Drop Down MenusCSS Drop Down MenuPure CSS Dropdown Menu

30 April 2012

New koala law to curb land owner's rights

Now the Labor federal government has a new raft of in-your-face laws to control and restrict what you do with your land.

Despite the species as a whole flourishing -- their numbers actually require "managing" i.e. culling, in South Australia southern Australia (see article below) -- the government is about to park itself in your back yard and tell you what you can and can't develop in the name of "saving" the koala.

The trendy latte sipping liberatchiks have thus scored a decisive blow to thwart jobs and development as their crusade to turn Australia into a third world socialist state continues.   And they've used the clever tactic of using one of our national symbols, the koala, to do it.
"..Australian Koala Foundation chief executive Deborah Tabart, who has campaigned for the listing for 16 years," (from Article below)
When Europeans colonised North America the great bison herds disappeared.  A shame in one way -- the bison were the basis for American Indian society -- but a boon in another for it allowed the grazing of Eurasian domesticated animals.  In the end the advantage of the herd clearing outweighed the disadvantage, and America prospered as a whole.

All of that occurred in a bygone era when humans, their wellbeing and development came first and nature was to be, not so much second, but "tamed" and managed.

In Australia the land was settled by Europeans much later in history than in North America and we still have vast tracts of land yet to be developed for mining and agricultural purposes.  

Unfortunately we live in a different era when "saving things" from evil, capitalist development is in fashion. Unfortunately it's the type of fashion that decimates economies, jobs, our prosperity and wellbeing.  And these fashions usually are of no benefit to the environment anyway and this koala issue is a good case in point. 

There will always be plenty of koalas in South Australia southern Australia. The upshot is, the centre of gravity of their population is moving south.  It's an unfortunate consequence of our development in the north, but a necessary one.

Yet so far on the poll in the article below the majority of readers disagree with me.

Question:

What's best for Queensland - development or protection of habitat?

Answer:

Development 17.86%

Protection of habitat 82.14%

28 votes

Federal Labor is already forcing Telstra to stop using its copper network so that the government can have a monopoly on the Internet.  This is against free market principles.  The NBN would never be undertaken by the private sector because its business model is so dubious.  It needs to be subsidised by the government.

Labor truly is the Australian Socialist Labor Party, as I've seen it described in foreign media.

The government owns your internet -- a government that favours a China-style URL internet filter.  There will soon be a smart meter on your house spying on how you use your electricity.
  
Now the government wants to be in your back yard too telling you how you can use your land and if it is in accordance with the needs of koalas.  Where the government and it bureaucrats will decide what's in the koala's best interests, not a scientific advisory panel.

It's just been decided as a political, not a scientific, decision to declare that in some areas (NSW and Qld) koalas are vulnerable.

There's an international, independent body who classifies the conservation status of animals called the The International Union for Conservation of Nature.  They list the koala's status as: least concern.



Australia's Environment Minister Tony Burke has hijacked the terminology of "vulnerable" -- it's not for him to decide.  Doesn't matter though, as this is just another cynical tool to obtain more control over you and your land.

Article and a poll here: 


________________________________________

Update:


At 4:26pm Environment Minister Tony Burke, in an  interview with sky news, has just said koala numbers are "dropping off a cliff" in Qld and NSW, and that we need to protect "endangered species".  

As I said above koalas are classified as least concern, they are not endangered.

They have had a modest 1/3 reduction in population in Qld and NSW according to the government's own claims and Burke describes this as a cliff.  What a bald-faced liar.

Burke confirmed that people wanting to develop land in any way would: "..face another government hurdle."  Great, that's what we really need right now Tony.  Thank you for helping to kill jobs.

Why do I get the funny feeling that vast majority of developments stopped under this law will have nothing to do with koala habitat at all?

24 April 2012

Infant male circumcision is genital mutilation


This post is of a very different topic than the ones I usually post on.  If this isn't a topic to your taste or you are too young to read it please do not continue.

A few web articles have come to light in recent days describing human male infant circumcision as male genital mutilation.  They are correct and I must say I can attest to many of the negative repercussions described as I am a victim of this procedure as well.  Taking a perfectly good and necessary organ of the body and removing it for some kind of societal trend is shocking.

If you or anyone you know is having a baby boy for Christ's sake please do not have it circumcised.  It truly is a profound disfigurement of an otherwise healthy, functioning genitalia and it's repercussions are lifelong and significant even when the procedure goes correctly.  The correct, intended outcome of this procedure is abhorrent.  A penis needs a foreskin especially during infancy when it's actually still joined to the glans.

Having said that, I know of some people who have their foreskins removed in adulthood because they are having some sort of medical problem with it.  That's fine, but for goodness sake at least let the penis develop properly up to and including puberty. 

The article links follow (links three and four often don't load -- keep trying until they do.  If it gets real bad let me know -- I may have to mirror it).  Warning, some of the images, especially in links 2, 3 and 4 are graphic and may disturb some viewers:




Mutilation of an Innocent
__________________________________________

Update: 25/4/12:


I found a video where a doctor against circumcision says that the complication rate of circumcision is 100%.  It sure is:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWq5PQsNhRw&feature=colike