What if We Couldn't Write to You Anymore

Government by its very nature is a violent construct.

And soon enough, if the government adopts the Finkelstein Review, if you write something the government doesn't like even on a personal blog the government could fine you and send you to jail too.
Click to expand...

Does that include posting in a forum such as this one?
 
willrocks said:
Government by its very nature is a violent construct.

And soon enough, if the government adopts the Finkelstein Review, if you write something the government doesn't like even on a personal blog the government could fine you and send you to jail too.
Click to expand...

Does that include posting in a forum such as this one?
Click to expand...

it sure does!!

I'm sure the likes of BigAD, Peter and EarthJade will cheer this along like the good statists/communists that they are.
For the rest of us - at least those who value what we regard as our inalienable freedoms - it means that government goons can kick my door down and arrest me for writing a post such as this one.
 
capt.sparrow said:
If the abject apathy shown here is anything to go by then this latest weapon of oppression is as good as a done deal!
Click to expand...


DOWN WITH FINKELSTEIN AND REPEAL SECTION 18C NOW!! (Preferably in 20-point font with flashing neon colours)

There, does that make you feel better?
 
Talking of our gradual reduction in freedom of speech (in many areas, but not all where our freedoms have increased over time), check out those crazy Russians.

PepsiCo are under investigation for "promoting homsexuality to youth".
6824_gaymilk.jpg


A Russian anti-gay group has asked prosecutors to investigate milk cartons that it claims promote homosexuality to children.

The label of the Vesyoly Molochnik milk, owned by multinational dairy company Pepsi Co, is adorned with a jolly milkman and a rainbow in the sky.

Anatoly Artukh from the People's Council, says the label is a violation of St Petersburg's anti-gay propaganda law.

"A rainbow appeared on the cartons, a world-renowned symbol of the gay movement," he said.

"That immediately put me on alert."

State prosecutors are now investigating if the label is attempting to promote homosexuality to youth, as Mr Artukh claims.

"I have no doubts about Pepsi Cola," Mr Artukh said.

"This is a company renowned for actively and aggressively financing and promoting homosexuality."

For gay and lesbian groups, the issue is no laughing matter.

Polina Savchenko, the director of advocacy group Coming Out, says it is just another sign of the atmosphere in the city since the passage of the anti-gay propaganda law.

"Our life has been quite funny in the last year or so with the introduction of the homosexual propaganda law in November," she said.

"You know, it could be funny. It's so ridiculous, and so middle-aged, that it could be funny.

"But unfortunately it's not funny because we know that they're serious."
Click to expand...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-14/russian-activists-gay-milk/4311912
 
:O It gets worse and worse. Now the Gillard government wants to censor talking about politics. :mad:

John Roskam said:
You would have seen how yesterday the Attorney-General released draft legislation that she claims 'harmonises' the federal government's anti-discrimination laws. But the draft legislation does much more than that. It dramatically expands the grounds on which people can claim that they have been discriminated against. The draft legislation will make it against the law to offend someone because of their political opinion in certain contexts, such as if you are at work.

The proposed laws say that you can't 'discriminate' against someone on the basis of their political opinions. And by 'discriminate' the government means 'conduct that offends, insults or intimidates' another person. Previously, it was unlawful to offend someone on grounds such as a person's race or religion. Now, offending someone's political beliefs is an offence.

Under the new laws, you saying something while working that offends someone because of their political opinions is now 'discrimination' that should be censored. Make no mistake. This is an outrageous attack on our fundamental freedoms as Australians. It is a law that will be used to censor freedom of speech. Here's what could potentially happen under these laws. Someone who says they've been offended by a comment you've made at work about Julia Gillard's carbon tax can take you or your employer to court. Just like Andrew Bolt was taken to court.

A free exchange of political opinions is central to democracy. I'm afraid I can't put it any blunter than this - these proposed laws from the Gillard government are a threat to democracy. For the first time in Australian history anti-discrimination laws will be used to censor the expression of political opinions.

This issue has been missed by the media. The draft legislation is 179 pages long and I doubt anyone (other than the IPA) has seriously analysed it. In today's coverage of the proposed legislation the focus has been on how Nicola Roxon wants to reverse the onus of proof, ie someone who is accused of discrimination will have to prove they're not guilty. Reversing the onus of proof is bad enough - and the IPA put out this press release yesterday condemning it - but censoring political opinion is much, much worse.

Please take the time to read the draft legislation for yourself. It's called the 'Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill 2012'. Here's the page that inserts political opinion as a new ground of discrimination. And here is the page that says anything that offends, insults or intimidates someone is now discrimination and therefore must be censored.
Click to expand...

'Andrew Bolt was censored for talking about race. The Gillard government wants to censor talking about politics.' - Simon Breheny


A few of us on here are basically screwed then.


NB I have set up the two links so that they open small PDF files with the proposed legislation.
 
bordsilver said:
A few of us on here are basically screwed then.


NB I have set up the two links so that they open small PDF files with the proposed legislation.
Click to expand...

Yep, history shows that speaking up against the rise of an authoritarian fascist socialist security state is not a particularly good idea.

At some point, the best idea will just be to give it up and leave the Aussies to their little fascist paradise. The only hope I see is the rise of the liberty movement in America. But I'm not convinced that Aussies will be as interested. There doesn't seem to be any historical precedent in this country for it.
 
hawkeye said:
The only hope I see is the rise of the liberty movement in America. But I'm not convinced that Aussies will be as interested. There doesn't seem to be any historical precedent in this country for it.
Click to expand...

Australia is a country founded by criminals, built by criminals, run by criminals for the criminal elite.

I wouldn't be holding my breath.

As for the liberty movement in the US, I am honestly not expecting it to happen. I think the establishment there will strike down like a hammer on any uprising, but the masses are becoming more and more placated by their servitude in reliance on the system to keep them alive.

You'd be hard pressed to get the average American on food stamps to take up arms and bite the hand that feeds it.

Socialism and Democracy are simply oppression of the productive minority.

Australia is no different.
 
Auspm said:
hawkeye said:
The only hope I see is the rise of the liberty movement in America. But I'm not convinced that Aussies will be as interested. There doesn't seem to be any historical precedent in this country for it.
Click to expand...

Australia is a country founded by criminals, built by criminals, run by criminals for the criminal elite.

I wouldn't be holding my breath.

As for the liberty movement in the US, I am honestly not expecting it to happen.
Click to expand...

So where then? :/
 
r0dman said:
So where then? :/
Click to expand...

I am honestly not sure there will be in the end.

Places like the Dominican Republic and China/Singapore express more value towards individual liberty and freedom than the western powers do now.

This is how you know the west is dying - it's falling into the grip of totalitarianism, fascism and communism not just in name, but in principles. As the elite get more desperate, I have absolutely no doubt they'll embark on a course of action that would make even the Third Reich era look tame in comparison.

I wouldn't live in the USA now even if you paid me and gave me land for free, it's not even a shadow of what it was once founded as and a true tragedy of the modern age IMHO.
 
Auspm said:
r0dman said:
So where then? :/
Click to expand...

I am honestly not sure there will be in the end.

Places like the Dominican Republic and China/Singapore express more value towards individual liberty and freedom than the western powers do now.

This is how you know the west is dying - it's falling into the grip of totalitarianism, fascism and communism not just in name, but in principles. As the elite get more desperate, I have absolutely no doubt they'll embark on a course of action that would make even the Third Reich era look tame in comparison.

I wouldn't live in the USA now even if you paid me and gave me land for free, it's not even a shadow of what it was once founded as and a true tragedy of the modern age IMHO.
Click to expand...

And therein lies the challenge. Canada is too much of a US partner to be a good spot, with many of the same issues as we have here (property bubble for example). NZ is our little brother. In some ways more free but in some ways more naive and lets the more ridiculous laws come to pass. Anywhere in Europe either lacks the land, desirable economy or (unfortunately if it came to it) Defence to be a safe place. And if you do go to a Central/South American, Asian, African or Eastern country you run the risk of being a foreigner - sometimes blending in is "worth it's weight in gold" (maybe 5gr Certicard though, not too much).

Mmm.
 
This really pisses me off .... my pet hate you could say.

I'm sick of having my liberties stripped from me, of the state telling me what is safe or not, and as if the whole discrimination sympathy stuff wasn't bad enough already, they want to broaden it.

Soon the only safe topic of conversation will be about last night's reality TV show. However, be sure not to discuss the contestant's possible political allegiances or "its" preference for red over blue underwear (the only two colours available in the future) as you may just offend the eavesdropper on the other side of the partition who prefers the blue underwear.

It's getting beyond a joke ..... the other day I had a Brazilian guy here at work tell me an anecdote about when he was called a racist for making a comment during the Olympics that the Jamaican's are fast runners. Unfarkenbelievable.

Problem is, I love this country and find it hard to consider living elsewhere (even though I was originally from Europe). Also, most of the countries in which civil liberties are protected, are down the sh1tter on an economic front. What to do???
 
bordsilver said:
'Andrew Bolt was censored for talking about race. The Gillard government wants to censor talking about politics.' - Simon Breheny
Click to expand...

Andrew Bolt was not censored. His was just a simple case of telling lies. Simple really.
 
browski said:
bordsilver said:
'Andrew Bolt was censored for talking about race. The Gillard government wants to censor talking about politics.' - Simon Breheny
Click to expand...

Andrew Bolt was not censored. His was just a simple case of telling lies. Simple really.
Click to expand...

No, he was convicted under Section 18C because his article was "reasonably likely to cause offence" based on race but normal media freedoms in 18D were overruled because of his errors of fact.
 
FullMetalFever said:
This really pisses me off .... my pet hate you could say.

I'm sick of having my liberties stripped from me, of the state telling me what is safe or not, and as if the whole discrimination sympathy stuff wasn't bad enough already, they want to broaden it.

Soon the only safe topic of conversation will be about last night's reality TV show. However, be sure not to discuss the contestant's possible political allegiances or "its" preference for red over blue underwear (the only two colours available in the future) as you may just offend the eavesdropper on the other side of the partition who prefers the blue underwear.

It's getting beyond a joke ..... the other day I had a Brazilian guy here at work tell me an anecdote about when he was called a racist for making a comment during the Olympics that the Jamaican's are fast runners. Unfarkenbelievable.

Problem is, I love this country and find it hard to consider living elsewhere (even though I was originally from Europe). Also, most of the countries in which civil liberties are protected, are down the sh1tter on an economic front. What to do???
Click to expand...

The whole "reasonably likely to cause offence" is very extremely distasteful. So not only can you be convicted for causing "offence" (whatever that is) but it doesn't even need to actually offend the person. It just needs to be "reasonably likely" that they may have been offended. WTF!?!

As Steve Hughes says, when did "sticks and stones may break my bones" stop being true?

http://videosift.com/video/Steve-Hughes-Political-Correctness-and-Offence
 
bordsilver said:
The whole "reasonably likely to cause offence" is very extremely distasteful. So not only can you be convicted for causing "offence" (whatever that is) but it doesn't even need to actually offend the person. It just needs to be "reasonably likely" that they may have been offended. WTF!?!

As Steve Hughes says, when did "sticks and stones may break my bones" stop being true?

http://videosift.com/video/Steve-Hughes-Political-Correctness-and-Offence
Click to expand...

Agreed. How is that determined anyway? What does "reasonably likely" equate to? Is it a 1 in 10 or a 1 in 100 chance of causing offense? And what is the acceptable limit?

It's ridiculous to say the least. How do the people entrusted to look after this country even come up with this crap???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top