The clampdown on freedom of speech is part of the State agenda but to get it accepted, it needed a catalyst. Along came “good old paedophilia” to provide the necessary justification for the removal of free speech. The Internet is the last bastion of free speech in this increasingly totalitarian matrix, and our only hope against a controlled media and a rampart power hungry state apparatus looking more and more every day like the Gramscian dialectic. By the way, this won’t stamp out pornography on the internet because it is one of the State’s tools of distraction along with sports and Dancing with the Stars. And BIG PED will still be there because it will use its own above the net system to deliver its foul product to the sick of mind and heart.

What we can be almost certain about if this legislation is passed is that freedom of speech will suffer because unlike the distractions, freedom of speech represents political power. It is an expression of the political will of the people.

Don’t expect the other side to jump up and down about this loss of freedom. They were and are party to the same game.

What is required here is not a putsch but a detailed explanation outlining the implications of Conroy’s mad plan.

Tim, John James and Dave Liberts have made the only sensible contributions to this debate.

Completely wrong. They’re not related. At all. They use the same software, and that’s it. Wikileaks is not part of the Wikimedia Foundation. The “document repository attached to Wikipedia”, if you could call it that, would be WikiSource.

To tell you the truth, I gave up reading the article about half way through because I found it to be “laborious” reading. I can’t quite put my finger on exactly why I felt that way but I sincerely hope you will consider rewriting (parts of) the article because this is such an important topic. Perhaps you could consider shortening the article a little and breaking it up into “chunks” by using sub-headings. I also found several sentences a little difficult to comprehend, quickly, on first reading. It’s almost as if you quickly wrote a “stream of consciousness” and never went back to rewrite anything. Hey, I can’t say that I’m such a wonderful writer myself! When I’m tired or after a couple of beers, or both, my writing style is far from easy reading.

I also found some of the language a bit strange, as if you are trying to write in an almost exaggerated style of colloquial Australian English. I am Australian myself (but an ex-pat) so I should be able to understand it easily but it was not so easy.

One more thing - maybe some of the points that you are alluding to in the article are very familiar to your regular readers, or to Aussies at home. And since I haven’t lived in Australia for many years, maybe this was part of my problem.

It would be a great pity for this article not to be widely read on the internet and not to be linked to other sites on the internet, simply because too many people, like me, found it to such a hard slog to read.

I own a subversive but legal website hosted in the USA and with private registration details. (I know Japan or the Seychelles would be better but I’m on a budget here).

Of late I’ve been getting lots of search enquiries with “sex site [name of my site]” as the search term. Is this an attempt to get my site blacklisted?

How true, The idea of pasty-faced IT types taking to the streets is quite humorous.
However, this filter is such a poor idea something has to be done.

Maybe if you put the word out that there was a massive nation-wide LARP?

Wikileaks actually has the ACMA blocklist from late 2008, too, at http://www.wikileaks.com/wiki/Australian_government_secret_ACMA_internet_censorship_blacklist%2C_6_Aug_2008

(John James - In terms of Kevin Rudd claiming the title of “social democrat” for himself and/or UK Labour, it may surprise you to know that the terms political parties self-apply cannot always be taken at face value! For example, the North Korean regime calls itself the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea despite not being at all Democratic. I also hear tell that a major western democracy has a Liberal party that isn’t liberal at all…)

Greg appears to have misunderstood the stupidity of ACMA. Downloading the list is legal and Guy Rundle has not asserted that access has been blocked. The filter to do the blocking is not in place yet. What ACMA are threatening to fine webhosts for is linking to it. Greg, put up the link from where you downloaded the material and Crikey can let us know exactly how long it takes to get a threat of a fine.

This Rudd Government must have conjones the size of watermelons.
The Rudd Government put http://www.betfair.com on the secret blacklist, meaning that Australians won’t be able to access that site soon.

However, Betfair.com clearly state that “Betfair Pty Ltd is licensed and regulated to offer Australian Markets (gaming) by the Tasmanian Gaming Commission.”

So betfair.com legally pay money in license fees to Tasmania (a state of Australia) to provide a gaming service to Australians yet the Federal Government will secretly block their website from Australians.

That’s like charging some-one for a taxi license and then saying they can’t have passengers.

I’m off to vomit, Australia must look like some sort of Sth American Socialist republic in the eyes of the international community. And it’s almost certainly illegal.

love this government!

If it stays dead for a day or so you’ll be able to get the list off mininova (search for Australian Government Internet Censorship Blacklist (Wikileaks))

The list included betfair.com (which won a Queens Award (BTW that’s HRH Queen of Australia) for Innovation) and a restaurant in Czechoslovakia (maybe it’s a front for pedo’s!)

love this filter!

http://www.dbcde.gov.au/communications_for_business/Digital_Economy_Development/digital_economy/future_directions_blog/topics/civil_and_confident_society_online/clestouj@guerrillamail.org

I await with interest a link deletion notice and threats of $11,000/day fines sent from ACMA to DBCDE!