[LINK] Conroy going ahead
david.boxall at hunterlink.net.au
Sun May 30 16:01:26 AEST 2010
Sent this to Jan, but forgot to cc: Link.
On 30/05/2010 8:14 AM, Jan Whitaker wrote:
> Poll: Should the government filter the internet?
> ...Yes 4%
> No 96%
> Total votes: 4910.
Total votes: 8736
> MINISTER for Communications Stephen Conroy has vowed to push on
> with his controversial internet filtering scheme, despite a barrage
> of criticism.
Conroy's a functionary. He'll keep doing what he's been told to do until
he's told to do something different.
> ''The scope of filtered content is so broad that it could block
> content that would inform political and social debate,'' Google
> spokeswoman Lucinda Barlow said.
There's something decidedly nasty going on. If they were genuinely
concerned for children, the government would not have discontinued
offering free filtering software under NetAlert in the absence of a
functional replacement. The true motives behind the proposed filter lie
elsewhere (and perhaps contrary).
> This should be a promise that Kevin Rudd should break.''
Why does Rudd pursue this weird policy, when he's caved in on so many
others at the first sign of resistance? His abnormal reaction to Bill
might give a clue.
> Yet Senator Conroy said ''blocking material is not considered to
> be censorship''.
By those of us who understand English, it is. Call it George of Mildred
if you like, it's still censorship. The government might think they have
God on their side, but censorship remains censorship no matter what
motives lie behind it.
> ''This filter is really not changing much, except that the
> blacklist of website pages will be mandatory.''
> The fourth Cyber Security Awareness Week starts next week to help
> raise awareness of internet privacy issues.
But our government prefers its perversion.
David Boxall | All that is required
| for evil to prevail is
http://david.boxall.id.au | for good men to do nothing.
| -- Edmund Burke (1729-1797)
More information about the Link