Is Australia Becoming a Repressive Government? - National Censorship Plan

  • metta

    Posts: 39090

    Dec 17, 2009 10:24 PM GMT
    Great Firewall of Australia will nationally block sites appearing on a secret, unaccountable list




    http://www.boingboing.net/2009/12/17/great-firewall-of-au-1.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+boingboing%2FiBag+%28Boing+Boing%29&utm_content=FaceBook


    http://alturl.com/z4e9
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2009 10:25 PM GMT
    *sneers* Yes.. Well.. I can see a class action lawsuit happening soon..............
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 1:39 AM GMT
    Kevin Rudd goes to church, what else do you expect? He is just another Tony Blair.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 1:47 AM GMT
    All governments are becoming repressive. It's just a general trend. What do you think "Homeland Security" is?

    In Canada, it's called the "Ministry of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness". In Britain, well, in Britain, it's been there for longer and is more refined and high tech. They are the most surveilled society on earth.

    All governments are finding ways to try to introduce internet censorship, curb free speech, curtail all freedoms and rights; this is just a general trend in the west. More often than not, it is done under the name of "national security" and "fighting terror."

    I believe it was Thomas Jefferson who said, "Those who give up liberty for security... deserve neither."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 1:49 AM GMT
    Yep. Possibly the dumbest legislation this government has introduced.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 1:56 AM GMT
    Seems to be the pattern of the Commonwealth these days - Uganda's going to kill gay people, Australia is going to come up with access limitations to rival China, and Britain is stuffed with cameras as well as increasingly oppressive limitations on speech through defamation law/limitations on criticizing religion. I'm really beginning to appreciate the advantages of entrenchment and strong courts in constitutional systems.

    metta8 saidGreat Firewall of Australia will nationally block sites appearing on a secret, unaccountable list




    http://www.boingboing.net/2009/12/17/great-firewall-of-au-1.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+boingboing%2FiBag+%28Boing+Boing%29&utm_content=FaceBook


    http://alturl.com/z4e9
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 2:04 AM GMT
    abelian0 saidSeems to be the pattern of the Commonwealth these days - Uganda's going to kill gay people, Australia is going to come up with access limitations to rival China, and Britain is stuffed with cameras as well as increasingly oppressive limitations on speech through defamation law/limitations on criticizing religion. I'm really beginning to appreciate the advantages of entrenchment and strong courts in constitutional systems.



    Hate to break it to you, but the US is heading down that path faster than most Commonwealth nations. Homeland Security is there to be the giant Orwellian big brother apparatus; New York is following London's example by installing a "ring of fire" of surveillance; the laws have been changed to allow the military to engage in policing activities, a violation of the Possee Comitatus Act; Halliburton got multi-hundred million dollar contracts to build hundreds of "detention centers" around the US to house millions of people in the event of an emergency. Changes to laws and successive executive orders have made the declaration of martial law a much easier thing to accomplish. The NSA spies on ALL internet and telephone traffic, courtesy of the telecom companies, which were granted immunity from legal persecution. Police are becoming more repressive as training alters, and euphemisms like "pain compliance" justify the use of tasers. Torture hasnt, nor will it, be going anywhere. Obama as a Senator actually voted FOR the law that made the torture of anyone, including US citizens, LEGAL. (Military Commissions Act, look it up).

    Yeah, sorry. So much for your "constitutional system" with "strong courts".
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 2:05 AM GMT
    Isn't that the truth? I fear the government more than any terrorist, for my part.

    Politics is sort of inherently flawed in this way - the only people who seek out office are otherwise unproductive busybodies who have a burning passion to tell other people what to do. People who are so obsessed with the idea of attaining this ability that they are willing to lead lives of extraordinary boredom just so that they don't come across poorly to some demographic. So nauseating.

    This is why I'm a libertarian.

    MeOhMy saidAll governments are becoming repressive. It's just a general trend. What do you think "Homeland Security" is?

    In Canada, it's called the "Ministry of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness". In Britain, well, in Britain, it's been there for longer and is more refined and high tech. They are the most surveilled society on earth.

    All governments are finding ways to try to introduce internet censorship, curb free speech, curtail all freedoms and rights; this is just a general trend in the west. More often than not, it is done under the name of "national security" and "fighting terror."

    I believe it was Thomas Jefferson who said, "Those who give up liberty for security... deserve neither."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 2:11 AM GMT
    I by no means am saying the US is a shining beacon of freedom - and agree Obama has been awful with respect to advocating the "Imperial Executive". However, we still don't have cameras watching every little thing we do. I can still criticize religion or chiropractors and not be sued blind. As you yourself acknowledge, we're learning from the lessons of the British in our amateur surveillance efforts. So yes, I'll agree it's all going to hell in a handbasket, but at a slightly slower rate than the Commonwealth seems to be flinging itself down that gilded path.

    MeOhMy said
    abelian0 saidSeems to be the pattern of the Commonwealth these days - Uganda's going to kill gay people, Australia is going to come up with access limitations to rival China, and Britain is stuffed with cameras as well as increasingly oppressive limitations on speech through defamation law/limitations on criticizing religion. I'm really beginning to appreciate the advantages of entrenchment and strong courts in constitutional systems.



    Hate to break it to you, but the US is heading down that path faster than most Commonwealth nations. Homeland Security is there to be the giant Orwellian big brother apparatus; New York is following London's example by installing a "ring of fire" of surveillance; the laws have been changed to allow the military to engage in policing activities, a violation of the Possee Comitatus Act; Halliburton got multi-hundred million dollar contracts to build hundreds of "detention centers" around the US to house millions of people in the event of an emergency. Changes to laws and successive executive orders have made the declaration of martial law a much easier thing to accomplish. The NSA spies on ALL internet and telephone traffic, courtesy of the telecom companies, which were granted immunity from legal persecution. Police are becoming more repressive as training alters, and euphemisms like "pain compliance" justify the use of tasers. Torture hasnt, nor will it, be going anywhere. Obama as a Senator actually voted FOR the law that made the torture of anyone, including US citizens, LEGAL. (Military Commissions Act, look it up).

    Yeah, sorry. So much for your "constitutional system" with "strong courts".
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 2:15 AM GMT
    abelian0 saidSeems to be the pattern of the Commonwealth these days


    Dumbest thing I've seen written on this site today, and that's saying something.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 2:25 AM GMT
    I think it's terrifying.

    We often theorise about future governments that might be repressive who could use this sort of technology to control the population. In Australia, the opposition party is now lead by a right wing Catholic who is anti women, anti gay, anti abortion and probably anti any number of other things.

    It's not unreasonable to think that this guy could be the Prime Minister in only a few years. Our access to the Internet could well be forced to fit within his narrow view of what he thinks is acceptable.

    Some future government scenarios are completely imaginary, but ours is way too close for comfort. Start emailing your MPs because MPs hear far too much from religious lobby groups and not nearly enough from normal centrally leaning people.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 2:47 AM GMT
    makeumyne saidI think it's terrifying.

    We often theorise about future governments that might be repressive who could use this sort of technology to control the population. In Australia, the opposition party is now lead by a right wing Catholic who is anti women, anti gay, anti abortion and probably anti any number of other things.

    It's not unreasonable to think that this guy could be the Prime Minister in only a few years. Our access to the Internet could well be forced to fit within his narrow view of what he thinks is acceptable.

    Some future government scenarios are completely imaginary, but ours is way too close for comfort. Start emailing your MPs because MPs hear far too much from religious lobby groups and not nearly enough from normal centrally leaning people.


    What is so terrifying is that both the Prime Minister and the leader of the Opposition are so religious and happy to use this as a foundation for their policies. Not that this is new in politics......
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 2:49 AM GMT
    Care to elaborate in any substantive terms, minus what seems to be your favorite adjective, "dumbest"?

    Plus give the site a chance - after all there are still hours in the day, and you appear to be participating. Opportunity abounds.

    syd_hockey_79 said
    abelian0 saidSeems to be the pattern of the Commonwealth these days


    Dumbest thing I've seen written on this site today, and that's saying something.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 2:54 AM GMT
    abelian0 saidCare to elaborate in any substantive terms, minus what seems to be your favorite adjective, "dumbest"?

    Plus give the site a chance - after all there are still hours in the day, and you appear to be participating. Opportunity abounds.

    syd_hockey_79 said
    abelian0 saidSeems to be the pattern of the Commonwealth these days


    Dumbest thing I've seen written on this site today, and that's saying something.


    My favourite adjective is 'cunty'.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 2:58 AM GMT
    syd_hockey_79 said
    abelian0 saidSeems to be the pattern of the Commonwealth these days


    Dumbest thing I've seen written on this site today, and that's saying something.


    In fact Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II is our head of State, and she like God gives us free agency, and she is also head of the Commonwealth; noting repressive about that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 3:01 AM GMT
    makeumyne saidI think it's terrifying.

    We often theorise about future governments that might be repressive who could use this sort of technology to control the population. In Australia, the opposition party is now lead by a right wing Catholic who is anti women, anti gay, anti abortion and probably anti any number of other things.

    It's not unreasonable to think that this guy could be the Prime Minister in only a few years. Our access to the Internet could well be forced to fit within his narrow view of what he thinks is acceptable.

    Some future government scenarios are completely imaginary, but ours is way too close for comfort. Start emailing your MPs because MPs hear far too much from religious lobby groups and not nearly enough from normal centrally leaning people.


    Vatican City has longed to do this this country, what it's has done to Ireland, repress it, and force it's will unto us. If this wanker gets in, it for the first time, may well have an open door to do so....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 3:04 AM GMT
    Now that was funny.

    http://www.xkcd.com/75/

    syd_hockey_79 said
    abelian0 saidCare to elaborate in any substantive terms, minus what seems to be your favorite adjective, "dumbest"?

    Plus give the site a chance - after all there are still hours in the day, and you appear to be participating. Opportunity abounds.

    syd_hockey_79 said
    abelian0 saidSeems to be the pattern of the Commonwealth these days


    Dumbest thing I've seen written on this site today, and that's saying something.


    My favourite adjective is 'cunty'.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 3:20 AM GMT
    To an extent - real libertarians go maybe a bridge too far for me. I'm not in the John Stossil "Abolish the FAA" camp. But I strongly believe in the limitation of government's power.

    I could similarly lampoon what is likely to be your political perspective, but I think that's rather pointless and not fair to some of the virtues of your experience that may have informed your views.

    jprichva said
    abelian0 saidThis is why I'm a libertarian.

    Oh dear. That explains much.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 3:26 AM GMT
    I apologize for the misinterpretation - what was meant by those five words then?

    jprichva said
    abelian0 saidTo an extent - real libertarians go maybe a bridge too far for me. I'm not in the John Stossil "Abolish the FAA" camp. But I strongly believe in the limitation of government's power.

    I could similarly lampoon what is likely to be your political perspective, but I think that's rather pointless and not fair to some of the virtues of your experience that may have informed your views.

    jprichva said
    abelian0 saidThis is why I'm a libertarian.

    Oh dear. That explains much.

    I must say you read a great deal into five little words.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 3:35 AM GMT
    Fair point. Well, only partially. The personal connection was more related to the viscerality of that.

    I still disagree with your characterizing his theories as 'debunked', but que sera.


    jprichva said
    abelian0 saidI apologize for the misinterpretation - what was meant by those five words then?

    It explains (among other things) your instinctive reaction to my opinion of the late Dr. Friedman.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 3:41 AM GMT
    Even if this was to come to pass, I'm sure it won't have a big impact on my private life, albeit I've never supported censorship, and thats why I've always been opposed to political correctness, as it's censorship.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 3:41 AM GMT
    I've heard that Australia already has hideously overpowered censorship, at least in regards to importing and selling video games. Does this follow the same suit in regards to other media like movies?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 6:27 AM GMT
    Deadbeet saidI've heard that Australia already has hideously overpowered censorship, at least in regards to importing and selling video games. Does this follow the same suit in regards to other media like movies?


    Computer games are a problem. There is no R18+ rating for computer games, making games that can be played by adults in other countries are refused classification in this country, making them illegal. Many games need to be changed for Australia or are not available. All states' Attornies General have to agree to allow an R18+ rating to be created for computer games, but the South Australian Attorney General won't allow it.

    I understand that when it comes to movies only child abuse material and beastiality is refused classification, and that seems fair enough.

    Swearing, sex and violence don't seem overly censored - Underbelly proved that most things can get onto broadcast TV without much trouble.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 6:28 AM GMT
    Under Australian classification law, any depiction of underage sex, whether real or implied, whether the persons are actually under age or not, where the censorship board considers the participants to be under age or I where it could be construed that they could be considered underage , it is a breah of the Act and will be 'Refused Classification'.

    The film 'Ken Park' was given a RC classification. That the actors were overage was insufficient. That the distributor offered to change the script so that the actors were shown as over 18 was insufficient.
    The fact that the board considered that the actors could be construed as under age meant that the film failed classification.

    Classification is not limited to photographs of real people. Drawings are also included as are written or spoken descriptions. A number of people have been gaoled in Australia for writing fictional stories depicting underage sex.

    The postings on this site where people admit to underage sex would breach the Act and this site could be blocked under the legislation.

    The information for the trial was provided by the Australian Christian Lobby. Both 'Gay.com' and 'Gaydar' were on the list of blocked sites in the trial.

    The list of sites is secret.
    The people on the board is secret.
    The decisions are secret.
    The regulations will not be passed through parliament as this is not required under Australian law.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2009 9:02 AM GMT
    jprichva said
    Pattison saidEven if this was to come to pass, I'm sure it won't have a big impact on my private life, albeit I've never supported censorship, and thats why I've always been opposed to political correctness, as it's censorship.

    It is refreshing to note that no matter what the subject matter, no matter what country or continent referred to, no matter what branch of arts or sciences or philosophy under discussion, no matter what period of history or region of the space-time continuum being generally talked-of, you find a way to make it all about you.

    It's a gift.


    1259733116happybdaybacktome.gif