.bmp)
Gillard's smartest move: becoming another Hanson
John Pasquarelli - The Australian - July 20, 2010 12:00AM HOW many more solutions will there be as Liberal and Labor stand toe to toe over the constant stream of boats illegally entering our waters?
Long ago, we should have seriously reviewed our membership of the 1951 UN Refugee Convention, as changing times have swept the original motives for its creation aside.
Australia benefitted hugely from the many post WWII migrants and refugees who came here, rapidly assimilated and locked arms with the rest of us.
Before he was garrotted by Labor thuggees, Kevin Rudd came out in favour of a "Big Australia", but that set the alarm bells clanging with mainstream Australia, as it coincided with his disastrous policy on people smuggling that resulted in boats arriving almost every day, as well as a continuous stream of media reports detailing the ethnicity of criminal offenders despite the PC brigade, including some senior police, trying to censor such material.............
In 1996 when Pauline Hanson called for "all Australians to be treated equally" and for ATSIC to be abolished, most politicians and the media vilified her in the most venomous way for her attack on the Aboriginal industry, but when Noel Pearson made similar comments 10 years later, he was warmly embraced.
Remember Hanson on how she had the right to invite who she wanted into her home and the famous "we are in danger of being swamped by Asians" statement?
Labor's polling has obviously shown that ordinary Australians are mightily concerned about these issues more than ever and in a breathtaking act of gross hypocrisy, Julia Gillard has dumped Rudd's Big Australia, as well as veering away from his asylum-seeker policy.
So much for Rudd saying that he would never move to the right on such matters and expecting Gillard to heel to his command.
Gillard's brazen echoing of Hanson has her encouraging mainstream Australia by exhorting it to debate issues such as border security and the boatpeople without fear of being labelled racist and intimidated by the agents of political correctness.
Calling for openness in public debate to be a mark of her prime ministership as long as people spoke with goodwill and were not critical of other's race or culture tells me that after all her clever and too-smart plagiarism of Hanson, Gillard fails to understand that it is cultural incompatibility that is the root of all the problems connected with refugees and migrants, the element that hinders us bringing in, in her words, "the right type of migrant".
It was suggested to Tony Abbott months ago that he should embrace the mainstream by encouraging people to debate all those issues connected to multiculturalism and immigration via dedicated postal and email addresses, but nothing happened and now Gillard has gazumped him.
Neither Gillard nor Abbott have an effective solution to the people smugglers as the successful way would be far too hard for most politicians to handle.
Our laws must change and people smugglers and their clients would be warned that they face arrest on criminal charges and serious time in prison: no visas, no "Hotel Australia". All boats would be destroyed and big bounties for bringing people smugglers into Australian jurisdiction would be advertised.........
She is now standing in front of the cameras like an automaton delivering her spin words "sustainable" and "moving forward" but her cynical intent to morph into Hanson may prove to be one of her best moves.
John Pasquarelli is a former adviser to Pauline Hanson.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Unmarried Gillard wedded to a nation that upholds injustice
Unmarried Gillard wedded to a notion that upholds injustice
SAMANTHA STEVENSON - July 17, 2010
When Julia Gillard became Prime Minister, many of us were triumphant at this ultimate smashing of the glass ceiling in Australian politics. Some chose to see it as a progressive step forward for those of the marginalised red-haired population, who now had an Australian celebrity to celebrate with more serious credentials than Nicole Kidman or Cameron Ling from the Geelong Cats.
One person declared ''Gillard is doing it for all the unmarried, barren atheists'', and that she clearly understood ''the church and the state should butt out of people's private relationships''.
Amid this optimism that Gillard's difference to her prime ministerial predecessors apparently represented, Australian gays dared to hope the refreshing lack of religious affinity at the highest level would mark a new approach to gay marriage rights that differed to the social conservatism of the Howard and Rudd years. It was wrong.
Gillard took time out from her mining tax deal-brokering to declare it was still the government's view, as well as her personal one, that gay marriage should not be legalised in Australia. She told Kyle Sandilands and Jackie O on morning radio that: ''We believe the Marriage Act is appropriate in its current form, that is, recognising that marriage is between a man and a woman.''
Yet treating marriage as some grand prize of heterosexuality reinforces the ultimate dichotomy between a man and a woman. While extending the right to marry to gay couples would be a progressive step forward for the homosexual community, it would also smash another cultural norm - the gender inequality of marriage. Even in today's most liberated households, women predominantly take on the bulk of domestic and child-rearing duties, even if they work in some capacity outside the home.
Some may choose to do so. But while fighting over whose turn it is to clean the toilet after mutually busy days at the office may seem mundane compared to fighting (as our mothers did) for the right to work outside the home in the first place, for many married women choices remain dangerously limited.
Bettina Arndt recently chose to deride Gillard's de facto status, claiming as Australia's most significant female role model, Gillard was doing it all wrong. Apparently the idea of Julia and Tim ''playing house'' in The Lodge without a marriage certificate set a bad example for us women, as de facto relationships limit our choices whereas marriage strengthened them.
Yet under Gillard, same-sex relationships will remain de facto by default, and they, obviously, cannot be characterised by a lack of choice for one partner based on gender difference. There is more at play than the absence of wedding rings...........
SAMANTHA STEVENSON - July 17, 2010
When Julia Gillard became Prime Minister, many of us were triumphant at this ultimate smashing of the glass ceiling in Australian politics. Some chose to see it as a progressive step forward for those of the marginalised red-haired population, who now had an Australian celebrity to celebrate with more serious credentials than Nicole Kidman or Cameron Ling from the Geelong Cats.
One person declared ''Gillard is doing it for all the unmarried, barren atheists'', and that she clearly understood ''the church and the state should butt out of people's private relationships''.
Amid this optimism that Gillard's difference to her prime ministerial predecessors apparently represented, Australian gays dared to hope the refreshing lack of religious affinity at the highest level would mark a new approach to gay marriage rights that differed to the social conservatism of the Howard and Rudd years. It was wrong.
Gillard took time out from her mining tax deal-brokering to declare it was still the government's view, as well as her personal one, that gay marriage should not be legalised in Australia. She told Kyle Sandilands and Jackie O on morning radio that: ''We believe the Marriage Act is appropriate in its current form, that is, recognising that marriage is between a man and a woman.''
Yet treating marriage as some grand prize of heterosexuality reinforces the ultimate dichotomy between a man and a woman. While extending the right to marry to gay couples would be a progressive step forward for the homosexual community, it would also smash another cultural norm - the gender inequality of marriage. Even in today's most liberated households, women predominantly take on the bulk of domestic and child-rearing duties, even if they work in some capacity outside the home.
Some may choose to do so. But while fighting over whose turn it is to clean the toilet after mutually busy days at the office may seem mundane compared to fighting (as our mothers did) for the right to work outside the home in the first place, for many married women choices remain dangerously limited.
Bettina Arndt recently chose to deride Gillard's de facto status, claiming as Australia's most significant female role model, Gillard was doing it all wrong. Apparently the idea of Julia and Tim ''playing house'' in The Lodge without a marriage certificate set a bad example for us women, as de facto relationships limit our choices whereas marriage strengthened them.
Yet under Gillard, same-sex relationships will remain de facto by default, and they, obviously, cannot be characterised by a lack of choice for one partner based on gender difference. There is more at play than the absence of wedding rings...........
Sunday, April 4, 2010
"Yellow peril" racism rear its ugly head
Professor David Day,
Vice Chancellor - La Trobe University,
david.day@latrobe.edu.au
Dear Professor Day,
We refer to the report by Professor Marilyn Lake for your information.
We wish to congratulate Professor Lake for her historian’s balanced and responsible report as she is acknowledging the fact that as Australians, we must continue to practice gentleness, self-sacrifice and generosity as our exclusive possessions of no one race or religion but as belonging to all.
However, as a historian, she forgot to be objective enough to point out that due to various unions pressures, Labor is already seen to be reverting to its former White Australia Policy by raising the English Dictation Test score from 4.5 to 5 last year. As a result of this discriminatory policy, no 457 Visa workers from China can now land on our shore.
This reminds us that racist Arthur Caldwell’s statement seems to us to be still well and alive: "Two Wongs don't make a White" and we would add that “two wrongs don’t make a right.”
Yours sincerely,
Eddie Hwang
President
Unity Party WA
unitypartywa@westnet.com.au
www.unitywa.org
http://twitter.com/unitywa (Uploaded)
http://unitypartywa.blogspot.com/
Date: 04-Apr-2010.
Environmental friendly-Save the trees-Use Email
Can you afford to give Telstra/Bigpond a try?
MARILYN LAKE - April 3, 2010 - Age
Chinese were once vilified in Australia, a travesty we'd do well not to repeat.
THE harsh sentence handed down to Stern Hu this week and radio talkback on Chinese investment in Melbourne real estate have converged in focusing attention in Australia on the consequences of the rise of Chinese power in the contemporary world.
Business leaders join would-be home owners in waxing indignant at the new turn of events. Australians are complaining about being sidelined. Suddenly it seems that Charles Pearson's remarkable prophecy of almost 120 years ago has come to pass.
In 1893, Pearson, a leading Victorian Liberal politician and journalist, predicted in what would become probably the most influential book ever written by an Australian - National Life and Character: A Forecast - that the day would surely come when the Chinese, victims of colonial persecution, would become a great power in the world. White men would be humiliated, ''elbowed and hustled, and perhaps even thrust aside by peoples whom we looked down upon as servile''.
Across the world, startled readers took notice. Theodore Roosevelt wrote to Pearson from Washington praising his book, but asserting that the timid colonial was surely mistaken. In any contest between East and West, according to the future American president, white men, soon to embark on new imperial conquests, would certainly prevail.
The Athenaeum magazine in London, on the other hand, urged its readers to heed the new insight deriving from Pearson's different perspective: ''He regards the march of affairs from the Australian point of view, and next to Australia what he seems to see most clearly is the growth of Chinese power.''
But Pearson's forecast was not as original as it seemed. In fact, he borrowed the idea and, in some cases, the exact words from the Chinese colonists among whom he lived in Melbourne.
Subject to relentless discrimination and humiliation at the hands of Victorians accusing them of alien customs and cheap labour, Chinese community leaders such as Lowe Kong Meng and Cheok Hong Cheong were moved to write numerous letters, booklets and petitions demanding fair treatment and recognition of their common human rights. They pointed out that Chinese worked just as hard and enjoyed material comforts just as much as other Australians.
They were often well educated, literate and usually law-abiding, and they objected strongly to the insults heaped upon the Chinaman solely because of the ''colour of his skin''. But perhaps the time for forbearance was past. Evil treatment, they said, would bear bitter fruit and wounds would fester.
''A time may come … probably will come sooner than is supposed, when the presence and power of China as a great nation will be felt in these seas.'' Pearson made the warning his own.
Australia's response to the prospect of Chinese power was the White Australia Policy. The passage of the Immigration Restriction Act and the ruse of a dictation test were aimed at barring all Asiatics from migrating to the new Commonwealth of Australia. A raft of state and federal legislation further discriminated in employment and welfare policy against those already in the country.
The number of Chinese-born Australians rapidly shrank to just a few thousand. With the end of racial discrimination in immigration, the numbers of Chinese migrating to Australia and arriving as visitors has risen again.
No longer accused of augmenting the ranks of cheap labour, they are now attacked for their apparent wealth and blamed for the difficulties experienced by young white Australians in buying their own homes, in realising the Australian dream.
The offence of the Chinese, it seems, is that they now have too much money. Increasingly, callers to talkback radio blame not just negatively geared investors exploiting Australian tax law, but Chinese buyers who speak Mandarin.
The visibility of Chinese buyers at auctions makes for good stories on the evening news - other foreign investors are not so easily identified.
A hundred years ago, warnings about the rise of China as a world power and the migration of thousands of Chinese people to southern Africa, Australasia and North America led to the adoption of racist policies of exclusion and discrimination, whose legacies continue to haunt us, as, for example, in Indian reaction to incidents of racial violence in Melbourne.
In responding to the housing crisis, let us be wary of reverting to type. Recent calls for tighter regulation of foreign investment in Australia, along with demands for cuts in the migration intake, deserve wide and open discussion, but we should not repeat the mistakes of the past by making race or nationality or colour the basis of our grievances and the ground on which we shape our policy.
Marilyn Lake is professor of history at La Trobe University.
Vice Chancellor - La Trobe University,
david.day@latrobe.edu.au
Dear Professor Day,
We refer to the report by Professor Marilyn Lake for your information.
We wish to congratulate Professor Lake for her historian’s balanced and responsible report as she is acknowledging the fact that as Australians, we must continue to practice gentleness, self-sacrifice and generosity as our exclusive possessions of no one race or religion but as belonging to all.
However, as a historian, she forgot to be objective enough to point out that due to various unions pressures, Labor is already seen to be reverting to its former White Australia Policy by raising the English Dictation Test score from 4.5 to 5 last year. As a result of this discriminatory policy, no 457 Visa workers from China can now land on our shore.
This reminds us that racist Arthur Caldwell’s statement seems to us to be still well and alive: "Two Wongs don't make a White" and we would add that “two wrongs don’t make a right.”
Yours sincerely,
Eddie Hwang
President
Unity Party WA
unitypartywa@westnet.com.au
www.unitywa.org
http://twitter.com/unitywa (Uploaded)
http://unitypartywa.blogspot.com/
Date: 04-Apr-2010.
Environmental friendly-Save the trees-Use Email
Can you afford to give Telstra/Bigpond a try?
MARILYN LAKE - April 3, 2010 - Age
Chinese were once vilified in Australia, a travesty we'd do well not to repeat.
THE harsh sentence handed down to Stern Hu this week and radio talkback on Chinese investment in Melbourne real estate have converged in focusing attention in Australia on the consequences of the rise of Chinese power in the contemporary world.
Business leaders join would-be home owners in waxing indignant at the new turn of events. Australians are complaining about being sidelined. Suddenly it seems that Charles Pearson's remarkable prophecy of almost 120 years ago has come to pass.
In 1893, Pearson, a leading Victorian Liberal politician and journalist, predicted in what would become probably the most influential book ever written by an Australian - National Life and Character: A Forecast - that the day would surely come when the Chinese, victims of colonial persecution, would become a great power in the world. White men would be humiliated, ''elbowed and hustled, and perhaps even thrust aside by peoples whom we looked down upon as servile''.
Across the world, startled readers took notice. Theodore Roosevelt wrote to Pearson from Washington praising his book, but asserting that the timid colonial was surely mistaken. In any contest between East and West, according to the future American president, white men, soon to embark on new imperial conquests, would certainly prevail.
The Athenaeum magazine in London, on the other hand, urged its readers to heed the new insight deriving from Pearson's different perspective: ''He regards the march of affairs from the Australian point of view, and next to Australia what he seems to see most clearly is the growth of Chinese power.''
But Pearson's forecast was not as original as it seemed. In fact, he borrowed the idea and, in some cases, the exact words from the Chinese colonists among whom he lived in Melbourne.
Subject to relentless discrimination and humiliation at the hands of Victorians accusing them of alien customs and cheap labour, Chinese community leaders such as Lowe Kong Meng and Cheok Hong Cheong were moved to write numerous letters, booklets and petitions demanding fair treatment and recognition of their common human rights. They pointed out that Chinese worked just as hard and enjoyed material comforts just as much as other Australians.
They were often well educated, literate and usually law-abiding, and they objected strongly to the insults heaped upon the Chinaman solely because of the ''colour of his skin''. But perhaps the time for forbearance was past. Evil treatment, they said, would bear bitter fruit and wounds would fester.
''A time may come … probably will come sooner than is supposed, when the presence and power of China as a great nation will be felt in these seas.'' Pearson made the warning his own.
Australia's response to the prospect of Chinese power was the White Australia Policy. The passage of the Immigration Restriction Act and the ruse of a dictation test were aimed at barring all Asiatics from migrating to the new Commonwealth of Australia. A raft of state and federal legislation further discriminated in employment and welfare policy against those already in the country.
The number of Chinese-born Australians rapidly shrank to just a few thousand. With the end of racial discrimination in immigration, the numbers of Chinese migrating to Australia and arriving as visitors has risen again.
No longer accused of augmenting the ranks of cheap labour, they are now attacked for their apparent wealth and blamed for the difficulties experienced by young white Australians in buying their own homes, in realising the Australian dream.
The offence of the Chinese, it seems, is that they now have too much money. Increasingly, callers to talkback radio blame not just negatively geared investors exploiting Australian tax law, but Chinese buyers who speak Mandarin.
The visibility of Chinese buyers at auctions makes for good stories on the evening news - other foreign investors are not so easily identified.
A hundred years ago, warnings about the rise of China as a world power and the migration of thousands of Chinese people to southern Africa, Australasia and North America led to the adoption of racist policies of exclusion and discrimination, whose legacies continue to haunt us, as, for example, in Indian reaction to incidents of racial violence in Melbourne.
In responding to the housing crisis, let us be wary of reverting to type. Recent calls for tighter regulation of foreign investment in Australia, along with demands for cuts in the migration intake, deserve wide and open discussion, but we should not repeat the mistakes of the past by making race or nationality or colour the basis of our grievances and the ground on which we shape our policy.
Marilyn Lake is professor of history at La Trobe University.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Ombudsmman's Duty to investigate Maladministration
----- Original Message -----
From: Unity Party WA
To: Commissioner -WA Police ; general@lpbwa.com ; Chair - legal pcc wa ; piccc@piccc.wa.gov.au ; Minister.Porter@dpc.wa.gov.au ; Ombudsman - WA
Cc: Premier - WA ; President - High Court
Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 9:32 AM
Subject: Re: OMBUDSMAN’S DUTY TO INVESTIGATE MALADMINISTRATION
The Ombudsman of Western Australia
mail@ombudsman.wa.gov.au
The Attorney General of Western Australia
Minister.Porter@dpc.wa.gov.au
The Legal Practice Board of Western Australia
general@lpbwa.com
The Legal Profession Complaints Committee of Western Australia
lpcc@lpbwa.com
The Parliamentary Inspector of Western Australia
piccc@piccc.wa.gov.au
WA Commissioner for Police
commissioner@police.wa.gov.au
Dear Sirs
OMBUDSMAN’S DUTY TO INVESTIGATE MALADMINISTRATION
OF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS - HOODWINKING THE PUBLIC?
I refer to the case of our Member Mr. Nicholas N Chin, Barrister & Solicitor. He alleges that he is a subject of malicious persecution caused by the maladministration of the Legal Practice Board of the Department of the Attorney General. He also suffers the detriment caused to him by Registrar Powell’s maladministration of court records of the Supreme Court. Both of them made wrongful administrative decisions thereby helping erring lawyers to achieve private and personal advantages and at the same time thus enabling them to commit crimes and cause public detriment with impunity. Both of them are not involved in making judicial decisions, the merits of which could not be questioned by the Ombudsman. They are involved in maladministration of the government departments for which the Ombudsman has the statutory right to interfere so as to promote better governance of Western Australia. The facts of the case are available at the blogspot of Mr. Chin, which you may access by Googling “nicholasnchin”.
In accordance with s.14 of the Parliamentary Commisioner Act, 1971 (WA), the Honourable Ombudman should therefore exercise his public statutory duty to investigate the following government Departments for maladministration, failing which, the public would have no choice but to compel him to perform his public obligations and duties:
a) The Department of the Attorney General, particularly the Attorney General himself is to be held responsible for his administrative decision in allowing a pseudo Full Board of the Legal Practice Board to fester and to usurp the statutory functions of that regulator of the Legal Profession of WA. The pseudo Full Board was able to influence the independence, integrity and impartiality of the lawyer’s watchdog body, the Legal Profession Complaints Committee. The pseudo Full Board’s unsavoury influence enabled that watchdog body to achieve a clandestine purpose which is against the public interests. This wrongful administration of that Department is thus causing a public detriment as members of the public are constantly being robbed, plundered and fleeced by erring lawyers with impunity. Many cited examples of these makes it abundantly clear that the Ombudsman should act and act quickly in order to stem the tide of a rapidly deterioration of what used to be an efficient government of Western Australia.
b) The Police Department of Western Australia should be taken to tasks for neglecting to make the administrative decision to investigate the criminal conduct of lawyers who infiltrate the Pseduo Full Board, the watchdog body of lawyers in WA and the corrupt judicial officers who manipulate court records for the personal advantage of erring lawyers. We acknowledge that it is not allowed to investigate lawyers and judicial officers if they are doing justice for the common people. But the situation would be different, if they are found to be manipulating the administrative affairs of the courts and the government departments to achieve the clandestine purpose of perverting the course of justice and to achieve a private advantage as opposed to the achievement of a public advantage in the public interests.
c) The Case Management Registrar D Powell of the Supreme Court of Western Australia had participated in a purposive wrongful administrative decision to cover up erring lawyer David Taylor. This had enabled the learned David Taylor to commit the crimes of perjury contrary to s.124 and the falsification of court records contrary to s.85 of the Criminal Code Act, 1913. The cover-up of these crimes in contained in his letter dated 11.6.2009 that has the effect of misleading the Court of Appeal in the case of Chin v Hall [2009] WASCA 216 to make a mistake in its reasoning at paragraphs 54 and 55 of that judgment. But for this error, the public detriment would not have been caused. This conduct of a judicial officer is contrary to the meaning of being corrupt as defined by Jean-Franois Revel (ENCOUNTER March, 1987) in the following words: “It means misapplying political or administrative power, whether directly or indirectly outside its proper spheres, for one’s own financial or material advantage, or in order to distribute the gains among one’s friends, colleagues, relations or supporters.”
We would appreciate your comment and action as our members therefore demand that we receive a reply to this letter within 14 days or we will have no choice but to upload this letter onto our website for public information.
Yours faithfully,
Eddie Hwang
President
Unity Party WA
UnityPartyWA@westnet.com.au
http://twitter.com/unitywa
http://unitypartywa.blogspot.com/
www.unitywa.org
Ph/Fax: 61 893681884
Date: 08-Feb-2010.
Environmental Friendly - Save the trees - Use Email.
Can you afford to give Telstra/Bigpond a try?
From: Unity Party WA
To: Commissioner -WA Police ; general@lpbwa.com ; Chair - legal pcc wa ; piccc@piccc.wa.gov.au ; Minister.Porter@dpc.wa.gov.au ; Ombudsman - WA
Cc: Premier - WA ; President - High Court
Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 9:32 AM
Subject: Re: OMBUDSMAN’S DUTY TO INVESTIGATE MALADMINISTRATION
The Ombudsman of Western Australia
mail@ombudsman.wa.gov.au
The Attorney General of Western Australia
Minister.Porter@dpc.wa.gov.au
The Legal Practice Board of Western Australia
general@lpbwa.com
The Legal Profession Complaints Committee of Western Australia
lpcc@lpbwa.com
The Parliamentary Inspector of Western Australia
piccc@piccc.wa.gov.au
WA Commissioner for Police
commissioner@police.wa.gov.au
Dear Sirs
OMBUDSMAN’S DUTY TO INVESTIGATE MALADMINISTRATION
OF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS - HOODWINKING THE PUBLIC?
I refer to the case of our Member Mr. Nicholas N Chin, Barrister & Solicitor. He alleges that he is a subject of malicious persecution caused by the maladministration of the Legal Practice Board of the Department of the Attorney General. He also suffers the detriment caused to him by Registrar Powell’s maladministration of court records of the Supreme Court. Both of them made wrongful administrative decisions thereby helping erring lawyers to achieve private and personal advantages and at the same time thus enabling them to commit crimes and cause public detriment with impunity. Both of them are not involved in making judicial decisions, the merits of which could not be questioned by the Ombudsman. They are involved in maladministration of the government departments for which the Ombudsman has the statutory right to interfere so as to promote better governance of Western Australia. The facts of the case are available at the blogspot of Mr. Chin, which you may access by Googling “nicholasnchin”.
In accordance with s.14 of the Parliamentary Commisioner Act, 1971 (WA), the Honourable Ombudman should therefore exercise his public statutory duty to investigate the following government Departments for maladministration, failing which, the public would have no choice but to compel him to perform his public obligations and duties:
a) The Department of the Attorney General, particularly the Attorney General himself is to be held responsible for his administrative decision in allowing a pseudo Full Board of the Legal Practice Board to fester and to usurp the statutory functions of that regulator of the Legal Profession of WA. The pseudo Full Board was able to influence the independence, integrity and impartiality of the lawyer’s watchdog body, the Legal Profession Complaints Committee. The pseudo Full Board’s unsavoury influence enabled that watchdog body to achieve a clandestine purpose which is against the public interests. This wrongful administration of that Department is thus causing a public detriment as members of the public are constantly being robbed, plundered and fleeced by erring lawyers with impunity. Many cited examples of these makes it abundantly clear that the Ombudsman should act and act quickly in order to stem the tide of a rapidly deterioration of what used to be an efficient government of Western Australia.
b) The Police Department of Western Australia should be taken to tasks for neglecting to make the administrative decision to investigate the criminal conduct of lawyers who infiltrate the Pseduo Full Board, the watchdog body of lawyers in WA and the corrupt judicial officers who manipulate court records for the personal advantage of erring lawyers. We acknowledge that it is not allowed to investigate lawyers and judicial officers if they are doing justice for the common people. But the situation would be different, if they are found to be manipulating the administrative affairs of the courts and the government departments to achieve the clandestine purpose of perverting the course of justice and to achieve a private advantage as opposed to the achievement of a public advantage in the public interests.
c) The Case Management Registrar D Powell of the Supreme Court of Western Australia had participated in a purposive wrongful administrative decision to cover up erring lawyer David Taylor. This had enabled the learned David Taylor to commit the crimes of perjury contrary to s.124 and the falsification of court records contrary to s.85 of the Criminal Code Act, 1913. The cover-up of these crimes in contained in his letter dated 11.6.2009 that has the effect of misleading the Court of Appeal in the case of Chin v Hall [2009] WASCA 216 to make a mistake in its reasoning at paragraphs 54 and 55 of that judgment. But for this error, the public detriment would not have been caused. This conduct of a judicial officer is contrary to the meaning of being corrupt as defined by Jean-Franois Revel (ENCOUNTER March, 1987) in the following words: “It means misapplying political or administrative power, whether directly or indirectly outside its proper spheres, for one’s own financial or material advantage, or in order to distribute the gains among one’s friends, colleagues, relations or supporters.”
We would appreciate your comment and action as our members therefore demand that we receive a reply to this letter within 14 days or we will have no choice but to upload this letter onto our website for public information.
Yours faithfully,
Eddie Hwang
President
Unity Party WA
UnityPartyWA@westnet.com.au
http://twitter.com/unitywa
http://unitypartywa.blogspot.com/
www.unitywa.org
Ph/Fax: 61 893681884
Date: 08-Feb-2010.
Environmental Friendly - Save the trees - Use Email.
Can you afford to give Telstra/Bigpond a try?
Saturday, March 27, 2010
China reports on US human rights record
Mr. Barrack Obama
President of the United States,
president@whitehouse.gov
Dear President,
We refer to the report below for your information.
Would you like to comment, please?
We wait for your reply in due course.
Yours respectfully,
Eddie Hwang
President
Unity Party WA
UnityPartyWA@westnet.com.au
http://twitter.com/unitywa (Uploaded)
http://unitypartywa.blogspot.com/
www.unitywa.org
Ph/Fax: 61 893681884
Date: 27-Mar--2010.
Environmental Friendly - Save the trees - Use Email.
Can you afford to give Telstra/Bigpond a try?
China reports on US human rights record
2010-03-12 16:50:03
BEIJING - China Friday retorted US criticism by publishing its own report on the US human rights record.
"As in previous years, the reports are full of accusations of the human rights situation in more than 190 countries and regions including China, but turn a blind eye to, or dodge and even cover up rampant human rights abuses on its own territory," said the Information Office of the State Council in its report on the US human rights record.
The Human Rights Record of the United States in 2009 was in retaliation to the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2009 issued by the US Department of State on March 11.
The report is "prepared to help people around the world understand the real situation of human rights in the United States," said the report.
The report reviewed the human rights record of the United States in 2009 from six perspectives: life, property and personal security; civil and political rights; economic, social and cultural rights; racial discrimination; rights of women and children; and the US' violation of human rights against other countries.
It criticized the United States for taking human rights as "a political instrument to interfere in other countries' internal affairs, defame other nations' image and seek its own strategic interests."
China advised the US government to draw lessons from the history, put itself in a correct position, strive to improve its own human rights conditions and rectify its acts in the human rights field.
This is the 11th consecutive year that the Information Office of China's State Council has issued a human rights record of the United States to answer the US State Department's annual report.
"At a time when the world is suffering a serious human rights disaster caused by the US subprime crisis-induced global financial crisis, the US government still ignores its own serious human rights problems but revels in accusing other countries. It is really a pity," the report said.
President of the United States,
president@whitehouse.gov
Dear President,
We refer to the report below for your information.
Would you like to comment, please?
We wait for your reply in due course.
Yours respectfully,
Eddie Hwang
President
Unity Party WA
UnityPartyWA@westnet.com.au
http://twitter.com/unitywa (Uploaded)
http://unitypartywa.blogspot.com/
www.unitywa.org
Ph/Fax: 61 893681884
Date: 27-Mar--2010.
Environmental Friendly - Save the trees - Use Email.
Can you afford to give Telstra/Bigpond a try?
China reports on US human rights record
2010-03-12 16:50:03
BEIJING - China Friday retorted US criticism by publishing its own report on the US human rights record.
"As in previous years, the reports are full of accusations of the human rights situation in more than 190 countries and regions including China, but turn a blind eye to, or dodge and even cover up rampant human rights abuses on its own territory," said the Information Office of the State Council in its report on the US human rights record.
The Human Rights Record of the United States in 2009 was in retaliation to the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2009 issued by the US Department of State on March 11.
The report is "prepared to help people around the world understand the real situation of human rights in the United States," said the report.
The report reviewed the human rights record of the United States in 2009 from six perspectives: life, property and personal security; civil and political rights; economic, social and cultural rights; racial discrimination; rights of women and children; and the US' violation of human rights against other countries.
It criticized the United States for taking human rights as "a political instrument to interfere in other countries' internal affairs, defame other nations' image and seek its own strategic interests."
China advised the US government to draw lessons from the history, put itself in a correct position, strive to improve its own human rights conditions and rectify its acts in the human rights field.
This is the 11th consecutive year that the Information Office of China's State Council has issued a human rights record of the United States to answer the US State Department's annual report.
"At a time when the world is suffering a serious human rights disaster caused by the US subprime crisis-induced global financial crisis, the US government still ignores its own serious human rights problems but revels in accusing other countries. It is really a pity," the report said.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Gallop blasts Racism in Australia
The Editor,
The West Australian
westinfo@wanews.com.au
Dear Editor,
We refer to the report below and wish to congratulate the former WA Premier Dr. Geoff Gallop for telling the truth about Racism in Australia.
It is a strange, enigmatic and tragic problem happening in our society which does not seem to want to go away. None of us would like to see himself or herself as a racist, yet this strange enigmatic force is very real, and it persists in its tenacious ways with its tentacle-like structures that permeate even our justice system let alone the school systems and the government departments.
Just look at the treatment of our Members Ms Lili Kang and Mr. Nicholas Chin. Their stories contain rich and meaningful lessons for us. Theirs are on our website: www.unitywa.org and http://unitypartywa.blogspot.com/ and the blogspot of Mr. Chin which you can access it by typing “nicholasnchin” on Google.
We are criticizing about Malaysia and its opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim being deprived of his rights in a country without true democracy but this very situation is happening in our own back yard. How can we be so hypercritical?
Yours sincerely,
Eddie Hwang
President
Unity Party WA
UnityPartyWA@westnet.com.au
http://twitter.com/unitywa (uploaded)
http://unitypartywa.blogspot.com/
www.unitywa.org
Ph/Fax: 61 893681884
Date: 20-Mar-2010.
Environmental Friendly - Save the trees - Use Email.
Can you afford to give Telstra/Bigpond a try?
Gallop blasts racism
PHILIPPA PERRY, The West Australian March 18, 2010, 5:02 am
Australia has significant pockets of racism and has seen a re- emergence of nationalism, according to former WA premier Geoff Gallop.
In a speech to be delivered to a Human Rights Arts and Film Festival breakfast this morning, Dr Gallop says Australia should have a charter of rights to benefit ordinary people as well as the marginalised and vulnerable in society.
"There are a lot of good things about Australia but one of them isn't the re-emergence of a form of political and cultural nationalism backed up at times by a particularly crude and nasty form of populism," he says.
"We describe ourselves as an egalitarian and tolerant nation but significant and unjustified inequalities remain as do not- insignificant pockets of racism."
Dr Gallop says Australia is the only democratic nation without a national bill or charter of rights and that while our rights receive some recognition nationally, it is very limited.
He says a charter of rights could be given a role in the legislative process, the administration of policy and the interpretation of the law.
Dr Gallop says there is a deep suspicion among elements of the political elite that a Human Rights Act will make it too hard for them to govern when faced with challenges such as terrorism and crime generally. "Not having a charter of rights legitimised by the Parliament sends a message to the community that the government itself is fearful of subjecting itself to serious human rights scrutiny," he said.
Follow thewest.com.au on Twitter
***************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
The Ombudsman of Western Australia
mail@ombudsman.wa.gov.au
The Attorney General of Western Australia
Minister.Porter@dpc.wa.gov.au
The Legal Practice Board of Western Australia
general@lpbwa.com
The Legal Profession Complaints Committee of Western Australia
lpcc@lpbwa.com
The Parliamentary Inspector of Western Australia
piccc@piccc.wa.gov.au
WA Commissioner for Police
commissioner@police.wa.gov.au
Dear Sirs,
OMBUDSMAN’S DUTY TO INVESTIGATE MALADMINISTRATION
OF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS - HOODWINKING THE PUBLIC?
I refer to the case of our Member Mr. Nicholas N Chin, Barrister & Solicitor. He alleges that he is a subject of malicious persecution caused by the maladministration of the Legal Practice Board of the Department of the Attorney General. He also suffers the detriment caused to him by Registrar Powell’s maladministration of court records of the Supreme Court. Both of them made wrongful administrative decisions thereby helping erring lawyers to achieve private and personal advantages and at the same time thus enabling them to commit crimes and cause public detriment with impunity. Both of them are not involved in making judicial decisions, the merits of which could not be questioned by the Ombudsman. They are involved in maladministration of the government departments for which the Ombudsman has the statutory right to interfere so as to promote better governance of Western Australia. The facts of the case are available at the blogspot of Mr. Chin, which you may access by Googling “nicholasnchin”.
In accordance with s.14 of the Parliamentary Commisioner Act, 1971 (WA), the Honourable Ombudman should therefore exercise his public statutory duty to investigate the following government Departments for maladministration, failing which, the public would have no choice but to compel him to perform his public obligations and duties:
a) The Department of the Attorney General, particularly the Attorney General himself is to be held responsible for his administrative decision in allowing a pseudo Full Board of the Legal Practice Board to fester and to usurp the statutory functions of that regulator of the Legal Profession of WA. The pseudo Full Board was able to influence the independence, integrity and impartiality of the lawyer’s watchdog body, the Legal Profession Complaints Committee. The pseudo Full Board’s unsavoury influence enabled that watchdog body to achieve a clandestine purpose which is against the public interests. This wrongful administration of that Department is thus causing a public detriment as members of the public are constantly being robbed, plundered and fleeced by erring lawyers with impunity. Many cited examples of these makes it abundantly clear that the Ombudsman should act and act quickly in order to stem the tide of a rapidly deterioration of what used to be an efficient government of Western Australia.
b) The Police Department of Western Australia should be taken to tasks for neglecting to make the administrative decision to investigate the criminal conduct of lawyers who infiltrate the Pseduo Full Board, the watchdog body of lawyers in WA and the corrupt judicial officers who manipulate court records for the personal advantage of erring lawyers. We acknowledge that it is not allowed to investigate lawyers and judicial officers if they are doing justice for the common people. But the situation would be different, if they are found to be manipulating the administrative affairs of the courts and the government departments to achieve the clandestine purpose of perverting the course of justice and to achieve a private advantage as opposed to the achievement of a public advantage in the public interests.
c) The Case Management Registrar D Powell of the Supreme Court of Western Australia had participated in a purposive wrongful administrative decision to cover up erring lawyer David Taylor. This had enabled the learned David Taylor to commit the crimes of perjury contrary to s.124 and the falsification of court records contrary to s.85 of the Criminal Code Act, 1913. The cover-up of these crimes in contained in his letter dated 11.6.2009 that has the effect of misleading the Court of Appeal in the case of Chin v Hall [2009] WASCA 216 to make a mistake in its reasoning at paragraphs 54 and 55 of that judgment. But for this error, the public detriment would not have been caused. This conduct of a judicial officer is contrary to the meaning of being corrupt as defined by Jean-Franois Revel (ENCOUNTER March, 1987) in the following words: “It means misapplying political or administrative power, whether directly or indirectly outside its proper spheres, for one’s own financial or material advantage, or in order to distribute the gains among one’s friends, colleagues, relations or supporters.”
We would appreciate your comment and action as our members therefore demand that we receive a reply to this letter within 14 days or we will have no choice but to upload this letter onto our website for public information.
Yours faithfully,
Eddie Hwang
President
Unity Party WA
UnityPartyWA@westnet.com.au
http://twitter.com/unitywa
http://unitypartywa.blogspot.com/
www.unitywa.org
Ph/Fax: 61 893681884
Date: 08-Feb -2010.
Environmental Friendly - Save the trees - Use Email.
Can you afford to give Telstra/Bigpond a try?
RESULTS OF APPLICATIONS FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL LISTED FOR THE PUBLICATION OF REASONS AND PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS CANBERRA WEDNESDAY, 10 MARCH 2010 No. Applicant Respondent Court appealed from Result
4.
Chin
Legal Practice Board of Western Australia (P36/2009)
Supreme Court of Western Australia (Court of Appeal) [2009] WASCA 117
Application Dismissed [2010] HCASL 4
The West Australian
westinfo@wanews.com.au
Dear Editor,
We refer to the report below and wish to congratulate the former WA Premier Dr. Geoff Gallop for telling the truth about Racism in Australia.
It is a strange, enigmatic and tragic problem happening in our society which does not seem to want to go away. None of us would like to see himself or herself as a racist, yet this strange enigmatic force is very real, and it persists in its tenacious ways with its tentacle-like structures that permeate even our justice system let alone the school systems and the government departments.
Just look at the treatment of our Members Ms Lili Kang and Mr. Nicholas Chin. Their stories contain rich and meaningful lessons for us. Theirs are on our website: www.unitywa.org and http://unitypartywa.blogspot.com/ and the blogspot of Mr. Chin which you can access it by typing “nicholasnchin” on Google.
We are criticizing about Malaysia and its opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim being deprived of his rights in a country without true democracy but this very situation is happening in our own back yard. How can we be so hypercritical?
Yours sincerely,
Eddie Hwang
President
Unity Party WA
UnityPartyWA@westnet.com.au
http://twitter.com/unitywa (uploaded)
http://unitypartywa.blogspot.com/
www.unitywa.org
Ph/Fax: 61 893681884
Date: 20-Mar-2010.
Environmental Friendly - Save the trees - Use Email.
Can you afford to give Telstra/Bigpond a try?
Gallop blasts racism
PHILIPPA PERRY, The West Australian March 18, 2010, 5:02 am
Australia has significant pockets of racism and has seen a re- emergence of nationalism, according to former WA premier Geoff Gallop.
In a speech to be delivered to a Human Rights Arts and Film Festival breakfast this morning, Dr Gallop says Australia should have a charter of rights to benefit ordinary people as well as the marginalised and vulnerable in society.
"There are a lot of good things about Australia but one of them isn't the re-emergence of a form of political and cultural nationalism backed up at times by a particularly crude and nasty form of populism," he says.
"We describe ourselves as an egalitarian and tolerant nation but significant and unjustified inequalities remain as do not- insignificant pockets of racism."
Dr Gallop says Australia is the only democratic nation without a national bill or charter of rights and that while our rights receive some recognition nationally, it is very limited.
He says a charter of rights could be given a role in the legislative process, the administration of policy and the interpretation of the law.
Dr Gallop says there is a deep suspicion among elements of the political elite that a Human Rights Act will make it too hard for them to govern when faced with challenges such as terrorism and crime generally. "Not having a charter of rights legitimised by the Parliament sends a message to the community that the government itself is fearful of subjecting itself to serious human rights scrutiny," he said.
Follow thewest.com.au on Twitter
***************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
The Ombudsman of Western Australia
mail@ombudsman.wa.gov.au
The Attorney General of Western Australia
Minister.Porter@dpc.wa.gov.au
The Legal Practice Board of Western Australia
general@lpbwa.com
The Legal Profession Complaints Committee of Western Australia
lpcc@lpbwa.com
The Parliamentary Inspector of Western Australia
piccc@piccc.wa.gov.au
WA Commissioner for Police
commissioner@police.wa.gov.au
Dear Sirs,
OMBUDSMAN’S DUTY TO INVESTIGATE MALADMINISTRATION
OF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS - HOODWINKING THE PUBLIC?
I refer to the case of our Member Mr. Nicholas N Chin, Barrister & Solicitor. He alleges that he is a subject of malicious persecution caused by the maladministration of the Legal Practice Board of the Department of the Attorney General. He also suffers the detriment caused to him by Registrar Powell’s maladministration of court records of the Supreme Court. Both of them made wrongful administrative decisions thereby helping erring lawyers to achieve private and personal advantages and at the same time thus enabling them to commit crimes and cause public detriment with impunity. Both of them are not involved in making judicial decisions, the merits of which could not be questioned by the Ombudsman. They are involved in maladministration of the government departments for which the Ombudsman has the statutory right to interfere so as to promote better governance of Western Australia. The facts of the case are available at the blogspot of Mr. Chin, which you may access by Googling “nicholasnchin”.
In accordance with s.14 of the Parliamentary Commisioner Act, 1971 (WA), the Honourable Ombudman should therefore exercise his public statutory duty to investigate the following government Departments for maladministration, failing which, the public would have no choice but to compel him to perform his public obligations and duties:
a) The Department of the Attorney General, particularly the Attorney General himself is to be held responsible for his administrative decision in allowing a pseudo Full Board of the Legal Practice Board to fester and to usurp the statutory functions of that regulator of the Legal Profession of WA. The pseudo Full Board was able to influence the independence, integrity and impartiality of the lawyer’s watchdog body, the Legal Profession Complaints Committee. The pseudo Full Board’s unsavoury influence enabled that watchdog body to achieve a clandestine purpose which is against the public interests. This wrongful administration of that Department is thus causing a public detriment as members of the public are constantly being robbed, plundered and fleeced by erring lawyers with impunity. Many cited examples of these makes it abundantly clear that the Ombudsman should act and act quickly in order to stem the tide of a rapidly deterioration of what used to be an efficient government of Western Australia.
b) The Police Department of Western Australia should be taken to tasks for neglecting to make the administrative decision to investigate the criminal conduct of lawyers who infiltrate the Pseduo Full Board, the watchdog body of lawyers in WA and the corrupt judicial officers who manipulate court records for the personal advantage of erring lawyers. We acknowledge that it is not allowed to investigate lawyers and judicial officers if they are doing justice for the common people. But the situation would be different, if they are found to be manipulating the administrative affairs of the courts and the government departments to achieve the clandestine purpose of perverting the course of justice and to achieve a private advantage as opposed to the achievement of a public advantage in the public interests.
c) The Case Management Registrar D Powell of the Supreme Court of Western Australia had participated in a purposive wrongful administrative decision to cover up erring lawyer David Taylor. This had enabled the learned David Taylor to commit the crimes of perjury contrary to s.124 and the falsification of court records contrary to s.85 of the Criminal Code Act, 1913. The cover-up of these crimes in contained in his letter dated 11.6.2009 that has the effect of misleading the Court of Appeal in the case of Chin v Hall [2009] WASCA 216 to make a mistake in its reasoning at paragraphs 54 and 55 of that judgment. But for this error, the public detriment would not have been caused. This conduct of a judicial officer is contrary to the meaning of being corrupt as defined by Jean-Franois Revel (ENCOUNTER March, 1987) in the following words: “It means misapplying political or administrative power, whether directly or indirectly outside its proper spheres, for one’s own financial or material advantage, or in order to distribute the gains among one’s friends, colleagues, relations or supporters.”
We would appreciate your comment and action as our members therefore demand that we receive a reply to this letter within 14 days or we will have no choice but to upload this letter onto our website for public information.
Yours faithfully,
Eddie Hwang
President
Unity Party WA
UnityPartyWA@westnet.com.au
http://twitter.com/unitywa
http://unitypartywa.blogspot.com/
www.unitywa.org
Ph/Fax: 61 893681884
Date: 08-Feb -2010.
Environmental Friendly - Save the trees - Use Email.
Can you afford to give Telstra/Bigpond a try?
RESULTS OF APPLICATIONS FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL LISTED FOR THE PUBLICATION OF REASONS AND PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS CANBERRA WEDNESDAY, 10 MARCH 2010 No. Applicant Respondent Court appealed from Result
4.
Chin
Legal Practice Board of Western Australia (P36/2009)
Supreme Court of Western Australia (Court of Appeal) [2009] WASCA 117
Application Dismissed [2010] HCASL 4
Friday, March 19, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)