PALE, I'm sorry to have to say this, but I think it is you who is extraordinarily naive.

Your ONLY instrument of dealing with this issue is your self-proclaimed MoU with Muslim leaders, which appears to have gone nowhere, since you have since (bitterly) dissociated yourself from those same Muslim leaders (as stated on other threads).

I should remind you that Animals Australia has both Dr Malcolm Caulfield and barrister Graeme McEwen to name just two "on board", so it probably doesn't need the (again self professed) expertise of any others. And police officers deal with corruption every day, and naive is the last description I would apply to Mark Pearson. He is more media savvy and better informed than PALE could ever hope to be.

Just because, and if, as you claim, they were unaware of the AWB matter (something you happened to fluke on, and an issue in which the public interest was only surpassed by the degree of public apathy) means nothing. That meant nothing and led to nothing. Consider their other achievements and please stop trying to discredit everyone and anyone.

MOVE ON, for heavens sake, that was all years ago. If both groups chose to reject PALE they would have given reasons - and you would know what those were. Reading between the lines I suspect it had more to do with PALE's belligerent attitudes than anything else. And why does PALE even need to be associated with any other organisation anyway? PALE could certainly learn a great deal from the communication skills of those organisations for a start

As I have said so often before - do your thing and let the others do theirs - essentially - get over it. You will not change the landscape of animal welfare in this country by whinging on these forums about everyone else.

For what it's worth, the ship prevented from loading a couple of months ago because it failed AMSA's pollution regulations was the 25+ year old "Al Messilah"; I found the FCA judgment about it.

Nicky

Nicky
I am getting tired of explaining to you (or at least trying to) what issues must be dealt with before real improvements for Animals will happen.
We moved on ‘long’ ago. We are as well on excellent terms with Muslim leaders.

We joined them in a rejection of certain people sitting on head boards.

(Elections in February.)


Speaking of which you dismiss the importance of the MOU but let’s face it that’s what is required in order to phase out

I don’t fluke on things either investigations are my field.

You say not disclosing the AWB connection at the time of the AWB Enquiry is nothing. My God is you serious. That was the best opportunity to blow the live export issue right out of the water to the public. It was criminal not to have done so imop.
Or something else. Naïve at best or political C. Take your pick. Personally I think just naïve but who knows really. Andrew Bartlett replied he could get the media to report on it. Umm, I guess that is possible considering the media control and influence in this country and the protection given to the live animal trade.

The bottom line is as I said Animal Welfare requires people like Col involved somewhere along the way if for no other reason than his background understanding of the boys club.

Animal is a political joke in this country and elsewhere lets me wspa in your ear,.

I Can’t be bothered trying to explain it to you anymore. There is none so blind they can not see.
Best wishes for New Year anyway Nicky

Cheers

PALE, the AWB issue is ONLY an issue if the Australian public, and/or the media decide it is - and it, and they, didn't. What was being exported was not the concern, what was being done with it was. It was a fizzer. As I understand it PALE tried and failed to get media attention, so what makes you think anyone else could? You cannot force the media to report what you want reported. Get over it. It went nowhere.

I would be very surprised also if PALE would have any influence over AFIC elections.

You have been saying that this MoU is "what is needed". If that is the case and you have had one for something like five(?) years, what has it achieved? Bugger all, it seems. Try a new strategy because that's another thing that has gone nowhere.

There are also, from what I have seen, plenty of people involved in this issue who can mix it with the best of "old boys' clubs" - and they have the experience and knowledge to do so.

And please get over the "wspa in your ear" pun as well - it is so tired it is at death's door.

I hope that 2009 brings PALE into a new era that is less confrontational and uncompromising. There might then be some progress.

Nicky

Nicky

I thought I would give you the benefit of the dought that your not on olo to beat the drum of the veggies- but alas its clear you are.

I didnt say we would had influence over 'votes . I said we stood up with others which was appreciated and may I say not for the first time either. It probably wont be the last.

The same people supported us when others tried to gate crash our efforts without our presence.

I wouldlnt put in house Animal Welfare lawyers up against ours if I were you.

Pale have achieved a great deal in the last five years which is why everybody was scambling to try to take credit for our efforts especially with our work with Muslim Leaders of Australia- but others things also.


As I see it the warnings we were issued well before we opended pale were well and truely warranted. The ugly jealous unfriendly face of the veggie groups has raised its head again.

Re AWB and media your 'wrong' again- We did get the media looking at the connection and it was published.

It took them 6 weeks to investigate all our claims before it could go to print.

That proves that others could have got it out to media had they of known and if they were willing- including Andrew.

Sadly we waited far too long for a response from the others regarding AWB

We thought it was in the best interests of the animals for AA Mark etc to all come out together re the AWB.

Problem was they said they had no knowledge or idea of AWB being Live Exporters.

Thats pretty worrying though the eyes of others.

A bit slack at best and sus at worste.

PALE, perhaps you could provide a link - preferably more than one - to the published media (other than material written by PALE on various blogs trying to get anyone to take an interest). The reality is that NO-ONE was interested in saw this cross-corruption issue, it was aeons ago, and it is OVER. Get over it. Trying to accuse the media of corruption for not publishing your (apparently unproven) allegations doesn't really cut it - after all, all you know, it seems, is that Wesfarmers was sold. I vaguely recall someone commenting on another thread that the timeframe of that made it irrelevant anyway. It's basically a vague, unfounded claim without proper substantiation.

Quite frankly, knowing enough about the law and many lawyers, I'd be happy to back the lawyers I mentioned, and others I know, any day over those claimed by PALE, who seem to be notable for their absence of any comment or contribution to anything very much. Graeme McEwen, for example, is not an "in-house lawyer" for anyone; he is the Chair of the Victorian Animal Welfare (Barristers) Panel. Another you may want to look at is John Mancy, as well as those in WA who managed the "Al Kuwait" case.

One does not have to be "beating the veggie drum" simply because they disagree with PALE's strident, and poorly expressed opinions. These are the sorts of reasons why no-one wants to be associated with you. How many times do you need this pointed out?

You have yet to provide any evidence of PALE ever writing (rational and relevant - I've read the ones to the Democrats Animal Welfare Bill) submissions on anything, and what contribution, in reality, PALE has made to genuine animal welfare improvements here or anywhere else. That includes the to-date totally ineffectual MoU which also appears to have achieved nothing. It's clearly all just a lot of rhetoric with no substance. Just what do you do with your days? Then compare yourself with the likes of Mark Pearson and Lyn White, and ask yourself what you are REALLY in this for.

Nicky

Nicky

I have put the copy of the story run in the Gold Coast Bulletin up 'several' times.


I have no intention of going that far back at 4am.

The story runs over three posts and isn’t a link but a copy!

*- after all, all you know, it seems, is that Wesfarmers was sold.*

Yes that correct Nicky it was rather quickly. (Three weeks in fact )

That was directly after we contacted the authorities regarding the fact they had not disclosed their interests into the live animal trade to share holders.

It was quickly then sold to AWB.

Lyn White was very helpful with that at the time as I recall. ( I personally contacted her.
After which I posted a copy of the sale from Wesfarmers to AWB to her and Mark Pearson.

I am absolutely curtain Mark would not be denying that.

I also sent it to Kevin Rudd.


I think any lawyers fighting for animals is good.

Nicky quite frankly by your comments over three years it’s clear to me you know ZILCH about the law.

Which was one reason Robert offered to speak to you in person ( Lawyer) However you refused and to this day hide behind a false ID on OLO./

As for the Subs to the Animal Welfare Nicky pls remember AFIC working in conjunction with pale RSPCA QLD put in a very substantial document asking ALL Animal welfare groups to co operate.

Hugh certainly didn’t nor RSPCA National nor Animals Australia.
These are simply facts. One has to wonder why not?

Only then to attempt to hold meetings without our lawyers or pale presence.
As for the media if you don’t know the control the Government has I cant assist you.

Re RSPCA wanting more control and I agreed with Col that first we need to know what they would do with that power.

Would it be then handed back to DPI or AQIS?

IMOP I think it would. There is no way they could police it themselves and I had already pointed out the structure of RSPCA National.