Communications minister apparently unaware that people are prosecuted for internet crimes already

Stephen Conroy’s new line for defending his stupid internet filter:

“Having no regulation to combat illegal activity actually weakens all that is good about the internet.”

That must be news to the police, who’ve been prosecuting people for illegal activity over the internet for years.

Secondly, it’s news to the survivors of child abuse, who argue that Conroy’s filter will in fact make it harder for police to catch predators.

And finally, it’s news to anyone who understands that there’s a huge gap between illegal content and content that simply hasn’t been classified in Australia. Conroy seeks to define the latter as the former, and demand that all content must first seek the approval of the state, through the classification board, before we’re allowed to access it.

Is there anything Conroy’s said in defence of his Great Wall of Australia that hasn’t been misleading, disingenuous or flat-out lying?

Advertisements

12 responses to “Communications minister apparently unaware that people are prosecuted for internet crimes already

  1. I’m starting to think that there is a bit more behind this than keeping nasty stuff away from Australian children.

    Nobody wants this damn thing, aside from a statistically insignificant part of the Australian electorate.

    Everybody says it’ll fuck up the performance of the Internet.

    And everybody says that it wont do the job it was designed to do.

    So why are they persisting?
    Is this a Trojan Horse?
    Hmmm…

    Cheers.

  2. Marek
    “I’m starting to think that there is a bit more behind this than keeping nasty stuff away from Australian children.”

    Needs some editing

    I’m starting to think that there is a bit more behind this than keeping Australian Children away from nasty stuff

    Nasty stuff does not, despite what Sen. Conroy says, jump out at Australian Children.

    bryan
    .

  3. “So why are they persisting?”

    So they can censor the internet for political reasons. It’s a disgrace but what’s really sad is that Conroy must think we’re stupid when I would contend that it is him who is stupid…..or just plain dishonest.

  4. Splatterbottom

    Nah. You are overestimating Conroy. If he has the filter, then he has to compile the list. That way he has access to the latest and most exotic product. In addition he knows that the rest of us get to see what he sees, which only adds to the frisson as he lubes up his Steely Dan.

  5. Splatterbottom

    “don’t get to see what he sees”

  6. Blast Tyrant

    Marek, he’s a politician. Not many of them really do have our best interests at heart so of course there’s going to be more to it.

    I think that Rob is onto it, there’s certainly political reasons.
    And once it’s started on the basis of stopping kiddy porn, it’s much easier to clamp down on other things they find undesirable. I’m pretty sure the right wing christian groups are lobbying for restriction on gay education etc.

  7. conroy is the trojan horse, not the filter. another catholic from the labor right, faction of betrayers

  8. Conroy is a true unifier- by which I mean he is unifying lefties and righties in hatred of his stupid internet filter.

  9. @ sldr (bryan).

    Don’t take it too hard if I reject your editing.

    Conroy is not filtering children from nasty stuff.
    My statement was correct as it was written.

    Yes RobJ and Blast Tyrant, that was always the fear from with the civil liberties community.

    The only thing that has changed now is that Conroy’s persistance in the face of all reasonable objections has made in patently obvious that he, and therefore the Government more broadly, are working on an agenda that has nothing to do with paedophilia.

    Another thing that I’ve been wondering about is whether the Government, under it’s anti-terror legislation, would be allowed to filter/monitor/track internet activity which they, or a friendly magistrate, deemed to be a security threat.
    Most importantly, would they be able to do this without ever having to inform the Australian public?

    I’m probably being paranoid, but I can’t help but think that the façade of the ‘kiddie porn filter’ is one the ASIO wishlist.

    Cheers.

    BTW, SB.
    My neighbour, mate and political nemesis is a huge American, ultra-right-wing ex-Marine who loves Steely Dan (the band).
    Some years ago, I had the excruciatingly sweet pleasure of informing him of from where his favourite band got their name.

    It’s the little things in life, ain’t it!

  10. “from within the civil liberties community”.

    Obviously.

  11. Blast Tyrant

    I don’t think you’re being paranoid Marek.

  12. “The only thing that has changed now is that Conroy’s persistance in the face of all reasonable objections has made in patently obvious that he, and therefore the Government more broadly, are working on an agenda that has nothing to do with paedophilia.”

    then you say:

    “I’m probably being paranoid,

    No Marek, it’s a perfectly reasonable deduction.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s