Freedom of Speech and Liberties

[Picci]

At the moment the censorship debate is extremely hot in Malta. Over here the Curia decides what is acceptable or not. The Curia, for those who don't know, is where Roman Catholic Archbishops takes policy decisions for its members. The problem is that it takes them for the whole state.

In fact we have just made history as Playboy was found on sale for the first time ever last week. Two theatrical performances - one in particular called Stitching - depicting an erotic scenario - was banned and not allowed to perform. They ended up in court and the case is still going on.

Another issue rose very recently when a fellow University student, Alex Vella Gera, graduate in Maltese, posted a short story on a Campus newspaper, called 'Li Tkisser Sewwi' - (literal translation: what you break, you mend) and it describes the sex adventures of an obsessed guy. The editor of the newspaper faces a number of charges and is most likely to be jailed for a maximum of 6 months. The argument is that it is extremely scandalous and that it became available to minors for their reading.

The whole thing about what I'm saying is that this country still has a very backward mentality. We still pretend we are all saints over here. When you go to Paceville - the entertainment hub, where you see 14 year olds with microskirts getting drunk and puking all over the place - people take scandals. They don't admit reality. We need to wipe some memories off people's faces and start from scratch, where new and more liberal standards are acceptable.

[Ian]

I find it interesting that this is an internet related issue. However, the only way anyone outside of the Australia could have heard about this is through the internet. I do not believe that the internet can force judges to change their mind but interesting thing with mass communication is that when you can reach 1 billion people instantly the amount of pressure you can force on an organisation or body goes up.

It would be naive to believe that the internet would be free of government interference, however, it would also be silly to believe that the 1 billion users would just sit back and not use the one medium of mass communication which is open to all to try to change the world they live in. I would suggest that the most recent example of this is the recent political crisis in Iran and the use of twitter to increase the level of awareness of the violence there.

All you have is conflict between people and government which has been going on for 1000's of years, but has simply changed format from the street and town square to the chat room and blog.

[MonteCristo]

In a world where we have more communications options than ever before, Iran shows how easily it can all come crashing down:

Three major international broadcasters have strongly condemned Iran for its "deliberate electronic interference" in their broadcasts.

The BBC, Deutsche Welle and Voice of America said the jamming began on Thursday as Iran marked the 31st anniversary of the Islamic Revolution.

They said Iran was broadcasting freely around the world while denying its own people programmes coming from outside.

Earlier, the US accused Iran of using a "near-total information blockade".

A state department spokesman said there were strong indications that the telephone network had been taken down, SMS messages blocked, and internet communication "throttled".

"Iran has attempted a near total information blockade," PJ Crowley said.

"It is clear that the Iranian government fears its own people."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8511921.stm

[LOUD HOWARD]

"It is clear that the Iranian government fears its own people."

Zombies!!!!

[MonteCristo]

Google joins new anti-filter coalition
By James Riley
Monday, 15 February 2010 20:21

Search giants Google and Yahoo have joined the Australian Library and Information Association and Inspire Foundation to create a coalition of online interests to lobby against Rudd Government plans to filter the internet.

Called the Safer Internet Group, the coalition is urging Government to adjust its internet filter plans, saying the scheme's present design is ineffective and puts at risk the benefits of a free flow of information.

Coalition members also argue the scope of the content to be filtered is too broad. Filtering all Refused Classification content – which the legislation is intended to do – could block content that has strong social or educational value.

"The Australian Library and Information Association has a responsibility to the Australian community to protect the free flow of information for all," ALIA executive director Sue Hutley said with the release of the coalitions Core Principles for Effective Action for a Safer Internet paper.

The group says peer-reviewed research on the issue found the most effective way to protect kids on the internet was through a combination of education and policing, coupled with technical measures that rely on ISPs, police and governments working together.

On technical measures the coalition says if governments can achieve the broad aims of these child safety policies through cooperation and partnerships with the industry, and by focusing on a clearly defined and narrow band of child sexual abuse material.

"As a large proportion of child sexual abuse content is not found on public websites, but in chat-rooms or peer-to-peer networks, we know the proposed filtering regime will not effectively protect children from this objectionable material," the Safer Internet Group coalition statement says.

"In fact, the policy may give parents a 'false sense of security' encouraging them to reduce their supervision."

The coalition also voices concern about the technical requirements of filtering and it broader impact on high volume parts of the internet.

Specifically it points to the Enex TestLabs report on the filtering trials carried out by Government, which said "in situations where there is a potential for very high traffic sites, such as YouTube, to have pages on the filtering list, this could result in significantly higher traffic rates passing through the filter, even though the specific pages being accessed are not those on the blacklist."

"This could cause additional load on the filtering infrastructure and subsequent performance bottlenecks.

B-b-b-b-but I can't look after my own kids. I need the government to do it for me!

I say again. Even if bad stuff is blocked in one country, it will continue exist in others. It truly is typical government action though: narrow-minded and sight-sighted.

[MonteCristo]

Today's funny is:

Conroy's website removes references to filterBy Andrew Ramadge, Technology Reporter From: news.com.au February 25, 2010

THE minister in charge of the Government's web censorship plan has been caught out censoring his own website.
The front page of Communications Minister Stephen Conroy's official website displays a list of topics connected to his portfolio, along with links to more information about each one.

All the usual topics are there – cyber safety, the national broadband network, broadcasters ABC and SBS, digital television and so on.

All except one.

It was revealed today a script within the minister's homepage deliberately removes references to internet filtering from the list.

In the function that creates the list, or "tag cloud", there is a condition that if the words "ISP filtering" appear they should be skipped and not displayed.

The discovery is unlikely to do any favours for Senator Conroy's web filtering policy, which has been criticised for its secrecy.

According to Google's cache records, the exception has been included on the minister's homepage since at least February 14.

A message on the page says it was last updated in October last year.

Melbourne web developer David Johnson told news.com.au the code was intended to remove references to internet filtering.

"The code is a quick fix," said Mr Johnson of creative agency Lemonade.

"If the developers of the minister’s site had wanted to do it properly they would have placed the 'ISP filtering' keyword exclusion on the server side where it is inaccessible to the public, instead of the front-end code which can be seen by anyone and understood by people with even a basic knowledge of scripting."

The function, written in web scripting language Javascript, appears to have been first discovered by a user on the Whirlpool broadband discussion forum.

Senator Conroy's office has been contacted for comment.

[MonteCristo]

Another kick in the balls:

$1000 fines for people carrying knives
ANDRA JACKSON, JARED LYNCH
March 4, 2010

*snippets*
The Victorian government has also expanded search and seizure powers to enable police to conduct random weapons searches in designated public areas, such as train stations, without notice.
...
Under the proposed legislation change, the onus of proof has been reversed to allow the fines to be issued as soon as knife is sighted by police.

The principle that a person is innocent until proven guilty will be turned around whereby a person found to be carrying a knife, is "guilty until proven innocent," Mr Brumby said.

Police have also been given new powers to carry out random search of public areas they have reasonable suspicion that knives are being carried.

This is in addition to the recently acquired power to carry out planned searches of designated areas, Mr Brumby said.

The random searches apply to public areas such as around railway searches.
...
They have been adopted because while there has been a trend down in knife attacks in Victoria, the government is concerned that more young people have been found to be carrying knives and that knife attacks are inflicting graver injuries.

So now, in Victoria, you can be searched for no reason at all, apart from the fact you are there. Yaysome.

Next: “guilty until proven innocent” – Jesus titty-darned Christ. Personally I won’t ever carry a knife until the robot seize control, but how can you justify flipping the very foundation on which our judicial system is based?

Later in the story it’s admitted that more and more people are carrying knives for protection. How can you prove that you’re carrying it for protection? “Your honour, I present to you email and Facebook records saying that I fear for my safety, and hence will be seeking a method for self defence.”
“Those are not applicable in court, defendant. Besides, you’re going to have to try harder. Clearly you saw yourself as being threatened. Who were you threatened by? How do we know you weren’t going to attack the person you saw as a threat to pre-empt them, eh?”
“But that’s for you to prove!”
“Not anymore laddy.”

What incentive is there for police to do their job under such a system?

About the only good thing is this:

Under the measures it will also become an offence for anyone under the age of 18 to buy a knife or a controlled weapon

But, of course, then you have to ask yourself why it was legal for kids to buy “controlled weapons” in the first place.

In all, one truly frightening step towards a police state.

[MiÑardi]

I'd be pretty annoyed at being searched if it became frequent. It's a difficult one though. I will say that anyone who carries a knife and threatens/stabs someone is an absolute c**t. Sadly there's a lot of them about.

You can't stop the sale of knives and weapons though. Anyone can legally buy a massive kitchen knife in a shop or steal it from the kitchen. Problem once again lies with idiot parents breeding idiot kids and not being able to raise them and educate them properly. I'm sure we can overlook that and blame it on GTA4 though.

[The Ghost Who Walks]

I'd be pretty annoyed at being searched if it became frequent.

Well no doubt the intent of the law is to be able to search a group of youths lying in wait for another gang and difuse the situation before someone actually pulls a knife in anger, fine and sensible if it stays like that, but people like Daz worry about the lack of safeguards and potential for corruption and misuse.

This is one of the main arguments I have heard against voluntery euthenasia, it's an all good fine concept, but too open to abuse. E.G. how long before "I'm in pain, I want to die now, not tomorrow." Becomes "you've got terminal cancer, you will be euthenased now to open up your hospital bed for someone else.."

Funny though I think most people who worry about a "Police State" in example A would also support euthenasia in example B

[MonteCristo]

I'd be pretty annoyed at being searched if it became frequent.

Well no doubt the intent of the law is to be able to search a group of youths lying in wait for another gang

I go back to the example, shown freely on the 7pm news about a month ago, of Victorian cops searching random people at a train station. Not gangs of youths, or even a bunch of school kids, but businessmen and women as well. Even before this law came in they were not following the "intent" you say.

This is one of the main arguments I have heard against voluntery euthenasia, it's an all good fine concept, but too open to abuse. E.G. how long before "I'm in pain, I want to die now, not tomorrow." Becomes "you've got terminal cancer, you will be euthenased now to open up your hospital bed for someone else.."

I really don't get the whole euthanasia debate. It doesn't need to be legal. FFS, it's so amazingly easy to kill yourself. Just drown a million sleeping pills from one canister (legal); or go find a drug dealer and OD on heroin and go out in blissful style (illegal, but finding a drug dealer would surely be as easy as trying to import those euthanasia drugs from Mexico).

[the_full_monty]

Back in my day you used to be allowed to carry around a knife and randomly stab passers by without the bloody loony left PC brigade sticking their oar in.

[The Ghost Who Walks]

I really don't get the whole euthanasia debate. It doesn't need to be legal. FFS, it's so amazingly easy to kill yourself. Just drown a million sleeping pills from one canister (legal); or go find a drug dealer and OD on heroin and go out in blissful style (illegal, but finding a drug dealer would surely be as easy as trying to import those euthanasia drugs from Mexico).

True - I've often thought that
But I guess there are those who are incapacitated by the time they want to go..

[xcraigx]

I thought knives were mandatory in Australia.

(...now THAT'S a knife!)

seen Crocodile Dundee too many times


But I'm generally against random searches without probable cause.

[MonteCristo]

I really don't get the whole euthanasia debate. It doesn't need to be legal. FFS, it's so amazingly easy to kill yourself. Just drown a million sleeping pills from one canister (legal); or go find a drug dealer and OD on heroin and go out in blissful style (illegal, but finding a drug dealer would surely be as easy as trying to import those euthanasia drugs from Mexico).

True - I've often thought that
But I guess there are those who are incapacitated by the time they want to go..

Yeah, but if you aren't so incapacitated as to go through (even if it was legal) what would be a fairly complicated procedure, then you can ask a family member to go to the pharmacy for you and get the sleeping pills.

[Travis Daye]

I really don't get the whole euthanasia debate. It doesn't need to be legal. FFS, it's so amazingly easy to kill yourself. Just drown a million sleeping pills from one canister (legal); or go find a drug dealer and OD on heroin and go out in blissful style (illegal, but finding a drug dealer would surely be as easy as trying to import those euthanasia drugs from Mexico).

True - I've often thought that
But I guess there are those who are incapacitated by the time they want to go..

Yeah, but if you aren't so incapacitated as to go through (even if it was legal) what would be a fairly complicated procedure, then you can ask a family member to go to the pharmacy for you and get the sleeping pills.

Or you can just regulate things, just to avoid people 'helping out' with pillows in faces and excessive amounts of medicine of which people don't know the exact effects. Wouldn't that be a bit more humane and less messy?

[MonteCristo]

Fantastic interview with Malcolm Fraser - former Liberal Party (the conservative party, for the foreigners reading) Prime Minister of Australia - on National Press Club Address right now on the ABC.

I urge all Australian members to hunt it down on iView or somewhere.

He blasts both sides of politics and the direction Australia is heading in. I agree with him 99.99%.

[The Ghost Who Walks]

That's right our conservative party is the Liberal party. While our liberal party is Labour, go figure..

[MonteCristo]

GOD HAS SPOKEN!

Mark Webber says Victoria becoming a 'nanny state'
March 28, 2010 3:12PM

HOMEGROWN grand prix hope Mark Webber has lashed out at red tape in Australia, saying it is increasingly becoming a nanny state.

Speaking before today’s Australian Grand Prix, Webber said increasing rules and regulations left him feeling like he needed to read an instruction book before getting out of bed.

"I think we've got to read an instruction book when we get out of bed - what we can do and what we can't do," Webber said

"Put a yellow vest on and all that sort of stuff."

"It's certainly changed since I left here. It pisses me off coming back here to be honest.

"It's a great country but we've got to be responsible for our actions and it's certainly a bloody nanny state when it comes to what we can do."

Straight from the Book of Mark.

[Picci]

Has somewhat to do with censorship, so I posted it here

Source: BBC

'Phallic' art sparks row ahead of Pope's Malta visit


The Pope's route will pass by the monument

The mayor of a town (Luqa) in Malta has called for a "phallic" sculpture displayed close to the main airport to be removed ahead of the Pope's visit this weekend.

Mayor John Schembri described the art work as "vulgar" and "embarrassing", saying it should go "as a sign of respect" for Pope Benedict XVI.

Colonna Mediterranea was created by artist Paul Vella Critien and has been on show in the town of Luqa since 2006.
Mr Critien responded by calling his critics "ignorant" and "uneducated".

Pope Benedict's route through Malta will involve passing by the roundabout at the entrance to Luqa, where the monument stands.

"The object... is not the most fitting way in which to greet the Pope, especially by what is considered to be the most Catholic country in the world," Mr Schembri was quoted by the Times of Malta as saying.

He told the newspaper that the council would again appeal to the government to order the removal of the column.

Mr Critien said his creation was not a phallic symbol but a modern representation of a symbol dating back to ancient Egypt.
He said the Pope "would look at it as a work of art. [He] is not the man in the street".

The government has said it has no plans to remove the sculpture.

[MonteCristo]

NSW Government recording features for facial recognition
By Gemma Jones From: The Daily Telegraph June 03, 2010 8:25AM

THE New South Wales Government is quietly compiling a mathematical map of almost every adult's face, sharing information that allows law enforcement to track people by CCTV.

Experts said yesterday few people realised their facial features were being recorded in an RTA database of drivers licence photos that the Government has allowed both state and federal police to access, The Daily Telegraph reports.

The federal body CrimTrac has asked NSW for its database so it can be mined nationally by police using the facial recognition information contained in it.

University experts in facial recognition said the correct match rate was as low as 90 per cent, meaning the names of people with faces sharing a similar structure to criminals could be returned in searches.

Dr Carolyn Semmler from the University of Adelaide said police wanted to eventually use facial recognition in smart CCTV cameras allowing people to be tracked anywhere there was a camera.

Some airports, such as Singapore, employ facial recognition technology and the US is considering using it at border crossings.

"Police hope that at some point an individual can be tracked," Dr Semmler said yesterday.

Professor Sowmya Arcot from the University of NSW said a "matrix of numbers" based on features and the distance between facial structures was derived using an algorithm applied to a photograph of a face.

That could then be matched to other faces stored in a database.

NSW Opposition police spokesman Mike Gallacher said most people were unaware their face had been mapped when they applied for or had their licences renewed, allowing them to potentially be tracked.

"Over 20 years ago we had a debate about the Australia card and the people of this country showed where they stood in relation to the government knowing people's movements," he said.

"The push for this into the future has far greater ramifications than some old Australia card.

"I have a concern about a lack of public debate."

The RTA began compiling its facial recognition database last December.

Roads Minister David Borger said it would be shared with other government agencies.

"While the facial recognition system is in its early stages, the RTA will co-operate with other agencies wherever possible," he said.

"The RTA already provides information to the police, and will co-operate with other state or federal law enforcement agencies."

He said the technology was also preventing fraud and stopping people obtaining multiple licences.

A spokeswoman for CrimTrac said its board of management had granted approval for a project proposal for a nation facial recognition capability.

What I hate about all this stuff is that governments don't ask people if they want it; it just happens. How were we ever able to exist without it?