TERROR ATTACK THREATENS MULTICULTURALISM

AAPJune 7, 2011

A terrorist attack in Australia would significantly damage the country's vibrant multicultural community, federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland says.

While the threat of terrorism was small, an attack would be extremely damaging to community harmony, Mr McClelland said on Tuesday.

He was speaking at a conference about the decade since the attacks of September 11, 2001, hosted by the United States Studies Centre in Sydney.

Australia had not been immune to the planning and activities of violent extremists in the past ten years, Mr McClelland said.

"Since 2000, there have been four major terrorist plots disrupted in Australia," he said.

In that time, 23 people had been convicted on charges relating to terrorism plots and 38 had been charged.

"Significantly, 37 of the 38 people prosecuted are Australian citizens and 21 of the 38 were born in Australia.

"For this reason, the government has focused on the risk of vulnerable individuals in Australia becoming radicalised to the point of being willing to use violence."

Mr McClelland mentioned the US government's belief that the country's 'melting pot' culture meant it was immune to recruiters trying to radicalise American citizens.

"We too in Australia have a vibrant multicultural community and those who would commit extreme acts are very small ... they are active but fortunately very small," he said.

"But the damage they could do, not only to our physical environment - and of course loss of life and injury would be a tragedy - but what they would do to that community harmony and that vibrant multicultural community would be another thing altogether."

Addressing the causes of radicalisation leading to violent extremism was a priority for the federal government, Mr McClelland said.

A unit in the attorney-general's department was dedicated to engage with community leaders "from a range of religious, ethnic and cultural backgrounds", he said.

These community leaders had expressed concern that they had "the most to lose" in the event of a terrorist attack.

Since 2001, the Australian government had increased the national security budget from $18 billion to $33 billion, he added.

MASSIVE IRISH PROTEST AGAINST THE EUROPEAN UNION, U.N, IMF & WORLD BANK

By Michael Byers, Editor in Chief: Mikiverse Headline News.

UP TO ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND Irish people have marched in protest against the imposition of the cruel “Austerity Measures” upon the working class and poor people by their governments via the insidious internationalist organisations: the IMF, the World Bank, and the European Union.

These insidious organisations that use disastrous situations –that are mostly engineered by them or their mates- to push through their self-advancing one world government agenda, has contracted the Irish Government to employ these harsh “Austerity Measures” despite the fact that the Irish Government have employed basically the same measures –minus some of harshest conditionality’s- through its own budgets for the last two years with little or no success.

This arrangement has little to do with eradicating debt, and, everything to with gaining control of a countries economy, essential services and eventually the country itself.

This program has been played out time after time in various South American countries, Asian countries, Greece, Russia and South Africa, when Mandela took over from de-Clerq.

The protesting Irish people are upset that working class and poor people are being forced to repay the debts incurred by Irish bankers and banks that destroyed an economy that just a few years ago was the envy of the rest of Europe.

AMAZINGLY ENOUGH, the poor and working class in America are bearing the burden of the sub-prime led economic crash which was caused by poor lending practices by the banks, while oddly enough, the companies that CAUSED the problem, such as Goldman-Sachs, was bailed out by the Government.

What an astonishing co-incidence!

ILLUMINATI NWO ELITE FREEMASON BANKERS CHARGED WITH TREASON TRIAL STARTS 2011

"THE ILLUMINATI IS THE ELITE FAMILIES(THE BANKSTERS) WHO RUN THE WORLD BECAUSE THEY CONTROL THE MONEY SUPPLY THROUGH THE WORLD BANK/IMF/FEDERAL RESERVE...THEY ALSO HIDE BEHIND RELIGION AND CONTROL MOST RELIGIONS....AND SINCE THE AUDIT THE FED BILL WAS VOTED DOWN IN JULY 2010, WHY ARE WE STILL PAYING TAXES IF WE CANT SEE WHERE OUR MONEY IS AND WHO HAS BEEN STEALING MONEY SINCE 1913 THE YEAR THE FEDERAL RESERVE WAS CREATED???!!! SO AMERICA AND OTHER COUNTRIES ARE NOT IN DEBT DON'T LET THESE CARTOON CHARACTERS LIKE GLENN BECK AND SEAN HANNITY MSNBC CNN FOOL YOU, OUR MEDIA IS OWNED BY THE EVIL ELITE!!! MOST OF OUR DEBT IS OWED TO THE IMF/WORLD BANKS WHO HAVE BEEN STEALING MONEY EVERYDAY FROM ALMOST EVERY COUNTRY NOT JUST OURS THEY ARE CROOKS AND UNTIL WE AUDIT THE FEDERAL RESERVE AND FIND OUT WHO STOLE MONEY WE DON'T HAVE TO PAY THESE PEOPLE ANYTHING!!!! WE ARE NOT IN DEBT!!! PLZ GET REAL NEWS FROM SITES LIKE INFOWARS.COM AND 911TRUTH.ORG....WE MUST BRING BACK FAMILY FARMS SO EACH CITY CAN BE SELF-SUBSTAINABLE WE ARE BEING SET UP FOR FAILURE!!!! WAKE UP PEOPLE OF THE WORLD!!!.....ALL RACES MUST UNITE TO DEFEAT THIS EVIL!!! WE THE PEOPLE!!! WATCH THESE FILMS ON YOUTUBE AND DO THE RESEARCH YOURSELF, KNOWLEDGE IS POWER, WE WERE LIED TO BAD IN SCHOOL AND CONTINUE TO LIE TO OUR CHILDREN EVERYDAY, WHAT KIND OF COUNTRY HIDES HISTORY FROM ITS OWN PEOPLE???....GOD WILLING WE WILL DEFEAT THIS EVIL!!!

OBAMA DECEPTION
THE SECRET OF OZ (EXPLAINS FAKE MONEY SYSTEM)
FALL OF THE REPUBLIC
TAVISTOCK INSTITUTE
ENDGAME
THE OBAMA DECPTION
PROFESSOR GRIFF(LOTS OF CLIPS ON YOUTUBE)
JIM MARRS
WILLIAM COOPER (R.I.P)
BOOKER T. COLEMAN
ALAN WATTS
G. EDWARD GRIFFIN
MAX KEISER


AND SUPPORT THESE MUSIC ARTIST:

IMMORTAL TECHNIQUE
K-RINO
BEAST 1333
PROFESSOR GRIFF
SONS OF LIBERTY

GOD BLESS"

REVENUE RAISING CAMERA FIGURES

TOTAL RAISED SINCE REVENUE RAISING CAMERAS INTRODUCED IN 1988-89: $4.9 BILLION

2009-10 $437.2 MILLION

2008-09 $397.6 MILLION

2007-08 $430 MILLION

2006-07 $444 MILLION

2005-06 $403.6 MILLION

2004-05 $325.7 MILLION

2003-04 $308.3 MILLION

2002-03 $382.5 MILLION

2001-02 $236.5 MILLION

2000-01 $215.8 MILLION

1999-00 $137 MILLION

1998-99 $134.5 MILLION

1997-98 $126.3 MILLION

1996-97 $123.5 MILLION

1995-96 $126.3 MILLION

1994-95 $129.5 MILLION

1993-94 $122.2 MILLION

1992-93 $116.4 MILLION

1991-92 $125.9 MILLION

1990-91 $78.2 MILLION

1989-90 $62.5 MILLION

1988-89 $52.4 MILLION

COALITION WOULD KEEP SPEED CAMERA NETWORK AMID BRUMBY FOI BLOCKADE

Keith Moor, Amelia Harris From: Herald Sun November 24, 2010
UPDATE 12.12pm: THE Coalition wouldn't cut speed cameras numbers despite accepting most people think they're revenue raisers.

Speaking in an exclusive heraldsun.com.au debate recorded live today for the Lunchtime Q&A series, Mr Ryan said the Coalition would instead seek to create “greater transparency” on their use.

While admitting many Victorians saw them as revenue raisers, and although the Coalition has previously attacked the proliferation of speed cameras, Mr Ryan said the policy was to ensure they were used responsibly.

But asked if he would cut the numbers, he said: “I think the cameras have a useful purpose in making sure that we contribute to cutting and controlling the road toll, but we have to use them fairly".

Mr Ryan said Coalition policy, if elected, would include an annual report on complaints and faults to Parliament.

His comments came soon after Police Minister James Merlino shifted blame to the Department of Justice after revelations the Brumby Government blocked a bid to reveal how many faulty speed cameras have been discovered in Victoria.

A whistleblower today accused the Brumby Government of intervening in the Herald Sun investigation.

"They don't want anything negative about speed cameras to come out before Saturday's election," the insider said.

Late yesterday the Department of Justice said it was unable to find out how many faulty cameras had been identified in the past five years.

It claimed it couldn't do so because the "relevant electronic information is stored in a combination of searchable and non-searchable data".

Are speed cameras revenue raisers or life savers? Join the debate below

In an online law and order debate with Police Minister James Merlino and Opposition police spokesman Peter Ryan, being recorded live this morning and to be aired on heraldsun.com.au this afternoon, Mr Merlino said freedom of information requests were not decided by ministers.

When asked by senior reporter John Ferguson about the fact the Herald Sun had been blocked from revealing how many faulty speed cameras had been discovered in Victoria, Mr Merlino said the release of information was a decision for departmental bureaucrats not the government.

“The decisions in terms of what documents are released, the timing of when those documents are released, is not a decision that the minister makes, or the minister’s office makes," Mr Merlino said.

"These are decisions within the (Justice) department, or Victoria Police, or whatever agency the FoI (Freedom of Information) request comes through to."

He said ministers were only given details of Freedom of Information documents to be released five days before the act.

But Opposition roads spokesman Terry Mulder has called on the Brumby Government to release information about faulty speed cameras ahead of Saturday’s election.

Mr Mulder said the refusal to release information showed a culture of secrecy.

"I think it’s imperative that this information is released prior to Saturday’s election," he said.

"You would have thought that if they had nothing to hide that all the information would have been laid out in front of the public."

Mr Mulder said the cover-up could set a dangerous precedent.

"If you are going to have a justice system that penalises innocent people then the fabric of your democracy is in tatters," he said.

"If they are going to do this with speed cameras, what are they going to with other forms of justice in the state?"

It took the State Opposition about a year to retrieve the documents under Freedom of Information showing the logs for EastLink cameras for the four months to June last year.

The logs, revealed in the Herald Sun in September, showed one camera at the Wellington Rd site had to be replaced after taking rogue images, and others contained corrupt data and had communication blackouts.

Mr Mulder said the contents of some documents sought, but not released, remained a mystery.

He said cameras served an important purpose, but must be used fairly.

The revelation comes as a Herald Sun investigation has found Victorian motorists pay vastly more per head in traffic camera fines than drivers in any other state.

The investigation discovered:

VICTORIA'S 3.5 million driving licence holders paid an average of $113 a year in speeding fines in 2008-09, compared with $63 in South Australia, $60 in NSW, $30 in the Northern Territory, $25 in Western Australia and $15 a head in Queensland in the same year.

VICTORIAN drivers have paid $4.9 billion in fines since 1989.

MORE than $3.7 billion of that has been paid by motorists since Labor came to power 11 years ago.

VICTORIA has 308 fixed and mobile speed cameras, compared with 178 in NSW, 90 in South Australia, 49 in Queensland and 36 in Western Australia.

DESPITE Victoria having many more speed cameras than any other state in Australia, the latest figures reveal its fatal road toll in the 12 months to July increased, while most other states recorded declines.

VICTORIA is the only state in Australia that does not put up signs to warn motorists they are approaching a fixed speed camera.

MOBILE speed cameras in some Australian states also have warning signs. But Victorian motorists are not warned they are approaching a mobile speed camera.

VICTORIA has by far the highest cash penalties in Australia for speeding at less than 10km/h over the limit and Victorian motorists also pay the most for exceeding the speed limit by more than 10km/h but less than 15km/h.

MOBILE speed cameras in Victoria have to be tested only once a year for accuracy. Fixed speed cameras are
tested every three months.

The Herald Sun lodged a Freedom of Information application in June seeking detailed information about speed cameras and their accuracy.

It got a response from the Department of Justice late yesterday and that was only to say six of the nine questions would not be answered.

A Government insider contacted the Herald Sun last week and claimed the FoI request was being deliberately stalled until after the November 27 election.

"The Government is very sensitive about the speed camera issue and doubts about their accuracy. They know it can influence voters and that's why you are not getting your stuff," the insider claimed.

A State Government spokesman yesterday denied the Government or any minister had played a role in stalling or rejecting the Herald Sun's FoI request.

He also defended the high number of speed cameras in use in Victoria.

"Speed remains the biggest killer on our roads and speed cameras save lives," the spokesman said.

"In 1989, 776 Victorians lost their lives on the roads. In the 20 years of speed camera operation, the road toll has more than halved. Last year our road toll was 290.

"We would gladly receive no money from speeding fines, because that would mean motorists were not speeding and the biggest killer on our roads had been eliminated.

"Our Government has taken the tough decision to back police and the road safety experts to do all we can to change the culture around speeding, in order to save lives."

Deputy Commissioner Ken Lay said he did not think the point-to-point cameras would be turned on before Christmas.

The cameras were turned off after nine of the 68,000 motorists caught by the cameras between Craigieburn and Wallan on the Hume Highway since 2007 were incorrectly fined.

Mr Lay said the cameras hadn’t been turned back on because he "(couldn’t) afford to run the risk of another of my members turning up and trying to seize a car that shouldn’t have been seized’’.

"I don’t trust the fact that we may not have a very, very small number of off readings," Mr Lay said.

"We need to make sure that will not occur.

"The last thing I need going into the most critical time of the year on our roads is for someone to be ringing up and saying, 'I've been inappropriately or incorrectly booked again'. We just can’t take that risk."

The Police Association is funding a legal challenge by a female officer contesting a fine generated by a camera on EastLink.

Secretary Sen-Sgt Greg Davies said it was crucial private speed camera operators and the State Government turned off cameras when they became aware they were faulty and immediately organised to get them fixed.

"If there are faulty cameras out there, and we contend that at least one of them was faulty on at least two days, if there's more, then the public aren't going to have much faith in the system and could be excused for saying, 'Well, if there's a number of faulty cameras and they won't tell us where they are and they're still operating them, you know, how do you have any confidence in the system?'," Sen-Sgt Davies said.

He said the union and its members' were primary concerned about how the cameras could help save lives.

"What other people use them for is a matter for them and, therefore, a matter for the public to judge."

Mr Lay said he remained confident only nine people were incorrectly booked.

He said there were human and technology-related issues every now and then.

"I think the community has got a perception out there that this technically is absolutely 100 per cent foolproof," Mr Lay said.

"The fact is from time-to-time ... there will be mistakes."

moork@heraldsun.com.au

GEELONG BOOZE BLITZ NABS 27 DRINK-DRIVERS

Aleks Devic From: Herald Sun November 20, 2010
GEELONG remains one of the state's worst drink drive hot-spots, after a police operation in the city nabbed 27 boozed drivers, two drug drivers and impounded a hoon's car.

More than 100 police and six booze buses swamped Geelong last night and breath tested 4130 motorists as part of a targeting alcohol and drug affected drivers. (sic) The stated purpose of this 'operation' was to target dring and drug drivers. They inconvenienced a bare minimum of 4130 people -based on the implausible notion that there were no extra people in any car- to catch an incredibly low 0.702179% of people. That is LESS THAN 3/4 0F 1%, or it means that 99.29782% of innocent people were inconvenienced for no other reason than the desire of Victoria Police to reap extra revenue for the Roads Corporation, which many of you know as its trading name; VIC ROADS. VICTORIA POLICE is a corporation as well, and any corporation has to run at a profit in order to satisfy the requirements of the Corporations Act. This is why you are being hasled and harrassed by these booze busses. The safety angle is a marketing ploy-nothing more.

But the operation also caught 19 speeding drivers, 21 unregistered drivers, 12 unlicensed/suspended drivers, 41 mobile phone offences, 19 seat belt offences and 56 defective vehicles. This is further proof that this is about revenue raising. The corporate marketing officers at the American-owned-tabloid-the-Herald Sun informs us that the focus was on drink and drug drivers, yet, the VICTORIA POLICE Corporate Officers were more than happy to line their pockets with an extra 168 income earning opportunities!!!

Are you buying into the corporate marketing line about safety being more important than profit?

Operation Commander, Road Policing Superintendent Neville Taylor said the results left police dumbfounded.

"Geelong has been identified as in the state's top 10 at-risk areas for road trauma,'' he said.

"This (Geelong's results) is very disappointing. -Why would he be disappointed with a result of over 99% of motorists not being effected by alcohol or drugs? Was he hoping for more positive readings to reap in higher revenue? To justify the inconvenience they are causing to the overwhelming amount of innocent people who have their time wasted by these detestable arevnue raising activities. And the corporate media, be it the radio, the newspapers or tv support this unlawful behaviour through their reusal to point out the obvious facts of this disgraceful situation. Am I really in posession of some type of fantasticly clever brain that alows me to point out to you something that has escaped ALL OF THE CORPORATE MEDIA'S ATTENTION? Of course not, they all know, or ought to know. They choose not to cover this reality, they choose to keep you in the dark, to helpthe charade that ancourages you to think that these actions are about safety- We will continue our strong presence across the wider area and will continue to breath test and drug test motorists to remove these people from our roads.''

Police also set up a number of satellite breath-testing sites along back roads, with a focus around licensed premises.

One male driver had a blood alcohol reading of .097 while a 32-year-old St Albans man was nabbed zooming at 135km/h in an 80km/h road works zone -which would be safe in many places in the world that actually have a focus on safety, rather than on profit- on the Western Ring Road in Gowanbrae.

His car was impounded for 48 hours, he lost his licence for 12 months and a received a $597 fine plus towing costs.SO MUCH FOR INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY IN ACOURT OF LAW.

GILLARD CONFIDENT OF G20 REFORMS

Paul Osborne From: AAP November 10, 2010

Julia Gillard meets President Lee Yung-Bak of South Korea in Seoul ahead of the G20 summit. Source: AdelaideNow

PRIME Minister Julia Gillard says she is confident an agreement on international economic reforms will be sealed during her trip to South Korea.

Ms Gillard flew into Seoul on Wednesday, ahead of the Group of 20 leaders meeting and amid a massive security crackdown in the South Korean capital.

Her first port of call was a meeting with President Lee Myung-Bak at his official residence, the Blue House.

Ms Gillard told Mr Lee she was looking forward to a very successful G20 meeting.

"Significantly we will deliver the reform to the IMF (International Monetary Fund), and I'm pleased we've been able to work on those and work alongside you," Ms Gillard said.

"We will deliver the financial stability rules which are so important for the future.

"That means this G20 here in Seoul, development will be centrally on the agenda."

A discussion on global growth would provide a framework ahead of future structural reform, Ms Gillard said.

Officials are moving closer to a communique on banking reform and other social and economic measures to be approved by G20 leaders on Friday afternoon.

The UK's Financial Times has reported the section on banking reform is likely to involve a two-tier system.

One tier would comprise about 20 global banks, mostly based in the UK, Europe and the US, whose failure would pose a risk to the international financial system.

The second would be a country-by-country list of banks that are important within their home economies, but would pose little danger to the world if they failed.

The move would mean many big banks in nations such as Australia, China and Japan with little presence overseas would be exempted from new financial rules designed to shield the world financial system from downturns.

But it is understood talks on currency exchange rates, which have attracted heated debate in the lead-up to the summit, are unlikely to produce a clear result.

Treasurer Wayne Swan, who is also in Seoul, says there is a consensus among finance ministers for more market-determined exchange rate systems and a commitment for G20 members to refrain from competitive devaluation of currencies.

The leaders are also expected to commit to tackling global trade imbalances, but would issue "indicative guidelines" rather than set targets.

Korean authorities have placed a ban on protests or rallies within a 2km radius of the conference venue at Coex - Asia's biggest underground shopping mall - which houses the convention hall where the talks will take place.

About 60,000 military and police are on duty ahead of the arrival of world leaders, as small groups of protesters gathered in Seoul's CBD highlighting issues including human rights and poverty.

Ms Gillard will on Thursday morning lay a wreath at Seoul's War Memorial of Korea to mark Remembrance Day, with a number of Australian veterans also attending.

This year is the 60th anniversary of the start of the Korean War.

About 17,000 Australians served in the war and 339 were killed.

Mr Lee thanked Australia for its role in the war in his remarks to Ms Gillard.

"We will never forget that," he said.

ESTABLISHED, FUNDAMENTAL, AXIOMS

With thanks to Mika of the family Rasila and the Ontario chapter of the Freeman of Canada group.

(As simplified as I can make them, based on the work of Robert-Arthur: Menard, Mary-Elizabeth: Croft and (to some extent Winston Shrout and Irene-Maus: Gravenhorst). Basically it is their work, tweaked a bit by re-writing, and removing 'God' - thereby reducing it to absolute fundamentals)

1) 'Lawful' is what it is all about. 'Lawful' .vs. 'unlawful'. Do not get trapped into discussing 'legal'/'illegal'.

2) In order to empower a representative, you must have the power yourself. You cannot give to anyone something you, yourself do not possess. You cannot give them any more than you, yourself, possess. Consequently you can look at anything any representative does, and say "I must be entitled to do that myself, without - necessarily - empowering someone else to do it for me".

3) In a democracy, 'a majority' does not depend on 'large numbers'. A majority can be as low as ONE. And that ONE must, of itself, (therefore) carry sufficient empowerment to put any motion into practice. (The US Supreme Court has 9 Members. A 5 - 4 majority carries any ruling. That's 'democracy')

4) Consequent to (3) no Government has more power than you do yourself. The powers are equal. The only difference is that your power is inalienable - it can't be taken away from you - whereas a Government can be replaced by some other set of role players. Consequently YOU are 'supreme'.

5) 'Requesting permission' is the act of a child. 'Licencing' is 'begging for permission' and 'submitting to someone else's will'. Adults do not beg permission for something they are lawfully entitled to do, and prepared to take full responsibility for so doing. Anything for which a licence can be granted must, by definition, be fundamentally lawful (otherwise it would be incapable of being licenced), and there is, therefore, absolutely no need for an adult to 'ask such permission'. The act of 'obtaining a licence' is the act of throwing away a fundamental Right, and substituting a (revocable) privilege instead.

6) 'Registration' of anything transfers superior ownership to the entity accepting the registration. Once an item has been registered, you are no longer the OWNER (even though you will still be paying for the item), but instead you become the KEEPER. This includes cars, houses, children (who become 'wards of the state' by virtue of a birth registration), etc. ('regis ...' = handing ownership to The Crown ... which, by the way, is the British Crown in Temple Bar, and NOT Elizabeth II)

7) When parts of the Magna Carta were 'transferred' into Statutes what was actually happening was that fundamental Rights were being transferred into privileges. Thus they were being watered down. Diffused. Being rendered powerless.

8) In all cases you are always being OFFERED A SERVICE - which includes 'benefits' - in the form of privileges. You are always fully entitled to waive such services, and of course you will also be waiving the attendant benefits, as you so choose. Your choice is - ultimately - to either assert your (inalienable) Rights, or accept (revocable) privileges.

9) The law can give rise to a FICTION, but a fiction cannot give rise to a law. Consequently a legal fiction called THE GOVERNMENT has no power to make LAW. It is, in point of fact, BOUND BY LAW (like everyone else, and including all other legal fictions). PARLIAMENT is another legal fiction entity. Statutes created by Parliament are not, therefore, the LAW. They are 'legislated rules for a society' and ONLY APPLICABLE TO MEMBERS OF THAT SOCIETY. Join a different society, and you would be bound by a different set of rules. (If this were not the case it would be impossible to become, for example, a Freemason and be bound by the rules of Freemasonry). Statutes are nothing more than the Company Policy of THE UNITED KINGDOM CORPORATION, or THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CORPORATION, etc. (See 'society', below)

10) Only a sovereign flesh and blood human being, with a living soul, has a Mind. Only something with a Mind is capable of devising a CLAIM. Legal fictions are soulless, and do not possess a distinct Mind. They cannot, therefore, in LAW, make a CLAIM.

11) Consequent to the foregoing, and since the Judiciary in a court de facto derives all its power from colour-of-law/Statutes, then no court de facto has any power over you as a sovereign human being, IN FACT (although, of course, they don't bother to tell you!). A court de jure is the only kind of court to which you are subject under Common Law, and there are none of those left (unless you insist that the court operates de jure, by demanding a Trial by Jury. But they will attempt to resist that with every fibre in their 'corporate', soulless, 'bodies').

12) YOU, and your fellow countrymen, constitute the entire and total 'wealth' of your country. The resources may be considered as assets, but without you & your fellow countrymen they are worthless. A field must be ploughed, and seeded, before potatoes will grow. Once grown they must be dug up, bagged, and transported before they can do the worthwhile job of sustaining life. Without the efforts of you, and your countrymen, NOTHING can happen, and your country itself is a worthless lump of soil.

13) A Society is, in essence, nothing more than a grouping of like-minded souls since it is defined as a number of people joined by mutual consent to deliberate, determine and act for a common goal. A society makes its own rules, and its Members are duty-bound to follow them. Different societies can exist, having their own unique set of rules. One way of 'choking' the action of a court de facto is to claim membership of a society that only exists in Common Law jurisdiction. The World Freeman Society has been set up precisely for this purpose.

14) Contractual obligation. For ANY contract to be lawful, INCLUDING A CONTRACT BETWEEN YOURSELF AS PLAINTIFF OR DEFENDANT IN A COURT DE FACTO, it must comprise the following:

A) FULL DISCLOSURE by both parties. Neither party can later claim 'you should have known' if it was not specifically declared at the time of making the contract.

B) A CONSIDERATION offered by both parties, this being the subject of the exchange. It must be a sum of money, or an item of value. Both parties agree that their CONSIDERATION is worth (to them) the other party's CONSIDERATION.

C) LAWFUL TERMS & CONDITIONS for the contract, to which both parties agree.

D) 'Wet' SIGNATURES of both parties. This means hand-written SIGNATURES, as made by two human beings.

Even though businesses and officials act as though there is a lawful contract in place, 99 times out of 100 these rules have not been followed. (Maybe it is 999 times out of 1,000 - or even more!). Standing on these 4 rules, requesting proofs, is the simplest way of stalemating just about every action that may be taken against you. (See No. 16, below)

15. Agreement to pay. Consequent to (14) above, all 'payment demands', that could result in court actions against you, can be stopped by 'conditionally agreeing to pay the sum demanded', subject to proofs that the 4 rules were followed in the first place. (Make sure you send this letter by registered post, heading it 'Notice of Conditional Agreement' and including 'Without Prejudice' in a suitable place). In almost all cases no proofs are possible (because the rules were never followed lawfully). However, by 'agreeing to pay' you have removed all CONTROVERSY. Thus a court action, which is only there to adjudicate on CONTROVERSY, cannot take place. If you receive a Summons, you can write back (registered!) with a copy of your agreement to pay, subject to the proofs being presented. The court will consider that any further action is 'frivolous', i.e. a complete waste of its time, since there is no CONTROVERSY on which it can adjudicate. (The court may even consider whoever applied to the court to be in contempt). (See No. 16, below)

16. "I feel 'guilty', because I owe the money". No, you don't owe a damn thing! When taking out the loan, you were 'loaned' back what was yours in the first place. You created the 'money' when you signed the Loan or Credit Application. By doing so, YOU gave THEM a Negotiable Instrument called 'the money'. They cashed this in(*), and then used that to loan you back your own money. You don't owe a damn thing! THEY owe YOU - an apology at the very least - for applying this confidence trick on you - AND FOR CHASING YOU FOR SOMETHING YOU ALREADY GAVE THEM.

(* Actually they just could have walked away with your cash. But they didn't, because they are greedy, greedy, greedy, greedy. They knew they could get you to pay everything back, and also to pay them INTEREST on top of that. Thus they had already been paid in full ONCE when they cashed in on your money, took a risk by offering it back to you, and reckoned on being paid TWICE OR EVEN MORE via the 'interest'. Are you just beginning to feel slightly less sympathetic? If not, I don't know what else to say.

"Can this really be true?" Answer: Yes, because there is no other way. Banks are not allowed (by LAW) to lend Depositor's money (which is held by them 'in trust'). Loan Companies and Credit Card Companies (etc.) have no Deposit Money in the first place! Do they? So how else could they do it, then?)

17. 'Responsibility' .vs. 'Authority'. You can DELEGATE authority, but you can only SHARE responsibility. In other words, if you task (delegate) someone to do something, you still retain the RESPONSIBILITY for getting it done, and for anything that may happen as a result. If, for example, a Police Officer carries out any order, given by a superior, then that Officer is personally responsible for what may occur as a result, and all those up the chain of command are considered accomplices, in LAW.

(That's what the Nuremberg Trials were all about)

Therefore it is important that, if you delegate authority, you delegate to the right individual or group of individuals. You delegate to an individual who will accomplish the task without come-backs. And who you choose is your choice, and your responsibility.

(If this had been pointed out, during the de Menezes trial, INCLUDING THE OBVIOUS BREACH OF COMMON LAW, a lot of Police personnel - up to, and including the Home Secretary & Prime Minister - could easily have ended up behind bars. The so-called 'legal profession' did a thoroughly abysmal job - as normal. A golden opportunity, tossed into the bin of history, by virtue of plain, common or garden, useless waffle. The police were charged under the Health & Safety Act. What utter rubbish! They should have been charged under Common Law)

Veronica: of the Chapman family -January, 2009

SWISS BANKS 'MUST FACE TOUGHER CAPITAL STANDARDS'

October 4, 2010

Swiss government-appointed experts said Monday that tougher capital standards should be imposed on Switzerland's two biggest banks, UBS and Credit Suisse, that far exceed new international "Basel III" proposals.

The commission of financial experts recommended in a report that the capital ratio for the two banks should amount to 19 percent of risk-weighted assets, including 10 percent in high- quality common equity .

"Compared with the minimum requirements of Basel III, the Commission's proposals require the big banks to hold around 40 percent more common equity and around 80 percent more total capital," the commission said in a statement.

The Swiss central bank and the regulator, the Financial Markets Authority (FINMA) welcomed the proposals and said they should be implemented swiftly.

"The Swiss National Bank and FINMA regard it as absolutely essential that the committee?s proposals are implemented in their entirety," they said in a statement.

Credit Suisse and UBS are regarded as "too big too fail" because of their size and influence on the Swiss economy.

UBS, then the biggest of the two, had to be shored up during the financial crisis by a multibillion dollar state rescue package.

The Basel III plans drawn up by central banks and regulators in the wake of the collapse of banks during the financial crisis will be submitted to the Group of 20 (G20) summit of major industrialised and developing nations in South Korea in November.

Under those international proposals, requirements for banks' top quality Tier One capital cover will rise to the equivalent of seven percent of their risk assets from the current two percent.

This story was found at: http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-world/swiss-banks-must-face-tougher-capital-standards-20101004-1643v.html

LAND OF POOR WHITE TRASH APPROACHING

Kenneth Davidson October 4, 2010

Our costly infrastructure projects look like train wrecks in the making.

The former prime minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, is reputed to have said in the 1980s that Australia was destined to become the ''poor white trash of Asia''. He may yet be right.

Infrastructure is the enabling investment of the future. Get this wrong and Australia's future is constrained. Energy, transport, telecommunications and water are the key to our future in the context of the global issues of peak oil, global warming and water.

Recent decisions in all these areas by both state and federal government are not reassuring.

Telecommunications is a $40-billion-a-year industry generating more than $5 billion a year in profits. Thanks to government policy to build the $43 billion NBN network and pay Telstra $11 billion to rip out its copper, these profits are up for grabs to rent-seekers such as Optus whose fixed-network profits are largely based on arbitrage, rather than competition based on engineering excellence.

Optus is Telstra's main competitor. Telstra offered the government a less ambitious, but nevertheless more than adequate, broadband service than NBN - financed largely out of existing cash flows from the copper network. The offer was refused, largely on the advice of Optus and other arbitragers, because the offer involved bypassing Telstra's exchanges, which are essential for the arbitragers to tap into Telstra's network in order to provide their ''competitive'' service.

In the name of competition and structural separation, Telstra's ability to earn a surplus of some $40 billion over the next decade for reinvestment and dividends is to be trashed and the company transformed from a centre of genuine global telecommunications excellence into another rent-seeking retail operation.

Given Lee's remarks, it is indeed ironic that Optus is a subsidiary of Sing Tel, which is owned by the Singapore government through Temasek Holdings. It seems that the Broadband Minister, Senator Stephen Conroy, prefers the interested advice of Optus and investment banks such as Lazard, rather than the disinterested advice of the owner of Mexican telcos and vice-chairman of the UN Broadband Commission for Digital Development, Carlos Slim Helu. Slim was in Australia for a conference last week and said the NBN was far too expensive.

Apart from New Zealand, the rest of the world agrees with Slim. Norway and Germany are now rolling out broadband along the lines suggested by Telstra and rejected by the government. Hopefully, the new Parliament will block the NBN legislation.

The NBN is another train wreck in the making, like the Wonthaggi desalination plant, which unfortunately is already on line to a major crash.

Only governments made up of fools or knaves sign on to projects with a capital cost of $43 billion, in the case of the NBN, or $4.8 billion, in the case of the desalination plant, without considering the alternatives that could provide the same service at a fraction of the cost.

The Wonthaggi desalination plant and the water it will produce will cost up to six times world's best practice - as recently announced by the Saudi Arabian government for a 368-gigalitre plant with a cost under $A2 billion.

The analysis of the costing of this project is set out in the London-based industry newsletter, Global Water Intelligence, which tracks desalination projects.

The capital cost for Victoria's desalination plant is $4.8 billion to produce 150 gigalitres. The Australian cost is $32 million per gigalitre, compared to $5.5 million per gigalitre for the Saudi plant.

On this basis, if the Victorian government had employed the Saudi government to oversee the engineering, procurement and construction, Victorians would have saved $4 billion.

Even allowing for a billion dollars of extras at Wonthaggi (difficult to find), it is appears that the Victorian taxpayer has lost upwards of $3 billion. It is hard to believe that any government could be this incompetent. The $3 billion to $4 billion at the beginning equates to an extra $11 billion in interest charges over the next three decades - enough to build and operate the best underground metro in the world.

The big difference is the Saudi government rejected public/private partnership financing and funded its plant on its own. Incredibly, the Brumby government guaranteed the Wonthaggi financing. The government should have borrowed the money itself and saved at least a couple of billion dollars upfront. But this still leaves plenty of financial fat in the engineering and construction contracts to be explained.

In the past five years a number of desalination plants have been built around the world - including two in Perth - where the cost differentials, although not as great as with the Saudi plant compared to Wonthaggi, still beggar belief.

A royal commission is imperative. Wonthaggi is no one-off. Government financial guarantees to sustain PPPs have become standard policy. Like the NBN and Wonthaggi, the $750 million Frankston bypass PPP is supported by the taxpayer because no bank or private investor would risk their own money on such an obvious financial lemon, quite apart from the fact that it is an act of environmental vandalism.

Kenneth Davidson is an Age senior columnist.

kdavidson@dissent.com.au

This story was found at: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/land-of-poor-white-trash-approaching-20101003-162ll.html

COURT ACQUITS KEATING OF TRAFFIC CHARGE

Former prime minister Paul Keating has been acquitted of driving through a red traffic light in central Sydney, with a magistrate finding there was "reasonable doubt" about the allegation.

The 66-year-old appeared at Sydney's Downing Centre Local Court on Tuesday to defend the charge that he ran a red light on Australia Day this year as he was driving from his Potts Point home to visit his mother in the city.

Mr Keating, who was driving his daughter's green Peugeot hatchback, was issued a ticket by police officers who say they saw him drive through the red light at the intersection of Park and Pitt streets.

In his evidence, Mr Keating said he had accelerated through the intersection and the light was yellow when he crossed the stop line.

"The light was yellow, not a doubt in the world," he told the court.

He denied police allegations that he was impatient on the day and in a hurry after being held up by Australia Day celebrations, which had caused traffic congestion.

However, he admitted to driving in a bus lane in an attempt to "shuffle" through "bumper to bumper" cars.

"I must find reasonable doubt. I dismiss the allegation," Magistrate Carolyn Barkell said.

Outside court, the grey-haired Mr Keating told reporters he was pleased with the outcome.

"I think it's important that ordinary people in the community, having received an infringement notice for an offence they didn't commit, basically understand that the system is not loaded against them, that they're entitled to have the courage of their convictions and I hope today there is some social good in that outcome," he said.

AUSSIE DOLLAR DAZZLES AS IT BREAKS THROUGH US 96 CENTS

AAP September 27, 2010

THE dollar broke through the 96 US cent barrier this morning to reach a two-year high, buoyed by a strong US equities performance on Friday.

The local currency hit its highest level since it touched 97.92 US cents on July 25, 2008.

At 7am (AEST), the dollar was trading at 96.15 US cents, up from Friday's close of 94.91 cents.

Since 5pm (AEST) on Friday, the local currency traded between 94.91 cents and 96.15 cents.

Westpac New Zealand senior market strategist Imre Speizer said the local currency gained more than one US cent during the offshore session.

"US equities closed much higher," Mr Speizer said.

"Much of the boost was around the US durable goods data. Excluding transportation, that indicator was much better than expected.

"If you were to guess the direction or bias today, you would have to say it is upwards."

Mr Speizer said there was only "very minor resistance" from Friday night's session.

"It's likely to test that and make a new high," Mr Speizer said.

Last Wednesday, the dollar pushed up to 96 US cents.

New York's Dow Jones index rose nearly two per cent to end the week as economic data continued to show the prospect of a double dip recession in the world's largest economy is weakening.

Figures showed orders for big-ticket items decreased in August at a slower than expected rate, and traders found comfort in the fact that orders of items such as household appliances rose by a more-than-expected 2 per cent.

The manufacturing industry is seen as one of the main engines pulling the US economy out of one of its worst recessions in decades.

In the absence of any local economic data today, Mr Speizer predicted the local unit would trade around the 96 US cent level.

"Once the US equity futures get going I think that will be the main driver."

He said there was a "reasonably high" chance the local currency would touch the two-year high in the upcoming sessions.

"It's got good momentum behind it and it's only two and a half cents away from that peak, so there's every chance it will get up there."

"DIGGERS" FACE KILL COUNTS OVER CHILD DEATHS

September 27, 2010

Three Australian soldiers are to be charged with manslaughter after an Afghanistan firefight that left five children dead.

"The accused persons will be charged with various service offences, including manslaughter, dangerous conduct, failing to comply with a lawful general order and prejudicial conduct," said the Director of Military Prosecutions, Brigadier Lyn McDade, today.

But two of the soldiers today said they would ‘‘strenuously defend’’ themselves against the charges.

They insisted the casualties - six dead, including a suspected Taliban fighter and the five children, and two children and two adults wounded - were caused by the ‘‘insurgent who chose to repeatedly fire upon us at extreme close range from within a room he knew contained women and children’’.

‘‘This forced us to make split-second decisions, under fire, which almost certainly saved the lives of our fellow Australian and Afghan soldiers,’’ wrote "Soldier A" and "Soldier B" in a statement released with the approval of the military.

"We believe that when all the facts of this incident are made known to the public, it will be clear to everyone that we made the correct decision under truly awful circumstances."

Brigadier McDade said the charges arose from a Special Operations Taskforce night raid on a residential compound believed to harbour Taliban insurgents in Oruzgan Province in February 2009.

The Defence Department previously has said the deaths occurred as the soldiers conducted clearance operations using gunfire and hand grenades.

The three former members of the Special Operations Task Group would be charged with service offences, Brigadier McDade said.

The soldiers facing charges have not been named.

Brigadier McDade said her investigations had been completed only recently and only after ‘‘careful, deliberate and informed consideration’’.

In a statement released the day after the attack, defence said the deaths occurred as SOTG soldiers conducted clearance operations through a number of compounds.

‘‘During the conduct of this operation the soldiers were fired upon by Taliban insurgents,’’ it said.

‘‘The SOTG engaged the insurgents, returning fire in accordance with their rules of engagement.’’

AAP

This story was found at: http://www.theage.com.au/national/diggers-face-kill-counts-over-child-deaths-20100927-15t99.html

DEVIL AND THE DEEP

Josh Gordon September 26, 2010

NO DOUBT, Julia Gillard is in a pickle. A worse pickle, perhaps, than the peripatetic Odysseus. In the epic poem The Odyssey, the hero of Greek myth found himself faced with the choice of sailing past the six-headed Scylla on one side of a narrow strait or the whirlpool Charybdis on the other.

Following the advice of Circe, Odysseus decided to sail closer to Scylla. Better to lose six men rather than risk an entire ship and crew. Sure enough, ''they writhed/gasping as Scylla swung them up her cliff and there/at her cavern's mouth she bolted them down raw -/screaming out, flinging their arms toward me,/lost in that mortal struggle''.

Grisly stuff, but at least Odysseus's ship was able to continue homeward. So tight are the numbers in Parliament that Gillard can ill-afford to lose a single crew member, let alone six.

Gillard has no choice but to take her chances with the whirlpool Charybdis.

For a start, she will be praying there will be no byelections or mishaps that could sink her entire government. It's a good bet Labor MPs are being instructed to take their vitamins, avoid scandals and be on the lookout for errant buses.

Gillard will also simultaneously need to manage delicately her relationship with the Greens and independents, battle an aggressive and obstructionist opposition, and swiftly deliver on some major policy challenges left over from the Rudd years.

Foremost among those policy challenges will be introducing laws to place a price on carbon. This will in turn involve conceiving a scheme with enough grunt to appease voters angry about the lack of genuine action to tackle climate change, while at the same time addressing concerns about the impact on prices for utilities, food and transport.

As a first step, Gillard has promised to set up a new parliamentary ''cabinet-style'' committee made up of Labor and non-Labor members to consider the options. For the first time in history, the Greens will be part of the cabinet process for a federal government.

Gillard has also backed away from an election promise that there will be no carbon tax on the grounds that circumstances have changed because of the hung parliament.

A carbon tax now seems the most likely political outcome. It would be relatively simple to administer in comparison to Labor's defunct emissions trading scheme. It could also initially be levied at a low rate, with scope to increase it over time depending on the outcome of international negotiations.

The price of carbon would also be fixed, in contrast to an emissions trading scheme, where the price would be determined by the market. That would offer producers and investors an added layer of certainty.

The major disadvantage would be that delivering guaranteed emissions cuts would be more difficult. Producers would have an incentive to cut pollution so long as it is cheaper to do this than pay the carbon tax. Abatement would cease as soon as it became a more expensive option than paying the tax. The government could only make educated guesses about levels of abatement associated with different tax rates.

Because emissions trading schemes involve issuing a fixed number of tradeable permits, they make it easier for governments to meet specific targets than carbon taxes.

Given the global nature of the problem, emissions trading schemes have the bonus of allowing permits to flow internationally to industries where they are most highly valued, and allowing abatement would flow to countries where it can happen at the cheapest cost. (There have also been proposals for hybrid schemes, combining a domestic carbon tax with international tradeability.)

If only this were purely an economic problem, the issue would have been resolved years ago. The challenge for Gillard will be, as we found out at the end of last year, of a political nature.

But what about the opposition? Tony Abbott too, will need to carefully manage the politics. The public clearly want action to address climate change and Abbott must be seen to be offering a viable alternative.

That's where the opposition's policy to spend $3.2 billion over four years on measures to directly cut emissions to a level 5 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020 comes in.

The centrepiece of the plan, thoughtfully conceived by climate spokesman Greg Hunt, would be a $2.6 billion fund allowing the government to directly tender for emissions reductions. In other words, taxpayers would pay for abatement, with specific projects determined by the government through a competitive tendering process.

Given the magnitude of the political problem, such an approach may be a sensible early option, particularly if there is no international consensus.

Yet the internal politics for the opposition are also far from easy. Many members of the Coalition are deeply sceptical about the science of climate change (which raises questions about why they would support spending even $3.2 billion).

Yet others, most notedly former opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull, are strongly in favour of so-called market-based mechanisms such as emissions trading schemes and carbon taxes to place a direct price on carbon.

Turnbull has already privately infuriated some of his colleagues. Soon after being restored to the opposition frontbench as communications spokesman, he strayed from his portfolio area by voicing his support for a carbon price and a market-based mechanism.

Abbott has been trying to impose a straitjacket on Turnbull and others by warning the Coalition's policy opposing any form of carbon price will not change.

Turnbull, however, says he does not resile from his political principles, in particular the need for a carbon price.

Much of the focus so far has rightly been on Labor and Gillard. Yet, it is possibly only a matter of time before the deep ideological rift in the Coalition over this and other issues re-emerges.

When it happens, things are once again likely to turn ugly.

Josh Gordon is The Sunday Age's national political reporter. jgordon@theage.com.au

This story was found at: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/devil-and-the-deep-20100925-15rjf.html

ALCOPOP TAX FAILS TO CURB TEENAGE DRINKERS

Melissa Fyfe September 26, 2010

THE contentious tax on alcopops has failed to influence teenage drinkers and done nothing to curb binge drinking, according to the first survey of underage alcohol use since the federal government introduced the excise hike.

A Victorian government three-yearly survey of high school students shows the tax faltered on two fronts: pre-mixed sugary alcoholic drinks have become even more popular among the young, and the tax's main targets, teenage girls, increased their risky drinking, with one public health expert describing the female drinking trend as ''an absolute disaster''.

In May, official data showed a big post-tax decline in alcopops, prompting speculation that young people might be replacing premixed drinks with other alcohol. But, for the first time, the Victorian schools survey found evidence that underage drinkers have stuck with alcopops - partly because the tax fails to influence parents, the main source of teenagers' alcohol.

The Health Department's 2008 survey, which asked 4224 private, Catholic and government school students about their alcohol use, found risky underage drinking continued unabated. But it did reveal some significant changes. The overall number of teenagers drinking alcohol turned sharply downwards.

The department was so surprised by this result it requested the authors, the Cancer Council Victoria, to recheck the figures.

The number of 12 to 15-year-old ''current drinkers'' - students who drank alcohol in the seven days before the survey - had dropped from 23 per cent in 2005 to 16 per cent in 2008, the lowest level since the survey began in 1984. The number of 16 and 17-year-old current drinkers was at a two-decade low: 44 per cent of boys and 36 per cent of girls in this age group. But the survey found levels of risky drinking and teenage preferences for alcopops unmoved by the new tax.

''This finding suggests that the tax increase has had little impact on current drinkers' alcohol preferences,'' the report said. ''In addition, as there was also no change in preferences for beers or spirits, the data also suggests that the tax increase did not cause students to switch their beverage preferences.

''As parents were the primary source of alcohol among current drinkers, their ongoing preference for premixed spirits may not be surprising, as it is likely that these beverages are affordable to most parents, even after the tax increase,'' the report said, adding that the continued popularity of sweetened alcoholic drinks ''remains a concern''.

The alcohol industry, which ran a bitterly fought campaign against the alcopops tax, has claimed the report as evidence of another Rudd government policy failure.

Stephen Riden, spokesman for the Distilled Spirits Industry Council of Australia, said: ''I think it's clear from this independent study that the tax has not shifted school students always from [these drinks] and if that was the purpose of the tax it has failed.''

But federal Health Minister Nicola Roxon pointed to the report's finding that, overall, there are fewer Victorian secondary students drinking. ''The government is determined to keep tackling the risks of dangerous alcohol consumption and tobacco,'' she said.

The survey report, called Victorian Secondary School Students' Use of Licit and Illicit Substances in 2008, was only recently released but the research was conducted in the second half of 2008. It was the first survey of underage drinking following the tax hike of April that year. The hike increased the retail price of premixed spirits by an average of 25 per cent. The 2008 results show that 43 per cent of students aged 12 to 17 nominated premixed spirits as the most common drink they consumed. This was up from 39 per cent in 2005.

But the figures show 70 per cent of 17-year-old girls were choosing alcopops in 2008, up from 64 per cent in 2005. Boys aged 17 also increased their use of alcopops, but most still preferred beer or spirits.

The survey showed that boys of almost all ages were reducing their risky drinking - defined in the survey as consuming seven or more alcoholic drinks on any one day in the previous week.

In 2005, 49 per cent of 17-year-old male drinkers were at risk of short-term harm from their alcohol use; by 2008 that had dropped to 46 per cent. But 17-year-old girls who drink did the reverse and have overtaken boys as binge consumers.

In 2008, 48 per cent of 17-year-olds girls currently drinking were consuming at levels that risked short-term harm, up from 44 per cent in 2005. This is in line with a rising number of studies that show a worrying drinking culture among teenage girls. The Rudd government cited the preference for alcopops among female teenagers as a reason for the tax rise.

''These figures are an absolute disaster,'' said Professor John Toumbourou, who holds the chair in health psychology at Deakin University, commenting on girls' risky drinking.

Alcohol had a bigger physical impact on girls, he said, but they were not heeding the message.



This story was found at: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/alcopop-tax-fails-to-curb-teenage-drinkers-20100925-15rnz.html

NWO in New Zealand Overview Part 1

We Want Your Soul

Australian Army RTF Contact with Taliban Extended Edition Annotated by the Mikiverse

HOW TO BECOME A DRUG DEALER IN THE UNITED STATES

SMU AND DARPA DEVELOP FIBER OPTICS FOR THE HUMAN NERVOUS SYSTEM

SMU and DARPA develop fiber optics for the human nervous system

By Joseph L. Flatley posted Sep 18th 2010 at 10:05PM

The Department of Defense and Southern Methodist University have teamed up to develop prostheticsthat use two-way fiber optic communication between artificial limbs and peripheral nerves to essentially give these devices the ability to feel pressure or temperature. The technology is called neurophotonics, and it will someday allow hi-speed communication between the brain and artificial limbs. But that's just the beginning -- the work being done at SMU's Neurophotonics Research Center might someday lead to brain implants that control tremors, neuro-modulators for chronic pain management, implants for treating spinal cord injuries, and more. And since we can't have a post about DARPA-funded research without the following trope, Dean Orsak of the SMU Lyle School of Engineering points out that "[s]cience fiction writers have long imagined the day when the understanding and intuition of the human brain could be enhanced by the lightning speed of computing technologies. With this remarkable research initiative, we are truly beginning a journey into the future that will provide immeasurable benefits to humanity." Truly.

Dallas Observer SMU Research