WD censorship

Just a quick note:

Since the 'return' of MK, a few posts of mine have not been published (a process referred to by the WD 'censors' as 'DNP-ing' - i.e. Do Not Publish), and a few others have been 'snipped;' both being polite(!?) terms for censored. If (when) this happens in future, I will - if sufficiently 'moved' - a) mirror-post the 'DNP-ed' post here, or b) in the case of a 'snip,' I will edit any post mirrored here and highlight the 'snipped' portion in red like this.

For real snip examples, see ebony and ivory_1927 and sorry ...1927.

ebony and ivory_1927

Submitted on June 28, 2007 - 4:40pm.

 Subtitle: what every troll should know.

-=*=-

Y'know what, Pаul Mоrrella?

I don't give a flying fu... - err, fig for your (slanderous!) attacks on me.

Kindly allow me to remind you, of where we actually are.

Highest on the list of things going wrong - if the indications from the legion of honest scientists working on the problem know what they're talking about - would be a climate-collapse triggered by a vast excess of CO2, what I call the greedastrophe®.

Second on the list of things going wrong - if the murdering bloody disasters in say, Palestine, Afghanistan and Iraq are indicative - would be a world system out-of-control, as I've said many, many times before. The world's putative policeman - the UN - is not; it has been corrupted, consciously so, and the main corrupters - seems to me, are the US and Israel, which, when combined with the Israel Lobby infesting the US forms USrael, and along with rest of the Anglo (Christian) CoW® being neatly summarised as: the wannabe world hegemon plus its illegal sprog and the poodle with dag, all mass-murdering to enable theft (of oil, land and water).

Third on the list of things going wrong - if the rip-offs evident in the mining industry are indicative - would be, as far as we, the sheople® are concerned, a government/industry - in the US, the m/i-plex, also toadally® out'a our control, dedicated to (ever further!) enriching a fat-cat keptocracy already filthy-rich beyond any dreams of avarice, descending into disgusting obesity. How utterly horrid! Not to mention criminal.

That should be enough, for now.

Well, of course some of the sheople® were/are still disturbed. Going back a bit, I personally entreated:

"Leave it to Blix!"

"No killing!"

"NO WAR!"

To which is added: "Stop the rip-offs!"

And "Get some morals!"

See where I'm going, Pаul?

Elegantly simple really, in the words of the Jackson & McCartney song, "I'm a lover, not a fighter;" I fight the good fight: me - n'me mates - we have right on our side.

Any opposing me/us, on the above themes, say, simply don't.

sorry ...1927

Submitted on June 26, 2007 - 9:23pm

 .. but not too sorry.

-=*=-

G'day Jen.

If I appeared at all 'short,' it was possibly because of this: "Sorry but not as you say." (Jenny Hume on June 26, 2007 - 3:51pm.)

I think you'n I've canvassed this before; that I don't regard WD so much as a nattering place, as work?

Sooo, no-one ort'a be really be surprised, if my 'work' - occasional opinion, but always solidly grounded on research (I do my best) - were to be so capriciously dismissed. Eh?

We won't go into who's "Sorrier."

(But then how very nice of Damian Lataan (g'day) to flesh out the question of "the US invasion of Afghanistan being a land-grab" with a few pertinent facts. And Damian's conclusion is (IMHO!) worth a repeat: "amazing coincidence!")

And as a BTW (aka 'by the way'), thanks for the back-handed compliment, always assuming that you had 'prioritised' your objection (for what it was worth); one assumes you had lesser - or dare I say it, no objection to the rest of my 'what is the end-game?' - speaking as you do with some familiarity?

-=*=-

Y'know, Jen, you remind me a bit'a me dear old ma? She was 'polled' once on behalf of a certain Mackerras; he came back - in person, like - to check me old ma's answers. He called her a 'statistical outlier.'

what is the end-game? 1927

Submitted on June 26, 2007 - 1:57pm.

 Subtitle: "follow the money!"

-=*=-

«[Narrator:]
The legend you are about to hear is true
Only the needle should be changed to protect the record

[St. George:]
This is the countryside
My name is St George
I'm a knight

Saturday, July 10th, 8:05 pm
I was working out of the castle on the nightwatch
when a call came in from the Chief
A dragon had been devouring maidens
Homicide
My job, slay him»

[Stan Freberg/St. George And The Dragonet]

-=*=-

Cast: 1) 'they,' the kleptocracy. 2) 'they,' the sheople. 3) 'we,' the witness/investigators.

-=*=-

The kleptocracy are those who 'control,' i.e. the 'front-men' politicians (aka puppets), the military force plus the Harvard Business School of Sharks (aka m/i-plex), the 'mouthpiece' MSM (aka venal, corrupt traitors), sundry (mostly r-wing) 'think-tank' (pseudo) academics and the dreadful neoCon cabal (of course), the Israel Lobby and any shadowy 'illuminati' or other 'banksters' - no specifics here (wha'd'ya expect?) - these shadows may exist or not, but this is not the place to trot out some to-be-poo-poo-ed conspiracy theory! - just looking for the facts:

[Knave:]
What's to describe
You see one dragon, you seen 'em all

[St. George:]
Would you try to remember, Sir
Just for the record
We just want to get the facts, Sir)

[ibid.]

I said 'no conspiracies;' what 'unites' the kleptocracy is that they all seem to be rowing in the same direction. Coordination, if it exists, must be on the QT. But conspiracy? Nah! When the choice is between conspiracy and a cock-up, we choose the cock-up every time. The only problem with this cock-up however, is that it's driven by greed beyond avarice and performed by murdering criminals, plus their accessories, the proxies and propagandists.

The kleptocracy in general, are amongst the fattest of the sometimes obscenely fat-cats.

The sheople® are the hapless, powerless multitudes (we at chezPhil do not belong, we generally don't 'do' TV - we try to keep our minds clean and fresh). Basically, the sheople do whatever they can, whilst doing what they must; food, clothing & a roof. All else - TVs, games, iPods, home-delivered pizza - is luxury; except that the (flat-panel, wide-screen) TV is now almost mandatory; a general must - for it is the instrument of control.

Then there's people like me'n you - not too sure about you; puzzling it all out.

-=*=-

1. The present crisis began in 2000 with the 'stolen election' of GWBush.

The judiciary failed utterly.

The MSM acted as a unified Bush cheer-squad.

The illusion of democracy collapsed.

It was a power-grab.

-=*=-

In the hiatus between 'election' and '9/11' we saw what could only be described as a pig-higorant hick from the (Texas) sticks. Coincidentally(?!) some time before this time, we also 'elected' our very own runt-on-a-rampage, starting in 1996. Just as the UK got their Bliar®. Coincidentally again(?!) it all changed - or so they tell us - when the twin towers fell - or were pushed (by parties un/known; WD forbids speculation). Now the US (with side-kick UK and hanger-on Aus) has gone on a thieving, murdering rampage, hence the wannabe hegemon and the poodle with dag

Terrorism? Debunked, see Pape's "Dying to kill."

Afghanistan was a land-grab.

Iraq is an oil-grab.

-=*=-

2. The present crisis began in the nineties, when Bush(the elder) then Clinton embarked on their own (mini) wars. What these two showed, is that both Repugs and Dummocrats will murder. This sort'a bipartisanship is toadally undemocratic.

-=*=-

3. The present crisis began in the '70s with the election and subsequent dirty (Lib/MSM/CIA?) putsch to displace Whitlam. (I dimly saw - through a film of my own tears - the tears of so many others...) It continued with the election of the Hawke/Keating governments when those two 'worthies' showed us that Labor could (and did) sell-out to the big end of town. It is rumoured that the current Labor mob have dumped any lefty-ideas. This sort'a bipartisanship is toadally undemocratic. Needless to say, as was the preceding dirty putsch.

-=*=-

4. The present crisis began with what many consider the illegal establishment of so-called 'modern-day' Israel. As if the actual establishment wasn't questionable enough, we got the King David Hotel atrocity and Deir Yassin massacre et al. Basically daaarlings, a 'nation' founded on blood, living on blood, none of which is theirs to shed - since it belongs to the former legal owners and their mates. Hence the illegal sprog.

The Israeli invasion of Lebanon was an attempted water-grab.

The Israeli invasion of Palestine was/is a land-grab.

-=*=-

5. The present crisis began with the A-bombing of the two overwhelmingly non-military, aka civilian targets in Japan. The history didn't start there of course; colonialism had been going on for yonks, but the nukular option - now on everyone's table - made things a bit more piquant, shall we say? Like, end of civilisation anyone?

The nuking of Japan was an intimidatory mass-murder life-grab.

-=*=-

6. The present crisis began perhaps with the fall of 'Bretton woods' under Nixon ("The Bretton Woods system was finally undone by the most destructive venture of the Pax Americana, its criminal war in Indochina..." - y'cn getcha own ref.) - or perhaps under Reagan ('deficits don't matter,' say) - but has really accelerated of late; the US no longer even bothers to inform us of just how much dough they're 'printing.' (Tip: squillions.) Along with the out'a control Japanese Yen and the out'a control Costello - we've got inflation (yeah. You wanna disprove it? Try here and here; Alan Curran - now known to be not his/her real name - never even acknowledged my hard work.) 'Asset-shortage,' whatever. Just far too much money sloshing around. Hard to understand where that's going.

But inflation is a savings/lifestyle-grab.

-=*=-

7. The present crisis began when the mining companies worked out that they could get resources for not much more than a song - plus the wages paid to the (AWA-conditions-depressed?) workers. In a nutshell: we is bein' robbed. See Perkins' "Hit Man" for more detail.

Currently, mining is a resource(our treasures)-grab.

-=*=-

8. The present crisis began with the 'ramp-up' of CO2 production. Could be the 'real biggie,' the one that actually does what nukular so far only threatens.

The greedastrophe is a goodbye-grab.

-=*=-

9. The present crisis continues now before our very eyes, with Howard sending in the Army to stop child-molesting. Q: will the army go into bedrooms?

Howard is a lying hubris-grab.

-=*=-

Not only is we bein' robbed, we're being lied to. Well, natch: we saw this 'in spades' over Iraq's non-existent WMDs. But not 'just' that, it's day in and day out, and the bigger the lie the better. Our troubles are in comparison small, there's the people 'under the gun' everywhere that the US, UK and Aus plus Israel want to steal some resource; the wannabe world hegemon plus its illegal sprog and the poodle with dag, all mass-murdering to enable theft (of oil, land and water) - if they want something, anything - then in they go, guns blazing DU-tipped death.

partly agree with Damian_1921

Submitted on June 23, 2007 - 11:11am.

 Re: Rhetoric and propaganda dies away; geo-political reality bites.

-=*=-

G'day Damian Lataan; thanks for your effective counter-propaganda work - there's lots to be none, and every bit helps (but only if enough sheople® were to appreciate such efforts.)

You may have noticed that SBS now regularly sends stuff with US accents; this probably 'goes over well' with any wannabe-Californicated sheople - but this sort'a pro-war slanted material (some also being relayed by the AusBC; what colossal nerve to allege left bias!) - is truly reprehensible, propagandising paid for out'a the public purse. Then there're the clips featuring the presumed to be Hollywood-groomed Israeli spokespersons...

An effective counter to any propaganda is to use one's own eyes and good native sense; one asks, for example, if it's asserted to be murder for oil, Q: are there any signs to confirm this? A: naturally enough, the answer is "Yes," see the US insistence that the (puppet) Iraqi government pass the largely US-drafted oil law, say, among other risible 'benchmarks.' (The whole benchmark thing is a ploy; as the Iraqis fail such 'tests' - as planned, the US says "See? We gotta stay!" - and they will, until the Dummocrats finally get the message. Q: too late? A: far too late for far too many Iraqis, perhaps 2mio dead since '91. Mostly due to the US, i.e. see Albright on 60 minutes - "worth it".) The propaganda spin being pushed about the oil law is 'revenue sharing;' the background to this 'sharing' (Haw!) being the 50-year span now being mooted for the brutal, murdering US-boot on Iraqi-neck occupation.

And as for Israel, Q: are their 'borders' being pushed ever further into erstwhile Palestinian 'native' territory? Q: is the perversely named IDF (hardly defensive, far more offensive) killing Palestinians using the very latest revoltingly murderous US whiz-bangery? (Blam! - out'a clear blue skies. Tut, tut - poor collaterals. The murdering trigger-pullers - possibly on both sides - obviously have no scruples. But whose land/water/oil is/was it?)

The geo-political reality of murder for spoil is cloaked in filthy, lying propaganda - which must be countered by all who can. What stands to be won is truth and justice; achieving that is the only reward I seek. (I mean, how else could I profit, daaarlings?) What drives the pro-murder propagandizers, one could wonder? (Tip: such propagandizers may also often be heard to say "Greed is good...")

not sorry, Margo_1837

Submitted on June 15, 2007 - 11:35am.

Subtitle: substantiate or withdraw, mk2.

Margo: Shall I give up? OK Phil, your very last post in this vein.

Me: Why should anyone give up, or worse, be forced to give up? You're a long time dead. Time enough then, and no rest for the wicked.

The only thing anyone might be forced to do is stick to facts; I feel impugned, unfairly impugned by stuff you moderated. Perhaps you might care to solve that?

«Margo: Hi Pаul. Yes, I chopped a bit. I don't want this thread to become a personal slanging match. As you may know, this thread led to the resignation of the writer of this piece from Webdiary. I know I'm being tough on editing all parties, but I really want this thread to get back on topic rather than descend yet again into personal abuse. Which is why I suggested wiping the slate clean on this thread and starting again.»

[from 'Questions and Liberty']

Some of this 'moderator comment' is IMHO a bit questionable, i.e. "this thread led to the resignation..." - is this a fact? Fascinating.

Then this: "...is why I suggested wiping the slate clean on this thread and starting again."

What a (suggested) luxury! But speaking for myself - as I often, almost exclusively do, I can't just simply ignore what I perceive as vicious slanders. Oh no!

In this frame (slander), let's take perhaps my central tenet: "NO WAR!" If I argue against war (and I do, continuously), then anyone aguing against me in this frame is arguing for war; the logic seems impeccable, also why the "with me or against me" meme is deployed. Sooo, I reckon that I have the perfect right to call any such opposing party a warmonger. Who can object to that? Or complain? And anyone who tries to call me bad names for arguing against war either needs his/her head read - or is simply wrong - or both. No ifs, ands or buts.

-=*=-

Margo, after your 'enough!' you allowed posts from both Mr Mоrrella and myself, posts which were probably 'on the way' before your 'stopper' became visible. Fair enough perhaps, but in Mоrrella's 'Questions and Liberty' almost all of his stuff that you allowed was, IMHO, toadally® scurrilous accusations, unsupported with any single shred of substance. I mean, that being allowed by you, Margo, as moderator/grounder. Really.

Then to add insult to injury, so's to say, you allowed another slanging-match piece gratuitously referring to me - 'The great man theory of history. So satisfying. So simple.' - by Eliоt Ramѕey on June 14, 2007 - 5:53pm. Exactly what does 'epistemology[1]' have to do with my generic challenge: "Dis/prove it!" Really again.

Lastly Margo, whether you acknowledge it or not, these two (Mоrrella, Ramѕey) appear to have come here primarily as disruptors. And they don't address the subject, so much as attack the person - for instance, me. First, they try to lay me out (alleging - without proof, see above, that I may be pushing propaganda - what a nerve! See my 'truth-seeker' etc claim), then they proceed to push their own pernicious brand of propaganda (for example, globalisation as 'cure-all'). One 'follows the money;' who benefits?

My comment: this is not some sort'a game; people, real people and lots of 'em (2mio Iraqis since '91?) are being slaughtered 'out there,' either directly or indirectly by USrael, and with the rest of the Anglo(Christian)CoW® all neatly summarised as: the wannabe world hegemon plus its illegal sprog and the poodle with dag, all mass-murdering to enable theft (of oil, land and water). I see my primary task as pointing this out; only agents wishing the slaughter-to-enable-theft to continue would seek to disrupt my work - or so it seems to me.

We get more and more distractions: 'No war ever justified?' All wars - apart from the current ones (see CoW®, mostly) - are in the past. It's the current ones which are, IMHO, both a) not justified and b) gotta be stopped. People can natter on about whatever they like, but reality should not be lost sight of (one might'a thunk) - and all the while, the gruesome greedastrophe® is getting ever-more unavoidable.

And I say again: your blog; do what you want. Just too bad, I suppose, if you (of all people) end up flushing it down the tor-let® tubes.

-=*end*=-

Ref(s):

[1] epistemology n. philosophy of knowledge.  epistemological adj. [Greek episteme knowledge] [POD]

objection_1837

Submitted on June 15, 2007 - 8:29am.

 Subtitle: substantiate or withdraw.

-=*=-

What exactly is this WD place anyway?

Is it a place where unsubstantiated personal attacks may be made? Seems like it, because Pau1 M0rrella has been allowed to make such; and more times than just this instance from yesterday:

The Sounds Of Liberty?!?!?

«And now Margo; the drum roll, and the final fling of desperation, for all those who venture into, what is the morass of internet propaganda: The character assignation. Phil (defender of the WD ethical realm) has never quite forgiven me, for correcting him, on what were, some dodgy statements. I could, and in fact, I did, point out that I do not appreciate being led on a merry-go-round of dodgy claims and sham links in an attempt to back up false statements.»

[Pau1 M0rrella on June 14, 2007 - 2:22pm]

Note: "for correcting him"

This statement, in context, is unsubstantiated, and IMHO non-substantiable - it is a false assertion.

Note: "sham links"

This statement, in context, is unsubstantiated, and IMHO non-substantiable - it is a false assertion.

Note: "attempt to back up false statements."

This statement, in context, is unsubstantiated, and IMHO non-substantiable - it is a false assertion.

-=*=-

To prove or disprove any assertion requires credible, checkable facts, no examples of which have been provided by this M0rrella fella. This person's motive(s) are IMHO questionable, for anyone wishing to investigate, here's his initial post and some subsequent traffic. IMHO, he attempts to impugn my integrity, as opposed to engaging in substantiated argument over any underlying facts.

-=*=-

enough!

«... Last chance guys. Debate the topic, not the man, or this thread will be closed.»

[Margo Kingston on June 14, 2007 - 3:03pm]

Sorry, Margo (but not too sorry), I cannot ignore the above deliberate slurs. And BTW, I'm not a 'guy,' you may call me a bloke - or a person; a man of the sheople® even - but never a 'guy,' OK?

You published the above unsubstantiated assertions; I'm taking this opportunity to point out that fact, and to request that the author be required to either substantiate or withdraw them.

Your blog; do what you want.

But before you decide, please recall that I see my main task as 'truth/justice/fairness-seeker.'

In this case - as in any other, except keeping in mind that this is WD, I'd like to see truth/justice prevail, and be seen to get a fair go.

A quick check of my records reveals possibly my first eml to you, Margo, on Wednesday, December 11, 2002 09:15 titled "re: Never give up your disbelief." (Root article still on the net, as the link shows.) Here's my eml start:

«G'day Margo,

One thing I haven't seen (doesn't mean doesn't exist) is analysis on the inclusion of E-Timor in the latest so-called "Osama" tape.»

[Phil Kendall to mkingston@smh.com.au]

My connection to WD grew from then, but my conception of it always was as a place of truth-seeking. Well? Yes or no, is it or isn't it?

If this 'substantiate or withdraw' request threatens this thread with closure, then rather than inflicting that punishment(?!), I would request you to please start another thread to feature this post.

Once more: your blog; do what you want.

civil discourse_1837

Submitted on June 14, 2007 - 10:03am

Subtitle: whither WD?

«G'day. Since I started Webdiary in 2000, I've envisaged it as a space for civil discourse between Australians of different political viewpoints – a democratic conversation.»

[Margo Kingston/Editorial Policy]

I'm supposing that the contents of the following:

Where Is This Stolen Oil?
... by Pаul Mоrrella on June 13, 2007 - 1:10pm

Margo: Hmmm. A true
... by Pаul Mоrrella on June 13, 2007 - 2:00pm

You Say Illiberal, I say Liberal
... by Pаul Mоrrella on June 13, 2007 - 2:11pm

Here we go....it's the "evil materminds behind world history"
... by Eliоt Ramѕey on June 13, 2007 - 2:29pm

Beware of 'The Claw'
... by Eliоt Ramѕey on June 13, 2007 - 4:44pm

Phil, Gary I am sure you have the heart in the illiberal place
... by Pаul Mоrrella on June 13, 2007 - 9:51pm

- are all perfect examples of your wished-for 'civil discourse,' eh Margo? I direct the question also to David R.

Lol. That obvious?

-=*=-

Anyone can have a proof-free blog - ask your mate 'over there;' that's one'a his specialities. Unsubstantiated discussions are toadally worthless. - Oh! Only IMHO, of course! Is WD to degenerate into ever more senseless blather; empty-headed nattering?

WD 'moderators' may take liberties; any 'cosmetic improvement' could obscure 'keyboard finger-prints,' say, and chopping out bits - like removing a "Prove it ain't so!" challenge - must be considered a bit undemocratic, if not outright autocratic/dictatorial. Hmmm? Is this sort'a manipulation how WD implements "free speech?" Not happy, Margo.

Again IMHO, the nature of the posts from both Mоrrella and Ramѕey indicate either ignorant interference or deliberate derailing/obstruction - i.e. they are time-wasters at best or simply 'trolls.' The only questions are two: a) are they sick, volunteer pro-murder for oil propagandists (as opposed to some sort'a 'professionals;' any difference being 'merely' the degree of criminality) and b) what is WD gunna do about 'em?

Tip: Allow them to waste ever-more of our Oh, so precious time?

As with the chaos in the remnants of old-Palestine, the illegally invaded now brutally occupied Iraq - and possibly/probably some/most/all of the other so-called "Al-Qaeda" trouble-spots, say, exactly whose interests are being served?

Tip: Follow the (grubby US oil) money!

-=*=-

All the while, the greedastrophe® gets ever more unavoidable, ever closer, ever more disastrous. How/where should we spend our last gasps? "On the Beach?" (But with no petrol for one last run of our Ferraris; the US having stolen it all? Just get in, take the pill.)

-=*end*=-

PS

«Not really, just a decade or so experience on and off similar forums.»

[Pаul Mоrrella on May 27, 2007 - 12:52pm]

Oh, do tell?

Web Results 1 - 2 of 2 for "Pаul Mоrrella". (0.12 secs)

Must'a all been on and off non-indexed forums until WD, eh?

Bye Pаul. Again. Bye Eliоt. Or should that be "Goodnight from him?"

Comments supporting objection to 200603484:

In the 1st instance, I lament somewhat that am no diplomat - sorry, but as a citizen of a democracy I don't think that I really need to be one (and besides, some/most/all diplomats *lie*; I do not stoop to that or any sort of baseness) - I just wish to pursue our rights as house-owners and occupiers. So I'm not here to grovel or sugar-coat, but to seek equality and justice. Although this is hardly the place to address the ugly McMansion philosophy - ACTPLA is approving them seemingly willy-nilly - there remains the fundamental concept of limited resources that we must all share. The resources here under discussion are access to views, sunlight and the sky. (Any effect on house-price values - as distinct from personal ones - will not be addressed herein.)

Please note: we sought out this (once?!) idyllic spot, specifically to be near to - and to view - the Big Monks mountain/skyline; the house was partly designed around this view, and to extend this amenity, we even added an extra window/sky-light on-the-fly during construction. We have lots of documentary mementos - i.e. photos, etc - available as evidence of this looong and intense interest, which I distinctly recall acquainting our neighbours with important aspects thereof. Our neighbours mentioned that they were on the verge of a 20-year project; our relationship to the Big Monks skyline has already been running for 20 years or so now - scouted '87/8, flew off it 1st in '89, negotiated purchase '92/3, built from mid-'95, and we would prefer our access to the skyline to endure for at least the next 20 years also, i.e. not to be wilfully and/or summarily removed as threatened by this proposal.

1. P3.1 "The privacy of dwellings and private outdoor spaces to be protected." Whilst building our own home, we came under the most intense scrutiny by PALM (now ACTPLA), prompted by what we regard were both unfair and unjustified complaints from the then-owners of #56 - even though our architect-prepared plans were approved as conforming to all applicable performance measures. Now what is proposed by #56 is an immense sight-obscuring structure to confront almost our entire house (East) and a full-length, full-visibility observation-platform balcony oriented towards our private open spaces (South) - with what we believe to be a Performance Criteria non-conforming design. Why that? Need I draw attention to the good old Aussie 'fair go?'

The design appears to be everywhere unnecessarily high; 2.7m UF ceilings, and a 3.59m ceiling to the dojo; 726mm floor-framing (ours is appr. 300mm) - plus the outsize 900mm West-facing, upwards-tilted eaves. Each of these over-sized items combines to exaggerate the impact on our sight-lines. The neighbours say they did react to my previously expressed concerns by dropping the roof-pitch from 10° to 5°, this reduces the impact from a potential 16° to 14° as seen from our office - but would still leave Big Monks obscured. The reduction on impact of the overhanging eaves of the dojo from a potential 26° to 23° is so minimal that it can only be described as 'risible' - since the 23° still totally blocks out our view not only of Big Monks but also most of the Eastern sky. One supposes that the planned impact could hardly have been greater, had they tried.

2. P3.5 "... to ensure no significant loss of amenity." The most serious aspect of the proposed re-development is the enormous Western aspect of the triple garage with dojo over. At 9.163m long, 7.399m high and with 5° elevated 900mm overhanging eaves it would form a 42° wide, 23° high sight-blocking blob - and all that on a 10.5m sight-line from our kitchen. This planned wall has the potential to a) obscure our sky in a quite major way - half of our kitchen window will view *almost nothing but this wall* (on the window, as little as appr. 2cm sky might remain visible), and b) including the proposed house-UF, our view to the Big Monks mountain/skyline will be completely obliterated, from the bath (specifically elevated to optimise the view to the skyline) and office, as well as from the kitchen. In addition, the blob will form a major sunlight excluder. The subsequent loss of amenity caused by building this blot on our landscape would be, to us, not just a permanent irritation but a deliberately neighbour-inflicted disaster.

In friendly discussions, our neighbours have not shown much if any willingness to minimise the impacts of the submitted plans, further than allowing that they could possibly reduce the eaves somewhat, and reduce the dojo ceiling height by 300mm - which are not significant improvements at all. Then, on the technical aspect: we had the existing garage on #56 surveyed (Nov'96, i.e. under a previous ownership), one result is that the NGL was measured at the foot of the 4.81m West-facing wall and reported to be 642.1 metres AHD. Based on this datum, we estimate that the non-conformities to the Performance Measure D1.2 Building Envelope of the planned new UF ceiling-heights (note: not the actual walls; we have not been given the data) at 0.9m (West-front) and 0.6m (East-rear), although the non-conformities must be somewhat greater than that. Apparently hardly trivial non-conformities, why that? But far more impressive is the non-conformity to Performance Measure D3.1 B, Minimum setbacks, East-rear UF on the plans; 3m instead of the prescribed 6/9m. That one appears to be an utterly gross non-conformity, again why that?

It would seem that other factors were given planning priority when compared to minimising the impact on us at #54. One could say 'fair enough' perhaps (IMHO the result is multiply *not*), and both sides of the fence are going to have to live (20+ years long?) with whatever consequences that may arise if these plans are allowed to proceed.

"Proposals, which do not meet the performance measures, may still be considered in terms of whether they meet the relevant objectives and criteria."

We consider that the proposal is in *serious* non-conformity of the "the relevant objectives and criteria," as detailed above. We wonder why ACTPLA has allowed/is allowing the proposal to proceed at all.

Thus we object to and seek relief from this proposal.

PS

1. Lose/lose.

The way it went, we at #54 were left with no good options; we could a) accept #56's proposal and so meekly cop the concomitant *horrendous* loss of amenity, or b) we could raise an objection and risk alienating #56. As my 'negotiating partner,' I believe Mr.#56 is an honourable man and wish him no ill.

IMHO, a win/win might have been possible, had #56 so wished.

2. Q: #56 at fault?

A: IMHO, they placed insufficient weight on #54's concerns. Apart from their own wishes (however reasonable), and noting the regulations, perhaps one could only say: they didn't think.

3. Q: ACTPLA at fault?

A: They are 'just' following orders?

If 'the orders' allow the imposition of McMansions (they obviously do), if those orders allow the drastic loss of a collateral's amenity (as they also obviously do) - then it's the rules that are crook.

"Town planning?" What a farce; and the ACTPLA workers - faced with such situations, probably have to 'cop-out' even if only to save themselves.

In truth, it's a failure of *leadership*.

4. Q: Is #54 at fault?

A: How? We did *bloody nothin'* mate! Even kept our heads (and shutters) down. But now we are threatened with - likely to get - an interminable future of vital amenity-loss and a state of extremely frustrated irritation - significantly reduced sun (*¼* East going), drastically reduced sky (*½* East going) and totally obliterated mountain/skyline views (*all* East going) - and simply no justice.

What was that about the good old Aussie 'fair go?'

objection to (re)Development Application 200603484

ACT Planning and Land Authority
16 Challis Street, Dickson ACT 2602
Email: actpla.feedback@act.gov.au
ph: +61 2 6207 1923

Dear Sir,

Re: Your letter to us of 24May'07, response deadline 8Jun'07.

Re: Single Dwelling Development Application 200603484
Block 10/53 Banks ACT.

We wish to object to this (re) Development proposal.

The grounds for our objection are:

1) Performance Measure D1.2 Building Envelope, West within 12m of UFL line.

2) Performance Measure D1.2 Building Envelope, East beyond 12m of UFL line.

3) Performance Measure D3.1 B, Minimum setbacks, East beyond 12m of UFL line.

4) Performance Criteria P3.1, "The privacy of dwellings and private outdoor spaces to be protected."

5) Performance Criteria P3.5, "Building walls to be sited and to be of length and height to ensure no significant loss of amenity to adjacent dwellings and private open spaces."


Yours faithfully,


-=*=-


Ref(s):

Plans: http://apps.actpla.act.gov.au/plandev/e-registers/singleres/singleresResults_new.asp?DA_no=200603484&block=10§ion=53&Submit=Submit

This eml prepared after reading:
Planning & Development
General Information
Getting help
http://apps.actpla.act.gov.au/plandev/generalinfo/help.htm

Which refers to:
http://apps.actpla.act.gov.au/aboutus/customer_support/customer_support.htm#lapac
Comment: "The page cannot be found."

Also possible:
http://apps.actpla.act.gov.au/aboutus/index.htm
Comment: "The page cannot be found."

Note also: "a sign on the land affected;"
Comment: There is no sign; none such has ever been seen by any of us.
Update: N/A for singleres.

Ref. Doc:
TERRITORY PLAN
APPENDIX III.1: RESIDENTIAL DESIGN AND SITING CODE FOR SINGLE DWELLINGS
http://apps.actpla.act.gov.au/tplan/Appendices/Appendix_III_1.pdf