ACMA and The Great Firewall of Australia

UPDATE2:- Here’s Angry Exile. and his/her take.

UPDATE:- And Samizdata, bless them, have also noted the Prison Island Plans. Why’s not Australia done that? They’re ahead in all other cyber-surveillance stuff…what’s it called? Bacup? ACPO? ACMA? Echelon, you know, that sort of thingy-business?

David Davis

I have not the time today to trawl through (referred to by The Landed Underclass and Boing Boing) the entire ACMA list of banned websites, soon to be marooned outside the Great Firewall of Australia, to find out if our blog  or indeed our parent archive at the LA, here,  is on it. (.txt)    PDF here.    About 50% of the list thingy is probably various forms of pornography anyway, and any self-respecting Okker will just want to puke a pavement-pizza even just reading the titles. Can’t think why people could ever want that sort of stuff: but there are some odd religions too about the place and there’s no accouting for tastes in a Free World.

BUT if there are any Ocker (Okker?) friends and readers of ours out there, inside Australia today and online, please could you simply reply via comment to this post, that you can still hear us? Thank you. That is all I ask. Could you do it regularly too, please? I’m sure your native bureauNazi population will be updating the list periodically.

It seems that The Internet, “at 20 years old”,  is at last acquiring the properties of an enormous and sentient living creature, with innate powers of reasoning and learned behaviour. When faced with censorship, its brain interprets this act as  __Damage__  and routes resources around it.

Bet you 5p The Remittance Man will pick this one up in a minute, but so far not yet. He’ll be back from the bar shortly.

Internet censorship coming soon….

….from Andy Burnham, the bust TV channels, and the Onebama…

…but The Landed Underclass has the right idea here.

Harry Haddock at “A nation of Shopkeepers” is more hard-hitting. Wish I’d had the foresight this morning,  to say what he does.

David Davis

This morning the Quislingraph led early with news of proposals to “give Internet Sites Cinema-Style Ratings”, which is of course newspeak for the first steps in censoring the internet, probably via state pressure on ISPs.

Guuido Fawkes, always with a nose checking the wind, has already made plans to move his site out of vulnerable jurisdictions, such as the UK and USA.

This is coupled with earlier tentative threats from the EU and from someone called Hazel Blears, to “regulate” bloggers (which States do not like) – this basically means Classical liberal and libertarian-leaning ones I expect. Once this power and the one flagged above are in place, Gordon Brown and his new accolyte the Onebama will be able to trumpet that they’ve done it all “for the children”. The Quislingraph piece is a classic screed of socialist caring-nonsense, dripping with parental concern which gets the sheeple nodding vigorously in agreement (we all love children don’t we?) while yet shrouding a terrible threat in the subtext, which next to nobody will pick up.

Again, once in place, i wonder which political parties a State will force the ISPs to proscribe? Obviously the BNP will go down the road of invisibility first, it being the State’s main left-wing competitor and also fully-corporatist, for mass franchise support. I expect UKIP won’t fare much better, and it will take some time for the buggers to catch up with LPUK, but they will, they will.

If “major ISPs” cave in and refuse access to sites deemed “unsuitable for children”, then “Best Practice” will inevitably be followed. You won’t even be able to get Wikipedia or Google, since this is unavailable on the LANs of most British State schools – and I dread to think how we’ll get ot Youtube.

Does anybody know how people get round this sort of restriction in places like China, Iran and Pakistan?

It’s bad enough trying to teach children whose HOMES have no books in them…so try removing the library too.

Yeah, great idea. It’ll really work. It’ll really get the poor, PSP-crazed buggers reading again.

Come on, we are not all accomplished web-searchers for that which we need – we and you on here are fortunate indeed in the way our brains work, but 99.9% of the internet is junk, and most people will need to be sympathetically helped to find what they need, or like, or lust after. Or even be shown….

David Davis

Although I hold no brief for Philip Pullman, nor for his somewhat strange books, he is dead right on this one.

I have xperienced at least two schools and a “Tech” in the past 7 years, all three within a heavy-field-mortar’s throw from here, which have “downsized” their libraries, and installed “terminals”, naïvely believing this to be not just a substitute, but better even…hmmmmm.

The failure to inculcate the reading habit from hard copy text, in today’s children (and it shows most badly in the younger tranche of their parents, aged say 20s to early 40s – who admit sorrowfully that they don’t know how to begin to find out how to help their sprogs compete with the Chindians ) will lead us faster to the New Endarkenment of The West.

I regret to announce that some dude in Cambridge has deleted the wikipage “Endarkenment” as having “no meaningful content”. Must be a FabiaNazi lefty. Could someone recreate it please? Endarkenment would say all I want to say about what I think is going on in terms of the deletion of libraries – and the debasement/attenuation of their content.

Interesting idea…libel insurance for bloggers?

David Davis

But if the stalinists, whom we blog about, are actually such astonishingly wicked people (they are) who deserve to be exposed and have rotting stuff thrown at their faces while they are in the Pillory, why then might we need to insure ourselves against their (unjustified) retaliation?

Why can’t socialists and other fascist abusers of other human beings just

(a) go home,

(b) shut up (you’ve lost)

(c) quietly contemplate your cow-bladder-gasbag lovinly sewn (slowly) by candle-light by your drugged hippy partneretta, filling (slowly) with chicken-shit-methane (and hydrogen sulphide while your back is turned) on your subsistence-farm in Wales,

(d) keep the hell out of discussions about how the world’s poor are going to better themselves?

Did Christianity sort of “let them in”? Is it our fault? Where did we go wrong? In the midst of all this plenitude of scientific, technological and liberal philosphical richness, how did the bastards get a foothold?

If what we say about them is true, can’t they just square up and duel with us on-line, just as any self-respecting ordinary petty-criminals, thugs and murderers would do so to our faces?

Or do they NEED the “law”, as their case is vulnerable to their own dangerous isolation from reality and their pan-global lack of support?

One of the unseen benefits of the internet is that truth cannot be quickly suppressed. this surely is an advantage – our enemies are for ever going on about “truth” – let them eat it.