author has sent numerous e-mail messages to both these MP's on the matter of Gillards integrity and her right to serve as the Prime Minister - never once have either sent a reply response.

I think they are both men who want to do good - and they both feel that this is their last term ... why would they want to cut it short ?

Any talk by either of them about the people's interest being served is false rhetoric - much as Emerson makes a fool of himself when he states the Australian people don't want to hear or read anymore about the AWU scandal.  The misread is there ... the Australian electorate may be treated as fools by this Government - yet they understand criminal behaviour and Gillard as a bees-dick away from being caught in her own honey trap.  If justice be served it will happen - but then how often is justice really served?

All the morning the lovesick Emerson continues to prostituted himself on National TV protesting Gillards innocence and that she 'has done nothing wrong' ... he remains the biggest fool in Parliament.  He behaves like a juvenile love-sick goon who still pines for Gillard in a romantic way - he is blinded by his affection for his Leader.   It is obsessive like, and to think that in the context of him being a Minister serving the highest office in the land - Emerson's continued defense of the PM is sheer lunacy.

As a ALP voter all my life - with the alternative - 'None of the Above' vote cast in half a dozen elections during that life - I find this ALP Government not worthy of office - I never voted for Gillard, I did vote for Rudd ... and most of Australia who did vote for Rudd have never forgiven Gillard and the Unions for what they did.

That is my motive in pursuing Gillard - she has never been worthy in my eyes ... yet this Cabinet full of her ex-lovers feel they are safe as long as Gillard is safe - hence their unqualified support.  If Gillard goes so do they ... one hell of a motive to stand before the whole Nation and lie about what they know about what happened and give Gillard their support based on what they have been told - not on what the evidence proves did happen.

Prediction:

Today - more of the same mis-direction and obfuscation by Gillard - she will not give a direct answer - if she does she knows the flood gates will open ... this will be decided by Caucus who will respond to the poll data - if Gillard retains her current levels then she will not be rolled - that is what Politics has come to in this Nation -

A PM with a past that will see her former friend and ex-lover most probably go to jail for deeds that were facilitated by Julia Gillard - our PM ... where has the integrity of all MP's gone ... where is the moral ground example from our Leadership?

Gillard has besmirched the office of the PM for the next in line to serve and for those that follow.  She has no idea what her performance means in the long term.  She demonstrates daily that she is without conscience, without morality,  she possesses integrity that can be best described as - 'you've done nothing wrong unless others can prove you have done something wrong' ...

This Nation is a step away from protests and violence over this issue ... if that happens will Gillard then get the message ...

Comment contributor Gerry was right - a joint Task Force by Victorian and WA police to investigae this matter in full is a solution if the Opposition can't get the job done in setting up a Royal Commission ...

Please - if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts - i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below - please click your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story. Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: - contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about - or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website - MP's


The EYE-BALL Opinion …

EYE-BALL Opinion – The Collective v the Abstract – Gillard is aware of her wrong doings -

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2

Latest ‘EYE-BALL Opinion’ Posts:


- 25th Nov – Distressed Damsel Gillard’s Black Knight – Bruce Wilson’s 11th hour offer to defend Gillard -


- 24th Nov – The Jewish v Arab problem – A naive perspective -


- 24th Nov – Hedley Thomas plunges the knife – Gillard mortally wounded -


- 23rd Nov – Immigration and Asylum Seekers – What is the real answer -


- 20th Nov – Schoolies Week Starts – The Booze for Kids debate again heats up -


- 16th Nov – How Deep does the AWU corruption cover-up go? – An exposé on innuendo, evidence, hearsay and conjecture -


- 15th nov – Hedley Thomas exploding on Gillard – Gillard has a case to answer … -


- 14th Nov – Gillard behaves like a Guilty Person – Asks for allegations to be made -


- 14th Nov – The Australian Media – Lapdog’s at best – absolutely lost the plot on integrity, and their charter of responsibility -


- 9th Nov – Open Letter to “The Independents” Re: -
- Julia Gillard, Peter Slipper, and Craig Thompson, three MP’s who bring continued shame to our Parliament -


- 9th Nov – “Courage is an Angle” – the difference between a good day and a great day -


- 8th Nov – RUDD fires a broadside aimed at GILLARD – done under a burka to hide its true intent -


- 6th Nov – Gillard’s caucus and union support in revolt – her position becoming more untenable by the day -


- 5th Nov – Referendum Discussion Part 1 – Compulsory Voting – Eye-Ball’s – “None of the Above Campaign” -


- 4th Nov – Gillard Sunburnt – the flames of discontent begin to impact -


- 2nd Nov – A Montage of AWU Scandal Reports – Gillard to become “Open-Season” -


- 1st Nov – Education … A white Elephant – Politicising the future of young Australians -


- 30th Oct – How do you awake a slumbering nation – Politicians – the most empty of vessels -


- 30th Oct – Whistleblowers – love ‘em’ or hate ‘em’ -


- 29th Oct – Polls pressure Abbott’s Leadership – Worst PM ever holds lead and flaunts her position -


- 28th Oct – Eye-Ball’s “YUCK FILES -1” – ABC’s “Insiders” – Barry Cassidy -


- To see more EYE-BALL ‘Opinion’ posts:

click here …


Title:
- The Collective v the Abstract -
- Gillard is aware of her wrong doings -
| Author: EYE-BALL Opinion | 26th Nov 2012 |
The collective voice from the ALP Ministers and MP’s in support of Gillard in recent weeks and over the weekend is openly available from all areas of the media – yet the rumblings continue.

Who are her detractors,  who among them want to see Gillard on a spike?

Who among us all want to see her expose for all her lies and her maleficence as a puppet on behalf of the Union heavies who resurrected her life and her career?

Yesterday – a day where Wilson finally comes out and offers his ‘fraud based’ view that ‘Gillard is innocent’ – created pause before the final assault in the House today.

The Opposition have as much to lose as does the Government in this sitting week.  The theatre will be important and the Speaker will have her task put to the test early.

Preparations are being made, strategy planned on both sides, and the anticipation for all those who think Gillard a ‘crook’ they are hopeful the Opposition can do their task.

On the other side, Albanese spent the weekend trying to find precedence to intervene if the questions to be put to the PM have foundation – his role will be to obfuscate the Oppositions time at the dispatch box, to create mis-direction and raise ‘point’s of order’ and have the Speaker rule.  All a part of a plan to waste time and obstruct the Oppositions declared intent.

In essence it is a ‘chess game’ where opening moves will declare intent and strategy giving the Government a chance to respond in kind.

Those hoping for a clear winner on this first day of the House’s last session before rising for the two month Xmas break, will be disappointed.   If by Wednesday the Opposition has not drawn blood, then it will be safe to say that Gillard will survive the week and possibly into next year.

There are some ‘jokers’ – the Independents and what they intend to do should a motion of ‘no confidence’ become a part of the Opposition strategy.  The Opposition will not play that move unless they hold indications from the cross-benches as to their vote intention and they feel sure they have the numbers.   It’s a card you don’t play more than once in a sitting week.

The money trail is for the physical evidence – the questions for Gillard are based in Law and her role as a lawyer and Partner in the Slater & Gordon Law Firm.

For Gillard to claim as she has in that – ‘I have done nothing wrong’ – all the Opposition have to do is trap her in her own testimony in the House.

Examples:

  1. Who was S&G’s primary client – and this goes to Gillard’s responsibilities to her S&G Partners, to her oath as an ‘Officer of the Court’,  and to her personal integrity in doing the ‘practice of law’, in the full knowledge that what she was doing represented a betrayal of her fellow Partners, and her ‘oath of office’ – the target of enquiry and questions should be about:
  • Did Gillard have any authorisation from the primary client S&G represented – i.e. AWU Victoria – to open up the Wilson Associations and the Bank accounts that became a part of those Associations,
  • What did Gillard do to ensure the interests of the AWU primary client was first and the foremost consideration in the advice Gillard was offering to Bruce Wilson,
  • Gillard’s reasons for keeping the file she opened on behalf of the Wilson advice as private and confidential, and off the S&G file database, needs to be explained in full given that that file is now ‘missing’,
  • The circumstances of how she became aware of the fraud and what action she took – aside from her admitted action of breaking off the personal relationship she had with Wilson,
  • Did she consider reporting the fraud – firstly to her Partners and the primary client in AWU Victoria, and secondly, to the police as her ‘oath of office’ required her to do so,
  • When did her relationship with Wilson begin, was it as a result of the S&G work she was doing for the existing AWU client, or was it from connections that were not associated with her professional job as a lawyer with S&G – i.e. did Wilson seek Gillard out to help with his planned fraud because S&G were representing AWU, and Gillard was connected to the existing AWU client,
  • Gillard needs to explain how she became aware of the fraud, i.e. did she discover something untoward, or was there an admission, or did she have suspicions she investigated and then discovered the premise of the Wilson fraud,
  • Depending on the response to the previous point – when did she report the discovery of the fraud to her fellow partners, if at all, how did the S&G partnership become aware of her involvement with Wilson and her connection to the Associations used to conduct the AWU fraud,  and was her record of interview with the S&G Partnership under a Q&A type investigation about a discovery  to the extent of S&G’s liability given Gillard’s complicity in the Associations being established -
  • Was the S&G actions after the discovery of the fraud in not advising the AWU primary client to do with the Firm protecting itself?
  1. The second major issue of enquiry arising from the scandal revolves around the discrepancies in Gillard’s statements.  Her response in the House to Julie Bishop’s questions on the 1st Nov ’12 – Hansard record inked here – see page 95 of PDF file -  relating to when Gillard became aware of the fraud, and when the fraud was reported to the police draws doubt on the honesty of her response.   This goes to the Ian Cambridge affidavit – linked here – which provides a time line structure of events that do not align with the statements already given by Gillard. For Example:
  • Ian Cambridge claims that the AWU S&G were representing did not become aware of the Wilson fraud until 1996, some 12 months after S&G did their own internal investigation that resulted in Gillard taking an extended leave of absence, why didn’t S&G report the Wilson fraud to the AWU primary representatives. This suggests gross probity issues on behalf of S&G and prejudicial conduct that cost their client large sums of money as the accounts Wilson still had control after the fraud was discovered were still be accessed and monies withdrawn.
  • The question has been answered by Gillard that she cannot be sure if defrauded funds were not used for personal use, or she did not benefit personally from those defrauded funds – her subsequent response to all questions on this matter since that – ‘I did not do anything wrong’ – hinges on this issue. If it can be shown that Gillard did receive a financial benefit – her creditability is completely destroyed. The evidence in this issue has to be so convincing, that even her worst enemies concede that she did not receive a benefit.
  • Bruce Wilsons claimed over the weekend that Gillard is innocent, his first comments made on the issue ever. They carry no weight. In fact, it draws more attention when her Ministers come out saying because Wilson has now made his claim, Gillard is innocent and the ‘smear’ campaign should stop. All questions have not been answered. It defies common sense that Ministers of the Government should take the position to defend Gillard when the law associated with her conduct has not been answered or put to her.
  • There is also the question for Ms Roxon, did she have, see, or deal with the S&G AWU file surrounding the Gillard/Wilson connection as a part of her responsibilities to Maurice Blackburn, her employer, and the new lawyers representing the AWU after they transferred their account from S&G.
  • What does Ms Roxon know about the Wilson fraud – and is she able to discuss the matter or is she still bound by attorney/client privilege.   Can Wilson give permission for Roxon to give a candid response to questions arising from her involvement.

The issue of the attorney client privilege can and is working to protect S&G and Gillard.  That same protection is working for Roxon in that sh can stay silent and argue that she is complying with the law.

As Gerry – a frequent commentator on this site has stated – nothing less than a Royal Commission into this, with an expanded mandate into all Union funds and the reporting of their use for all Unions in Australia will discover what really happened.

The AWU wanted this matter kept quite – and that includes ALP heavies including current MP Bill Shorten, past Senator Graham Richardson,  Premier Carr and his connection to the Ian Cambridge appointment to the NSW Industrial Commission at a time when Cambridge was pursuing a Royal Commission in 1996 into the AWU scandal.

This toxic sludge has been buried and gathering a catharsis of pent up emotion and conjecture – a Royal Commission will uncover the deep roots of Union fraud at the highest levels.   This is the achilles heel of the Union movement – snap it now and you get rid of a century of corruption and intimidation dominating the ALP faction groups and the backroom deals done withe the faceless men to get their charges appointed as Senators and pre-selected in safe Labour seats.

Australia has a chance here to cleanse the stacked deck.   All Australians should see this opportunity for what it represents.   Write you local Member and give them your view and dare them to do the right thing.

It begins this afternoon – tune in for Question time at 2:00pm AEDST – let the games begin.

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please click your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story. Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


The EYE-BALL Opinion …

EYE-BALL Opinion – Distressed Damsel Gillard’s Black Knight – Bruce Wilson’s 11th hour offer to defend Gillard -

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2

Latest ‘EYE-BALL Opinion’ Posts:


- 24th Nov – The Jewish v Arab problem – A naive perspective -


- 24th Nov – Hedley Thomas plunges the knife – Gillard mortally wounded -


- 23rd Nov – Immigration and Asylum Seekers – What is the real answer -


- 20th Nov – Schoolies Week Starts – The Booze for Kids debate again heats up -


- 16th Nov – How Deep does the AWU corruption cover-up go? – An exposé on innuendo, evidence, hearsay and conjecture -


- 15th nov – Hedley Thomas exploding on Gillard – Gillard has a case to answer … -


- 14th Nov – Gillard behaves like a Guilty Person – Asks for allegations to be made -


- 14th Nov – The Australian Media – Lapdog’s at best – absolutely lost the plot on integrity, and their charter of responsibility -


- 9th Nov – Open Letter to “The Independents” Re: -
- Julia Gillard, Peter Slipper, and Craig Thompson, three MP’s who bring continued shame to our Parliament -


- 9th Nov – “Courage is an Angle” – the difference between a good day and a great day -


- 8th Nov – RUDD fires a broadside aimed at GILLARD – done under a burka to hide its true intent -


- 6th Nov – Gillard’s caucus and union support in revolt – her position becoming more untenable by the day -


- 5th Nov – Referendum Discussion Part 1 – Compulsory Voting – Eye-Ball’s – “None of the Above Campaign” -


- 4th Nov – Gillard Sunburnt – the flames of discontent begin to impact -


- 2nd Nov – A Montage of AWU Scandal Reports – Gillard to become “Open-Season” -


- 1st Nov – Education … A white Elephant – Politicising the future of young Australians -


- 30th Oct – How do you awake a slumbering nation – Politicians – the most empty of vessels -


- 30th Oct – Whistleblowers – love ‘em’ or hate ‘em’ -


- 29th Oct – Polls pressure Abbott’s Leadership – Worst PM ever holds lead and flaunts her position -


- 28th Oct – Eye-Ball’s “YUCK FILES -1” – ABC’s “Insiders” – Barry Cassidy -


- To see more EYE-BALL ‘Opinion’ posts:

click here …


Title:
- Distressed Damsel Gillard’s Black Knight -
- Bruce Wilson’s 11th hour offer to defend Gillard -
| Author: EYE-BALL Opinion | 25th Nov 2012 |
Overnight Bruce Wilson broke his silence on the Gillard involvement in the AWU scandal.

The timing could not be more calculated with the House set to resume Monday [tomorrow] – and the Opposition’s fore-warning to the PM over the past week that they plan to strip back her life and expose her in full for her past sins connected with  the criminal aspects of the AWU fraud.

Why didn’t Gillard report the fraud to the police when she claims she discovered it for the first time in 1995?  As a lawyer it was her duty to report the crime … she has not responded to this question when asked by Julie Bishop in the House on the 1st Nov ’12 – see this link to Hansard [edit updated 26/11/12] on the questions posed.

Bruce Wilson has made his first on the record comment to be published in papers around the Nation tomorrow [Monday].  Snippets released in the ‘Daily Telegraph’ today highlight Wilson saying -

“Julia Gillard had absolutely no knowledge of anything that went after and people can search and continue this hunt all they like but they will find nothing. Nothing,” Fairfax quoted Mr Wilson as saying.

These statements released a day before Gillard was to face her possible demise in the Parliament House sitting over the next week has caused a pause in the media’s thinking and momentum in building the story.

The past weeks has seen a build up of revelations and presentation of circumstantial evidence all painting Gillard into a corner.   To reassess some of these events – please visit the following links to get first hand reporting on the past matters raised in the last week:

  1. Firstly – Paul Murray of Sky News presents the Nick Styant-Browne release of documents on his 22nd Nov broadcast that included a statement of fact about when Gillard new about, and how the purchase of the Kerr St property was funded.
  2. Secondly – Bill Shorten gave an interview on Lateline on the 21st Nov – and called the ‘slush-fund’ accounts as ‘inappropriate’ and ‘unauthorised’, thus distancing himself from Gillard – see video of interview linked here:
  3. Thirdly – Wayne Swan defended Gillard yesterday – 24th Nov, in the light of the past weeks fresh accounts against Gillard’s role in the AWU scandal/fraud – i.e. the Hedley Thomas stories based on the Ian Cambridge diaries and other matters including:
  • the $5000 cash deposit to Gillard’s bank account – story linked here
  • the implication of ALP Member Chris Hayes in payments to ‘slush fund’ accounts – story linked here
  • the connections made over a, AWU ‘slush-fund’ $15,000 cashed cheque and a $10,00 bank cheque paid for by these cashed funds that appear to have been used to pay for renovations to Gillards home – see story here
  • the Ralph Blewitt confession to Victorian Police made Friday last – see ’7:30 Report’ interview here
  • Wayne Swan gave a press conference yesterday – 24th Nov – to offer comment that called Nick Styant-Browne ‘disgruntled’, and Ralph Blewitt as ‘lacking creditability’ and that – ‘it is all a smear campaign’ – watch Sky News video of his interview hereread story here
  1. Now hear Sky News video comment from the ‘Daily Telegraph’ journalist STEVE LEWIS about what Bruce Wilson said in his statement  – linked here … read Daily Telegraph story here

There had been a building expectation about next week’s Parliamentary House sittings.

Yesterday Gillard appeared to be a fully cooked turkey awaiting a thanksgiving feast … today with the release of the Wilson statement it has caused a holding pattern where the turkey has put back in the oven for further cooking.  Perhaps the Wilson ‘fork-test’ reveal some blood ooze indicating more cooking is required – maybe the story is still a little underdone and has more to offer.

Some questions for Bruce Wilson -

  • Why has Bruce Wilson chosen to talk now when all looked lost for Gillard?
  • Why has he refused to give an account for well over 12 months since this story gained new life?
  • Why has Wilson made claims to discredit Ralph Blewitt as someone that was a – ‘very risky’ – source of information?  ['The Daily Telegraph' gave this comment in the linked Sky News video above.]
  • A skeptic might ask – was Wilson paid for his story -
  • Was he asked to make a statement by the PM, or advisors acting on behalf of the PM given how desperate things were looking for the PM heading into next week?

Swan’s claims in his defence of Gillard yesterday that Blewitt has ‘creditability’ issues, and S&G former Partner Styant-Browne was ‘disgruntled’.

If one was to use Swan’s pretense for discrediting both Blewitt and Styant-Browne – what can be said of Wilson’s creditability?  What about the Ian Cambridge diaries, the Bob Kernohan claims,  the acknowledgement by Gillard that she knew of the fraud in 1995 and did nothing about it other than to break off her relationship?

Blewitt has taken a risk in coming back to Australia to make his statements.  His request for an immunity deal has been granted and it will keep him out of jail.   He has nothing to lose in the claims he has made other then to either confirm his creditability over the events of the AWU fraud, or settle old scores with Bruce Wilson and Julia Gillard.   Either way claims that Blewitt is less than creditable have foundation, but then the same applies to responses from Bruce Wilson and Julia Gillard.

One could be cynical and draw some lines in the sand and allow a constructive appraisal of Swan’s defense of Gillard.

Take Swan’s tirade against Rudd earlier this year,  … see YouTube clip below with Swan’s and other Gillard Minister’s comments about Rudd and the ALP Leadership earlier this year – comments begin from 3:50 sec mark -

Watching this clip will bring back painful memories for ALP supporters, and again remind us how far the ALP caucus has disconnected from the ALP support base.

To compare Swan’s comments with his concession days ago about Rudd being the architect of the GFC response that saved Australia – give Swan’s own creditability a sewer dump as well.

The EYE-BALL Guru has called Swan the dumbest Treasurer ever in many of his posts where he highlights Swan’s ineptness at his responsibilities as the Treasurer … this might be a biased opinion … but then when the facts and figures are measured, Swan has given us all plenty of reasons for this assessment.

How should anyone regard any statement from Bruce Wilson given Mr Swan’s easy dismissal of Ralph Blewitt and Nick Styant-Browne’s statements under creditability issues?

One could say it is all smoke and mirrors – and any real evidence will come from a ‘follow the money’ type investigation.   It is still the best way to get to the bottom of the matter and that goes again to Hedley Thomas, the Ian Cambridge diaries, and the investigative journalism underway in digging up the Bank account statements and obtaining copies of the cheques and deposit slips and pursuing the trail of funds.   This is a timely exercise but it will be precise.

If Gillard is involved there is no chance of her or her ‘cleaners’ tinkering with this type of evidence – i.e. – past history over the lost files from Slater & Gordon, and the West Australian storage facilities can only point to a previous ‘cleansing’ of the background evidence to protect Gillard.

For more on this see the latest ‘Kangaroo Court of Australia’ story on the appointment of Federal Court Chief Justice Patrick Keane as a High Court Judge – linked here.

Reading between the lines on this Shane Dowling story,  one might thing Keane reward in a High Court posting, was for doing his part in losing files crucial to the AWU fraud.   As Shane Dowling states – there will be more in this as the ‘missing files’ becomes more of an issue.

The ‘Bolt Report’ discussed the Bruce Wilson comments this morning – view YouTube clip of this discussion below:

Gillard and her media team have made a complete mess of what should have been a clean skin-issue from the outset.  Had she gave a full and frank account of her involvement many years ago – this issue would not be coming back at her as it has done time and time again.

The reason why she has not been able to give a full account is because it would incriminate her.  It would reveal how her behaviour as a Lawyer is the reason for the ’cause and effect’ of the scandal in the first place.  Since she first responded to the AWU allegations – the comments have been about her being ‘a young and naive’ person that has not flown, then it became – ‘I did nothing wrong’,  and the evidence has shown that she did do plenty wrong.  What will her next defense be?

What will she now offer – will she claim that Bruce Wilson’s account of her involvement is something we all should take on face value … hardly.

Nothing has changed and the headlines about the Bruce Wilson comments has allowed the turkey to now become fully cooked, rested and now awaiting a feast for all of Australia’s ‘disgruntled’ voters.

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please click your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story. Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


The EYE-BALL Opinion …

EYE-BALL Opinion – The Jewish v Arab problem – A naive perspective -

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2

Latest ‘EYE-BALL Opinion’ Posts:


- 24th Nov – Hedley Thomas plunges the knife – Gillard mortally wounded -


- 23rd Nov – Immigration and Asylum Seekers – What is the real answer -


- 20th Nov – Schoolies Week Starts – The Booze for Kids debate again heats up -


- 16th Nov – How Deep does the AWU corruption cover-up go? – An exposé on innuendo, evidence, hearsay and conjecture -


- 15th nov – Hedley Thomas exploding on Gillard – Gillard has a case to answer … -


- 14th Nov – Gillard behaves like a Guilty Person – Asks for allegations to be made -


- 14th Nov – The Australian Media – Lapdog’s at best – absolutely lost the plot on integrity, and their charter of responsibility -


- 9th Nov – Open Letter to “The Independents” Re: -
- Julia Gillard, Peter Slipper, and Craig Thompson, three MP’s who bring continued shame to our Parliament -


- 9th Nov – “Courage is an Angle” – the difference between a good day and a great day -


- 8th Nov – RUDD fires a broadside aimed at GILLARD – done under a burka to hide its true intent -


- 6th Nov – Gillard’s caucus and union support in revolt – her position becoming more untenable by the day -


- 5th Nov – Referendum Discussion Part 1 – Compulsory Voting – Eye-Ball’s – “None of the Above Campaign” -


- 4th Nov – Gillard Sunburnt – the flames of discontent begin to impact -


- 2nd Nov – A Montage of AWU Scandal Reports – Gillard to become “Open-Season” -


- 1st Nov – Education … A white Elephant – Politicising the future of young Australians -


- 30th Oct – How do you awake a slumbering nation – Politicians – the most empty of vessels -


- 30th Oct – Whistleblowers – love ‘em’ or hate ‘em’ -


- 29th Oct – Polls pressure Abbott’s Leadership – Worst PM ever holds lead and flaunts her position -


- 28th Oct – Eye-Ball’s “YUCK FILES -1” – ABC’s “Insiders” – Barry Cassidy -


- To see more EYE-BALL ‘Opinion’ posts:

click here …


Title:
- The Jewish v Arab problem -
- A naive perspective -
| Author: EYE-BALL Opinion | 24th Nov 2012 |
To the naive the senseless genocide, the bombings,  the hatred, the politicking, the view from the outside world where they think – ‘over there who cares’ … they all add up to the diminished concerns normal people have for the ongoing conflict between Jews and Arabs.  It’s a conflict that has no context in an advanced and educated world.

I pose a few questions -

  1. How many Nations were formed based on religion?
  2. How many Nations place religion before the interests and advancement of the people?
  3. How many believe history’s version of how religion became a part of the global society?

They’re simple type questions, but they form the basis for a debate about how religious belief has been responsible for conflicts over many thousands of years.

I can count just three Nations formed and based on a Religion faith – Israel – formed out of the WWII persecution of the European jewish population, and Pakistan formed out of the separation of India into muslim and hindu states.

Most of the arab world were already formed Nations well before the post WWII formation of a Jewish Israel, and a muslim Pakistan.

In answer to question 2 – the answer is all the Muslim Nations, and the Jews. i.e. Indonesia, the Arab States, and Israel.

The most populous Nations, China, Russia, The Americas, Europeans, many with Roman Catholic origins do not place religious beliefs above the State … hence the separation of Church and State statutes in their constitutions.

You look at a global map and take in from Pakistan, Iran, to Syria, to the Nth African Muslim Nations, Indonesia, they are all generally dictated by a religious belief ahead of State affairs. It is changing in some Nations, but the hard-liners still have sway in places like Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, western ways are shunned, where moderate Nations have allowed progression on human rights issues.

In answer to question 3 – well that is a question for each of us to answer dependent on our education and history lessons.

If you take religion out of the conflict between the Jews and Arabs, would there still be a conflict?  Is the solution connected with diminishing religious beliefs, or would the conflict of hatred born from generational revenge continue?

To Westerner’s the stupidity of lobbing bombs across borders, either by uncontrolled rockets, or from precise war planes, it is all about the resultant deaths of innocents.  The respect both sides have toward human life is unfathomable in the modern world.  Women and children are dying and all the Leaders can think about is escalating the conflict to kill more of the other side.

Surely an appropriate response would be for the rest of the world to admonish both sides – yet America, and much of he Western world support Israel unconditionally in the conflict and there begins the problem.

I read a story recently – linked here – that made sense … logical sense.

A story is titled: “CIA Document Declared Israel Founded Upon Terrorism” – and the passage referred to is copied below:

… Germans ethnically cleanse innocent Jews and claim they are a threat to the government and German society.

Now Israelis ethnically cleanse Palestinians and claim they are a threat to society.

What a weird, disgustingly shocking affront to what normal human behavior and societies entail! I do not know what to make of such hypocrisy, inhumanity, and stupidity but to feel sorrow for Israelis.

It is clearly a result of what happens when a government indoctrinates its people with HATE!

… read more …

The comment resonated – it gave some clarity about the conflict and allowed a review of opinions that were based on 1960 history lessons, and modern day reading when the arab, jewish conflicts escalated.

Trying to understand what Arab’s and Israeli’s feel toward one another becomes a perspective in arrogance and stupidity. These populations don’t respect the rights of each other, and for the rest of the world to have respect for either side – the opinion comes down to our own religious beliefs. Is there not such irony in that conundrum?

I accept the holocaust, I accept the efforts to create the Jewish state, but the continued cost in innocent human life terms that allow both these mandated religious and fanatical Governments to keep warring with one another – is grossly unacceptable.

Arming both sides is a West verses East contest … and that is a recipe for a disaster the West has experience with when wars between Iraq and Iran, Iraq and the West, Afghanistan and the West, are all considered in human life and financial terms.

Yes it is disgraceful to measure human life and financial costs in the same context.   Just about as respectful for the feelings the Arabs and Jews have for one another.

This conflict is spreading with Jews among the most assimilated people around the globe.   The muslims are also becoming integrated and Western Governments have open their borders for this migration out of the racist position card being played if they close their borders to either race.

This is an underbelly problem with societies and it will not be long before the hatred these two races have for one another infects our own society.

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please click your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story. Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


The EYE-BALL Opinion …

EYE-BALL Opinion on – The MEDIA – Peddlers of Truth – or just GRUBS without morality!

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2
Title:
- The MEDIA -
Peddlers of Truth – or just GRUBS without morality!
11th June 2012.
Who reads daily newspapers anymore?  Who believes what newspapers print and vision media deliver?  When is the truth stretched until it is no longer believable?  Who has a mind to tell the truth as it really is, or just a watered down version because the real truth would not suit or help a cause?

Who are the biggest peddlers of the ‘dish-washed’ version of a news story – who writes their own ‘copy’ with a view to cause a media ‘beat-up’?  It is easy to sling the mud – and with a news cycle normally limited to 24 hours or so, the next news story is always only a heart beat away.

Let us get real for a moment -

  • free local newspapers offer recycled stories and cover about 10% of the publication – the rest is advertising.
  • mainstream newspapers are on life support and agonising over whether to charge for ‘internet read news’.
  • media revenues are falling, journalist’s are being laid-off, and the public are ever wanting their news delivered by ‘lipstick’ models who look good and can hold an audience.
  • the written word has no appeal anymore unless accompanied with images that create to eye-candy to entice readership.
  • by the time it takes to write a good story – the next news cycle is out there – the 24 hr news cycle offered by the global stage renders morning stories as wastepaper fill by the afternoon.
  • the world has 10 million or so bloggers out there – all reporting news and commenting on mainstream and other bloggers published stories.  Which RRS feeds do you subscribe to as believable?

In this mayhem of news uncertainty – who can be trusted to deliver the truth – research is long forgotten – too time consuming and someone else might beat you to the story.

_______________________________________

Lets us examine some evidence -

  • The Olympic swimmers Monk, and Darcy, like Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid being photographed holding firearms – have been hung out to dry on the back of a ‘social-media’ photo.  The story went viral and has been alive for a week now.  The AOC have been forced to respond – they imposed a penalty on the swimmers.  It is that penalty that now has also gone viral because the facts on the first story were ill-reported and inflamed by hungry journalists looking for name recognition, and by editors looking to create sales and advertising revenues.  How wrong is it when a story like this is distorted to try and turn public opinion against sporting heroes.  So much of what we want to believe is challenged by what we are forced to believe through media reporting then we all have to confront the truth that the media got it horribly wrong.
  • The Syrian crisis – each side is trying to win the propaganda war – all as a cause to win public support that means one of two things – to have us believe the military are acting in the interests of all the people – or in the alternative to point the ‘genocide’ finger at the Syrian President as he orders his military to continue to slaughter thousands of innocents.  There can only be one truth and we can only read or hear one side of the story.
  • The Craig Thompson affair – he has no chance of a fair-trial if he is required to face a judge.  The scandal in this is criminal in the alleged abuse of Union funds – but from the motives of Kathy Jackson, the prostitute, Gillard, Albanese, Abbott, Pyne, and every other person making mileage out of a disgraced politician – the media pedal it all as carpetbaggers out to make a quick buck. How much of the milking in this Craig Thompson story is news as opposed to someone’s vested interest?  How come the media have forgotten Peter Slipper’s troubles and media reports on his progress are quite?

_______________________________________

The western perspective on human existence has become a soft perspective. Soft in the sense that unless it comes easy – via debt purchase or creature comforts – living in hardship is not an option. News delivers confronting images and stories – the western response is to not watch and believe out of sight is out of mind. It is the same with the ease at which media reporting is believed to always be the truth. Yet time and time again stories get altered, retold with new facts, i.e. The Azaria Chamberlin story is about to have another inquest verdict some 30 years later – this was a story that changed on its verdict many times and was retold as new generations of law enforcement revisited the facts.

What is the truth – the Chamberlains told their story and it was never believed. How much responsibility of that tragedy rests with the media and their speculative imput that swayed public opinion. How much sway does the media have in forming opinions on any issue.

Take the ‘children overboard’ scandal. John Howard never faced charges in the way he fooled all Australia into believing that ‘boat-people’ threw their own children into the ocean to force the navy to rescue them. The truth eventually came out after the election – yet Howard rained for another six years.

The truth behind Gillard’s coup to gain the Prime Minister job was revealed after the fact – she lied about when she began to join the plotters, and when her staff started to write her acceptance speech.

These issues were big news stories at the time and all found to be based on lies and fodder fed to the press to print and promote vested interests. The MEDIA are as linked to the slant of truth that suits a MASTER – a master that pays for the collusion, the lies, the agenda, everything but the absolute truth.

It is right to question, and to question everything put out there – for if we don’t then we are sheep and deserve all that comes forth.

_______________________________________

Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Link to Previous EYE-BALL Posts.

________________________________________

The EYE-BALL Opinion …

 

EYE-BALL Opinion on – The UN – as useless as a Bull with no dick!!!

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2
Title:
The UN – as useless as a Bull with no dick!!!
This morning at a special gathering if the UN Security Council called to discuss the Syrian crisis – the best the UN could come up with was a resolution that was toothless as a ‘fire ants’ with no fire.

When will World Leaders call a spade a spade and get their collective ass’ out of their self-serving and perpetuating condoning of the slaughter of innocents. This is a ‘genocide’ – we’ve seen in in Bosnia, Rwanda, Libia, Tunisia, Balkans, and many other ‘hot-spots’ around the world in the last century, and that does not include the two World Wars, of the other major conflicts including Vietnam, Kuwait, Korea, Indo China, South America, and so on – it is abhorently irresponsible that the World Leadership does not recognises the ‘genocide’ taking place and the best it can do is slap the Syria Leadership on the wrist and tell them to withdraw the military tanks and troops.

Read the ABC story on this below: [Linked On-line here.]

Security Council condemns massacre in Syria

| Updated May 28, 2012 10:02:55 |


The UN Security Council has condemned the Syrian regime over the massacre of more than 100 people in the town of Houla.

A statement agreed by the 15-nation council, including Syrian ally Russia, said the attacks “involved a series of government artillery and tank shellings on a residential neighbourhood” and again demanded that President Bashar al-Assad withdraw heavy weapons from Syrian towns.

UN observers in Syria saw at least 108 bodies in Houla including 49 children and at least seven women, UN officials said.

What happened in Houla?

- Houla is a cluster of Sunni Muslim villages 20 kilometres north of the city of Homs.

- Activists say the area is near a region inhabited by members of Mr Assad’s minority Alawite sect that has been acting as a hub for pro-Assad militiamen.

- Activists say the killing started when Syrian troops and militiamen loyal to Mr Assad, known as shabbiha, stationed at roadblocks that surround Houla, and fired heavy machine guns at a demonstration in the area on Friday, killing five people.

- They say Free Syrian Army rebels responded by attacking two roadblocks manned by Mr Assad’s loyalists.

- They say Houla then came under an intense artillery barrage that killed about 15 villagers.

- They say members of the shabbiha militia then entered Houla from the nearby Alawite villages and killed scores of men, women and children by hacking them or shooting them at close range. But the Syrian government says the massacre was carried out by terrorists after fighting between rebels and forces loyal to Mr Assad.

- It says no Syrian tanks entered Houla and government troops in the town only acted in self defence.

“The members of the Security Council reiterated that all violence in all its forms by all parties must cease. Those responsible for acts of violence must be held accountable,” said the statement, released this morning.

Britain’s UN ambassador Mark Lyall-Grant said that the council statement, while important, was not enough.

“Over the next two days, the Security Council will be meeting again to discuss in more detail what steps need to be taken,” he told reporters.

The Syrian government has denied responsibility for the massacre, and Syria’s ambassador to the UN said the meeting had been told a “tsunami of lies”.

“Women, children and old men were shot dead. This is not the hallmark of the heroic Syrian army,” foreign ministry spokesman Jihad Makdissi said in Damascus.

“We categorically deny that Syrian government forces are responsible for this massacre, and we condemn in very strong terms this terrorist and clearly criminal massacre of Syrian youths, girls and and old men.

“We are sorry that some people make hasty judgments about events.”

Instead, the government blamed “terrorists” for the deaths.

“We have set up a military and legal committee to investigate,” Mr Makdissi said.

“The results will emerge within days.”

UN-Arab League special envoy Kofi Annan is to brief the Security Council on the Syria crisis at a new meeting on Wednesday.
Witnessing horror

Witnesses in Houla said men were shot in the streets and women and children were stabbed in their homes during the attacks on Friday and Saturday.

Many of the child victims were stabbed to death in their homes after an artillery bombardment.

Amateur videos posted on YouTube showed horrifying images of dead children, with at least one child’s head partly blown away.

Another video posted on YouTube showed a mass grave filled with bodies wrapped in white sheets.

Angry residents have voiced their frustration.

“Some of the children were less than eight months old. What did they do? Did they also carry rocket-propelled grenades?” one man shouted at a visibly embarrassed UN observer.

“We are human. Doesn’t the regime fear God?” he added.

British foreign secretary William Hague said time was running out for the regime to stop violence against its people.

“It is a familiar tactic of the Assad regime to blame others for what is happening in their country, to try to get out of responsibility for the scale of death and destruction,” he said.

“We are absolutely sickened in the British Government and across the international community by what we’ve seen over the last couple of days, in particular the deaths of more than a hundred unarmed men, women and children.”
Audio: Outrage at Houla massacre in Syria (AM)

Exiled opposition head Burhan Ghalioun called for a “battle of liberation” against the regime until the UN takes action under Chapter VII allowing military intervention.

“I call on the Syrian people to lead a battle of liberation and dignity, relying on its own forces,” he told a news conference in Istanbul.

The rebel Free Syrian Army warned that unless the international community took concrete action, it would no longer be bound by the UN-backed ceasefire that was supposed to start last month.

Australia is pushing for stronger UN action on Syria, including tougher sanctions.

Foreign Minister Bob Carr has asked Australia’s ambassador to the UN to start discussing tougher sanctions against Syria with other governments.

Senator Carr described the Houla massacre as hideous, and said no effort should be spared in bringing those responsible to justice.

He also said those responsible for the killings could be referred to the International Criminal Court.

“I’d like to see sanctions strengthened, all of us would, but we want to stop short of hurting the Syrian people, ” Senator Carr said on Sunday.

The Syrian government kept up its shelling of neighbourhoods in the central city of Hama on Sunday, the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.

The Observatory said the town of Rastan to its south came under artillery fire for a 14th straight day.

Reports this morning said the bombardment in Hama had killed 30 people.

Rebel fighters who pulled out of the flashpoint central city of Homs earlier this year in the face of a devastating assault by the army are holed up in Rastan, activists say.

“The town is being hit at a rate of two shells a minute,” the observatory said.

Troops loyal to Mr Assad also clashed with rebel fighters in the town of Harasta near Damascus.

Australian media cycles give more airtime to the Thompson affair then to the 1,000′s being massacred in Syria – we are numbed to the fallout – out of sight out of mind. Where is the ‘human conscience – condemning it only leads to it escalating and Syria leadership thumbing their noses and saying – what aer you really going to do about it?

It puts in clear perspective where Leadership priorities truly lie and they are not about trying to stop the human carnage.

Shame! Shame! Shame!

Where is a real Leader when one is needed?  Bob Carr – this is your chance to show some Leadership and get the UN ambassador to do what ‘you’ think is the right thing.

Right now – threaten to withdraw our troops from Afghanistan and send them to Syria would make you a demigod and might just allow you to stake a claim for the PM’s job.  Shame the rest of the World and fight a winnable battle as opposed to the lose lose battle in Afghanistan.

It’s a ‘hail-mary’ play but the shame felt by the rest of the world would be put in clear view of those World Leaders all too happy just to sit back and read about the daily loss of civilian life.

_______________________________________

To have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative and have your say – please use the links below to find your Local Member and let them know how you feel about this or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Link to Previous EYE-BALL Posts.

________________________________________

The EYE-BALL Opinion …

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 130 other followers

%d bloggers like this: