I guarantee ATS will be banned by Australian Government.

This is not some out there conspiracy. I'm presenting all the evidence for my arguments, and it is not a hard case to take in.
The Australian government does not conceal it's intentions, but they are outrageous. I've never seen or heard of such fascism in a democracy since Nazi Germany.

EDIT: I have subsequently realized my folly re:nationalfilter.net.au, as a site which is not legitimate however don't let that deter you from reading the main points in my second post, and other contributions

Here is the run down.

Australia has been developing an internet filtering scheme under the guise of protecting against child pornography, from July until December of last year a live trial ran for opt in ISPs and users.

Currently:
Media Release Senator the Hon Stephen Conroy, Measures to improve safety of the internet for families

The Government expects to introduce legislation during the Autumn 2010 parliamentary sittings. There will be a twelve months process of implementation after the passage of the legislation.

So it's Autumn here now, the legislation will be going through shortly and over the next year we'll slowly lose our access to much internet material.


So? you say? thats good right? no more pedophiles! whats that got to do with ATS?

Through a leak of the blacklist, and admissions by government it turns out the mandatory (FORCED) filter not only blocks out child pornography but:

1. Regular Pornography
   
2. Homosexual material
   
3. Politically sensitive material
   
4. Other parliamentary parties
   
5. Video games
   
6. Contraversial issues: ie Euthanasia
   

Now, much of the evidence I'm about to present I was going to post in another thread Australia on internet watchlist with Iran, North Korea, but something happened which made me so mad, that I felt all must know exactly how they're spinning the issue, and what is to come.

So, I went to The Australian National Internet Filtering Scheme, and I noticed they have a poll for users to vote:

Do you support the Australian Government's proposal for mandatory Internet filtering?
Yes, I support the government's fair and reasonable mandatory filtering scheme.
No, I am a pervert.
No, I hate children.
No, I am a criminal.

Well, I thought, that certainly isn't a loaded question with bias options, but hey, If I'm against legislation then I must be a criminal, so I aptly voted
yes, I am a criminal

I continue browsing, checking out the Media Releases, and I find an article pronouncing landslide 'support' for the scheme..
HUH?
okay maybe I'm a rare criminal and Australia does want to give up its freedoms. I check it out:
Survey Reveals Landslide Support For Internet Censorship

In an intensive four day session, top mathematicians at the DBCDE analysed the data from over 550 respondents, and found almost unanimous support for the DBCDE's proposed censorship, once self-confessed antisocial individuals were removed from the data. Furthermore, of those opposed, 36% listed themselves as "child haters", 35% as "criminals" and 26% as "perverts."

what? are you with me still? Does anybody else see a link here?

Actual result

No, I hate children.
272-37.2%
No, I am a pervert.
248 -33.9%
No, I am a criminal.
188-25.7%
Yes, I support the government's fair and reasonable mandatory filtering scheme.
23-3.1%

Number of Voters : 731

... so remove 96.9% of respondents and you have unanimous support.
AND... All votes against must choose crime, child hater, or perv..

EDIT: I have subsequently realized my folly re:nationalfilter.net.au, as a site which is not legitimate however don't let that deter you from reading the main points in my second post, and other contributions

continued

[edit on 14/3/10 by countercounterculture]

[edit on 3/15/2010 by semperfortis]

Man I hope you guys don't get shut down. Though if your gov is like ours in the U.S. you will find plenty of ways around that system. I will be rootin for ya.

reply to post by ventian


Absolutely...

If the worst does happen, every Australian internet user; man, woman & child will know how to use a proxy or how to find an overseas VPN provider

That is a certainty....

I rooting for aussie internet users too, if Australia loses free speech the rest of the world will follow, I think its just a pilot for future countries. IMO TPTB will use the aussie data to work out how they will censor the rest of us. They are talking about licences for internet use here in the uk too. sorry im no good at loading links but heres one www.techradar.com/.../internet/exclusive-the-uk-s-internet-licence-leaked-673143

reply to post by cosmodromia tis parnasida


Licenses for internet use in Britain ?? Egad !!

That's shocking Cosmo, and like internet filtering in Australia, could easily be looked at by other countries as a way of appeasing the minority groups who are trying to force internet censorship on people...

Okay, so MAYBE that whole charade was orchestrated by hackers?
I don't think so. Usually the hacking attempts against Conroy have been quickly fixed *, and the reason why the 'Conroy' to 'Control' edit goes unnoticed is because it is hard to notice. I didn't notice it!

Okay so now what has this got to do with banning ATS?

Well during the trial the Aus government was testing the filter through opt in users and ISP's.
Thanks to Conroys 'honest' nature and especially thanks to Wikileaks, I got a hold of the list as it was leaked, as did many journalists. Lets see what gets banned:


First: Video Games:
Web filters to censor video games

The Federal Government has now set its sights on gamers, promising to use its internet censorship regime to block websites hosting and selling video games that are not suitable for 15 year olds.

How about banning political party, The Australian Sex Party ( i know silly party but how to draw a line???)

Aussie net censorship turning Chinese

"Despite letters of protest about the unconstitutional nature of such bans he refuses to budge. These bans have now spread to state government departments with the Victorian Dept of Infrastructure the latest government agency to ban access to the Sex Party’s site." She also expressed concern over Senator Conroy’s statements in Senate Estimates that he admired Google’s role in blocking content in countries such as China and Thailand. She adds: "First he tells us that it is only Refused Classification (RC) material that will be blocked and only via a complaint driven scheme. Now he is discussing getting Google to block search requests for what might be considered RC material."

Or just anything Conroy or Rudd don't like:
Web filtering pulls plug on euthanasia debate

A copy of the blacklist (leaked to __._) shows the peacefulpillhandbook.com in undistinguished company, lying in the murky alphabetical territory between panty-ass.com and pickyourperversion.com. This is not an argument in favour of voluntary euthanasia, a subject on which I don't have a firm opinion. It's an argument in favour of freedom and free speech. As I've tried to find out more about voluntary euthanasia in recent months, attending several talks by Nitschke and speaking with lots of people, I've been struck by the number of laws that seek to prevent the flow of facts. They haven't been hugely effective to this point, but they're probably going to become more so soon. This is despite the fact that killing yourself in Australia is actually legal, and 70 per cent of respondents in opinion polls support voluntary euthanasia.

Point being here is that Euthanasia isn't even illegal...

also:

Leaked Australian blacklist reveals banned sites

But about half of the sites on the list are not related to child porn and include a slew of online poker sites, YouTube links, regular gay and straight porn sites, Wikipedia entries, euthanasia sites, websites of fringe religions such as satanic sites, fetish sites, Christian sites, the website of a tour operator and even a Queensland dentist.

If its controversial ie Euthanasia, Fringe religion, Christian sects, Opposing party... BANNED.

One vote from one person on www.netalert.gov.au... saying it's inappropriate for children.

Then we never see it

Point being, a contraversial site it is, ATS, dealing with Euthanasia, revolution, anti-government, religion etc.

Do you really think ATS wont be banned

[edit on 14/3/10 by countercounterculture]

Sorry for the delay on the continuation.. as i noticed my ignorance with the whole 'Conroy' 'Control' thing, looking at the website further, I think it's clear that it may have been hacked and altered recently.

Still my second post brings home the issue i hope!

reply to post by countercounterculture


I suggest writing letters to all Australian newspapers about this.
It would be interesting to see if they are total sycophants or if they will print the truth.

Originally posted by countercounterculture


I did however notice after my fit of rage that either the webmaster of the site or hackers have slipped in some nice editions on the site altering Conroy (the minister) to Control

Are you sure that (site) isn't a satire/joke/protest?

"Digital Eekonomy"?

"On this site you can find important information about Australia's exciting new regime of Internet censorship. Please participate in our reader's poll, or read about how Internet filtering will protect your children, pets and other livestock."?

The nationalfilter.net.au site is defo a spoof, Counter...I guarantee it If it were a government site, it would be a .gov.au...I know this cos I used to work firstly for a company that used to have the monopoly on registering .com.au domain names, I also worked for the company who has .net.au & I also worked for AuDA for a stint on secondment...

However, pretty much everything else you've said about the proposed internet filter is right on the money Your second post does have it summed up well

And yes, given some of the topics discussed on ATS, its quite possible the site could be off limits for Australian internet users should the filter be implemented...


[edit on 14-3-2010 by Retrovertigo]

reply to post by Kailassa


OH wait there IS more i left out... We can't oppose on any .com.au domain, which is how you have to register Australian domains...

auDA take down stephenconroy.com.au

The auDA today suspended the registration of the domain stephenconroy.com.au, which was being used by those against the mandatory Internet filter which Senator Stephen Conroy has announced recently. The site has moved to www.stephen-conroy.com... and they have posted the correspondence between auDA and the domain’s owner. What is concerning to me is that they were only given 3 hours to respond to a request to provide evidence as to why they should be able to continue to own the domain. 3 hours. Lets look at the applicable auDA policies surrounding eligibility concerns.


....


the auDA wouldn’t say why they cancelled the domain registration.

auDA is the Australian Domain name administrator.. We have to use US based sites in order to protest.

reply to post by Retrovertigo


Yeah I kinda realized it was fishy after my fit of rage. must be middle of the night stupidity.. But I already posted thread.

There is still very important information to consider though!

stephenconroy.com.au was taken down purely because the person who registered the domain was not Stephen Conroy...

.com.au has a very specific policy with regard to registering domains, and that policy states you cant register a .com.au in a persons name unless you're that person...

reply to post by countercounterculture


Hail 4CHAN - Anon. The only answer to dictatorship on de internetz!!


Hope this boosts your morale.

Anonymous vs the Australian Government, play by play live

Anonymous vs the Government of Australia


Australian Government attacked by 4Chan [UPDATES]

4chan hacks Australian government sites



RESULT



Enjoy!!

[edit on 14-3-2010 by December_Rain]

reply to post by Retrovertigo



Your exactly the kind of person I'd like to ask about some of this stuff, IE the auDA controversy. Would there be a reason as to why stephenconroy would have been taken down? Other than new legislation?

blargh, my emotional rage has left me subjective and poor on my fact checking.

usually im more objective!
okay... sometimes.

reply to post by countercounterculture


Absolutely dude, pretty much everything else you posted about the issue is very relevant

Good job

reply to post by Retrovertigo


and you answered my question before I asked it LOL.

thanks man!
So I think its the same guys from that site putting up nationalfilter then.

Well this is why ATS kicks butt, you realize your errors and grasp the whole situation before throwing your monitor out the window.

edited..

[edit on 14-3-2010 by December_Rain]

reply to post by countercounterculture


The rage is certainly understandable.

This link, to a thread by MysterE, shows a form of protest that could be considered:
Operation Titstorm

reply to post by countercounterculture


Anytime bruv

Yeah, it looks a lot like the guys behind stephenconroy.com.au...Good thing they used a domain name that wasnt someones actual name or that probably would have been taken down again...

Tell me about it...If you want to know anything about anything, ATS is the place to find out