<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.2" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Net Censorship in Australia</title>
	<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia</link>
	<description>Control Congress is a multi-partisan, issue-oriented political forum that brings together the Left, Right, and everyone in between.</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2008 13:51:23 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Bill</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59624</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2007 13:23:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59624</guid>
		<description>So what does "the state" like to do with increased control of children?
http://tinyurl.com/3a9r48
And who monitors THEIR content?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So what does &#8220;the state&#8221; like to do with increased control of children?<br />
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/3a9r48" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/3a9r48</a><br />
And who monitors THEIR content?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59623</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2007 13:18:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59623</guid>
		<description>Again I'm no expert but "nationally" (in the U.S.) aren't there some "barriers to entry" already with adult sites?   (You need a credit card usually) and you're probably breaking a law if you "certify" that you're 18 years old right?  Remember "protecting kids" is one of the old standbys with socialists and other assorted "control freaks". And the end result is more state control over kids, and less freedom for us adults (and small business)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Again I&#8217;m no expert but &#8220;nationally&#8221; (in the U.S.) aren&#8217;t there some &#8220;barriers to entry&#8221; already with adult sites?   (You need a credit card usually) and you&#8217;re probably breaking a law if you &#8220;certify&#8221; that you&#8217;re 18 years old right?  Remember &#8220;protecting kids&#8221; is one of the old standbys with socialists and other assorted &#8220;control freaks&#8221;. And the end result is more state control over kids, and less freedom for us adults (and small business)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: social media and green horses &#187; Web Censorship law in Australia (updated)</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59614</link>
		<dc:creator>social media and green horses &#187; Web Censorship law in Australia (updated)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2007 09:50:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59614</guid>
		<description>[...] Meanwhile a debate has risen in the slashdot community, in digg as long as in the controlcongress community. Should the government regulate the content children should have access to, or is it solely the responsibility of the parents to control what their children are allowed to see? As slashdot user, thegnu noted: [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Meanwhile a debate has risen in the slashdot community, in digg as long as in the controlcongress community. Should the government regulate the content children should have access to, or is it solely the responsibility of the parents to control what their children are allowed to see? As slashdot user, thegnu noted: [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SgtMac</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59336</link>
		<dc:creator>SgtMac</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2007 14:05:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59336</guid>
		<description>Bill

That's a good question. They could either drag him out in handcuffs or drag him to a Ron Paul rally.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bill</p>
<p>That&#8217;s a good question. They could either drag him out in handcuffs or drag him to a Ron Paul rally.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59159</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Dec 2007 01:40:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59159</guid>
		<description>re:
"The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) will be able to force content providers to take down offensive material and issue notices for live content to be stopped and links to the content deleted."

So the way I read this is (if we were in Australia) if I linked to an adult site here it would be this site's responsibility to delete it?  And if they don't?  Do they drag John Konop out in handcuffs?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>re:<br />
&#8220;The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) will be able to force content providers to take down offensive material and issue notices for live content to be stopped and links to the content deleted.&#8221;</p>
<p>So the way I read this is (if we were in Australia) if I linked to an adult site here it would be this site&#8217;s responsibility to delete it?  And if they don&#8217;t?  Do they drag John Konop out in handcuffs?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: captain_menace</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59155</link>
		<dc:creator>captain_menace</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Dec 2007 00:45:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59155</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;"What the people actually care about is not addressed."&lt;/i&gt;

I wish I knew what the people cared about.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>&#8220;What the people actually care about is not addressed.&#8221;</i></p>
<p>I wish I knew what the people cared about.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Web censorship law in Australia &#124; social media and green horses</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59114</link>
		<dc:creator>Web censorship law in Australia &#124; social media and green horses</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Dec 2007 17:43:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59114</guid>
		<description>[...] Meanwhile a debate has risen in the slashdot community, in digg as long as in the controlcongress community. Should the government regulate the content children should have access to, or is it solely the responsibility of the parents to control what their children are allowed to see? As slashdot user, thegnu noted: [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Meanwhile a debate has risen in the slashdot community, in digg as long as in the controlcongress community. Should the government regulate the content children should have access to, or is it solely the responsibility of the parents to control what their children are allowed to see? As slashdot user, thegnu noted: [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Oliva</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59112</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Oliva</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Dec 2007 17:11:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59112</guid>
		<description>Capt,

Are the elites evil is a motivational question I cannot answer, but they are interested in power first. The lesser of two evils is rhetorical and not literal in any case.

Do they know best? I don't think so, they simply happen to have the power to set their own agenda and we have allowed them to accrue so much power that they no longer fear being held accountable to the people.  If they lose one election, they expect to win the next for their party.  What the people actually care about is not addressed.

In the meantime, we are duped into believing that we have no other choice, nowhere else to go. We are kept in liberal vs. conservative camps vehemently opposed to each other, and in the resulting divisive atmosphere the elites maintain power.

As for the dumbing down of America, you must recognize that they have taken over our educational system.  An educated populace is the biggest threat to their positions of power.  The basic founding principles of our nation are ignored in favor of all the diversity and feel good stuff.  The discussion of education has been going on for a while now, but one thing is sure, the system has failed our kids and it seems everyone is unhappy with education these days. 

You are correct that the wolves are guarding the sheep, so does that mean we continue to accept those conditions?  Due to the unique opportunity we have in this coming election and the fact that we can now communicate with each other through internet sites like this one means we have a chance to seize the day and bring about a restructuring of the power base in Washington.  We simply cannot afford another elite from the two major parties as President.  

Whether you would consider voting for me or not, you are going to have to work hard at explaining how once again voting the lesser of two evils will generate new thinking and innovation in our governing process.  You are also going to have to work hard at proving that if we do elect another elite, Dem or GOP, how this will not add to their belief in their own invulnerability which  allows them to continue to be the deciders.

Is it time for a revolution?  Absolutely, we need a revolution at the ballot box in 2008.  An independent President is the first thing we need as a tool to breakup this virtual lock on power by the elites,  Nothing else can do that, and unless you prefer the 2 party system of continued control, how else could you effect real change?

The post John put up this morning about the greater good is relevant here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Capt,</p>
<p>Are the elites evil is a motivational question I cannot answer, but they are interested in power first. The lesser of two evils is rhetorical and not literal in any case.</p>
<p>Do they know best? I don&#8217;t think so, they simply happen to have the power to set their own agenda and we have allowed them to accrue so much power that they no longer fear being held accountable to the people.  If they lose one election, they expect to win the next for their party.  What the people actually care about is not addressed.</p>
<p>In the meantime, we are duped into believing that we have no other choice, nowhere else to go. We are kept in liberal vs. conservative camps vehemently opposed to each other, and in the resulting divisive atmosphere the elites maintain power.</p>
<p>As for the dumbing down of America, you must recognize that they have taken over our educational system.  An educated populace is the biggest threat to their positions of power.  The basic founding principles of our nation are ignored in favor of all the diversity and feel good stuff.  The discussion of education has been going on for a while now, but one thing is sure, the system has failed our kids and it seems everyone is unhappy with education these days. </p>
<p>You are correct that the wolves are guarding the sheep, so does that mean we continue to accept those conditions?  Due to the unique opportunity we have in this coming election and the fact that we can now communicate with each other through internet sites like this one means we have a chance to seize the day and bring about a restructuring of the power base in Washington.  We simply cannot afford another elite from the two major parties as President.  </p>
<p>Whether you would consider voting for me or not, you are going to have to work hard at explaining how once again voting the lesser of two evils will generate new thinking and innovation in our governing process.  You are also going to have to work hard at proving that if we do elect another elite, Dem or GOP, how this will not add to their belief in their own invulnerability which  allows them to continue to be the deciders.</p>
<p>Is it time for a revolution?  Absolutely, we need a revolution at the ballot box in 2008.  An independent President is the first thing we need as a tool to breakup this virtual lock on power by the elites,  Nothing else can do that, and unless you prefer the 2 party system of continued control, how else could you effect real change?</p>
<p>The post John put up this morning about the greater good is relevant here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Web censorship law in Australia &#124; social media and green horses</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59098</link>
		<dc:creator>Web censorship law in Australia &#124; social media and green horses</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Dec 2007 16:09:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59098</guid>
		<description>[...] Meanwhile a debate has risen in the slashdot community as long as in the controlcongress community. Should the government regulate the content children should have access to, or is it solely the responsibility of the parents to control what their children are allowed to see? As slashdot user, thegnu noted: [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Meanwhile a debate has risen in the slashdot community as long as in the controlcongress community. Should the government regulate the content children should have access to, or is it solely the responsibility of the parents to control what their children are allowed to see? As slashdot user, thegnu noted: [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: robojiannis</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59096</link>
		<dc:creator>robojiannis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Dec 2007 15:35:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/net-censorship-in-australia#comment-59096</guid>
		<description>Governments are slowly getting themselves involved into issues of the cyberspace (see also the china-yahoo and TorrentSpy-MPAA issues). But I think the cyberspace has proved that it is self-regulated. No central control is needed. Remember the &lt;a href="http://homes.eff.org/~barlow/Declaration-Final.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;declaration of independence of cyberspace &lt;/a&gt;(Barlow, 1996)?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Governments are slowly getting themselves involved into issues of the cyberspace (see also the china-yahoo and TorrentSpy-MPAA issues). But I think the cyberspace has proved that it is self-regulated. No central control is needed. Remember the <a href="http://homes.eff.org/~barlow/Declaration-Final.html" rel="nofollow">declaration of independence of cyberspace </a>(Barlow, 1996)?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
