 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Country Specific / Australian Group / March 2005"Hello, I'm John Howard, I've taken the unusual step of contacting you..."
Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching the Telecommunications Act, there remains the question of the various Privacy Acts, the Copyright Act and anti-spamming laws. Was the investigation too limited in its brief? Any opinions on this? "The Prime Minister's pre-recorded messages were sent to thousands of voters in marginal electorates with the greeting: 'Hello, I'm John Howard. I've taken the unusual step of contacting you with this recorded message'. Mr Horton said the ACA investigation sought to find out if the Liberal Party had unauthorised access to the Integrated Public Number Database which is a national database of all operational phone numbers in Australia - including private numbers. He said the authority found that the private numbers used during in the campaign had been sourced through a now-defunct database company Desktop Marketing Systems and not the IPND numbers database". (http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,12623911%5E15306%5E%5Enbv%5E,00.html) "Implications of Telstra v Desktop Marketing The decision clarifies that for databases to be protected by copyright in Australia, a low level of originality and creativity is required. It significantly enhances the rights of those who compile databases and confirms that database users may need to obtain permission from the owner of copyright in the database if they want to copy, adapt or transmit a database". (http://www.nswscl.org.au/journal/45/Stammer.html) "...corporate affairs spokesperson for Telstra's Sensis, said that three courts had found DtMS guilty of copyright infringement. 'Our intention is to protect the hard work and hours that have been put into developing [our] directories and also to protect the privacy of people listed in the directory', White said. Scibor-Kaminski and DtMS had appealed the decision several times in various Australian courts, but to no avail, he said. 'The impact of this will be felt in the marketplace in about six months time, because market researchers will no longer have access to information. Law enforcement people will be paying Telstra $5.50 a search, instead of $100 for a CD-ROM". (http://www.itnews.com.au/newsstory.aspx?CIaNID=15696) "Even though a database may be a compilation of facts available in the public domain, it may, in appropriate circumstances, nevertheless still be possible to prevent use or access to that database by resort to the law of confidential information. There are a line of confidential information cases which established that if information is acquired by means of expenditure of time, effort and money then the information should be protected against unfair exploitation notwithstanding that the information is available in the public domain. A duty of confidence was held to arise in relation to the format of publicly known information in Interfirm Comparison (Aust) Pty Ltd v Law Society of New South Wales16. In that case, information contained in a questionnaire for the purpose of determining the responses of New South Wales solicitors with respect to solicitors' practices was held to be confidential notwithstanding that much of the information was in the public domain. Bowen CJ held that the information was confidential: 'Having regard to the amount of skill, judgement and labour involved in the preparation' The protectable element was the 'particular expression and arrangement of the material, which arrangement was not known'. The usual rules in protecting confidential information should be applied to databases of confidential information. The database should, itself, clearly be marked as being confidential, appropriate confidentiality agreements should be entered into with anyone who is given access to the database and, if the database is electronic or web-based, technical measures should be put into place to limit access only to those authorised to do so" (http://www.claytonutz.com/downloads/SharpeCond.pdf) > Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching the > Telecommunications Act, there remains the question of the various Privacy > Acts, the Copyright Act and anti-spamming laws. Nope, political partys are specifically exempted from those laws, fuckwit. And there is no problem with the copyright act anyway, you silly little clown. >>Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching the >>Telecommunications Act, there remains the question of the various Privacy >>Acts, the Copyright Act and anti-spamming laws. > > Nope, political partys are specifically exempted from those laws, fuckwit. > And there is no problem with the copyright act anyway, you silly little clown. The original post called for an opinion about whether any Acts had been breached. Please notify your controller that you need some adjustment. There remains the question of whether the acts have been breached. If the information was not used for the same purpose that it was collected & the consent of the 'spamees' was not obtained, then various Privacy acts may have been breached. In the case of copyright, the high court clearly ruled that the copyright belongs to Telstra. While the Telecommunications act may not have been willfully breached, how is this different to a hacker using Telstra customer information stolen (hacked) from a Telstra server? Is it not clear that the information cannot be used without Telstra's consent? If there is no protection of IP, then what is the purpose of the Copyright act? Is Telstra taking steps to harvest this use of IP (at $5.50 per address)? And if not, has a precedent been set for other parties to use Telstra's White Pages freely? Anti-spamming legislation: "Messages from government bodies, political parties, religious organisations, charities and some messages from educational institutions are not subject to the unsolicited message prohibition or unsubscribe requirement, where the messages relate to goods or services provided by those organisations. The requirement to include accurate sender information still applies". Whilst Anti-spamming laws may exclude political parties, there remains the question of how spamees can unsubscribe themselves. If the "accurate sender information" in this case was John Howard, then perhaps all of those affected should contact John Howard to have themselves removed from the list. Does anyone know how this can be done? >> B J Foster <bjfoster@yahoo.com> wrote >>> Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching the >>> Telecommunications Act, there remains the question of the various Privacy >>> Acts, the Copyright Act and anti-spamming laws. >> Nope, political partys are specifically exempted from those laws, fuckwit. >> And there is no problem with the copyright act anyway, you silly little >> clown. > The original post called for an opinion about whether any Acts had been > breached. When the spam legislation specifically exempts political partys, clearly there can be no breach, fuckwit. > There remains the question of whether the acts have been breached. Nope. > If the information was not used for the same purpose that it was collected & > the consent of the 'spamees' was not obtained, then various Privacy acts may > have been breached. Nope. Reams of your mindless sh.t flushed where it belongs. > Is it not clear that the information cannot be used without Telstra's > consent? If there is no protection of IP, then what is the purpose of > the Copyright act? Is Telstra taking steps to harvest this use of IP (at > $5.50 per address)? And if not, has a precedent been set for other The $5.50 per *enquiry* is the fee that Telstra charges Law Enforcement areas for searches requested > Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching the > Telecommunications Act, there remains the question of the various Privacy [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Any opinions on this? ZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz DTMS did not have private numbers in it. It was compiled from the telstra whitepages phone books which do not include private numbers. How can they *honestly* say they got the private numbers from DTMS?  SignatureEnjoyDialup - You know you want to... mail=valid required when replying http://www.EnjoyDialup.info * Owner of Curt Cerb's arse * > Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching the > Telecommunications Act, there remains the question of the various Privacy [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > to do so" > (http://www.claytonutz.com/downloads/SharpeCond.pdf) > Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching the > Telecommunications Act, there remains the question of the various > Privacy Acts, the Copyright Act and anti-spamming laws. I don't believe it was, certainly not against the Spam Act. The gov was smart to only make it an offense for commercial messages, not political. >> Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching the >> Telecommunications Act, there remains the question of the various [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > smart to only make it an offense for commercial messages, not > political. This does not explain how they got hold of private phone numbers. Their explanation is a lie, so they must have used federal databases. SignatureEnjoyDialup - You know you want to... mail=valid required when replying http://www.EnjoyDialup.info * Owner of Curt Cerb's arse * >>> Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching the >>> Telecommunications Act, there remains the question of the various [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> smart to only make it an offense for commercial messages, not >> political. > This does not explain how they got hold of private phone numbers. Their > explanation is a lie, so they must have used federal databases. Or maybe they never did get hold of any silent line numbers at all. Bet that was just another labor lie. >>>> Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching >>>> the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Bet that was just another labor lie. They would have access to them via telstra, but not via DTMS which they claimed to have gotten it from. SignatureEnjoyDialup - You know you want to... mail=valid required when replying http://www.EnjoyDialup.info * Owner of Curt'C's arse * >>>>> Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching the >>>>> Telecommunications Act, there remains the question of the various [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> >> Bet that was just another labor lie. > They would have access to them via telstra, You dont know that. > but not via DTMS which they claimed to have gotten it from. Or some stupid journo completely mangled the story and they did in fact use the DTMS and didnt call any silent lines except those that had been made silent AFTER they had been in the DTMS. ... >>but not via DTMS which they claimed to have gotten it from. > > Or some stupid journo completely mangled the story and they did > in fact use the DTMS and didnt call any silent lines except those > that had been made silent AFTER they had been in the DTMS. Or some stupid newsgroup automaton completely mangled its logic and failed to interpret typical public servant-speak >> EnjoyDialup <EnjoyDialup@HyperOz.com> wrote >>> but not via DTMS which they claimed to have gotten it from. >> Or some stupid journo completely mangled the story and they did >> in fact use the DTMS and didnt call any silent lines except those >> that had been made silent AFTER they had been in the DTMS. > Or some stupid newsgroup automaton completely mangled its logic and failed to > interpret typical public servant-speak Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of your predicament better than that pathetic effort, desperately w.nking child. MACRO!!! He sent a macro. than means he lost! SignatureEnjoyDialup - You know you want to... mail=valid required when replying http://www.EnjoyDialup.info * Owner of Curt'C's arse * >>> EnjoyDialup <EnjoyDialup@HyperOz.com> wrote > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of your predicament > better than that pathetic effort, desperately w.nking child. > >>> Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching the > >>> Telecommunications Act, there remains the question of the various [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Bet that was just another labor lie. What a typical Nazi response. Short, abusive and off-the-point. >> >>> Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching >> >>> the [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >> > What a typical Nazi response. Short, abusive and off-the-point. That is the definition of Rod! SignatureEnjoyDialup - You know you want to... mail=valid required when replying http://www.EnjoyDialup.info * Owner of Curt'C's arse * ... >>This does not explain how they got hold of private phone numbers. Their >>explanation is a lie, so they must have used federal databases. > > Or maybe they never did get hold of any silent line numbers at all. > > Bet that was just another labor lie. As it happens, the ACA has confirmed that silent numbers were used, that *some* of the silent numbers were previously listed (i.e. some other were not LOL), and that *all* of the silent numbers would be investigated. However, the ACA also stated that there was "no breach of regulations because the spam material related to a non-commercial company and there was an exemption for political parties to spam voters". Nice one - the "non-commercial" company involved is apparently owned by Howard's son. Oops. > This does not explain how they got hold of private phone numbers. Their > explanation is a lie, so they must have used federal databases. Or the auto-dialer just used random numbers... you know 8374-4321 8374-4322 etc etc >>This does not explain how they got hold of private phone numbers. Their >>explanation is a lie, so they must have used federal databases. > > Or the auto-dialer just used random numbers... you know 8374-4321 > 8374-4322 etc etc Nope. The DTMS data was "crossed" with other databases for optimum targeting in marginal electorates >> This does not explain how they got hold of private phone numbers. Their >> explanation is a lie, so they must have used federal databases. > > Or the auto-dialer just used random numbers... you know 8374-4321 > 8374-4322 etc etc This would be a very bad idea because it would hit business many times in a row if they have a rotary group. It would piss people off. It would also waste a lot of calls to fax machines. I believe doing such a thing is also in breach of the telecommunications act. ie. one of Austell rules. SignatureEnjoyDialup - You know you want to... mail=valid required when replying http://www.EnjoyDialup.info * Owner of Curt'C's arse * >> EnjoyDialup <EnjoyDialup@HyperOz.com> wrote >>> This does not explain how they got hold of private phone numbers. Their >>> explanation is a lie, so they must have used federal databases. >> Or the auto-dialer just used random numbers... you know 8374-4321 8374-4322 >> etc etc > This would be a very bad idea because it would hit business many times in a > row if they have a rotary group. It would piss people off. It would also > waste a lot of calls to fax machines. I believe doing such a thing is also > in breach of the telecommunications act. ie. one of Austell rules. You're wrong on that last, and Austel is long gone as well. >>>>This does not explain how they got hold of private phone numbers. Their >>>>explanation is a lie, so they must have used federal databases. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > You're wrong on that last, and Austel is long gone as well. All hypothetical and irrelevant because the ACA confirmed that DTMS had been used. Oops, they didn't realise that DTMS data was copyright Telstra. >>>>>This does not explain how they got hold of private phone numbers. Their >>>>>explanation is a lie, so they must have used federal databases. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> >> You're wrong on that last, and Austel is long gone as well. > All hypothetical and irrelevant because the ACA confirmed that DTMS had been > used. Not hypothetical or irrelevant to point out that he is just plain wrong on what he claimed is illegal under the telecoms act. > Oops, they didn't realise that DTMS data was copyright Telstra. Completely irrelevant to USING it to make phone calls, fuckwit. >>>>>>This does not explain how they got hold of private phone numbers. Their >>>>>>explanation is a lie, so they must have used federal databases. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Not hypothetical or irrelevant to point out that he is just plain > wrong on what he claimed is illegal under the telecoms act. Whether or not rotary dialing is a breach of the telecommunications act is irrelevant since the ACA has stated that DTMS data was used. Secondly, the phone spam was *targeted* (correlated with other database to improve targeting) and that is completely inconsistent with mindless rotary dialling. >>Oops, they didn't realise that DTMS data was copyright Telstra. > > Completely irrelevant to USING it to make phone calls, fuckwit. The high court established that the data was owned by Telstra. The ACA found that the data was not obtained from Telstra. It follows that the data must have been stolen - this would be a breach of the Crimes Act. Try to keep up Speedy boy > >>>>>>This does not explain how they got hold of private phone numbers. Their > >>>>>>explanation is a lie, so they must have used federal databases. [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > It follows that the data must have been stolen - this would be a breach > of the Crimes Act. Nope. I have a copy of an old DTMS. I can use it as much as I like, its not a crime. The breach of copyright issue is b/w DTMS and Telstra, there are no issues with the end-user who bought the DTMS software before it stopped being made >>>>>>>>This does not explain how they got hold of private phone numbers. > [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > The breach of copyright issue is b/w DTMS and Telstra, there are no issues > with the end-user who bought the DTMS software before it stopped being made Oh I see - so what is the point of the ruling that Telstra owns the IP? Please explain where 'use' begins and end >>>>>>>>>This does not explain how they got hold of private phone numbers. >> [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] >> The breach of copyright issue is b/w DTMS and Telstra, there are no issues >> with the end-user who bought the DTMS software before it stopped being made > Oh I see Nope, you never do, you wanked yourself blind long ago. > - so what is the point of the ruling that Telstra owns the IP? To stop DTMS flogging their product, fuckwit. > Please explain where 'use' begins and end Read the copyright act. >>>>>>>This does not explain how they got hold of private phone numbers. Their >>>>>>>explanation is a lie, so they must have used federal databases. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >> Not hypothetical or irrelevant to point out that he is just plain >> wrong on what he claimed is illegal under the telecoms act. > Whether or not rotary dialing It aint rotary dialing. > is a breach of the telecommunications act is irrelevant since the ACA has > stated that DTMS data was used. Not irrelevant to point out that he is just plain wrong on what he claimed is illegal under the telecoms act. > Secondly, the phone spam was *targeted* (correlated with other database to > improve targeting) and that is completely inconsistent with mindless rotary > dialling. Irrelevant to point out that he is just plain wrong on what he claimed is illegal under the telecoms act. >>> Oops, they didn't realise that DTMS data was copyright Telstra. >> Completely irrelevant to USING it to make phone calls, fuckwit. > The high court established that the data was owned by Telstra. Completely irrelevant to USING it to make phone calls, fuckwit. > The ACA found that the data was not obtained from Telstra. Completely irrelevant to USING it to make phone calls, fuckwit. > It follows that the data must have been stolen Wrong again. Breach of copyright aint theft. > - this would be a breach of the Crimes Act. Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a f.cking clue. How odd that no one ever got charged with theft, fuckwit. ... >>It follows that the data must have been stolen > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > How odd that no one ever got charged with theft, fuckwit. Yes, indeed. The (Liberal) government circumscribed the investigation around whether or not the IPND had been used, knowing full well that it had not. > ... >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > The (Liberal) government circumscribed the investigation around whether or not > the IPND had been used, knowing full well that it had not. Just another pathetic little conspiracy theory, child. ... >>>How odd that no one ever got charged with theft, fuckwit. >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Just another pathetic little conspiracy theory, child. Thanks for that, now we all feel a lot better that *you* have confidence that the Liberals are upholding the constitution >> B J Foster <bjfoster@yahoo.com> wrote >>>> How odd that no one ever got charged with theft, fuckwit. >>> Yes, indeed. >>> The (Liberal) government circumscribed the investigation around whether or >>> not the IPND had been used, knowing full well that it had not. >> Just another pathetic little conspiracy theory, child. > Thanks for that, now we all feel a lot better that *you* have confidence that > the Liberals are upholding the constitution The voters clearly dont give a flying red f.ck, child. And there is NO constitutional issue with their telemarketing anyway, fuckwit. >>>>>How odd that no one ever got charged with theft, fuckwit. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > And there is NO constitutional issue with their telemarketing anyway, fuckwit. Correction: There is *officially* no constitutional issue, since the question was excluded from the ToR >>>>>>How odd that no one ever got charged with theft, fuckwit. >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >> And there is NO constitutional issue with their telemarketing anyway, >> fuckwit. > Correction: Nope. > There is *officially* no constitutional issue, since the question was excluded > from the ToR There never ever was any 'constitutional issue', you silly little pig ignorant w.nker. > Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching the > Telecommunications Act, there remains the question of the various > Privacy Acts, the Copyright Act and anti-spamming laws. [SNIP] > (http://www.claytonutz.com/downloads/SharpeCond.pdf) Who gives a *sh.t*, it is all political *BULLSHIT*. What I reckon is funny is that my answering machine took John Howard's call and I missed half of it cause he started talking as soon as the machine picked up the call and he didn't wait until after the tone! :) SignatureThe views I present are my own and NOT of any organisation I belong to. 73 de Simon, VK3XEM. http://www.aca.gov.au/pls/radcom/client_search.client_lookup?pCLIENT_NO=157452 VoIP http://www.TALKonIP.com.au/ > > Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching the > > Telecommunications Act, there remains the question of the various [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > :) Umm, I don't think John rang you personally. It just *may* have been a recording. Ken >> Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching >> the Telecommunications Act, there remains the question of the various [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > :) This is known as 'B2B'. Rod Speed is cutting edge > Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching the > Telecommunications Act, there remains the question of the various [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Any opinions on this? ... Thank you all, for the responses. It is clear that there are several opportunities to pursue the Liberal Party for breaking the law. In the case of anti-spam laws, it appears that the rules were followed to the 'T', including the provision of "accurate sender information". We are grateful to the legislators for inclusion of this requirement and no doubt some people will not miss the option to contact John Howard personally to request that he removes their names from the spam list. >> Whilst the inquiry might have cleared the Liberal Party of breaching the >> Telecommunications Act, there remains the question of the various Privacy >> Acts, the Copyright Act and anti-spamming laws. >> Was the investigation too limited in its brief? >> Any opinions on this? > Thank you all, for the responses. It is clear that there are several > opportunities to pursue the Liberal Party for breaking the law. Just another of your pathetic little desperately w.nking fantasys. They broke no law at all, fool. > In the case of anti-spam laws, it appears that the rules were followed to the > 'T', including the provision of "accurate sender information". > We are grateful to the legislators for inclusion of this requirement and no > doubt some people will not miss the option to contact John Howard personally > to request that he removes their names from the spam list. Pathetic, really. John Howard is a Great Australian Patriot and should be treated with respect. He is a National Living Treasure. "James Bell" <bellj@telstra.com> said > John Howard is a Great Australian Patriot and should be treated with > respect. > > He is a National Living Treasure. A lot of treasure lies on the ocean floor. John Howard just lies. SignatureKwyj. (Remove my smelly jocks to reply by email) > John Howard is a Great Australian Patriot and should be treated with > respect. > > He is a National Living Treasure. I'd like to see him buried > John Howard is a Great Australian Patriot and should be treated with > respect. > > He is a National Living Treasure. Treasure should obey the law Patriots obey the law >> John Howard is a Great Australian Patriot and should be treated with >> respect. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Patriots obey the law http://network.news.com.au/image/0,10114,425756,00.jpg But he is neither a Treasure nor a Patriot SignatureSir Jean-Paul Turcaud Exploration Geologist Australia Mining Pioneer Discoverer & Legal Owner of Telfer, Kintyre & Nifty Mines The Great Sandy Desert of Australia Founder of the True Geology Mobile +33 (0)6 68 99 43 84 ~~Ignorance Is The Cosmic Sin, The One Never Forgiven ! ~~ >>> John Howard is a Great Australian Patriot and should be treated with >>> respect. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://network.news.com.au/image/0,10114,425756,00.jpg Turd-caud!!! How are you? Still sending that earthquake to Sydney? > But he is neither a Treasure nor a Patriot > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > > > http://network.news.com.au/image/0,10114,425756,00.jpg For your govern, Dudes ! Copy of reply on sci.geo etc and aus.etc ! Get it up your arse where your brain ticks ! ________________________________ Just get your facts right, Ralph ! There are many places on the web, where information* can be found on that matter. It will avoid you looking like a fool with some : QUOTE he apparently, based on information posted here ! UNQUOTE If you don't know, either you learn or you shut up ! ... and I take it for granted that you never in your life found any worth while mineral deposits... .... ... never further looked for something to be found ... reciting publicly the Newmont / Newcrest / BHP and WMC, BORAL 's breviary is really pathetic and obviously confirm my assessement of a very gullible and weak mind indeed !!! ... further you have no clue about Geology and especially True Geology ! So what the game ? Playing Mr Interesting or stooping low in front of Mining & Financial Criminals ??? Nom De Dieu, Mais C'est Pas Possible !!! NOW Ralph , Just know that the 40 original claims were REGISTERED by the Newmont & BHP Mining Criminals but PEGGED by another companies belonging to the BORAL Criminals, and which companies ( Narla & Day Dawn ) scuttled themselves conveniently after having proved the show ! ... as the Newmont / Newcrest Filth put it : QUOTE ... they just passed on their claims onto us for 15, 000 Dollars, since the show did not come up to their expectation ! UNQUOTE .... after having spent 800, 000 dollars in drilling and costines by the way ! What a most marvellous pack of Sons of Bitch those Newmont / Newcrest / BHP / BORAL and sundries ... as well as them Political Hierarchy friends in the WA and Federal Parliaments indeed ... blocking a Royal Inquiry into their Crimes since 30 years exactly to day !!! What was involved then were not 300 acres claims but 100 km² Reserves. My main discoveries in the Great Sandy Desert was a 2,400 km² show which I proposed to that Newmont / Newcrest / BHP / WMC FILTH ! A Reserve of 100 km² cost in the 70s was One Million Quids + all exploration expenses tied up with it during a 5 years period ! I don't really remember now how many Reserves the Mining Criminals took over, since I am unable now to re-open that huge file, but it was about a dozen !!! and in any case they control the lot of the original show now ! Just know that before me, NEVER any claim had been pegged in the Great Sandy Desert nor any show of value had been found indeed ! I paved the way as a Mining Pioneer to all those who followed ! But out of it I received NOT a single Cent NOR a single Thanks for the estimated 100 US Billions Mining discovery .... Neither the Western Australian Government gave me the right bounty coming with the discovery of a new Goldfield, nor of course the prestige coming with it ! .... A thing they can certainly stick up their f...u...c...k....e...n arses Only insults, denial, calumnies, deaf silence, cold shoulder was my lot ... and there is no turning back the hands of time ! What has been done is written down for ever .... but unfortunately for all that Mining & Political Manure : "Je commande et la Nature obeit à ma voix " and I have ordered no Rain for the Land of Bastards 7 years ago ... and the snare is chocking the beast now indeed ! (continued ) Just know that every time a claim is lodged for base metals IT AUTOMATICALLY INCLUDES PRECIOUS ONES on the claim papers tied up to the datum post and to the copy lodged at the Warden , and there are never been a diversion from that rule in the hundred of claims I pegged while with a Major US Exploration Company, or while as an independent Mining Prospector pegging my own claims ( approx 33 or 37 in all to my name ) Just know that the Mining Criminals of Newmont, Newcrest, BHP, WMC & BORAL screwed up in the process as well thousands of Narla & Day Dawn shareholders and this of Billions of dollars Just know that the Corporate prospector who denounced that Financial & Mining Legerdemain was plainly murdered ! His name was Bert Rutherford and to this day none as yet has found his burial ground ! ... and let it be known from that day onwards as THE RIGHT HON. BERT RUTHERFORD The Right Hon. Bert Rutherford fully deserves that Title for his Gallantry and Raw Courage indeed, and certainly more than some Gutless & Greedy Political Bastards I can name here ! Just know that before you open your f...u...c...k...e...n . fat mouth next time, Ralph, just be sure to clean it beforehand with the proper length of toilet paper ! Spilling the Mining Criminals ' calumnies on our exclusive Australian and related ng-s , is showing indeed no regards for that high class company ! Just know that there is still a ROYAL INQUIRY PENDING required in the WA Parliament by a former WA Attorney General on the Mining Criminals Blood and Financial Crimes ! ... and there is no Statute of Limitation for A Royal Inquiry ! In clear if tomorrow such Royal Inquiry is imposed _ as I may require it before returning to Australia _ the whole Telfer Mine with other associated Great Sandy Desert Discoveries will reverted to me in virtue of the Royal Principle that : QUOTE Anything demonstrated acquired through deceit has to be reverted to original owner ! UNQUOTE The time is passed for sterile quibbling and argufies ... the time is for punishment ! ... and remember that after 7 years duration, the Divine Drudging Drought is still making great progress .... AND AT THIS POINT IN TIME THIS IS ONLY WHAT MATTERS !!! ... The time of recognition or gratitude is long gone, and 35 years later I really could not give two hoots for it, especially coming from definitive & miserable mongrel Bastards ... No regards SignatureSir Jean-Paul Turcaud Exploration Geologist Australia Mining Pioneer Discoverer & Legal Owner of Telfer, Kintyre & Nifty Mines The Great Sandy Desert of Australia Founder of the True Geology Mobile +33 (0)6 68 99 43 84 ~~Ignorance Is The Cosmic Sin, The One Never Forgiven ! ~~ For example *"THE GOLDEN RULE" "Gold and Intrigue in the Desert" "The true story of the discovery of the Telfer gold mine" Author : Bob Sheppard, President of the Australian Prospectors' Union http://www.tnet.com.au/~warrigal/ Published in Perth WA 15th Dec 2002 "Ralph Nesbitt" <ralph-nesbitt@sbcglobal.net> a écrit dans le message de news: Gje2e.5198$c76.5078@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com... > >> Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud wrote: [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > a legal claim to the gold discovered in the process of mining the copper. > Ralph Nesbitt > Get it up your arse where your brain ticks ! Take your own advice. CARE ABOUT YOUR DESPERATE DROUGHT CONDITIONS ! OR SOON YOU WILL BITE THE DUST INDEED SignatureSir Jean-Paul Turcaud Exploration Geologist Australia Mining Pioneer Discoverer & Legal Owner of Telfer, Kintyre & Nifty Mines The Great Sandy Desert of Australia Founder of the True Geology Mobile +33 (0)6 68 99 43 84 ~~Ignorance Is The Cosmic Sin, The One Never Forgiven ! ~~ >> Get it up your arse where your brain ticks ! > > Take your own advice. > For your govern, Dudes ! > Copy of reply on sci.geo etc and aus.etc ! > Get it up your arse where your brain ticks ! > ________________________________ Hey Turd.. you aren't related to this clown are you? http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/strange/routhighcourt.htm > Patriots obey the law Really? What drugs are you on? Perhaps a bit of reading of, for example, American Civil War history.. > John Howard is a Great Australian Patriot and should be treated with > respect. > > He is a National Living Treasure. Interesting opinion. My differs a little from yours. Still, I´d love the meet the guy... alone... even for just a minute. Signature/Jeßus/ Telstra: `We´re not happy unless you're not happy´ |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.