During the last few weeks, every elected federal politician in Australia has
received a series of emails from members of the public. Digital 'read
receipts' prove that the vast majority have read them. Only two replied,
with one of them, on behalf of a prominent Senator, stating that he "will
not be initiating any further intervention into this matter".

This is not remarkable, as literally dozens of emails on the same subject
have met the same fate over the previous three months.

What is remarkable, however, is that, de facto, the repeated response
failures equate to open complicity with criminality and corruption.

THE CRIMES OF A STATE
In July 2005, Australian citizen, Schapelle Corby, who was facing 20 years
in an Indonesian prison, was awaiting her appeal.

On 5th July 2005, the then Australian Justice & Customs Minister,
Christopher Ellison, discovered the game changing information: that
Schapelle Corby's boogie board bag was the only one not scanned at Sydney
airport. Three days later, he withheld this vital primary evidence from her
lawyer. Six days later he withheld it again.

AFP Commissioner Michael Keelty had the same information. So did Prime
Minister John Howard.

Schapelle Corby was never informed, and this critical evidence was never
used to defend her.

This is just one example. Let's take another. Schapelle Corby checked her
bags in normally, without excess or fuss. The authorities later discovered
that they were 5 kg overweight on the Qantas system. Despite a handy 4.2 kg
of marijuana appearing in her bag on arrival in Indonesia, she was never
informed. This vital primary evidence was again withheld, and never used to
defend her.

More examples? There are literally hundreds. A small sample of the questions
recently asked of Australia's politicians, all of which have been ignored,
is presented below.

CORRUPTION
The point here is that this equates to corruption. The wilful withholding of
primary evidence from a court of law is illegal (perversion of the course of
justice). Wilfully lying to Parliament and its instruments is also an
offence (perjury). Covering up known criminal activities is a serious crime
in itself (criminal conspiracy).

The political benefits, of protecting the newly privatised Sydney Airport
Corporation, brushing AFP corruption under the carpet, and cosying up to a
foreign state, do not permit or excuse criminal and corrupt acts, even by
Ministers of State.

All those Australian MP's and Senators? They are well aware of this; all of
it. They have been sent material by members of the public on many occasions,
often begging them to take a stand and expose this travesty, or asking them
to demand an independent commission, or invoke an external police
investigation.

It is an international scandal, and an innocent woman is paying for it with
her life. Those involved in the offences described, remain immune from the
prosecution they should be facing. Canberra appears to be spotless and white
on the surface, when it is patently the exact opposite below the surface.

The Australian media, which lost its independence from vested interest
generations ago, is shamefully silent. Utterly and completely silent. There
has not been a solitary reference to any of this staggering information in
any mainstream organ. Instead they point fingers at impossible smears.

The situation has become one of integrity, or the lack of it; the integrity
of Canberra, and the integrity of the nation state of Australia.

THE TRUTH IS RESILIENT
The information proving all this has been published on the website of an
international research team known as The Expendable Project. The reports on
there contain the damning government emails; from Minister Ellison, Minister
Downer, Minister Ruddock, AFP Commissioner Keelty, and others.

It is important to view these items directly - to see them for yourself. In
the game of government corruption, and a puppet media interests, it is
essential not to take anyone's word for anything at all.

The best place to start, however, is to watch the Expendable film on the
front page. This was released two weeks ago, and it goes progressively
through each of the crimes of state, and the reasons why they were
committed. It has already been viewed by over 100,000 people. Despite the
media boycott, it is viral, and the global public's reaction to it is naked
anger and fury. Australians and non-Australians alike, are openly disgusted,
as evidenced by public comments on YouTube and elsewhere.

The film can be viewed directly on the Expendable website:
http://www.expendable.tv

Further documentation is available in the form of reference dossiers, the
first of which was released today (expendable.tv/p/expendable-dossier.html
<http://www.expendable.tv/p/expendable-dossier.html> ). The second dossier,
which is currently being completed, is scheduled to be submitted to a range
of international agencies. That legal sanction, against those guilty of
serious crimes in Australia, should have to be sought from outside
Australia, is in itself a further self-inflicted indictment of that state.
In cold human terms, it would appear that they would prefer the innocent
victim, Schapelle Corby, to die, devoid of human rights, on her cell floor.

THE GLOBAL PUBLIC
However, the seed of truth is being sown on a global scale, as the film is
being downloaded, and the Expendable website is being mirrored, by citizens
in every nation.

With the Australian Department of Defence, ripping and vulnerability
scanning the Expendable.TV website, almost on a daily basis, the producers
of the film are encouraging this, and are urging viewers to make their own
copies of both film and dossiers, and to distribute them.

The film itself states: "Future generations of Australians will look back on
the Schapelle Corby affair as one of the most shameful in the history of the
nation. They will view the actions of their government at the time with
disgust and contempt". But, so extreme, and so visible to Joe Public, is the
corruption demonstrated by 'Expendable', that unintentionally, Schapelle
Corby may be the catalyst for changing the nation in the short term.

The deep seated corruption it reveals will shock many Australians, not only
because it is inherent with the politicians involved, but because it
transcends departments, agencies, and a number of corporations. It reveals a
seam of ruthless self interest, which many will have previously sensed, yet
dismissed through lack of focus or clear-cut evidence. 'Expendable' provides
both, and may have a fundamental impact upon the  long term moral compass of
the nation.

However, if the ending of the Schapelle Corby affair isn't going to include
the death of the innocent victim, the citizens of the world have a critical
role to play, and it has to be played right now.

               A FEW OF THE QUESTIONS THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT REFUSE TO
ANSWER

               1. Why were Schapelle's bags 5kg overweight on the Qantas
system, when she checked in without excess charge ($175)? [Transit Report]

               2. Why was Schapelle or her lawyers never TOLD that her bags
were 5kg overweight on the Qantas system? [Supplementary Report]

               3. Why did AFP Commissioner Keelty tell the media that there
was no evidence of airport drug syndication two weeks before the verdict,
when this was clearly, demonstrably and utterly false? [Transit Report]

               4. Why did Minister Ellison withhold the vital information,
that ONLY the boogie-board bag was not scanned, when Schapelle's lawyer
asked, TWICE? [Transit Report]

               5. Why was this hidden from Parliament, when direct
questions were asked? [Transit Report]

               6. Why did John Howard, and his friend, Head of Sydney
Airport Corporation Ltd, Max Moore-Wilton, keep quiet about it, when they
both knew? [Transit Report]

               7. Why did the AFP never investigate the reason for this
missing screening data? [Transit Report]

               8. Why did Keelty, and the AFP, withhold all the other vital
evidence, including the information from the Kessing Reports? [Transit
Report]

               9. Why did the AFP and DFAT evade the forensic tests
Schapelle was begging for? [Mutual Evasion Report]

               10. Why did DFAT not invoke the MACM treaty to obtain the
sample of the marijuana which Schapelle begged them for, when they could
have? [Mutual Evasion Report]

               11. Why did Ellison tell a false story about marijuana
testing to a constituent? [Mutual Evasion Report]

               12. Why did the AFP and Qantas provide wholly contradictory
stories about the missing CCTV footage Schapelle Corby pleaded for? [Transit
Report]

               13. Why did the AFP tell Parliament that they couldn't
perform marijuana pollen tests, when they could, and indeed, had originally
offered to perform them? [Mutual Evasion Report]

               14. Why did the AFP refuse the services of a forensics
expert, who was able to perform them? [Mutual Evasion Report]

               15. Why did Foreign Minister Downer and Prime Minister
Howard endorse the original Bali trial, when they were well ware of the
multitude of legal and human rights abuses throughout? [Show Trial Report]

               16. Why did Ellison endorse the burning of the evidence,
when Schapelle Corby pleaded for it to be stopped? [Mutual Evasion Report]

               17. Why have DFAT endorsed and hidden the ongoing human
rights abuses of a mentally ill Australian citizen for seven years? [Health
Report]

               18. Why were ACLEI, when forced to examine the AFP's role,
directly and demonstrably complicit with the AFP in producing a report which
was an utter embarrassment to all parties [Whitewash Report]

               19. Why was a functionary, at the heart of the Howard regime
when the above abuses occurred, allowed to rubber stamp ACLEI's rubber
stamp? [Whitewash Report]

               20. Why was there a wholly unique flight delay pattern when
Schapelle passed through Sydney airport, and whilst her bag was on the same
baggage area as the Mocha Operation cocaine? [Transit Report]

               21. Why did the government force an Australian QC, Mark
Trowell, on to Schapelle Corby, and then hide when he decimated her appeal
by attacking her defence team to the media? [Insider Report]

               22. What was the precise role of Justice & Customs Minister
Ellison, the QC's long term friend, in this appalling situation? [Insider
Report]

               23. Why was there no comment when the QC subsequently
admitted that he was working for the government, and not for Schapelle
Corby, all along? [Insider Report]

               24. Why did Downer and Howard publicly call a standard flour
hoax a 'biological agent' and a 'murderous attack', when there was no
evidence at all to suggest it wasn't flour? [PowderGate Report]

               25. Why did neither of them say that the note included with
the flour didn't mention Schapelle Corby, and was written in Bahasa, when
they promptly blamed it on her supporters? [PowderGate Report]

               26. Why didn't Ellison immediately alert all parties, to
prevent the false (but support-wrecking) story from circulating around the
world, when he was informed by email at 6:35pm? [PowderGate Report]

               27. Why did the government seize Schapelle Corby's book
royalties, when she was still in legal appeal in Indonesia, when they knew
what signal this would send to Jakarta? [Political Seizure Report]

               28. Why did they bring the Australian judiciary into
disrepute, by extending its jurisdiction outside Australia, and holding
secret trials, at which Schapelle Corby was not even represented? [Political
Seizure Report]

               29. Why did they deny her the funds for another appeal, and
for medicine, even when they knew about the nature of the Bali trial, and
about the vital primary evidence they had themselves withheld? [Political
Seizure Report]

               30. Why has the ABC engaged a clear campaign of hostility
against Schapelle Corby and her family, which has included a number of known
tools of propaganda, and which has even required an apology for presenting
malicious allegations as fact? [Opinion Management Report]

               31. Why have the dozens of breaches of the Freedom of
Information Act, with respect to requests made on behalf of Schapelle Corby,
remained totally un-addressed [FOI Abuse Report]

               32. Why was the direct linkage of DFAT funding of
'scholarships' to Jakarta, for dozens of journalists, and subsequent hostile
reporting with respect to Schapelle Corby, not been investigated when
complaints were lodged with the Attorney-General's Department? [DFAT Network
Report]

               33. Why were the serious media abuses, submitted to the
government in 2011, excluded from the Finkelstein inquiry, particularly
those relating to the unlawful  activities of the broadcasting media?
[Expendable Documentary]

               34. Why has the Commonwealth Ombudsman supported the
government with respect to every complaint ever lodged with respect to
Schapelle Corby [Quango Report]