Action Blogs

Time to Pull The Plug On Internet Filtering

by Eliza Cussen
 

Stephen Conroy's been sounding defensive lately. Recently, he got called into the boss' office for a raking over the delayed roll-out of the national broadband network.


Then he felt compelled to argue point-for-point with a 22 year old campaigner (ie me) over the deeply flawed design of the internet filter policy.


At every opportunity, the Senator has felt compelled to defend his ideology-driven policy against immense opposition.


This week he was given another reason to get on the back-foot with the announcement that the legislation will be shelved before the election.  This is a small and subtle way of Rudd expressing his lack of confidence in his communications minister.


The internet filter is on life support but we need Kevin Rudd to pull the plug.


Just by speaking up, Rudd could save over $40 million a year- money which could be spent on methods which work- education, parental empowerment and resourcing the Federal Police to help keep kids safe online.


While we can't quite say the filter policy is dead, we can say it's dying. And for that we have to thank the 120,000 people who have signed our petition, the 10,000 who flooded Q & A, the thousands who donated and the countless other GetUp members who have shown their support for internet freedom. The campaign is an excellent example of why we need to keep the internet a free and open space for expression. Without keeping the internet free from censorship a movement of this kind would not be possible.


So thanks, GetUp members, for helping to keep the internet amazing!

@MikeFitzAU

Posted by @MikeFitzAU 4/30/2010

This is not yet a victory. The filter remains a threat to our childrens' freedom as long as it remains Labor (or even Coalition) policy. At the upcoming federal election, ensure that the person you intend to vote for understands that your vote is conditional on his/her opposition to the filter.

Any plan that places scope-creep-ready censorware in all Australian ISPs is a danger.

reply »







CAPTCHA

ElizaC

Posted by ElizaC 4/30/2010

Right on, Mike!

GetUp is determined to keep the pressure on until we know the policy is gone for good.

reply »







CAPTCHA

FredZ

Posted by FredZ 4/30/2010

We are told that the filter will not be brought in until after the next election.

It makes me think that the Government knows it has the majority of its voters on side and will thereby gain a comprehensive mandate to put the filter into legislation.

I think we're pissing into the wind here...

reply »







CAPTCHA

John Lord

Posted by John Lord 4/30/2010

What did Rudd think he was going to filter? Family pics of a naked baby sent to relatives? OOOOOHHH!!...NAKED...FILTER IT !!!! Funny, harmless jokes because there is a swear word in it??? Tourists sending a pic of the statue of David, or the Mannequin Pis to their friends??
Go back to square one Rudd, and learn how to become a popular Prime Minister. Dictators always lose in the end....reason...The POWER of the PEOPLE!

reply »







CAPTCHA

Carolyn McK

Posted by Carolyn McK 5/1/2010

There seem to be only two methods of government, John Howard's stay safe do nothing and Rudd's gung ho just do anything that sounds good without bothering to find out if it will work, if it will make any difference, or if it is safe. There is an in between, teach the office junior to google, do a little research and find out stuff, call someone who has tried something similar and find out what the result was. No expensive feasibility studies they just cost millions, just a little quiet research, about an hours worth will do. That's enough to inform you for example that internet filtering of this kind puts us up there with countries with the most censorship and control of their citizens in the world. Australian's have rules for everything, we are suffocated in cotton wool, its time to grow up and take responsibility for ourselves. If you go on the internet, take precautions, if you walk to the edge of a cliff don't fall over the edge, if you smoke you are taking a risk. We should not have to put fences around everything. Open your eyes look around and take care of yourself! Censoring the internet is just what Hitler would have done, his solution was to burn books. Human beings will go to extraordinary lengths to inform themselves of the truth, to enrich their knowledge. I don't want to be protected I want to be free. Predators and people who hurt children should be hunted down. Focus on them. I had a teacher once who kept the whole class in if one or two people spoke, it caused anarchy. We should not all be punished for the minority that abuse the internet and its infinite sharing of information.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Thorn

Posted by Thorn 5/2/2010

A forward thinking government would put in place the legislative framework to enable the online publication and distribution of everything that can be legally obtained offline.

Instead, the proposed legislation will ensure Australia is strategically placed last in the internet race.

What company would take the risk of placing content on a server in Australia? There is much legislative uncertainty as to what will be acceptable online in Australia. There is also the added risk that the company would lose huge amounts of money when a site is incorrectly blocked due to an error. If you locate the server overseas, you reduce the possible negative impact of blunders as only Australian customers would be blocked by the filter.

Movies, television shows, books, games, magazines and newspapers are already on the internet. With the ability of the user to interact with these media, at what point does an interactive book, television show or movie become a game? The government's blinkered vision that games are only for children also adds to the legislative uncertainty.

What is next? Burning every book or magazine that is unsuitable for 5 year old?

The economic effect of blunders on companies could be devastating. Most online sites have competitors, and if their site is unavailable their customers will go to competing sites, losing that business forever. Customers who have paid weekly or monthly subscriptions could also be out of pocket.

The restricted content includes too much content that should not be restricted. I have little faith in the government's ability to put it into practice without bankrupting companies due to errors or adding significantly to internet latency.

There has to be a better solution!

reply »







CAPTCHA

Tony L

Posted by Tony L 5/5/2010

The more I read about the filter proposal, the more I see that ideology has gotten ahead of practical, or even financial concerns.

I have some experience in implementing a URL based filter on a small scale. In this case, it was to limit access to "distracting" material to a group of rooms that were being used to conduct a youth training programme. Material restricted included not only adult content, but some online gaming sites and IM portals, which were notorious time wasters that the teachers had to keep moving the students off.

In some ways, the technology worked much as the Government's proposed filter works. It was URL based, where anything from a single file, to a directory, to an entire site could be blocked. IP blocking was also an option. URLs were generally reported (to me) by the teachers. We had a turnaround time of minutes (if I was free) to a couple of hours worst case), but even then it was a game of "whack a mole", as new URLs came to notice. We did have the advantage of a controlled environment, where there was much less scope for bypassing the filter entirely. However, when it came to performance, that was actually quite good, even when browsing sites on the LAN, where there was no noticeable degradation. Internet sites actually benefited from the inherent caching of the system. The filter ran on an old surplus PC, so it didn't need a lot of processing power to keep up.

Scaling that up to a national level would add up to a monumental waste of time and money in maintaining the list. I agree, both on technical grounds, and on the grounds of human rights that the money that would have been allocated to the Internet filter is better spent on education, empowerment (of parents to supervise their kids with confidence) and law enforcement, to pursue and bring lawbreakers, such as those creating and trading in child porn and other forms of abuse to justice.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Kirk

Posted by Kirk 5/10/2010

I agree Tony... no sooner will as site be added to the list a new site will pop up. There are so many ways around filters too.

What about all those forums, chat rooms, blogs, etc, how can the Govt (or anyone for that matter) block us from seeing what people post on there??

This all seems like a complete waste of time and money... taxpayers money, which would be better spent actually chasing the bad guys. There are already systems in place where by our police are successfully catching people in "child porn rings"... wouldn't it be better to focus on more of the same??

reply »







CAPTCHA

@nthony

Posted by @nthony 5/10/2010

If only Rudd could feel the pulse of the people again... I know another 20/20 summit!!! Maybe this time he could listen to what people want and stop wasting everyone's time and money on this ridiculous plan. Who knows maybe he might wake up and just rip some of the title out of Senator Conroy's portfolio of Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, it worked with Garrett!!!

We need to put these politician's straight they work for us not the other way round.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Adam

Posted by Adam 5/10/2010

The Australian Internet Filer if implemented will be the beginning of the end for what freedoms of information there is left, not to mention an attack on all Australians right to the choice of the information we view. Policing the internet on a National level under the voter friendly veil of "protecting the children" is not the way, and any regulating should be performed by parents in the home.

Another solution would be to provide an Internet filter to homes and business via download which is a lot more effective for those that "choose" to adopt it, and the Government is being taking a proactive stance against content which may be deemed hazardous. Forcing it upon everyone and removing the choice is not the way.

Finally, the Internet is not a static piece of media that can be categorised, rated and approved by a standards board like a magazine, dvd, cd or video game. The Internet is dynamic and ever-changing wealth of information which is free for all of us to enjoy. Further if ACMA wants to treat the Internet as static media by forming a blacklist of sites, why isn't this information made public, and why hide it? Why did Senator Conroy become so defensive when asked about this? Alarm bells are ringing and the only thing that brings me peace is to think in 10 years time, I'll sit with friends laughing about what the Government tried to do once.

Stand up and make your opinion known about this attempt to rub out a key human right - choice.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Power to the Paedophiles

Posted by Power to the Paedophiles 5/11/2010

"Choice" to do what ever you like is not part of a Free Society.

ADAM You do not have the choice to kill; to steal; to rape; to act as a preditor; to let bombs off in a crowd etc etc.

If you are a contributing member of a society it requires you to help your neighbour and not rape his wife because you think you have the choice to rape her or want her.

Society requires you to protect the weak and the young and at times it limits your CHOICE to drive at 200kmh and drive through STOP signs etc etc

WE have laws that are broken every day. This does not mean we should not have these laws as you seem to be inferring above because you see them as removing your choice to read and see what you want. If you want your children to be able to access the sick violence or see the results of Paedophiles at some friends home then by all means go for CHOICE for all and bring up your kids in a ANARCHISTIC Society because you deserve it mate as they will have the CHOICE YOU LONG FOR. NO LAWS to hamper their choice.

POWER TO THE PAEDOPHILE GO "Get Up".

reply »







CAPTCHA

Power to the Paedophiles

Posted by Power to the Paedophiles 5/11/2010

It was shocking to see the great number of Q&A audience and the 120,000 at get up that want NO controls on what our children see on the net.

The only argument used was it was able to be hacked around or it should be the responsibility of perents.

We have laws against Pack RAPE, against underage drinking; against stealing and they still happen.

It seems freedom for our society to go to hell in a bucket is OK at GET UP as we should not have laws because people can break them.

Or is it we should only have laws that people cannot break.

How many Paedophiles are members of GET UP?

reply »







CAPTCHA

Bakalite

Posted by Bakalite 5/29/2010

Hi, Power to the Paedophiles (sic),

I'm pleased that you are engaged enough to comment on GetUp! I also get what you are saying. I'm a software engineer and I can assure you there are many controls monitoring what we all see, including what our children see.

Your negating point that filters can be "hacked around or should be the responsibility of parents" as being nefarious is fair enough. But, frankly, what do you do. I protect my children using openDNS. Ironically openDNS circumvents the proposed filter (the DNS server being in the US). openDNS is used by many tens of thousands of schools worldwide and the take up increases daily.

Our Internet speed over ADSL+ is typically around 5.5 Kb/s and is very rarely above 8 Kb/s. For example, in Europe its running as high as 35 Kb/s. Cable very recently here for comparison will run at 100 Kb/s (but no static IP address). Its impractical to monitor our Australian network by packet sniffing simply because we don't have a good enough network (the proposed filter does not packet sniff - much more primitive). So what are we left with?

Trust me, there are other ways to track pedophiles. I for one would prefer to use common internet policing practice and catch the perpetrators electronically stalking their targets, rather than drive them underground and catch them from the victims forensic evidence. Be careful what you wish for, your hoped for filter may well do much more harm than good.

reply »







CAPTCHA

DD

Posted by DD 5/11/2010

Pursuing individual offensive sites has been very successful. I don't know what "Power" is finding - and I can't be bothered to deeply scour the net for material I don't want - but at a surface level most of the material intended to be covered by the filter has gone

"Power" seems to equate opposing the filter with supporting child pornography - nothing could be further from the truth. The two items are only connected in the minds of the computer illiterate. The filter would achieve precisely nothing positive, except perhaps raising computer literacy to get round it for the sheer Hell of it! Kids will!

Surely it is better to have sites that can be prosecuted, rather than promote - as a filter will - an underground network of complicated encryption, and probably far worse source exploitation of the innocent

Kids who use the net are like wizards compared with most of us of older generations - No filter will block them seeing what they want to see - pirating what they want to pirate - and using the medium as part of normal youthful exploration and rebellion.

The internet is part of their universe. A whole generation has now grown up who do not remember the days before the internet existed. Behaviour in your personal universe is a personal matter. Decent behaviour prevents more road accidents than laws do. People do not behave in a socially acceptable manner merely because laws punish them when they do not. Parenting is the key to most of it. The filter is yet another attempt to usurp the parental role. Do that in one area and parents learn to abrogate their responsibilities to properly parent in others.

We have to bring our children up to understand their environment - an environment far wider and more complex than the one in which the older generation grew up

People like Conroy and "Power" seem to live in a patriarchal and patronising world that is gone. For all the nostalgia - I don't miss it. I prefer a freer and more open world, despite the dangers. I prefer a world not totally dominated in terms of ethos by a frequently corrupted parliamentary class. I elect them to run the country - not to take away my role as a parent. I elect them to protect and enhance liberty not to censor. I elect them to pursue criminals not to interfere with a complicated technological medium they all to obviously do not really understand

Progress can be dangerous - the Reformation was dangerous, the Enlightenment was dangerous, the nuclear age is dangerous. But there is no going backwards - no return to a Golden Age - simply because there never was one. "Power" seems to be feeding the myth of a society that is degenerating because of "freedom for our society". That is a very old Catholic myth from the time of Luther. It rears its ugly head periodically to threaten the gains of Enlightenment

Conversely I believe society is endangered, progress is threatened, the future of our children is being soured, by outdated and dysfunctional attitudes - some drawn from decaying superstitions and some simply from an archaic and nosey desire by the arrogant to impose their will on others in every area of their lives.

It is time to forget the filter - learn to live with the new media - and move on. All the filter will ultimately achieve is the loss of some half a million votes and the ousting of the ALP in Australia

Or is that what it is really all about? - Just asking. What is the real agenda. Do the perpetrators of this nonsense really not see what they are doing?

What was that old term from James Bond books? - "Agent Provocateur" - might as well be

reply »







CAPTCHA

Power to the Paedophiles

Posted by Power to the Paedophiles 5/11/2010

DD you are typical of those who believe we all should be anarchist and bring all our children up as if there is no one in society to protect them or further "to believe society has no right to protect them". You believe they must be EXPOSED TO THE MORE COMPLEX environment of "enlightenment". You make that clear in what you wrote above.

You said so much in your comment. I was brought up in a society that protected me in the late 40s and 50s. Please do not tell me about how I was brought up as you are clearly ignorant about the threats in my society in regional Queensland.

If you want your kids to be exposed to violent sex and the evils of paedophiles then vote for the GREAT "NO TO EVERYTHING" PARTY.

The REAL AGENDA is to protect our society from preditors and the evil of violent SEX called RAPE and HARD DRUGS and Terrorists who make BOMBS.

What is your AGENDA DD? Are you one of those PREDITORS protecting your turf? Maybe a terrorist or a pack rapist after some ideas to be more degrading? So we all go forward to your Golden Age of free and violent sex and no laws by the state to protect the young and the weak.

And you call your future with this anarchy PROGRESS? REALLY?

If you have never lived in a WAR zone you sure long to do so with your strange views of PROGRESS.

Yes I have lived in a WAR zone in a Village and observed you lawless state. Only the SICK ever want to return to it.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Thorne

Posted by Thorne 5/25/2010

What a wierd statemnt!

You've lived in a warzone and Australia without an internet filter is like that?

And by installing an internet filter will magically rid Autralia of pack rapists and sex offenders and turn the country is a magical happy place full of sunshine and rainbows?

And anybody opposing the secret government ban list (with no review process or any oversight at all) is clearly a paedophile.

Being so old, I'd of thought you'd want to be able to access infomation on euthanasia so you don't have to spent the rest of your days living in pain tied to a bed dying of cancer or trapped in a body that doesn't work from a stroke.

Whoops thats banned too! Can't have the little kiddies looking up how to "off" themselves can we now?

Clearly your on drugs or your Stephen Conroy (or both)

Porn is the excuse for the filter but the real reason is so the government can filter anything it likes for any reason it like and nobody will directly know or be able to do anything about it.

Thorne

reply »







CAPTCHA

Borowicz

Posted by Borowicz 5/11/2010

Troll rubbish.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Posted by 6/22/2010

That said, it's pretty defeatist to compare Australia to Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia simply because of an internet filter. To suggest that Australia would become totalitarianism is a ridiculously unsubstantiated claim.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Posted by 6/22/2010

That said, it's pretty defeatist to compare Australia to Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia simply because of an internet filter. To suggest that Australia would become totalitarianism is a ridiculously unsubstantiated claim.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Power to the Paedophiles

Posted by Power to the Paedophiles 5/11/2010

Borowicz,

You must work in the Sun with a detailed comment like that.

Fried brain obviously.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Grandma

Posted by Grandma 5/11/2010

Being a very senior citizen, I have heard all this carry-on about censorship being the end of all liberty time and time again. This never eventuates. I was disgusted at the selfish attitude of the elders who wanted free unlimited access to information about ending their lives. Did they give any thought to depressed young people, those suffering mental illness or severe depression who might also take this option before seeking help.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Thorne

Posted by Thorne 5/25/2010

My Grandfather died of liver cancer. He was doped out on morphine as high as they could give it and he was still in pain.

He lost all control of all bodily functions. His bowels stop working and faeces starting coming back up.

A young person doesn't need to research a happy pill that puts them to sleep. They hang themselves, crash cars, swallow pills or jump off buildings.

The filter does nothing to save young people but it does try to rob terminally sick people of the right to go with diginity and without pain.

Of course the realy point is that the filter "TRIES" to. They're running classes on how to get around it for old people.

If your anti filter you should vote against it cause it's a blow against your freedom. If your pro filter you should still vote against it cause it's a huge waste of tax payers money that can't technically work.

Thorne

reply »







CAPTCHA

Borowicz

Posted by Borowicz 5/11/2010

Never eventuates? Think of Nazi Germany and the former Soviet Union, to name two memorable examples. Tyranny starts early with government censorship and control over information. They then merely continue expanding the definition of "unacceptable content" and hardening the laws.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Olternative

Posted by Olternative 6 days 18 hours ago

Agreed...

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." – Benjamin Franklin

reply »







CAPTCHA

Bob

Posted by Bob 5/11/2010

Kevin Rudd learned to speak Chinese and he may as well move to China where they already have internet filtering. What an un Australian thing to do. Where has our free country gone.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Nik

Posted by Nik 5/12/2010

If the government has any sense at all they wouldn't be trying to implement a broad filter, but rather spending a fraction of the cost on a filter that the user can install on their own computer.

By providing the tools for the people that need the filter they keep the speed and fundamental qualities of the internet in-tact and offer protection to the people that want it.

I will be fighting to keep the internet free! Not so I can look at porn or illegal sites but to ensure that one of the greatest tools the human race has seen remains in-tact and in control of the people, not by the small minority of political/religious views that seem to shape our society in such negative fear mongering ways.

Education over control please Mr Rudd!

reply »







CAPTCHA

OldFart

Posted by OldFart 5/21/2010

I think Solomon is missing the point - this has nothing to do with effectively filtering the internet or protecting children and everything to do with getting the votes of elderly and conservative voters who are scared of 'new' technology.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Thorne

Posted by Thorne 5/25/2010

http://www.theage.com.au/technology/conroy-savages-facebook-privacy-20100525-w8bt.html?autostart=1

"What
would you prefer," Senator Conroy said, "a corporate giant who is answerable to no one and motivated solely by profit making the rules on the internet, or a democratically elected government with all the checks and balances in place?"

So what Conroy really asks us is do we want our privacy or our freedom?

To quote Robert Downey Junior in the original Ironman "is it too much to ask for both?"

He might have had some point if the "democratically elected government" actually had the "checks and balances in place" but as far as I can see the list of filtered sites is hidden with no reveiew process (except maybe a six monthly review by a retired judge. Maybe)

Quite frankly it appalls me to think the only review to my internet freedom is a retired judge who more than likely has to get his grandchildren to help him order his alzheimer medication online cause he can't use a keyboard.

God forbid him to be also a god fearing christian "family man" (who more than likely visit Ken's Karate Klub too) specially selected by Conroy to be his oversight.

If I ever have to select between my privacy and my freedom, I pick my freedom.

Google and Facebook before Conroy

GetUp needs a new campain for the customs new right to search laptops for "porn" when going through airports.

This has nothing to do with porn and everything to do with the right to search for anything they feel like without a warrant.

Lets say I have a naughty photo of my wife. All perfectly legal. By law I have to tell them I have porn on my computer and show them the photos. Worse still I can say no I don't, they search the computer and look anyway then hit me for lying on my custom forms.

While their at it, they can read my emails, letters, browser history, etc etc. Wonderful isn't it. The joys of living in a police state.

Thorne

reply »







CAPTCHA

zoltanp1967

Posted by zoltanp1967 5/29/2010

Gotta watch them though - shelvng sometimes is another way of saing: 'If we get through at the next election, we will do as we like if parliament majority allows us to, and say that we had a mandate to do so'.

reply »







CAPTCHA

adamsmithrpg

Posted by adamsmithrpg 6/11/2010

for something new that's almost as bad...
http://www.zdnet.com.au/govt-wants-isps-to-record-browsing-history-339303785.htm

reply »







CAPTCHA

Richard

Posted by Richard 6/12/2010

So democratically elected governments are accountable? You mean the governments that take us to war on lies and conscript people when they refuse to go voluntarily?

reply »







CAPTCHA

Phillipe O\'Connell

Posted by Phillipe O\'Connell 6/16/2010

Keven Rudd runs a fair chance of screwing the mining industery,then he takes a walk with a 200k pension, and we are left carring the baby, australia has few blue chip stocks left, look they wanted to sell the snowey mountains hidro but the people steded in and aposed it. the mining industery are already paying 41 cents in the dollar tax he wants to increase it to 80 cents, so where is the incentive to drill , westfarmers in the last 48 hours have advised it it's shareholders they can expect a drop in divedends asthey are heavely into coal and the tax will efect them, by they are the largest single employer in australia owning coles, ad this together with the refugee crises global warming blackflip. and you see this is a one turm goverment.remove them from goverment, because he can screw what what we have left, then take the walk with a 100k pension , which he doesen't need as he is a millionare in his own right , ps forgot to mention the insulation sceme a 300 million debarcle garret only qualifications are he is a labor seporter, he would still be on his 150k a year, in private industery he wuld be drawn and quarted. Phillipe O'Connell

reply »







CAPTCHA

Tom J

Posted by Tom J 6/20/2010

Why wasn't Internet Censorship listed on the recent survey as one of the issues GetUp members could vote on as being important to them? Are the civil liberties of Australians somehow less important than the rights of refugees? Is GetUp attempting to move away from supporting us on this critical issue? Have they come under some kind pressure from the government? It seems only the Greens and Electronic Frontiers Australia is fighting this in our behalf. Please explain.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Posted by 6/22/2010

Good on Getup! for standing up for what's right and keeping the internet as it is.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Keith

Posted by Keith 6/25/2010

A new PM gives us the opportunity for renewal. More than half of the priorities that existed under Rudd have to go.

In particular all plans to borrow more billions of dollars should be immediately abandoned. But there's more.

I hope we will also see a rapid review of the open door policy on illegal entry to Australia.

I believe Kevin Rudd did an excellent job in fooling most people back in 2007, and lying about the extent of the economic crisis.

It must have been exhausting work at great cost to himself to maintain the bullshit for all that time. He made an excellent start but i feel he simply and understandably ran out of things to bullshit about. We need a refreshed leadership. Pity we dont have one now.

If i have a personal hope it is that Julia Gillard will draw herself away from all sides of politics and our economy may have a chance of recovery. Maybe she could go back to being a lawyer, where her lies wont destroy the country quite as much.

I hope too to see an end to pandering to the left wing politically correct bleeding hearts. These people of fundamentalist stupidity are so much in need of reform themselves.

reply »







CAPTCHA

DD

Posted by DD 6/29/2010

Blog stalking is a common form of intimidation used by the great unwashed Right wing of politics. Its aim is to subvert and divert discussion of important matters, lowering the tone to abuse and malicious sexual innuendo.

So I am not biting Keith, particular at a time when such important events are taking place

There is more than just a glimmer of hope in the recent changes in Canberra. I wish our new PM the very best

reply »







CAPTCHA

Liberator_1

Posted by Liberator_1 6/24/2010

We absolutely cannot allow them to censor the internet in any way. They start by telling us that it will be to prevent child pornography and also to em-place a 'government designed anti-virus program' for the safety of all citizens. What a load of bull. Period. First, C.P distributors will find a way to circumvent the filter and second, we already have efficient firewalls and anti-virus software. The important factor that they are missing is that youngsters will know how to stay safe online from EDUCATION NOT CENSORSHIP.
Remember, every power given to government is another liberty taken away from the people.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Jack O\'Neil

Posted by Jack O\'Neil 6/27/2010

Agreed! Who's behind the Gulf Oil Spill? Why the Toxic Sprays? And for what Agenda? GetUp Readers, what's your opinion?

As an independent researcher with an enquiring mind, thought you may like to look beyond the clever manipulation of those who continue to saturate your psyche with grandiosum rhetoric and collective socialism, depriving you of forming you own informed conclusions. Please read what this insider has to say and do your own research. Become a Free Thinker not a Sheeple. (A mature Lamb to the Slaughter)

Kind regards

Jack



___________________________________

Scientist Insider Whistleblower

Last year when all the internal documents and emails of the "climate scientists" at East Anglia University in England, were leaked to the internet, the global warming movement was revealed to the world for what it really was---A fraud! Global warming is just another scam designed to bring the so-called global elite enormous windfall profits, at the expense of the so-called middle class. This internet revelation literally wrecked the Copenhagen Conference and the so-called Copenhagen Treaty. (It also resulted in criminal investigations in England.) Recall, that the scam was to be implemented through a "carbon tax" and the installation of a "cap and trade" exchange mechanism. Of course the point man for this outrage was, and still is, "fast Al Gore." But Gore's mentor and handler is George Soros. It is well known that Soros hand picked Obama and also acted as the bag man for the Obama administration. But, let there be no doubt that there is more than money involved here. These people, Soros and the people he fronts for, are determined to destroy the middle class in the USA and bring this country down to the level of the third world. The Carbon Tax and Cap and Trade are of central importance to the implementation of their plans to socialize this nation.

So how do "they" benefit from the alleged BP disaster in the Gulf?

First, Obama has suspended all further oil production in the Gulf for platforms in water in excess of 500 feet. This will eventually tighten the supply of oil in the USA market and raise the price of oil. Also, George Soros would love to see the U.S. oil industry crippled. He has invested about 900 million dollars in Petrobras Offshore, which is a Brazilian company that is about to develop a massive oil deposit on the coast of Brazil.

Second, this tragedy serves as a pretense for the passage of a carbon tax, and the implementation of the cap and trade mechanism. Right now, this legislation is being pushed in Congress. We have to save the world from the dreaded toxic gas known as carbon dioxide!!! (Funny I thought all plants thrived on CO2?) We all thought the Global warming scam was history after the scandal was revealed. But these people will NEVER quit. They just fall back and probe for another weak spot.

As far as Corexit being just another weapon to use in controlling the population, well we will just have to wait and see. I would not rule it out. This chemical has been banned in England and the rest of Europe. It is extremely toxic.

In short, this incident in the Gulf, if it is in fact an "illusion of disaster" as opposed to a real disaster, is classic Hegelian Dialectic: Problem, Reaction, and Solution.

If you think this is far fetched then think Pearl Harbor, Think U.S.S. Liberty. Think Murrah Building, Oklahoma City. Think 911 and the attack on the WTC. If you frighten people enough you can drive them like sheep to do just about anything. I am reminded of that famous line by Gene Hackman in "Crimson Tide" where he is talking with Denzell Washington, his XO. They were discussing the Lippizzaner Stallions and how they can be made to do such amazing things. Hackman said"you shove a cattle prod up their ass." "You see It is just a matter of voltage."

Think! Be aware, and be prepared....

http://shtf411.com/bp-illusion-of-a-false-spill-t7065.html-sid=75f49d984d7e8acccaec5214bb60fbfa


The 'disaster' in the Gulf of Mexico is beyond a false flag; it's an illusion. What I'm about to reveal will more than likely go by the wayside, and the charade will continue. The reason for writing this is not for attention, games, or folly, but to expose the biggest scam in the 21st century, and to relieve some aching hearts. There is no need for fear as this is a staged event. I cannot reveal my sources, they do go straight to the top, but hopefully what I write will echo inside of each person reading this as the truth.

Much of the information I present here cannot be easily verified, fast checked, or ever presented as anything, but hearsay, as they are just words of an anonymous online entity. The Government, corporations, and the people behind them have pulled out all the stops to insure the truth doesn't come out. They are the reason why the beaches have private security contractors, insuring no one is able to gain access to the oil on shore. They are the reason the Gulf of Mexico is a no fly zone. They are the reason why the gulf states are being locked down by military. They are the reason why the well head you see is different in many videos that BP releases. Without this measure of control the illusion would fail. In this post, what I can do is provide leading evidence, or give clues to the truth; from there you can use something that has gone by the way side, common sense.

The large oil spills washing up on the shores are not from BP Deep Horizon. They are indeed from surrounding wells, that were already leaking by design. These wells can be verified through a simple online search. You'll notice that much of the oil is actually in the form of tar. Usually tar balls; sizes of these have reached 2000+ pounds.

From the start, BP, Haliburton, and co-conspirators knew where they were drilling. Using specific equipment, such as the German ship RV Sonne, they had detailed maps of the ocean bottom. The ship, and a specific college study from 2005, in the Gulf of Mexico, are your starting points to what's really happening in the gulf. Here's a link to what the study synopses http://geology.about.com/cs/volcanology/a/aa051604a.htm


What
BP, Haliburton, and other co-conspirators intentionally drilled into was an Asphalt Volcano. Sounds scary doesn't it? It really is not. In fact, after you read the above link you'll know that the Gulf of Mexico is literally coated in oil, tar, and methane hydrate at the bottom. The study went on to find that massive aquatic life has specifically adapted to living off of the hydrocarbons. That in fact these asphalt volcanoes are a natural part of the ocean ecology, and their eruptions actually benefit the sea life over the long duration of time.

Another aspect to what I was directly told is that BP, Haliburton, and other co-conspirators drilled intentionally into the 'mid side' of this particular asphalt volcano. Basically from what I understand, it is a soda bottle effect. If they had drilled into the top of the volcano, then all the gas would rise out, and explode as would bottled carbonated liquid. The effect of drilling into the side permits a safely controlled release of gas, tar, liquified asphalt, and other related gases. What was done is a more or less controlled release; almost natural in fact!

The Asphalt volcano was a win win situation for this false flag: as it presented the best illusion to all outside parties. Not only do the conspirators need to fool the general public, but also the oil industry, and scientific community. The public is easy to fool, but the latter two groups take a little more effort; this is the main reason why the Gulf is being isolated by security contractors, and military. Anyone well versed on this giant debacle in the Gulf knows that it is surrounded with stories, and claims of negligence. This was the first purposeful aspect to make the story seem credible to all outside parties; as the story is more easily believed, when it is chalked up to human error, or incompetence.

Besides using inferior, shotty, or flat out negligent craftsmanship, as the well was intended to fail from the onset, the conspirators knew that the pressure produced from the volcano would blow out even better equipment. This was the second mechanism to fool other industry experts. All experts, and scientific communities only know what they are told, and that is the well tapped into a large high pressure hydrocarbon pocket. To even a trained eye, what they are being told appears to be a massive oil gusher, when in fact it's a controlled event.

In watching the videos, or live feeds looks horrible, and very ominous, but upon closer examination the tell tale signs of what it really is shows through, what you are actually viewing is a man made(well bore) large "Black Smoker". You should take note, as the evidence has built, the live feed appears to have been tampered with. I suspect it is because of the video below. The man narrating the video has it correct, it is a volcano! But those aren't flames. From the link provided above, they are a combination of gases; specifically Sulfur, and Iron are what create the flame effect. Since the airing of that video, several of the live feeds have been proven to be tampered footage, or faked.

http://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3Den9CoYb0OHs

You
need to realize that an illusion is only as good as it's weakest link. All scientific evidence on paper coming from the government, and corporations is being fudged. In the case of this staged, and controlled event that weak link is the oil, or more specifically the tangible tar that can be collected. As I mentioned much of the oil that has been seen, or noticed is tar rather than heavy crude oil. Out at sea closest to the Deep Horizon site, "shrimpers" have been hired to boom the oil/tar together, and set it ablaze. There are several huge fires right now out in the Gulf. The reason is for this is to hide the evidence. The distinct asphalt volcano tar, is actually coated with naturally produced oil eating microbes, and other natural safe guards produced by Mother Earth; these types of organisms are not present in a regular oil well, but commonly in the Asphalt Volcanoes, and large tar flows at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico.

To continue with why the asphalt volcano was a win win to drill into, is the heaviness of the tar. Read the linked article provided above, the tar will cling to lighter oil, and fall to the bottom of the Gulf at some point, near in the future. Also, the microbes, and other organisms that naturally occur from this will multiply. They will not only eat the tar, but the other control released oil that they are pumping into the Gulf.

We've all seen the videos of beaches not lined so much with oil, but with tar balls of varying sizes. Also, we've all noticed BP's overall lack of concern for cleanup. We've seen booms which aren't tied together. We've heard first hand account of staged clean ups on the beaches. As soon as a press conference, or media event is done BP stops work. The reason is simple, it's not that they don't care, but that they already know what's gonna happen. The oil will start naturally being cleaned up via decomposition, oil eating organisms, and falling to the already naturally tar covered bottom of the Gulf of Mexico.

What's the benefit of this scam? MONEY, and population control. Read this article [link to theintelhub.com] ... ized-plan/ If you're still reading this article, and even beginning to grasp the sinister nature of the fraud being perpetrated, then you'll realize that the corexit9500, and other dispersant's are not needed. They are purposely being sprayed by Evergreen Air/CIA to cull the population along the Gulf Coast.

Also, explained to me, is the large amount of useless eaters, pond scum, or undesirables living along the gulf coast. These would be the Americans living off of the government. I will not beat around the bush with pleasantries, or politically correct statements here. This coastal area from Texas to Florida has the highest, or most dense population of targets of illimination by the US Govt., and corporations. These are the populations living on welfare(in this area dominated by African Americans), and the older population living on Social Security(mainly Florida). These people are going to start dropping like flies over the next few years, and greatly reduce the burden to government coffers.

In this respect this is a doomsday event, but it's not the end of the food chain, death of the oceans, or as some have warned an extinction level event. It's only bad for the targeted populations.

To cover the money aspects of this fraudulent event, are somewhat self evident. Primarily, as President Obama (note he's not very worried, think about it) has just pointed out, they are using this false flag to move forward with the Carbon Tax, followed by Cap, and Trade. Another aspect of profit is the clean up of this disaster; those boats aren't running around for free in the Gulf. From there, is the very real aspect of banks calling their notes on the remaining mortgaged properties along the Gulf, and peninsula of Florida. Remember Katrina? They never gave the land back, but sold it to casinos, and other businesses. Almost all beach front property will end up in the hands of the banks, and government. They'll play this disaster off for a few years, and explain the mysterious disappearance of oil on kindness from mother nature.

The side effects of this scam are negligible; in the eyes of the perpetrators, they've done nature a favor. They've opened up an asphalt volcano from the side, and will shut it down in the next few months by equalizing the pressure. The equalization of pressure will come by way of the two relief wells; which are not wells, but vents. when they do this, I have no clue what excuse they'll use, but the current gusher will stop. I said stop, it will not slow down, but literally stop. Remember, all they have done is aided nature in something that is a very common, and naturally occurring event at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico.

That's about all I have to say. I will pop in to answer any if at all questions. The reason I came forward with this information is that I myself was worried about the level of this event. Honestly, knowing the reasoning of what, why, and how has given me peace. Anyone who has family anywhere near where they are spraying these chemicals need to alert their family to leave; they are the target of this false flag. To anyone who finds credence, or a shred of truth in what I've written, please pass this on; as we all are the target on the grand scale. The target by way of the coming carbon tax, cap, and trade.

God Bless,

Scientist Insider Whistleblower


US: BP Whistleblower lashes out against her employer and exposes its deceptions, gross negligence, and indifference to the effects of the Gulf oil spill.

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/877.html

reply »







CAPTCHA

Tom J

Posted by Tom J 7/2/2010

Did you even bother to note the topic under discussion here before you posted this mess of yours?

reply »







CAPTCHA

Thomas Gibbons

Posted by Thomas Gibbons 7/6/2010

Thank God for GetUp!

This is the sort of thing that can easily sneak through because at face value, "We need to protect people from the evil internet people" laws seem like a good thing.

While there are things on the internet that need to be controlled, Child porn etc, a massive filter, especially one so flawed and controlled secretly by the government is NOT the way to do that sort of thing.

Thankyou GetUp! for this.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Patrick

Posted by Patrick 7/8/2010

This legislation is not dead yet, everyone needs to call or have a meeting with their federal politician unless you want the great useless firewall of Australia.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/australian-it/filtering-legislation-on-the-way/story-e6frgakx-1225889109550

Patrick

reply »







CAPTCHA

A. G. M.

Posted by A. G. M. 7/12/2010

Learning about Get Up, I have appreciated what founders
aimed for. A new way of promoting democracy by providing
an easy forum for direct people power input.
However, viewing your video clip titled 'Election 2010
Spoof Trailer', I am deeply disappointed seeing that, they
who do positive things, are also infested by the negative
aspect of the collective mindset of stupid attraction of violence, mayhem, murder with a bit of sex mixed into it.
What kind of democracy would we have by such advocacy?
Remember! Hitler have been also elected democratically.
Think about it. The best time for that is your last minute
of consciousness just before falling asleep. Than if your
latent higher, better self also condemns it as your mistake,
than be man enough to stand get up and say so. That
would wash you clean.
- I am wishing you success for renewal.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Shybloke3

Posted by Shybloke3 7/17/2010

All very well about a mock campaign for Julia, but is anyone going to be sucked in by Tony Abbot's socalled promise of no "Work Choices" style polices for the first year...but wait there's more..what similar program has he instore for the 2nd Year??? Had I not been unemployed, I would glady give you $20 towards a mock advert asking what Mr. Abbot's plans there if he were to be elected...
Watch and see...I already call Abbot the "Ghost of Howard", and he has proved me right already..
You at GetUp (which so far has done a good job in the last election on the Libs), are doing a great job so far, but i would rather keep Labor in than the drongo Libs...that is my soapbox...think very carefully before even think of ridding Australia of a Labor govt..

reply »







CAPTCHA

Posted by 7/19/2010

Hello, GetUp!

We are Anonymous.
And we have been watching you, we are pleased with your veiws and the voice that you are bringing to the people of Australia.

The labor hype back in 2007 was increadible, Many of us Australians saw Both K Rud and Barack as beacons of potential to bring end to the conservative culture that currently swamps the USA and Australia. Many of us thought otherwise, and it turns out 'they were right'.

'You as a leader, Labor have failed us'

The concept of Anonymous is what empowers the smallest man to achieve the great feats in the face of political corruption.
That is what the current government is; nothing more than a corrupt body, full of inadequately educated men, abusing power and turning Australia from a democracy into a totalitarian run communist country with chairman Rudd at the helm.
Remember, people shouldn't fear? their government, the government should fear its people.

You, as a leader, have failed us. You are bringing an end to what is the greatest link between all people; the one thing that can cross all cultural boundaries, that can bring people together despite ethnicity, political or religious standings, class or nationality; the largest information transfer ever created. You, a democratically elected leader, have decided to do what only the most power-hungry of all tyrants dare:

You have opted to censor the internet.

This is why we, Anonymous, have decided that this censorship plan should be among our primary targets for elimination.

We demand the resignation of the Australian Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Stephen Conroy. This is a man who has no level of understanding of the topic he is dealing with. This is a man who readily supports the abolition of free speech in exchange for social security. This man and his policies go against everything Australia and the western world stand for. As we see it, Stephen Conroy is completely unsuitable of being a minister of Australia, and as such, we demand his dismissal.

Anonymous is your final obstacle in this battle. We fight where no one else dares to fight. We ruin the lives of animal abusers and bring pedophiles to justice. We destroy the reputation of political and religious leaders alike. Our soldiers currently fight the cult of Scientology and the Iranian government. To us, you are just a step higher. We will create and make freely available methods to render your censorship plan useless, and let these methods be known to the entire Australian public by ways we will not reveal in this message. We will also leak updated versions of the blacklist as often as we can, ensuring that the people who voted you in know what is being withheld from them.

And as your people slowly begin to realize the veil that their own government is draping around them, they will realize that they voted a tyrant into power.

This is when we will have succeeded in all our goals.

Information is free,

We Anonymous as not your friends,
We are your docters,your lawyers, your tax-payers, your brothers and sister.

We are everywhere.

We may not be the best of people, but the one thing we will unceasingly fight for is the assertion that Information is 'Free'.


Farewell,

We are Anonymous.

We are Legion.

We do not forgive. We do not forget.

We are not your friends.

Expect us.


http://www.whyweprotest.net/en/

reply »







CAPTCHA

Greg

Posted by Greg 7/21/2010

I fail to comprehend why internet filtering shouldn't be compulsory in all countries.

This would go a long way to getting bomb making pages, pedophillia pages, and a whole lot of other things that people in general should not be able to participate in.

This is freedom gone crazy to oppose this. It's for our own good!

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 7/23/2010

The problem is the filter won't work. Getting around the filter has been proven easy by using gateways and a number of other methods. Any adult out there can EASILY figure it out so the whole thing becomes worthless for stopping someone who really wants to seek such sites. If they truly want to reduce these crimes then they should take the money due for the internet censorship and inject it into our police force.

If they're focused on pedophilia then they'd get much more benefit putting the money into programs to teach parents and kids how to protect themselves online (remembering that the filter CANNOT stop chat sites that children and pedophiles might visit). Even the majority of child agencies agree that funding in these areas will be much more effective than internet censorship.

Heck, I'd even like to see a program that encourages potential pedophiles to come out and seek help to deal with their urges before they even commit any crime.

reply »







CAPTCHA

DD

Posted by DD 7/23/2010

Greg, the same mental approach thought Prohibition would stop people drinking - in fact alcoholism rates increased

All Prohibition systems do is provide vast funding for crime networks. During Prohibition the organised crime networks, including the Mafia, installed themselves even more firmly in the alcohol, drugs, and vice industries

Just look at the world wide mess that has resulted! Whole Governments have been corrupted and wars erupted in drug producing areas

Personal parental guidance is the ONLY solution. Nothing else - other than direct pursuit of websites - will do anything but make the situation worse. Your innocence in these realities - echoing Conroy's moralist stance- is a disaster

No I am not prepared to risk our communications liberties in pursuit of the unattainable!

reply »







CAPTCHA

David Mahoney

Posted by David Mahoney 7/22/2010

great stuff, keep up the good work.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 7/23/2010

Along the same lines, has anyone heard of the government's plans to capture information on our internet surfing? In this case the government heavily censored a document on the suject the it realeased under FOI. It's so censored that there's pretty much only page numbers left with even subject headings blacked out: http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/no-minister-90-of-web-snoop-document-censored-to-stop--premature-unnecessary-debate-20100722-10mxo.html?autostart=1

reply »







CAPTCHA

mick

Posted by mick 7/25/2010

It's all well and good to see Get-Up going after the sheeple with the climate change mantra but if we don't kill stone dead the Internet filtering, and isp logging we can kiss all freedom of speech in this country goodbye as the gove will ass-hole Get-up as a first off the block internet strangle policy.

Without the freedom of speech, freedom of association this labor govt wants to crush we have absolutely sweet F-A

Go for the throat while we still have a voice.

reply »







CAPTCHA

DD

Posted by DD 7/26/2010

I share your view, mick, that the internet filter proposal is potentially a
an appalling danger to freedom of speech - but I remain convinced that the best way to kill it is a popular grass roots campaign such as we are having and the re-election of Labor in the House of Reps , with the Greens holding the balance of power in their own right in the Senate. Part of any deal should be the dropping of the filter and the sacking of Conroy

I find post such as yours a little worrying because really the message they are giving is "vote against Julia Gillard" which is the same message as "vote to return the liberal/national Coalition'

I therefore repeat the stark warning I put on another thread about the tactics of the Abbott "regime in exile" and the Climate Change Deniers lobby:

"They will barrage us with misleading posts aimed at one thing - persuading us to "punish" the ALP for "whatever" reason - Rightist, Leftist, of Centrist - religious of secular - any excuse would suit their purpose (including sensible opposition to the ridiculous internet filter)

Let us take our reply from the days that Madrid fought against the onrush of Franco's Fascists who themselves used any means to bring down an elected Government

"No Paseran" - "They shall not pass" - No way!

Eyes on the prize - a Social Democratic Government that responds to Grass Roots campaigns and that encourages public participation in political processes

I think we are well on our way to creating such a body politic - the best chance since the Whitlam aims

That is why evil forces are so scared! Hang in there - Hold on! The forces ranged against us are not dissimilar to those that brought about "the Dismissal" - Identify them now before it is too late

reply »







CAPTCHA

Shig

Posted by Shig 7/26/2010

The two worrisome facts for me are:
1. The govt will not provide any detailed information on the sites to be excluded. How can we be sure of what they will be censoring without some review?
2. The Aus govt in the past has used censorship laws to exclude political content, including, but not limited to, "offensive" portrayals of the Catholic Church, socialism and even books and plays which portrayed the depavity of fascist regimes.
In short all most of us are asking for is a review of what will be banned and assurances that there are legal guarantees to prevent its use for political censorship.
Neither of these have been forthcoming.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Shig

Posted by Shig 7/26/2010

And as we saw from Australia history whereby political content was as often censored as any other content.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/3/2010

You know... If Getup and others just focused the anti-labour campaign to Victoria and the senate in particular, I wonder if loosing a few Victorian senate seats would send a clear enough message to labor.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Tastiger

Posted by Tastiger 8/3/2010

What about the filter on this site that blocks iPad users from viewing videos and other Flash components?

reply »







CAPTCHA

Dr Strangelove

Posted by Dr Strangelove 8/3/2010

It is an interesting question: Would Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, Chauchescu, Senator Joe McCarthy, Milosovitch et al have had such power or survived as long as they did, if a free and ubiquitous internet had existed in the countries they terrorised? I think not. The only true dictatorships surviving today with relative impunity are those where the internet is unavailable to the vast majority of the populous, and what is available is strictly controlled. (North Korea, Burma, Zimbabwe, Tibet, and to a large degree Iran and China) The plea by any government that "we would never use the legislation for that.." is meaningless, as no one can tell what the next government, or the one after that will do with the ability to block sites using a secret list. The Wikileaks list that so annoyed the Minister contained sites that were already off topic to what he said his intentions were. It does not take long for the temptation to overcome any moral resistance to abuse of power. History, even in only the last 70 years, is littered with the bodies of those who accepted the reassurances of those who said "It could never happen here". Toss on top of all that the fact that a filter would not stop the real nasties anyway and you have the bloody mess that Sen. Conroy finds himself in now. Ditching the filter now is not a backflip, even though the media will paint it as such, it is discovering that there is wisdom in the community and that we can learn from it. Remember. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

Zee Dr.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Drake\'s Drum

Posted by Drake\'s Drum 8/4/2010

Absolutely "StrangeL" History is so important and I am actually quite shocked at how little a part it is playing in the election campaign. Wake up Julia on this Two generations have been born since events that shaped the modern political forum - these generations do not "remember" - You must tell them - teach them their history - the draft - the dismissal the Liberal campaigns against developing social democracy

Problems with Abbott's Coalition are not recent but go right back to the time of "Pig Iron Bob" Menzies and the foundation of the Liberal Party as a buttress against political reform and social progress. Historically, under the Liberal Party, Australia, whilst enjoying a period of great prosperity for many, entered a period of social stagnation that we have yet to recover from

This is a history that includes such horrors as the drafting of our young men to fight in Vietnam where many tragically lost their lives or became permanently traumatised. Under the more recent Howard regime - the successor to the Menzies mentality - we again entered a period of social and political stagnation, accompanied by new involvement in the military foreign policies of other countries. Failure to scale down our involvement still brings us the sad news that one of our brave and honourable military personnel has paid the ultimate sacrifice.

Give us back the history Liberal policy has taken from us and that a dumbed down media increasingly fails to remind us of. In that history are the warning s we need and must heed

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/6/2010

LIBS ARE BLOCKING THE FILTER!!!

WOOT!

The Howard NetAlert program is the way to go. A free filtering program for parents to download and install at their discretion to provide their own protection. Granted, the kids can still get around it, but they have to WANT to get around it, which means whatever they hit isn't something they're stumbling over but something they're seeking.

Throw the money into that solution, get support and awareness of it out there and also a good deal of money into education for parents and kids on how to stay safe on the internet.

General education on home computer systems could be great, not only for keeping the young ones safe and/or better enabling parents to monitor their internet activity but for many other reasons. Teach them to spot and avoid phishing scams as well as other social engineering tactics used by criminals to gather personal data and even some basics on getting anti-virus information installed.

They have a ways to go on climate change but I'm very happy with how the Liberals are tackling this area at least. Give the Greens the power balance and I guess we cover both bases. Greens and Labor will vote together for a better solution than the Liberals are likely to allow while the Greens and Liberals will squash the damned Interrornet Censor

reply »







CAPTCHA

CC

Posted by CC 8/6/2010

The Howard filter has been there for a long time. You can also get free filters from most ISP providers.

If you want information about how to use it then call your ISP helpdesk.

If you want to know anything else - www.google.com.au - this is also where your kids will go to find out how to get past the filter.

There are other things that you can do too - like configure your router with filters / firewalls.

The kids are taught everything you are asking at school - and through each other - and if they want something they just go to google.

The libs have better policies on just about everything - this and mental health being the most important to me - and labor and greens in the senate will keep them honest.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/7/2010

CC I hear you. I am the parent of Y-gen kids - and I haven't ever had a problem with filtering their content.

Except that is, when I try to block them doing something they want to do.

Amazing how much info is on google re how to get past filters / firewalls and they can find it.

As a parent of kids who've used the net pretty much since it was released - and they were only young then - I've educated them, warned them about the danger is chat rooms, monitored them and then when net filters were available blocked certain content.

It worked until they got old enough to want stuff I was blocking..... go figure.... rebellious teenagers.

I don't believe that the governments plans will stop them any more than I can.

Better that we provide better policing to find the guys who build these site - and go after them. Sites that include not just pornography but also that insight suicide, give instructions on how to make drugs, poison people - you'd be surprised what's out there - get rid of them - and don't just block them - put them in jail. That's how we can protect our kids.

reply »







CAPTCHA

DD

Posted by DD 8/6/2010

julia really must declare Conroy's Folly dead.

Allowing this mess to continue so long has given the Coalition a momentary advantage. Conroy came close to losing Labor the unloseable election

Well done GetUp. You have helped get Labor and the Greens back on track as far as their policies and Programs are concerned

The Liberals promises from Opposition benches are meaningless CC. You can promise anything so long as you don't have to fund it - or deliver it.

An election "promise" is like a kiss blown across a dance floor. It may mean everything to a recipient in search of love, whilst still meaning nothing more than a passing tease to the person who blows it.

I need more than just a tease myself. But I can still enjoy a blown kiss from a pretty girl

Sadly Abbotts blown kisses just don't have the same effect! Not even for one magic moment

(sigh)

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/6/2010

Its a funny one because if you look at a lot of the responses both here and to some of the news reports there really are a lot of people out there who are swayed by Conroy into believing that the filter will be effective and even still jumping up and down that you're a pedophile or criminal for not wanting it. I'm not exactly certain that sticking with their filter is that bad an election move for Julia.

I'd dare say Labor will continue to try and look like they're on the fence to keep both sides happy by announcing the delay and such. Liberals have been quietly against the filter but they knew Conroy's message of stopping pedophiles was sticking so they haven't opposed it too strongly until now, when the message of both how useless it is and it's real intentions have begun to sink into the public.

I think the Liberals are sincere in their stand to abolish the filter and bring back the original plan for home filters brought in under Howard. Between Labor and Liberal I actually tend to trust what the Liberals say more. Thats not saying I don't distrust them a good deal as well, but I tend to find that Labor is more likely to say they'll do or not do something to gain them popularity and then find an excuse to change their mind afterwards. Again, Liberals do it as well, Its just my perception that Labor do it much more.

Personally, I think the best solution would be for the government to fund and require the ISPs to have a general computer techy visit a new customer every time they sell a new internet connection to someone. The techy sets up the internet/wireless and then spends 2-3 hours advising and helping the user to install any free anti-virus and filters they might want together with the firewall settings, giving them some quick advice on surfing safely on the internet (i.e. phishing scams, etc).

We loose Billions each year to phishing scams and people's computers being hacked for account details and the like. Some simple assistance could reduce it significantly IMHO and if they can either give advice or hand a pamphlet to those with children on best practices for monitoring or educating their kids on surfing safe then it would do much more than Conroy's filter could ever hope in keeping kids safe while providing just as many, if not more, jobs.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/7/2010

Charles

I agree with you that both sides can sometimes say things and then not follow up.

However, the Labor guys do it more often - that's certainly true. I didn't see Rudd actually deliver much of what he promised - and Julia hasn't either - and she was a big part of the Rudd government from the start.

In relation to having a techy come out to install / setup internet connections - no thank you. I think that this would just increase the cost to consumers - and given so many of us are completely computer literate completely un-necessary. And any households with Gen Ys in them - the techy would probably be shown how to do it by our school kids.

Most ISPs provide the kind of support you suggest over the phone - and can provide, if the customer agrees - a remote-in service where they can set up filtering remotely.

We old fogies have to get with it and accept these facts.

As for filtering your home PC - it's up to the parents / adults in the house to do so. If there are sites with the wrong kind of information on them - send the link to the police and have them chase it up - and notify your provider.

Protection against unwanted content is easily and freely available now.

If you have a Gen Y in the house who's determined to get past your filter - I hate to tell you this - but they will.

You can do other things to track them if you are so inclined - and all of this information is available for free on google.

We don't need to be paying techys to visit users homes.

reply »







CAPTCHA

The_Mainlander

Posted by The_Mainlander 8/7/2010

Conroy + Broadband = FTW yay.

Then...

Conroy + Broadband = Internet filter?!

WTF?

Hmm, that Conroy needs a dose of filtering himself into an objective politician that is not supported by doctrine written thousands of years ago from the brutal book.

Let's just say that in an open democracy if he want to filter his own net at his client PC good luck to him.

But filtering the Pipe into Australia... that is too close to corruption and yes ASIO will be looking for a piece of IT! (think they are trying to get their fingers into the NBN already as well!)

Well really the whole IF is a bloody debacle and a Conroy Fail.

God, why do I feel the need for a dose of atheism! (irony people)

Conroy had better get the NBN right or they will glass fibre on the walls!

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/7/2010

Hopefully the NBN will be abandoned. I agree Australia needs better access in regional areas and fibre-optic to every home would be nice.

Reality is - why are the government paying so much money for something that commercial entities should be doing as a matter of their business.

If it's too expensive for them to put in fibre-optic to remote regions - then provide some insentives / compensation for regional work - but why are we paying for it so that Telstra can make even more profits.

Quite frankly there are higher priorities that need addressing - like health (including mental health) education and policing - life's essentials.

reply »







CAPTCHA

DD

Posted by DD 8/8/2010

Commercially owned communications structures are not particularly successful in the long term, BJM - in that the Corporations are more interested in shareholder profit returns and executive wages than in long term infrastructure improvement. Just look at the remuneration received by heads of Telstra!

State owned Telecoms suffer from being used as a source of revenue.

Behind all this is the desperate need for top quality and top speed, reliable and economically priced communications

Anyone who uses a computer in a complex manner knows that the present system is too slow and too expensive. We are lucky it has held up as long as it has for so long - but it needs fixing sooner rather than later.

A feature of Right Wing Governments in particular is an either/or attitude to expressing economic matters. In this case the delusion Abbotts mob are putting forward is we can either have a National Broadband Network OR we can have health services

Nope - it doesn't work that way. The NBN is needed to provide high quality services in all areas of activity including health. It is needed for us to move forward technologically and even demographically. It will break the semi isolation of remote areas and in its construction provide a pattern of essential jobs and skills

In this blog we have been part of fighting for a network free of State interference in the operation of our communications network - But there is far more to the story - If we are to have satisfactory free communications, the network must be upgraded

If everything was always either/or what choices would the people make? - fish or concrete? - a car or an aeroplane? - homes or vegetables?

We could perhaps extend our choices to one of between pandering to and propping up an excessively over propertied, over remunerated, excessively powerful and overprivileged rich class AND a more egalitarian society

Now there is a choice we'd like to vote on! If only were it as easy as either or. The vast majority are fed up of this charitable support of the rich through periods of economic crisis - whilst ordinary decent hard working and undemanding people lose their homes

(sigh)

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/8/2010

Sorry DD - I disagree.

I wasn't saying anything about an either or attitude... it's all about the wasteful spending by the government...

I won't list the amount of waste in the stimulus package.. but it's this that is my greatest concern.

I agree that some work needs to be done - but $42BILLION worth - it's just not a high enough priority to be putting our country (not the state) into further debt.

It seems that in this instance you agree with the government paying big-business massive amounts of money - this isn't consistent with your normal stand.

Telstra have a reputation for excessive spending and massive profits - and they have the resources to do this.

What I actually suggested was providing incentives - that way it would still happen but not at the massive cost to our back pockets.

When the government wastes money - remember it's OUR money they are wasting - it's not someone else's.

reply »







CAPTCHA

DD

Posted by DD 8/8/2010

I think you are making a common theoretical economics error, BJM.

The presumption I think you are making is that there is a pool of money available which does not vary in availability from project to project. Thus it might seem that if there is - say ten billion available - that amount is available for both the provision of services AND/OR the provision of physical infrastructure/capital works

But that is not the case

The availability of money is also dependent upon its predicted return in the form of a stimulated economy and in taxation - including company and personal taxes. Thus a capital works scheme that costs ten billion may well return anything up to some forty percent of the outlay immediately, and then redeem the rest through increased revenue producing industrial and economic activity

The obvious example is a bridge between two halves of a city. Without the bridge one half of the city may develop and the other shore be disadvantaged. The Capital Works outlay is redeemed through creating one unified efficient city. Increase in hospital services unfortunately does not have built into it the outlay redeeming effect. Sadly a new hospital in fact economically increases outlay and does not decrease it

I do not think that commercial Telecoms alone anywhere have much of a record of increasing their physical infrastructure at the pace required on their own initiative. I - for example - live in a capital city mobile phone black spot - one from which I can actually see the city centre! The NBN is an attempt both to catch up and to put this nation ahead in a competitive world.

Two of the great pillars of an advancing Australia have been immigration - which bring fresh ideas and new skills to the country - and Capital Works which sets the pace for development. The Capital Works departments of the various states virtually built Australia. Much of what they built over a century ago remains with us today as some of Australia's greatest achievements

At a time of economic downturn Capital projects can rescue an economy and tens of thousands of families. They provide hope, and the dream of a better future. The NBN fits especially well with the dreams of the younger generation

In America Roosevelt put America back on its feet with what was called the New Deal. I believe the Gillard Government draws much from this successful programme

Australia needs its own Twenty First Century New Deal - the old relationships between classes and between Labor and Capital no longer can be claimed to work when Capital - first on life support in intensive care continues to need charitable aid

The Economic system has not recovered - one can watch the share prices themselves oscillate over a nodal point for moths on end - it is stagnated.

Programs such as the NBN can keep us moving on, whilst perhaps better economic structures than simple market economics are devised

Market economics nearly killed small business and elsewhere brought whole families to economic ruin and even homelessness

Here we weren't just lucky - we were far better managed and Governed. And because of that I am quite prepared to trust in the present expertise of the Gillard Government - a Government that has shown the willingness to make the sacrifice of Abraham - its own leader - in the interests of not halting that progress

Are we to assume that - were (God Forbid) an Abbott Luddite regime to get in, that when he shows signs of floundering the Liberal Party idiots wouldn't change leadership because it would "look bad"?

Thanks for the debate - Heaven forbid too, BJM that we always agreed - What kind of democracy would that be?

reply »







CAPTCHA

TheBatsAreBurning

Posted by TheBatsAreBurning 8/8/2010

DD you are in bad need of a life.
You are typical of the majority of sheeple in this country, unable to think, or do your own research.
Your remark: Concerning the economic management of Rudd the Dud and Gillard the knife,
Has only highlighted yourself to be a follower + Sheeple, who believes what they are told without question, it seems you totally believe all the MSM and lying Government says:
Well I have news for you: Wake up sheeple,
This country was, only saved by the mining industry, in fact had the Gang of four, not gone on a frenzied spending spree, this country could have well been still in surplus.
But no we are in Debt.
On top of that: Rudd, Gillard, Swan and Midnight Oil. Not only put us into debt, but the clowns wanted to tax the very industries that kept this country going.
Rob Peter to pay Paul: Typical of a economic vandal.
So I would not call them economic saviors, I would call them economic terrorist.

reply »







CAPTCHA

DD

Posted by DD 8/8/2010

Oh dear someone really does not know their constitutional history.

The Universal Franchise - the universal right to vote - in fact came about as a result of Trade union activity in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. That role of enhancing democracy was taken over by newly founded Labour(sic) Parties and Social Democratic parties worldwide.

In fact it is an interesting feature of Australian politics that its Labour (sic) Party is in fact the older and longer established of the two major parties. The Liberal Party is a trumped up, banged together party invented by Menzies in a splurge of ColdWar anti-Communism. With the fall of the Berlin Wall it rather lost its own "raison d etre" and should have remained a quaint antiquated relic of a past struggle

As for the rest of your rant BJM... - I can only say it is a pleasure to see conservative forces rattled despite their expressed belief that Australia has come to love Tony Abbott - the World greatest remaining political denier of Climate Change

Maybe a trip to Moscow - sweltering in crazy temperatures and stifling in bush fire smoke might bring him to his senses

Probably not

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/8/2010

Interesting.... conservative politics has been alive and well in Australia long before Menzies formed this current liberal party - in fact the first 2 Prime Ministers - that is the first 2 elected parties - were protectionist - that would be conservative between 1901 and 1904 - long before 1944..

And as for compulsory voting - it was actually discussed a number of times but not implemented until the introduction of the Private Senator's Bill, "the Commonwealth Electoral Bill 1924" by a backbench Tasmanian senator from the Nationalists, Herbert Payne, on 16 July 1924. There was no real debate and it was passed without opposition from either side. I believe that the Nationalists were actually conservative.

I truly find it amusing to watch someone who thinks that they are an intellectual resort to your mud-throwing and misrepresentation of fact.

Terribly amusing.... I think you've fallen for more of your 'party sell' stuff.

reply »







CAPTCHA

DD

Posted by DD 8/8/2010

You appear to be confusing universal manhood suffrage, BJM - the right to vote - with "compulsory voting".

The historical process whereby the right to vote spread throughout all classes in the former British Empire is as I have said it - it was as a response to determined demand for democratic rights made by working class institutions

Australia itself was founded as a British Colony by a British Parliament that in terms of franchise was authoritarian and not democratically based. The story of the evolution of democracy from ancient Greek origins through enlightenment of the middle class is a middle class fantasy

Democracy was won through struggle and blood. That is why the recent High Court Case won through GetUp's efforts was so important. Simon Sheikhs team won a very significant victory against Howard's ultra conservative attempt to put the electoral clock back

I sincerely hope it adds - like icing to a cake - to the defeat of Menzies-ism - especially in its Howard/Abbot incarnation - once and for all.

By the way protectionism is not solely the realm of Conservatism - not by a long way

And to return to the struggle for democratic rights - I'll remind you of George Loveless of the Tolpuddle Martys words when sentenced to transportation to Australia

"God is our guide! from field, from wave,
From plough, from anvil, and from loom;
We come, our country's rights to save,
And speak a tyrant faction's doom:
We raise the watch-word liberty;
We will, we will, we will be free!"

GetUp is the defender of a very great tradition! - the tradition of democracy itself forged through the voice of the people themselves

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/8/2010

And we can all be grateful that society grows as it learns things and all of what you are referring to has no bearing on our world today. Interesting history - but that's all it is - history.

It doesn't matter really what happened all that time ago - it's about where we are now and where we can go to...

I for one don't want to return to any previous state - I want to grow and move forward and change - you never know - if you give that a try you might actually enjoy it.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/8/2010

More amusement - but in there is some interesting fact that everone should remember.

The labor party (that the people of Australia elected) are NOT running this country - it's the union power brokers...

I thought part of the democratic nature of our politics is the ability to establish a new political party - so your nastiness and constantly negative comments don't support that philosophy anyway..

More comments to provide us all with some amusement..

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/8/2010

I won't debate with you - as previously stated the labor government could promise to sell you children to the devil and you would still vote for them.

But I will assure you that given I am qualified in economics / accounting I do actually have a bit of a clue what I'm talking about.

Moving on from that I now work in IT Infrastructure provision and have done for over a decade and largely contracting or consulting with government - so I also know what I'm talking about in that field.

What ALL governments don't do well - is conduct an appropriate 'impact assessment' of the changes that they want to introduce - whether it be reallocation of budget money or related to a change in service provisions to the people that pay them.

I have seen the excessive waste inside government and this is and always has been unpallatable to me.

In relation to health - I am a Queenslander and I do need to point out that while labor are touting their success with health they include the introduction of medicare - well I can assure you from personal experience that the health system in Qld was the best free system in Australia until the labor government introduced Medibank (came before Medicare and was a complete failure) and then Medicare. In the early years we didn't even get the same $ per capita as the other states - and we lost the best medical system in Australia. It was the labor government that closed our mental health hospitals - rather than fix the problems - and at a time when they were providing good 'holistic' care to their patients - including psychiatrists, psychologists, counsellors, social workers, chaplains etc.... If you speak to the long-term sufferers of mental illness - who were here for that change they'll tell you that this was a major blow to mental health in Qld.

But as I already stated - it wouldn't matter what facts are put before you - you will push for labor regardless.

And I note more nastiness toward Abbott - a 'Luddite' - and you called Liberal party 'idiots' - these are not factual statements about performance - these are simple denegration.

reply »







CAPTCHA

bendz

Posted by bendz 8/7/2010

Thank you Getup, for so strongly and competently representing my concerns. It is not just the proposed internet filtering legislation, it is also about issues such as the the successful High Court challenge to Howard's Electoral legislation that disenfranchised so many young and disadvantaged Australians, climate change policy, amongst others.
Congratulations!

When will out elected representatives realise their first duty is to represent their electors? It is not just to represent party or business interests, or even their own personal convictions, ahead of the wishes of the citizens of this great country.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/8/2010

For this to be successful we first of all need to have electors who are prepared to keep an open mind, truly care and understand the issues and be prepared to vote for the government that will provide for what they want.

Otherwise GetUp becomes nothing but another political patsy of either side.

Closed mindedness and attitudes that aren't prepared to bend even in the light of evidence - don't assist.

How are our 'electors' supposed to distinguish real 'grass roots' from the blind followers of one side of politics.

Interesting comment and even more interesting that DD agrees....

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/8/2010

Spoken like a true party man....

reply »







CAPTCHA

Quest

Posted by Quest 8/8/2010

"Rats"don't have to do anything when there are brats working from within. Anyway isn't "Getup" for all concerned Australians?

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/8/2010

whatever..... I'm not pointing out all instances where your views change...

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/11/2010

I gotta admit... You truly sound like a Greens party man DD. :Razz:. Like any party, they have their issues but as raidcal Lefties I guess they're simply more popular to us in Getup.

As I spoke earlier, I tend to believe the Libs promises more than the Labor ones. The reason for this is simple. Labor promises you the world to get in, much like they did last election, while the Libs tend to be a less radical mob and promise less but deliver more of it.

Many of the things Labor promised in the last election which they haven't delivered are now election promises for this election.

My understanding is that the Libs actually have better climate policy than Labor now (certainly not as good as we want and no-where near the Green's, but better). The reason is that Labor is hoping to spend money elsewhere, like on the hospital cetralisation, the NBN and the ISP filtering.

If we're just to look at the technology side, the ISP filter, once installed, will be there forever! I don't care what any government says, it will never be scrapped in the future once its installed. If we miss out on the NBN then its something which could still be put in at a future point. If I'm to pick where the $40bil or more for both the NBN and ISP filter goes then applying it to climate change, health and many other areas seems like a much better idea than a fast internet.

reply »







CAPTCHA

DD

Posted by DD 8/11/2010

Being opposed to the Greens blanket anti-uranium policy I could not be a Greens Party man in Australia, Charles. I might have been one in Europe where Greens parties have come to recognise the need for compromise on the energy issue - But were I there I would probably be a mainstream Social Democrat - Of all the politicians I have lived under the one I most admired was Willy Brandt, of West Germany's SDP

I also shared his well known love of Scotch whisky. None of this affects my desire to see the Greens hold the balance of power in the Senate or my willingness to share a single Malt with both Bob Brown and Julia Gillard.

I wholeheartedly agree that the filter is a problem - so much so that I earnestly wish that the ALP would question Conroy's ideological position and political loyalties. The internet filter is a lousy and incompetent idea that should be taken out the back and shot. To me it is nothing more than a ploy to lose Labor up to half a million votes

However I accept that - provided we maintain the pressure - and most especially so long as Greens hold the balance of power in the Senate - Conroy's folly is a medieval Catholic dead duck.

A party under a leader like Abbott, who publicly refers to Climate Change Science as "crap," does not have a Climate Change policy at all - What Abbott has is a proffered honey trap for unaware potential voters who would never see any honey. Were it anything else Abbott would have supported an amended Government policy. Instead he came into his unenviable position as one of the last political leaders in the world to adopt the medieval Catholic anti science position on the Climate Change issue a stance promoted by no less than Cardinal Pell. Whatever policy one might think he has on "Climate Change" he will lose in the manner of the original Crown Jewels lost by King John - that is, in the Wash

I do not think we CAN wait any longer for the total revamping of our communications network - Some of our present copper wiring is up to a century old - and like Howard, who is the real "brain" behind the Liberal campaign it has passed its use by date

Much of the cost will go into providing jobs in the technological area and be recouped in taxation. The NBN is one area in which the financial outlay is likely to be recovered over time. In understanding this Abbott has been a bit slow - but economics - unlike medieval papal theology - is not a strong point with him

reply »







CAPTCHA

Trav

Posted by Trav 8/9/2010

went to school one day. was there 5 minutes. locked out of internet. some filter at tafe. very uncool

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/11/2010

Indeed, the Greens need to learn some compromise. If they're not shouting "No" they're screaming "Not good enough" and in the end they have the equivalent of empty pockets by demanding diamonds when they could have compromised for gold. Like the Internet filter, you only need to get the framework of the CBS in place and its very easy to increase carbon reductions/targets at a later point.

I'm not sure why Bob doesn't support the trading of preferances though. I think this is one of the great tools for the smaller parties to influence government and an effective one. To be honest, I actually thought they'd done this in the last election by trading preferances for the promise of the Government signing the Kyoto protocol, but maybe I'm wrong and Labor signed it for nothing more than the public popularity.

Gillard can't really get rid of Conroy. He's the major right-wing Church man and despite Abbot being one himself and leading the Libs, those factions are about the same size in both parties. She has to appease them to stay in charge of her party and that means giving Conroy his position and his Filter.

I personally don't see a lot of significant benefits to the NBN and I'm a Systems Engineer. Labor claims it'll let people work from home but with my profession, I use more network bandwith than regular users and my simple ADSL connection is more than fine for working from home. Its old business thinking in companies and mangers that are keeping people in the office. As for improvements to businesses, I work for a company that needs hundreds of branches to talk back to our head office and with SDSL 512 in every branch and a couple of ADSL connections out of the HQ its self, we have no bandwith problems. We have decided to get a better connection, but we're paying for the optic fibre ourselves and the cost isn't all that bad for someone our size. We're only doing it because of a business decision to host our own web content to the public. Webhost companies all have fibre connections they've paid for as well and provide a decent service for a good price IMHO (seriously, I don't know why my company wants to host it themselves).

Granted, it'll be better if its everywhere to begin with but the truth is that businesses aren't begging for it since anyone big enough to require it can afford it with ease and internet speeds in city areas, where the NBN would be rolled out first, are enough for the vast majority of people and companies. Don't forget that the Libs do have a plan. They are putting money in to improve the current infrastructure where required (like in some of those 100-year old copper runs), getting those city speeds to more people in the fringes and rural areas, and they're rolling out more wireless than Labor. While wireless isn't a solution for speed I think it is a significant area to advance in with mobile internet connectivity (not just talking mobile phones here) being much more important for the future society than sheer speed beyond what we have IMHO. In essence, I think Libs have a better plan for getting much more of australia connected or on more decent speeds compared to Labor who will put those who have waited so long to connect with the rest of Australia, and the world, on hold for even longer while it rolls out massive internet speeds over the next 3-4 years, starting with those who already have the best speeds.

You're correct that the $40bil will be partially recuperated in the jobs it pays for getting their pays taxed, but after those men have layed down the infrastructure its over and for reasons stated before, I don't think it will grow our technological sector, or business in general, a great deal. In the future, I'm sure it'll be much more beneficial and even needed but I don't see that requirement yet (not even in the next 5 years).

Honestly, I think the government would see far better return if they put it into climate change technology/initiatives and carbon trading/taxing systems. Seriously, aren't we world leaders in Solar technology? How about a goal to get a set of solar panels on every roof good for it instead of fibre to every node. Imagine the jobs produce by that. The world is obviously making a significant move in the climate change direction and if the government can ensure that Australia is a leader in the technology to measure and reduce this we'll probably get far better return on our government's investment in the long-term. Imagine trading our own, vast, bushland with companies outside Australia, realise this and suddenly we have a resourse that could rival our minerals. There are easily just as many, if not more, jobs and returns to be made here, despite any reduction or scaling back of our polluting industries.

reply »







CAPTCHA

DD

Posted by DD 8/12/2010

Discussion rather than disagreement Charles. I was very interested in your post.

We got our first home computer in the days of the Apple LC twenty years ago - it had 40Mb of storage space and we used a dial up connection for internet access, including for remote continuous online access to my wife's firm. The system was so slow that a letter typed might not appear on screen for almost a second

But we thought it was wonderful. It is about five years since I plugged in the LC - it still worked even then. Bravo Apple!

In my home we now operate three modern computers, plus one IPad and two iPhones, all connected to the Router Modem by cable or wireless. My storage capacity has increased to somewhere in the region of a thousand Gigabytes with a two terabyte backup. My family often operates three computers simultaneously on a broadband plan of over forty Gigabytes - some months we come close to using it

Despite being in a capital city the speeds are sometimes too slow. It is the connection or general data speeds that cause the problem, one computer even uses a Solid State Hard Drive

To go from Mb to Terabytes in a generation is a massive change in date needs - it is all going down the same wires for the most part. My area especially needs an upgrade. Wireless doesn't work well here in that we are in a radio shadow. So a better broadband network is indeed an issue here, and once again we are talking capital city. In addition to my metered use there is also unmetered use for the ABC's excellent iView Service

My son is a computer nerd of the university qualified type. He assists people with their systems - we have old ladies round here downloading bucketfuls of data - the demand increase is escalating exponentially. I believe we have to bite the bullet on the NBN and get on with it. Apart from cost recouping through income taxes etc it is important to bear in mind that it is not a case of doling out forty billion and getting nothing for years. The network will be usable in most cases as it is progressively completed. Data use includes in its cost a GST component - don't worry they'll get their money back far faster than any private company would. When the Government describes it as "a good investment" they are right!

You suggest the use of the money for technologies such as solar - in particular solar panels on every roof. I have looked into this very thoroughly and the figures simply do not add up. I use a fairly normal household amount of around twenty KWH daily - I need a drawing capacity of about twenty five KWH a day to give me the edge

I am very careful with electricity use and do not need anyone to tell me to reduce it. We can't. We also use a solar water heater of greater power than the normal rec rebated power. Frankly they don't work. For six months of the year there is very little output and all year they require 24 hour boosting. In fact they are a misnomer. Solar water heaters are really solar BOOSTED heaters - they are on line devices.

A PV system would - if it fitted on the roof - cost me around eighty thousand dollars and have a life expectancy of not more than twenty years. The 1.5KW devices on offer are just a joke. Useless. And they only give that much power for a few hours in full sun - daytimes only. Grid exchange systems are therefore no use to me.

These are the kinds of issues that the Greens here need to realistically examine. In Europe Green parties are beginning to. Ours is just a bit behind. For example it is now realised by most Green parties in Europe that nuclear power may be unavoidable if we are to reduce carbon emissions. The great indicator is the technical reality of the Danish renewable power systems. They are dependent on European Grid backup and the excess power on the Grid is coming largely from Nuclear produced electricity exported from France and Scandinavia and from Hydro power also coming in from Scandinavia

The bottom line is that the EXCESS power needed to manufacture renewable power units in the required quantities can currently only come from other technologies. Earth Hour may be a good propaganda exercise but it gets us nowhere but fairyland

This said, I believe that the Greens in the Senate would be a responsible monitor on environmental matters. I believe we need a greater push for Climate Change policies and for expanding renewable technologies. If they ever get over their nuclear phobia then I would vote for them in the Reps too. I believe that will come because i believe the scientist who introduced the Gaia hypothesis ( James Lovelock) is correct. To stand against nuclear technology is wrongheaded in that it is a case of standing against the only technology that is currently capable of making the major difference to carbon emission and to help us reduce the growing impact of climate change.

Thankyou for the discussion

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/12/2010

GETUP: "Abusive, racist or expletive language won't be tolerated"

Was Naive's post censored by getup as being racist/abusive, or did he/she remove it themselves? Considering the number of posts in here dropped from 122 to 103 it looks like Getup just censored a heap of posts...

*************************

Ahhh, the good old days of computing DD. I can still remember colouring in on my father's punch cards, hehe. I can't remember exactly what our first computer was. I think the first one I was dealing with was probably a terminal in the computer room of the company my father worked for at the time *shrug*.

Not sure what speeds you are getting on your link but if its a slow then it certainly sounds like yours might be one of the areas that needs some better wire or something run. The scary thing I'm hearing is that you're in a bit of a wireless deadzone. I have a good friend in Brisbane who just moved into an area on the far south-side which is in a deadzone and running off a RIM hub (no ADSL possible). It pains me to think that there are people even this close to the cities who are not only still on ADSL incompatible infrastructure but in wireless deadzones. With two iPhones and an iPad I'm sure you're aware of how important mobile connectivity is becoming to society. This is the other growth area of concern that the Libs are set to cover but which Labor is in denial about despite technology moving significantly towards this area with netbooks and the other devices you have yourself.

I have another mate on a property near Roma trying to study UNI with a dialup connection thats about 1/4 of normal dial-up speed. He was set to get a subsidized satelite connection and there was even a big move for some wireless in the region with repeater stations that was market driven with government incentives/subsidy, but government pulled out and he's still sitting there with an internet connection that needs to be left for hours to download or upload UNI papers, etc. My thoughts are that Labor's fibre solution won't be benefiting either of them any time soon while Libs push to continue improving the existing infrastructure is likely to reach those still disconnected from the world first. It seems to me that the fibre option is a right-wing option to give the "haves" already on high-speed ADSL even more and leave the "have-nots" even further behind for even longer.

I agree with the line "we are going to need it" but not with the idea "we need it now" with regards to the fibre solution. Its my opinion that getting ADSL users to fibre when there are those on dialup or worse, is like trying to get drivers into flying cars when there are still those in horse and carts. The "need" for this infrastrucutre to BEGIN being built is still 3-5 years away.

On the solar solution. It was just a minor example I picked out of thin air. But I will note that my grandparents had three electrical panels installed and hooked to the grid, and its halved their energy bill without costing them a fortune. Certainly, solar power isn't a silver bullet to energy needs and climate change, but its still a bullet in the revolver IMHO and Australia would do well to invest in making and keeping its self as the leader in that technology, together with many other climate changing solutions that they could sponsor and lead the way in. The insulation scheme was a nice one for addressing SOME of the energy saving solution just as solar power is a good one for SOME of it (seriously, I moved from a home with full insulation to one with nothing but "Charlie Fluff" in the roof last year and the place is freezing. Insulation makes a good difference). I'd love to see much more minor and side work, sponsored to get wins in the battle for climate change, even technology to make coal power cleaner. With all our poluting power, industry, refinery and mining, we could really lead the world if we push for reductions and sponsor Australian researchers to produce many different solutions and technologies that the companies would adopt to reduce their output if they were either forced to trade carbon or even simply taxed on their carbon output (I'd have loved to see that tax on the miners actually made into a simple tax on their carbon so they'd invest in technology to measure and reduce it in order to save on the tax).

I also agree with you on nuclear power. Thats another quick solution to carbon output. Certainly the polution it produces is easily argued as much more dangerous, but the couter argument is that its polution collected and stored as opposed to the polution we're dumping directly into the atmosphere. I also think Australia could make great profits for storing the nuclear waste of other countries. I'm not trying to suggest that a lot of desert automatically means we have great places to store it, but we have vast lands and sparse population. I'm more than happy with how nuclear waste is stored in the modern world and I think if we're decide to produce and store our own we could easily lease storage to other countries.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/12/2010

Charles I doubt GetUp bothered to screen censor these posts. If they did DD's posts would have been removed a long long time ago.

Unless that is, he is somehow involved in GetUp and pushing a personal agenda.

Interesting... maybe Naive removed them because the argument wasn't worth having.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/12/2010

Naive didn't have 19 posts here and it appears to be that many which have been removed.

*meh* despite being strongly opposed to the government filter/censorship I do understand and approve of people or organisations who host these forums in removing people's discussions which go against rules that they clearly display. Getup display it in bold letters that abusive or racist remarks together with offensive language won't be tolerated every time you go to post, so I don't see an issue.

Never-the-less the irony of some censorship taking place in a blog to speak up against censorship was too great, despite any understanding of the different contexts between them.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/12/2010

Whoever removed the posts - it's a good thing. It's often disappointing to me anyway that these blogs sink to mud-slinging.

There's simply no need for it. Everyone is entitled to their views - and as adults we need to be able to agree to disagree without becoming bigotted in our responses.

Good one GetUp if you did in fact do this. It's about time.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/13/2010

Well DD I'm not at all surprised to see your response...

You are actually advocating rude insulting belittling behaviour is acceptable on this forum.

Very interesting that you have come out and openly stated this.

So - what you are saying is that if someone disagrees with you that they have the right to say so - but beware because if you disagree you will belittle them, insult them and be rude - and that's ok.

True colours....

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/13/2010

You have missed my point - I made no comment about anyone's beliefs - just your belief that you have the right to personally attack anyone who disagrees with you.

Nothing to do with content.

GetUp however has lost it's way - it's now being high-jacked by political agendas - and no longer not aligning to either party.

This will be the reason I will not be involved with GetUp after the Mental Health Vigil that I'm organising is over.

I may well attend a polling booth to hand out Mental Health fact sheets - but they won't be ones with GetUp on them.

And tell me what happens if Liberal win the election????? Actually don't bother telling me - because I'm completely over you and your politicising everything - this last post of yours being a classic example.

But it could actually happen.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/13/2010

Don't go twisting my words - you try this and to any intelligent reader - you fail....

This is NOT a temporary atmosphere - your insults, beradement, harassment and judgement attitude continues day after day and has been going on for as long as these blogs have been.

Such a shame GetUp don't WiseUp and get rid of you.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/12/2010

I advocate for discussing and debating the issues, not attacking the person (although I might tease here and there :razz:). I'll address DD's conversation in another post.

The Unions don't have nearly as much clout and influence in labor or Australia as what they once had. Even workers themselves got sick of their bullying and whining attitudes they developed at the height of their power. Now-a-days they have far less power and the leaders are much more reasonable IMHO.

I see no issue in government ventures that improve our public services and create jobs for the blue colar workers. I might disagree with DD and Labor that the NBN is the next good place to grow with stimulus but I think stimulus in blue colar areas, outside the resource sector, are where you want to keep putting the money and I'm in agreement with DD that the Labor government did a fantastic job of stabalizing the Australian economy. The mining boost helped that sector but the government's actions kept the rest floating quite well.

Labor discovered in the Keating years, after heavy research by professionals outside their party, that economic stimulus was the answer to cushioning a recession. However they learned that the only mistake they made back then was that they waited to long to get it out. This time they threw it out there as fast as they could and certainly it was messy and not as efficient as it could have been but if they'd followed the Liberal's method to plan it out better they'd have been repeating the mistake that the Keating government made.

Don't forget who it was that sold Telstra either ;)

Not sure what you're getting at with the weakening of the Aussie blood line, but I suspect you're talking about immigrants bringing in foreign cultures and values to give us a multi-cultural society when we already have our own Aussie culture. I certainly believe that Australia has it's own unique culture which should be preserved and nurtured rather than killed by some push to become a multi-cultural society. however I don't believe its being destroyed or poluted by foreigners despite all the talk out there of making us a multi-cultural country. I think a good many of them appreciate the "Australian way" and integrate quite well. The groups of immigrants who have gathered together in places to remain outside of Australian society and form close-knit communities aiming to retain the culture of their origin and reject the Australian one are really quite small in the scheme of things. I'm one of only two Australians in my department which is made up of two South Africans (one black, one white), two Indians, a Dane, a Chinaman and Kiwi. Certainly you might point out that thats an insane ratio of immigrants to locals but the important thing that I note is that all of these people I work with are part of any of those groups banding together to create a pocket of their foreign culture in Ausralia. They all embrace the Australian way of life and keep an open mind while happily sharing some of their own culture with, what I believe to be, a majority of Australians who are open minded as well.

The foreign culture groups, out there are the minority compared to the vast majority of immigrants who are embracing Australia and simply sharing the culture and values of their home.

reply »







CAPTCHA

DD

Posted by DD 8/12/2010

If Australia has a distinct culture then that culture is successful multiculturalism

I'm not sure we have got there yet, but of one thing I am sure and that is that the culture of Banjo Patterson, Lachlan Macquarie, the First Fleet, the bushrangers - and indeed of Gallipoli - is not the culture of some thirty percent and more of Australia's population. Nor does it represent their history. We might wish it were so but it is not. It does not make those images any less powerful to put them in a world context

For example it is hardly the culture of our indigenous people - who have resisted it for two hundred years - nor is it the culture of the recent descendants of migrants to Australia. My culture is the culture of twentieth century England and of its past - it is also the culture of both Protestant(Huguenot) Europe and of Irish Catholicism - I was multicultural before I even arrived here - I have brought my family up to be so. Like multitudes of Australians they hold dual citizenship true love - true patriotism - for them is to love the world!

For others it is the inherited culture of Vietnam - or of Italy - or of China - or of Judaism - or of the Arab world.

A true Australian culture would draw from all these strengths and share all our histories. This would be a lot easier without the divisiveness of racist attitudes fostered largely by the Coalition Parties in these times, when the rest of us have largely moved on

True Australian culture would rescue, unthinkingly and selflessly, Sanctuary Seekers from their boats, because Australian multiculturalism is caring and compassionate - the tribalism that occurs is mostly a Right Wing media and talk show radio host beat-up, a fraud perpetrated on a largely repressed people - to keep them repressed

If there was a strength in the British "blood line" it entirely came not from isolation but from diversity. The British cultural and genetic pool drew from the entire world - so it is in Australia - Diversity should be, and often is, our Australian pride

I have lived in streets in Australia in which a dozen ethnic origins have been represented. They have been some of the happiest streets I have lived in - with people sharing their company and their backgrounds and stories round a Sunday barbecue. My Australian son has had both Australian and Chinese girlfriends. He studies with people of his generation from all over the world.

Follies such as the internet filter are lapses into a monoculturalism most of us have left behind. We need free communications in order to grow. We are capable of being responsible without nanny holding our hand - and we are better able to protect our children from visible dangers than theoretical ones

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/12/2010

"I'm not sure we have got there yet, but of one thing I am sure and that is that the culture of Banjo Patterson, Lachlan Macquarie, the First Fleet, the bushrangers - and indeed of Gallipoli - is not the culture of some thirty percent and more of Australia's population."

What of the culture represented by Steve Irwin? Steve was an extreme and eccentric example of it but there is the core of the Australian culture and values that I personally see through much of Australia. Its not a culture of racism as many advocates for multi-culturalism believe but one of mateship, family values and BBQs in the back-yard with the neighbours.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/12/2010

"Certainly you might point out that thats an insane ratio of immigrants to locals but the important thing that I note is that ALL of these people I work with are part of any of those groups banding together to create a pocket of their foreign culture in Ausralia"

replace "ALL" with "NONE" sorry ;P

reply »







CAPTCHA

Drakes drum

Posted by Drakes drum 8/12/2010

Despite the fact I support it's re-election the Labor Party is very far from being my Party, Naive. It is the sad reality however, that the alternatives are so very much worse.

I do see however a sudden and unusual hope in the possibilities of a Gillard Labor Government in the Reps moderated by the Greens in the Senate - but ultimately the solution lies initially in a growth in intellectual, political, educational and cultural awareness in this country. These first faltering steps still need to be taken, and the combination I suggest is the only political one we currently have of it being able to be done through the Parliament

In the thirty five years I have been here, Australia has made considerable progress - but I am left with the feeling that a progressiveness and energy - and even the thirst for the new -that fired the Whitlam election has not recovered since the externally engineered dismissal. This is why GETUP is so important. It is the voice of the people learning again - as a new generation - to demand change - and it is the voice of people who have come to realise that present political structures are failing

To vote for the Coalition alternative would be to vote for the very ideology that brought down the hopes of the Australian people and have kept it slowly slipping behind faster progressing nations. It is the ideology of "I have the Right to Rule because I am better than you" - it is the ideology of exclusive clubs - classes and cliques. It is the ideology that says that so long as a privileged sector of our society receives the educational opportunities elitist private education and tutoring can provide, then that is good enough and should be satisfying enough for ALL the people - "for after all there is a trickle down effect provided by the Holy Market"

But there is no trickle down effect. The passage of wealth and opportunity flows up and not down, and the Market Economy is in fact the greatest recipient of charity in the world - far more than all the charity given to the poor combined - the market economy of laissez faire capitalism is in fact on charitable life support as I type

I'll talk to you of a second frustration - and this is a Labor Party error - it is that we do not have a proper social democratic culture in this country, and therefore it is very hard to get through the blockade of a monopolistic Right Wing Media - one that at commercial TV level and Radio broadcasting level is aimed at the constant dumbing down of the population

The result is - to give but one example - the historical and proper modern role of Trade unionism is misunderstood - even within those movements. The Right Wing elitist myth - taught especially in Private Schools is that democracy rose from Classical Greek Origins via Roman law and Christian society. It is a largely rubbish myth. Greek philosophy and political philosophy indeed played a role in shaping political evolution - but had it been the major factor we would have had a fully functioning educated democracy two thousand three hundred years ago and would probably have landed on the moon by the year 300AD. And we would certainly not have the kind of intellectually backward medievalism that the Howard/Abbott option displays

Democracy rose through the struggles of the people to advance themselves and to share what life has to offer. No small contribution was played by the Trade Union movement, many of whose leaders were transported to Australia as convicts. It is to Trade Unionism that we owe the universal franchise - the Right to vote that is every citizens share in democracy. It may not be much, but it is all most of us have. Trade unions fought for and obtained the working conditions we enjoy - poor as many are but far better than once was - when children worked in mines and factories - bent double - uneducated and suffering diseases that killed them at a very young age

Social democracy only works when the participation rate of the people is greater in decision making processes - That is why in Europe from time to time experiments are conducted using such organs as Workplace Councils

There is a mountain one could write here, but to return to your post - you decry the suggestion of a high speed Broadband Network - I say "We are going to need it - we need it now - so lets get on with it" - I would go further "We need more public Housing - so lets build it" - "We need more land for private housing - so let us release land in our cities currently either privately or Govermentally locked up and not being used - Let's put a sunset clause on being allowed to leave a private apartment empty and for heaven sake let's bring back rent control - including on business premises so small businesses can get a break"

Oh there is so very much more - but it can only come through better social organisation - broadcast licensing that sets much higher minimal standards - a greater emphasis on free education and more varied entry into professions - and above all through a sharing of wealth

So here is my frustration - Naive - - It is seeing a good life stolen from Australia's people , migrant and indigenous to prop up a Colonial Class system- It is from seeing the wealth of our nation - our children's heritage - ripped out of the ground with unfair return to the Australian people - and it is seeing the opportunity for the finest life in one of the greatest countries in the world taken away. or squandered.

Once again I think that we can move forward but not by oscillating between the two major parties. If you want to move forward - re-elect the Gillard Government - Give the Greens the balance of power in the Senate - and increase the size and voice of organisations such as GetUp.

(And while you are about dump Conroy and his silly filter - it won't work anyway)







reply »







CAPTCHA

GetUp!

Posted by GetUp! 8/13/2010

Hello,

We are glad to see that passionate debate is alive and well! However, although GetUp! is in favour of free and open discussion, this is just a reminder that comments that are personally abusive or racist will be removed.

This is in the interest of keeping our blogs a friendly and most importantly, a constructive forum.

All the best,
GetUp!

reply »







CAPTCHA

DD

Posted by DD 8/13/2010

This is something for debate within the GetUp leadership.

For GetUp to remain a progressive organisation on certain issues it is necessary I believe for it to take a firm stance. Climate Change is the most important of these

It is important because there is a highly funded disinformation campaign taking place throughout the net ,much of it aimed, in a similar manner as "Holocaust Denial", at creating the appearance of there existing two equally valid sides to an argument where in fact there are not. Blog threads are used as gaps in the dam - places where defences are most weak. That is why they are often the scene of the greatest battles. Incursions need to be recognised and dealt with

No matter how much effort is put into scientifically establishing the reality of Climate Change and the thoroughness of the Scientific work - it will never be enough to satisfy a deliberate disinformation and denial campaign that is utilising Climate Change Denial to popularise a far wider agenda. That is how populist totalitarianism works

Refuting the deniers nonsense takes a lot of time and effort and in the process creates what the funders of Denial Campaigns most seek - exhaustion and confusion in the body politic. The only way to deal with this is to adopt a clear position on the matter and not allow posts to diverge from that position. Let such posts be posted elsewhere. We need to move on. The movement to rectify climate change has been stymied quite long enough by the tactics of propagandist dishonesty. Let Copenhagen be the last time this is allowed to happen

Yes it is a limitation internally on absolute freedom of speech - but that may be unavoidable if we are to move forward against such irrational and funded hostility

I think that the rule could be on the lines of allowing purely scientific material submitted by accredited qualified scientists in the relevant fields. But I think that the allowing of pseudoscience waffle put on by unqualified persons in the Denial lobby needs to stop.

GetUp now is a victim of its own success- it started as a voice of the people at a time when it was not perceived by anti-progressive - ultraconservative forces as a threat. Those days are over and we must expect political and cyber assaults on our movement

In recent times the burst of activity on the part of GetUps leadership has been most impressive. I congratulate them on their determination and courage, but as an old campaigner - right back from the days of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament in the late fifties and early sixties, I urge caution and clear ideological and theoretical thinking

Do not take any post at face value as being an honest expression of genuine opinion. Our forum is political and politics do not work that way - much as we may wish they did. Hang in there - Septembers coming!

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/13/2010

You talk like this blog is all yours....

So - that then makes me wonder if you are actually a part of the GetUp team.

Disappointing - EXTREMELY disappointing if you are.

Your language and attitude to the bloggers on these sites is completely and utterly unacceptable to me. You have shown a blatant disregard for their mental wellbeing and have been bullying and harrassing.

I can assure you once again you have judged someone incorrectly.

I am genuinely a swinger voter - and all this nonsense that you throw at the Liberals without looking in the Labor back yard is not just amusing - but the very reason I will NOT be voting Labor.

This is supposed to be a group that is NOT a political party and does NOT support any political party - read the Home page.

I got involved because I want to see change in the Mental Health system and no other reason.

I believe that it is the MOST IMPORTANT issue before us this election - because it's about SAVING LIVES her and now.....

Whether you think Liberals are liars or not - there's no evidence (other than some claim that you know someone - which can't be tested) that they won't follow through on their promises and plans, even if they don't implement everything in the nominated time frames. But I can assure you that there is plenty of evidence that Labor doesn't follow through on it's promises - and we don't have to go back decades as you are so fond of doing - just look at what's gone on since 07.

Whether either of them will or won't follow through - that's what our job is past this election - to hold them accountable that they actually do implement what they say they will.

For GetUp to now be running 'anti-Liberal' campaigns is not what I signed up for - I agreed to back this organisation because it claimed to be non-political.

The ability of GetUp to achieve what it's charter was will be reduced markedly - and I won't be part of a 'political' movement.

This is what they are now becoming - and it has nothing to do with policy.

However, this blog won't be frequented by myself any further past the mental health vigils still being run, while you continue to be such an out-there bigot and while you continue to insult berade and belittle anyone who disagrees with you - or who expresses an opinion that isn't 100% in line with yours.

Didn't your parents ever teach you that you catch more flies with honey than vinegar?

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/13/2010

@DD/BJM: If I can give my opinion on the two of you here.

DD, you do seem to make a little argument in many of your posts to point back at many of the problems we face as being the fault of Christians (Catholics specifically) and an apparently facist, liberal party, striking out with the note that Tony is a right-wing, Archaic, racist, Catholic at every turn and blowing a lot of fear instead of keeping the discussion to the policies. The Libs use this same tactic by attacking with fear campaigns that Labor doesn't know how to manage the country responsibly, but I hope that you can rise above such methods. Certianly many might make such a spiel here and there, but you seem to throw it in with every discussion and rebuttal. If you were talking about Muslims or Jews ruining our country the way you are Catholics, I'm sure many of some of them would be close calls for censorship.

BJM, I'm honestly seeing a constant, personal attack on DD from you and while he's returning a few blows here and there I'm noting that you keep it very personally aimed at him in what I perceive as an aggressive manner. Much of the "mud-slinging" you note as disappointing in such forums, appears to come from yourself and I think you could do well by addopting your own advice and applying a little less vinegar to your arguments against DD's discussion tactics. Many of your posts I would regard as close calls for being censored due to abuse.

R. E. S. P. E. C. T.
Find out what means to me!

Sing it with me now ;P

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/13/2010

I am disappointed that even in your attempt to slap us over the knuckles you too have made comments that are not FACT and without evidence.

I note your comment "The Libs use this same tactic by attacking with fear campaigns that Labor doesn't know how to manage the country responsibly" - I'm not sure that this has any base in fact and certainly you haven't provided any evidence.

However, I think it's pretty easy to prove that the current Labor governement (and many past) have difficulty running the country responsibly - if you are looking at financial matters. Just look at the report of waste in the schools building program. The evidence is available to anyone who wishes to read it. And that's only one example.

And I don't see that being pertinent to the topic at hand - internet filtering.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/13/2010

I wasn't aware that I was slapping either of you over the knuckles for making comments without FACT and evidence. I was hoping for it to come across as more of a plea to get along but apologies if it felt like an attack it's self.

But I wasn't aware that I needed to state that Tony Abbott and the Liberals have been saying that the Labor party don't know how to run the country and finance since the Howard days where a Labor party was certain to equal interest rate rises. I tend to think its common knowlege since Tony is still telling us that Labor doesn't know how to responsibly roll out the NBN and other Labor initiatives. Do I really need to find quotes from Tony and Howard or link to Liberal campaign adds to prove it? Maybe you're arguing that Liberals comments on this aren't a fear campaign but statements of truth from them. Not sure.

Although I haven't been commenting, I've been a lurking reader for sometime. Since the Censordyne campaign I think.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/13/2010

You might have missed my point - I wasn't refuting the fact that they are saying that - I agree with them - and there's plenty of FACT to support their statements.

The evidence you didn't provide is that it's nothing more than fear tactics... as you implied....

And in relation to the NBN - I think there has to be a way to do it better than spending so much money. And given Labor's current performance on managing the rollout of their 'projects' I doubt that it will be done efficiently too. I would like to see the government reassess what they are doing and implement the necessary changes to bring connectivity to regions and put it back on the private sector to at least contribute. They could do this through providing incentives - like matching them $ for $ of their investment or something like that - maybe $2 for every $1 that they invest. There has to be a better way - and there has to be a complete feasibility study and business case to show how it will be paid for and over what period of time with it be paid back and by whom.

This is a huge concern.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/13/2010

Heh, we'll have to agree to disagree that Labor aren't skilled enough to run the country and economy. As I stated elsewhere, Labor's rapidly rolled out projects to stimulate the economy with insulation, handouts and school revamps needed to be run out the door with little planning or they wouldn't have achieved their objectives. They learned this in the Keating years of recession, when they did take the time to plan their stimulus and ended up coming in late when we'd already sunk too low for an easy recovery. But you won't get any argument from me that the NBN is the wrong move and the Liberals plan is far superior and targeted in the right areas and the right direction. I don't know if the NBN is a complete "white elephant" but its certainly more of a popularity piece and vote winner than any real project thats addressing some great national need. It will grow businesses in certain market sectors and bring some return and advancement but no-where near what they're shouting about or hoping the public will presume. They have been doing a lot of planning and work with the industries, but I get the feeling their getting told it'll cost more than their $40B+ which is why Telstra haven't been co-operating.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/13/2010

Maybe it might be more appropriate to simply say that you don't think this is the fact - rather than make a comment that is negative without providing any facts to support it (that the libs are 'attacking with fear campaigns'). This is what I object to. That's not the sort of comment that is designed to be an agree to disagree comment. That's the point I was making. You also made some fairly strong accusations against me - unfairly I feel, and your comments to poor Lynda that really was caught up trying to defend her right to her opinion.

I really am against what I see as money being wasted - rather than being spent on essential services like mental health.

I was against the massive 'stimulus' package from day one - and believed that there were many other things that money could have been spent on that would have provided better outcomes rather than the BER program.

Like housing or improving health facilities.

This project wasn't about only providing needed things - it was about providing 'nice to haves'. And I don't agree that Labor saved Australia from the global financial crisis through this wasteful spending. All money spent should be done so wisely - and it should always provide value for money no matter what the reason for the expenditure.

As for Telstra being given this huge contract - a joke. I've worked for Telstra and they can't manage their way out of a paper bag efficiently.

My personal opinion, based on my experience in the IT field, is that they would get better value for money to upgrade existing services such as wireless, satelite and microwave technology. Particularly given we have such a huge deficit, I don't see any point in spending that much moeny on this 'nice to have' technology. That doesn't mean that I don't acknowledge the need for some improvement.

Surely this money could be spent on more important things.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/13/2010

"the labor guys are the ones that are into character assassination and personal attacks" You didn't exactly provide evidence to support this or simply say that you think this is fact although I do believe it to be true with "you can't trust Tony on Work Choices" and the like. I could have used that example just as easily but as you may have noticed I was directing that particular comment towards DD so a Liberal example was more appropriate considering, what I perceive to be his distaste for them. I don't think I commented that either of you were making comments without evidence. Maybe you're offended by my post and wanted to make some accusations back. Fair enough, I can't shout foul to that but I do hope you don't give up on the Getup staff working to keep these blogs free of bullying as they seem to be rising to the challenge now. I'll join you in noting and protesting any abuse he or others throw out there, together with encouraging others not to raise to the bait of trolls.

Again, you don't get any argument from me that the Lib's Broadband plan is superior to Labor's NBN. They're trying to claim that it'll enhance health survaces and education which will benefit from higher speeds, but I feel those improvements will be very minor. Heck, if they think its that great they should just roll the fibre to the hospitals and schools alone.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/13/2010

I'm sorry I didn't provide evidence on that - it's all over the media. You yourself commented that the Libs are saying that the GOVERNMENT can't perform - whereas the majority of the labor campaign is all about TONY - as you just yourself made reference to. I find the ridiculous comments about 'budgie smugglers' particular amusing... the man was doing a triathalon or something - what was he supposed to wear.

This is the one constant I keep hearing about the electioneering and how everyone is sick of it.

It's to be expected that they go after each other - that seems to be the way of it - but they really should stick to policy and the performance of the government, and not go after the leader personally.

Personally I think that the ad re work choices is just an example of taking some comments and quoting them out of context. He also said that he won't be going there as he knows this is why they lost the last election. Work choices is not all of the legislation - so I don't see anything wrong with the comment about the indstrial relations legislation - and there does need to be some changes - but not to the extent that Howard took it. I agree that work choices was a disaster even though it would never touch me personally. I've worked under negotiated conditions for decades so it wouldn't touch me no matter what they brought in. But for some it did have an impact although I don't think for one minute that was the intention. I do though think that it allowed employers to go too far.

The thing that I do feel confident in is that the liberal party know that they would be committing political suicide (punn only) if they were to reintroduce it again.

Some of the things in there were good if they were to be more toward the choice of the employee rather than being left open to one-sided 'negotiation' by employers.

What I'd like to see is that both sides of government listened to the people and the common sense that many of us make, and also that they didn't go ahead and introduce things that don't seem to be needed at this time when we should be being more careful that any expenditure gives us value for money. This in fact should be the way government runs at all times.

If they took this approach we might see much more bipartisan policies and a better country all around.

I'm not making any accusation back.... just making a point. Statements that show a disagreement is one thing but to include 'put down' remarks are unnecessary.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/13/2010

I wasn't affected by workchoices either and didn't look too heavily into it. But at the time it was being introduced, unemployment was incredibly low. That creates an atmosphere where employers are desperate for workers, so workers are in a relatively good bargaining position with something like workchoices. The problem is that when things get tough and unemployment goes up the bargaining position is reversed. The other milder issue with this is that the big employers usually have better education and lawyers behind them when they're spending time to make the workchoice offers and an every-man-for-himself situation for employees can be dangerous. I can still remember working for a Property Development company leading into the Economic fall and they took us one at a time into meeting rooms to sign new employment documents that made us workers under it's various different companies/divisions. What this meant is that each of their individual "companies" was considered a small business so they could deny payouts and the like when retrenching staff. I was fortunate to get another job before they fell and reduced their staff from about 70 to 30, letting people off in an economic slump, with little or no payout. But I'm certainly willing to believe the promise from Tony that workchoices is dead and won't bring in even elements of it under different names, at least for his first term. It really would destroy them politically as it did Howard's government. The memory of that is what'll keep them honest there.

Back a little on the question of why Labor didn't throw stimulus into healthcare. This is certainly out of the area of FACT and honestly, in the deep region of conspiracy theory, but I think it was done intentionally by Rudd to sell his plan for a Federal run hospital system. My understanding is that Federal funding into the state hospital systems reduced after the beginning of Rudd's term. Then towards the end of his term, after he's been starving the hospitals and allowing them to decline and look worse (unsupported opinion there), he came in with the money he'd been holding back from them to be given under the condition that they signed up to his plan. Maybe our hospitals will do better united under Federal government management and maybe they would have been better managed at
State level, closer to the people. But there was no doubt that the hospitals were going to improve either way from the funding starved situation they were in at the time with an injection of the cash they should have had from the beginning. Rudd and Labor, of course, would claim the improvments were the result of Federal management.

-end of conspiracy theory.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/14/2010

Ineresting concept. Here in Qld they are going to close down the existing childrens hospitals and open a super hospital - not sure why - no one seems to understand it.

The existing 2 childrens hospitals struggle as it is - and the locations are one on the north of the river and one on the south...

I just would have preferred to see stimulus money go to essential services - there's plenty of essential services that could have done with a large injection of capital expenditure.

What about the housing situation.... building public housing would have been better.

Lets hope that the internet filter doesn't go ahead - I think it will be another disaster for so many reasons... and more unnecessary spending....

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/13/2010

hmmm, yeah way off topic sorry DD. This last one in particular probably belongs in the mental health blog.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/14/2010

I'm not sure I follow - what 'particular term' do you find puzzling?

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/13/2010

If you want evidence of the poor management of the BER program you can check out the audit report...

In the summary the comments start around about point number 14 - up until that it's an outline of the 'project'

It's here:
http://www.anao.gov.au/uploads/documents/2009-10_Audit_Report_33.pdf

I
am a professional project manager - and if I was to deliver a project with this kind of performance I would expect my job to be on the line.

And it's a LOT of money..... an awful lot... and I've heard feedback from a lot of people saying that a lot of the 'halls' were in fact only demountable buildings and not really what the schools needed.

Peter Feather, who heads the Parents and Citizens Association at Pymble, told a press conference... "Under the building program, the cost for a couple of new classrooms was $3595 a square metre."

Hardly good management.

This is one example of what I believe show that Labor aren't really capable of managing the country responsibly.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/13/2010

Charles

A lot of DDs past posts have been removed... and as you seem to be new to this blog I'm sorry that you've come in on the tail end of this.

If you re-read my posts you will note that I do nothing more than make an observation of his bigotted attitude (a lot of his extreme posts have been removed) not just to me but to anyone who dares to disagree with him.

Stating an observation is not abuse. However, if you had had the pleasure of reading many of DDs posts you might change your view. I am careful with what I write and do NOT insult or abuse the man. He has caused obvious distress to many other bloggers who have long left - and someone needs to point out that his attitude is harmful to others as I'm hopeful that it's not intentional.

I must say that I have noticed a sizable 'tone down' of his language over the past 24 hours or so. I hope it stays that way.

But thank you anyway for your opinion.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Naive

Posted by Naive 8/13/2010

1st I did not pull my comments along with the dozen or so others, as I said we can not say certain word, we get labelled.

I question, who is GETUP? what is their background ? why is it that most of their programmes seem to be left wing, who finance them?
I have serious reservations .

Well done Dick Smith and his ABC show last night, these are the very points I have been trying to talk about, I would like to be able to talk about immigration and not be called raciest .

I'm a vietnam vet and I put my life in harms way many times because ,right or wrong, that's what our troops do, I think I have earned the right to speak up about the conditions of my country and what is happening to it, I believe our war dead are turning in their graves at what has been going on in this great country .

Dick hit the nail on the head, when will it be enough?at some point we have to face the big question, but no ones got the hanging things to do it. why?
Topend business killed Hanson for this reason (the magic dollar), I believe she was right, but too early for people to come to grips with , well we are going to have to come to grips with it and get tough, call it what you want, racist or what ever, but at some point we will have to admit we have a problem.

One senator said "but Bangladesh has x million", is this what we want to see the cholera karts coming down the street selling kebabs, the gas truck selling bottle gas, cos no one can afford piped gas, and the water truck transferring water to our home tank.

I have been through 70 countries around the world, I drove a car through them, all Africa, Europe, Afghanistan, Pakistan iran etc etc, I have seen these people and their way of life and what they do, please please take a hard look at these places, is this what we want?.

We need to stop talking just about Australia and being to scared that someone will label us, the whole world has this problem not just Australia.
I believe we need to stop/ educate people about religion and their beliefs, once we control radical religious nuts, then we can control the birth rate, when we control the birth rate (population) then we control the worlds food, once we control all these then we control the environment, yes I know I have high hopes, the future will show that this will be done (long way off), until this can be done, mother nature will de- frag the population, wars will continue, as sad as it is.

Look at Rwanda, Cambodia, Hitler and many many more atrocities,storms,floods etc,this is mother nature at work doing the job we should be doing.

DD you are right about what we want for this country, we all, labor ,liberal,greens, all want what you want for Australia, the difference is not in what we want, the difference is which party do we think can do the best jobs and I'm sorry mate Labor does not have a good track record, I look beyond the leaders and look at the management team and who will be the best.

Regarding Broadband 40B, at the moment it probably is the best, but wireless is getting better and half the infrastructure is already out there, and lets be honest, my IT son only wants to get it faster so he can download movies quicker and if thats what the young want and will vote for, then we have lost the plot , and do we see it sold off and then buy it back with a B1, B2.

no I did not pull my blogg, I would like to be able to have free speech and not be labelled, I suppose they will pull this blogg as well

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/13/2010

As far as I'm aware, Getup is a radical left-wing activist/lobby group. Not sure if they try to hide it or claim they're anything else. I like to think of myself as a bit of a central wing if such a thing is possible. I believe that the extreme ends of either left-wing tend to drag the entire country down while the extreme of right-wing push the gap between rich and poor. Somewhere in the middle is the sweet spot we need to maintain... probably more left of the exact middle ;)

I probably lean towards the more conservative philosophy as opposed to radical, but I'm talking about conservative views to governance as opposed to conservative values and the like which are usually associated with racists and extremist Christian objectives to hold society to their own values. I believe that true conservative governance isn't about holding back change or restricting it but about planning and guiding it appropriately without letting over analysis lead to paralysis of change and an understanding that in some cases, time is of the essence and quick decisions or work needs to be done when that is the case.

Even if Getup doesn't have a particular stance on the population debate yet, I'd love them to open up another blog for discussion as I think its a wonderful thing to finally get on the table. Despite anyone's opinions of Dick Smiths views on it and alternate views, I think its wonderful that he's pushed this issue forward so that we do start discussing and considering it instead of ignoring it like we ignored climate change for so long. We've certainly let the discussion of the ISP filter waver to other areas such as the closely related NBN and much more diverse matters such as climate change, but I'd like to see another whole blog dedicated to population discussion if they could oblige.

I'm of a similar opinion on the NBN. I don't agree with views such as "no-body would know what to do with 100mbps speeds" because there's a good deal which can be done with it. IP television, better IP telephone service, much better virtual meeting room services and other live video/voice streaming capabilities, together with much more. If we had it, we would do something with it, that I concede. However I agree that none of these are vital or likely to become vital for a significant number of people in the next 5 years, while slow speeds and lack of connectivity are a VERY significant problem for the good portion of Australia which still can't get more than dialup internet.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/14/2010

I have to disagree with you that silencing discussion of policies and politics in the leadup to an election is a good idea. If anything I think its the most important time for discussion to take place. Certainly party members might make appearances and try to put their own message in here, but I don't have a problem with hearing their discussions and I certainly see no issue with them sharing their opinions and such, here if they wish to face the scrutiny of the Getup members who will call them on what they say. Whenever there is someone to pipe up about how wonderful a party policy is, there is someone to pipe up and note it's flaws or areas for improvement.

On the idea that racists could jump on the population wagon. I believe this to be a very great threat and such people threaten putting a bad stain on opinions. I'd still like the discussion to take place but we most certainly need to be wary that while racists will try to push anti-immigration objectives we should not be too quick to label those in favor of a "small Australia" as racists, lest we become no better than those who call opponents to Internet filtering, pedophiles.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/14/2010

I agree Charles...

And if a discussion is to be had about a sustainable population why not now? The whole issue of 'boat people' is very much an election issue this election - and if this discussion is a part of that then why not discuss it now.

Why leave it until after the election.

DD I'm not sure that I agree with your conspiracy theories - particularly given you seem to be such an ardent supporter of Labor, or is it ok for you because you blindly support labor?

I have told you many times that my vote will be on policy - the mental health policy. If Labor were to promise to implement all of the recommendations outlined by Prof McGorry balanced with the recommendations from their own enquiry - they'd get my vote. Regardless of whether or not I think that they have any chance of implementing the changes - and then I'd work to hold them to it - and ensure that they raise the issue to the position that work choices had for the liberal party last election.

And I would stand by that.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/13/2010

GetUp sell themselves as being non-political - they state that they are NOT a political party and that they don't support a political party.

But I fear you are correct - the extreme left is certainly what's represented here.

Comments that are not FACT and without evidence that slog the conservatives or Liberals or the church or the wealthy etc etc are pretty much the standard here. Extreme extremes.

I fell for it - but I won't be around long - because GetUp isn't what they represent themselves as and I don't need to maintain a long-term relationship with any organisation that misrepresents themselves.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/13/2010

Naive

I find it very interesting that your blogs were pulled and not DDs....

I think that this is pertinent.

GetUp has lost the plot - they said that this election we were focussing on 3 issues - and I have backed them on that.

They claim to be non-political - and that they don't support either side... but look at their last couple of campaigns - nothing more than personal attacks on Tony Abbott.

Although politics is about throwing mud - I have always noticed during my long life that the conservatives attack policies and bad past performance of the party - the labor guys are the ones that are into character assassination and personal attacks.

This is consistent with DDs approach if you dare disagree with him - although GetUp don't seem to care about his personal attacks on people or his harassment and discriminatory remarks.

Interesting....

This blog will probably be removed too - now that they are paying attention - which they haven't been over the past weeks while I know that there were complaints made about DDs attitude and language - but they weren't pulled.

Not impressed that GetUp are showing such bias to one side of politics.

reply »







CAPTCHA

Will Mason

Posted by Will Mason 8/14/2010

Filtering create more employment than digging holes and filling them in again. It won't mater to anyone who needs the interweb nor to criminal elements like terrorists and moral abusers.

It would have slowed down legitimate use of the net (say, 98% or business and commerce) to kill a not insignificant minority better dealt with by proven means. History is a better teacher than logic -- Karl Wieks; while he never said that, I just did(summarising what I'd call the 'Eureka Truth').

What works is so much more cost effective than what sound good - c.f. "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" (Prisig, R)

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/14/2010

"[censorship] is necessary to bring about transparency...it helps the public at large." - Fijian dictator Frank Bainimarama

reply »







CAPTCHA

Watch Out

Posted by Watch Out 8/14/2010

Forget Labor and the Filter. Start asking Mrabbit what he has cooking if he gets into "power". You may be very surprised at his lack of "teck head" ability to answer. He will talk child exploitation spin when his deep ( i nearly said brain) self is saying "Terrorism, terrorism, nuclear bomb plans, viruses, gases, germ war" so stop talking about Conroy and pay attention to what you may well be faced with and prepare to act. Start by asking questions.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/14/2010

Please share with us what Tony "has cooking if he gets into power" as all I'm aware of is that he and his party are opposed to a filter. However is you're that worried then maybe you should be concerned about them getting elected in the future and inheriting Conroy/labor's filter.

As for his lack of techical knowledge, I'm a Systems engineer and I believe a good many of the questions he were hit with are beyond what I'd expect even an educated non-techy to be knowledgeable in. I'd much rather hear questions on how/if his policy is going to upgrade or connect the hundreds of thousands of Australians with Dial-up internet speeds or worse and generic questions about getting hospitals, schools and other public services on higher speeds rather than specifics on technical details. I might be worried if his communications minister, Tony Smith, was ignorant of such technical knowledge, I might be a bit more worried... Has Julia been grilled about the technical details of the NBN or is she just being allowed to fire her speeches on 100Mbps (actually I think they raised that to 1Gbps now) without facing questions as to if they will be replacing RIM hubs/nodes with it first and foremost? Whats the bet she asks what a RIM hub/node is? Again I don't blame her if she doesn't know. There are ways to ask these questions which don't require you to be a tech head such as "will you be running fibre to hubs incapable of ADSL or with only dial-up speeds first?" and there we can get an actuall answer instead of trying to catch her as ignorant of technical details like we've labelled Tony. The fact that Tony can't script AIX to remotely check a DS8100 for 1020 faults through SNMP traps does not worry me.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/20/2010

WARNING! LABOR/CONROY'S FILTER IS STILL ON THE CARDS!

"An undefeated Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has refused to declare the government's mandatory internet filter policy dead in the water."

"Conroy has resisted calls for the policy to be scrapped, stating the legislation would still come before parliament under a re-elected Labor government."

SEE AT ZDNet: http://www.zdnet.com.au/parliament-decides-if-filter-is-dead-conroy-339305289.htm

reply »







CAPTCHA

Naive

Posted by Naive 8/20/2010

can someone tell me ........,

Is optical cable under the ocean? or is it still copper? and if copper wont that slow the speed?

I take it that optical will be run all the way out to Woopwoop in the middle of the Gibson desert, yes /no? so they can get on the internet and talk to a doctor (how many doctors are going to be sitting there waiting for my call???, will this save me having to go to the local doctor?.

How much will I pay if I connect to the polypipe, 20 bucks a month 100 bucks a month, do I have to connect if I don't want it, lots of questions here.
I would think 40B would be wiser spent on getting water down from the north to people that need it to live, although it would be good to be able to download porno movies faster.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/20/2010

Yes. Optical cable under the water out of Sydney and Perth (mostly Sydney to the rest of the world).

http://www.visualinformation.info/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/2009-submarine-cable-map.jpg

I
was actually surprised to see how much of the country towns the NBN does go through. Its not every one but if you compare it against the map of Australia, it really does hit a good deal of the country. ZDNet had a more detailed map that showed even more wireless coverage (can't find it) but maybe they scaled that back or something. Obviously its not hitting properties but thats where they hope subsidised sattelite will be enough. But the speeds won't be great on that so the really small towns, not between the major ones, would have to still rely on flying doctors or local ones if there are any.

I saw some recent articles somewhere that suggest it could be $300-$400 to connect the fibre to a single port in your home.

http://www.webwhitenoise.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/wireless_nbn_map.jpg

http://www.alp.org.au/getattachment/a056f388-c0de-4660-8d62-ad85f94b2fa5/nbn/

reply »







CAPTCHA

naive

Posted by naive 8/20/2010

Thanks charles, I was not really up on NBN and I will follow your links to find out more.
Those prices are really going to be out of reach for........, I would at guess ..... for 60% of the public if not more, Sky "Your money" talk back experts are talking about small user paying 50 to 80 for 12mbps which I would think about, given that I could reduce other costs eg phone etc and cable tv.
thanks again for that info well done.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/20/2010

Found the news article on the cost to connect to homes. They initially estimate it to be $250 to $450 per household. I'm guessing thats for a single cat5 or cat6 port put somewhere in the house and maybe also whatever special broadband modem would be required since the current ones wouldn't work on the new network.

It starts by saying you'd need to spend up to $3000 to fully utilize it but I'm not sure what thats made up of. I suspect it involves multiple cat5-6 connection ports, a good wireless modem, ip telephone (with monitor maybe) and IP television box... I suspect.

However it does note someone who already has the broadband and they're paying $75 a month and got the modem for free from iPrimus.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/homes-to-pay-heavy-price-for-internet-from-nbn/story-fn59niix-1225907517167

reply »







CAPTCHA

Naive

Posted by Naive 8/21/2010

DIVORCE AGREEMENT

THIS IS SO INCREDIBLY WELL PUT AND I CAN HARDLY BELIEVE

IT'S BY A YOUNG PERSON, A STUDENT!

WHATEVER HE RUNS FOR, I'LL VOTE FOR HIM (not sure about giving up the Subaru though).

Dear Australian Labourites, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists and Gillard, et al:

We have stuck together since the late 1950's for the sake of the kids, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has clearly run its course.

Our two ideological sides of Australia cannot and will not ever agree on what is right for us all, so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.

Here is a model separation agreement:

Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a similar portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.

We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the labour judges and the CFMEU. Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, and the military. We'll take the nasty, smelly oil industry and you can go with wind, solar and biodiesel. You can keep the ABC left wingers and Kerry O'Brien. You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all of them.

We'll keep capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Woolworths and the Stock Exchange. You can have your beloved lifelong welfare dwellers, food stamps, homeless, homeboys, hippies, druggies and illegal aliens. We'll keep the budgie smuggling, bike riding, volunteer firemen and lifesavers greedy CEO's and rednecks. We'll keep the Bibles and give you ABC and Bollywood .

You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us. You can have the peaceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help provide them security.

We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, political correctness and Penny Wong. You can also have the U.N. But we will no longer be paying the bill.

We'll keep the SUV's, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find.

You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors. We'll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right. We'll keep "Waltzing Matilda" and "The National Anthem." I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute "Imagine", "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing", "Kum Ba Ya" or "We Are the World".

We'll practice trickle down economics and you can continue to give trickle up poverty your best shot.

Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our name and our flag.

Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like-minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you answer which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.

Sincerely,

John J. Wall

Law Student and an Australian

P.S. Also, please take Lindsay Tanner, Wayne Swan, Peter Garrett, Alan Griffin, Mike Kelly, Mark Arbib and Jenny Macklin with you. We can also do without any Senators at all!

P. S. S. And you won't have to press 1 for English when you call our country.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/21/2010

Mate, I think you just took 10% of Australia with you at best. While we might have trouble finding doctors, you'll struggle to find men to work your smelly oil factories, clean your offices and collect your garbage bins.

In essence, I think you just divorced the richest men of Australia from the people who are making them money. Skilled and unskilled labor, tradies, shop assistants (gonna be difficult running Woolworths stores without them), miners, wharfies and every other blue collared worker. I have this wonderful image of doctors driving garbage trucks, lawyers mining the coal 1km underground and right-wing politicians cleaning office windows. Frank Lowey could even go back to operating a Deli.

Don't forget that Howard was the man who lead the charge on anti-gun laws and Abbott is the one who's pushing for solar power.

Sincerely,

Charles

Human and Earthling

P.S. don't bother dialing 000 for help. Those workers followed us for better pay and treatment... Maybe it can contact the military instead, just like Fiji.

reply »







CAPTCHA

naive

Posted by naive 8/21/2010

would I have expected different answer then that DD from you? as I said Gillard could sell Qld to chine and you would still support her.

I run a business from home too, but thats ridiculous, trouble is like all labor policies they don't tell the people the truth, white elephant her we come.
By tomorrow we will know if Australia is stuffed

reply »







CAPTCHA

Naive

Posted by Naive 8/21/2010

I reckon we should start using Getup to swap or pass good jokes back and forward.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/21/2010

Also, please don't be so naive that I wouldn't notice your plagarism.

http://hepzibahpyncheon.blogspot.com/2009/02/divorce-proposal.html

Seriously
, you changed the word "American" to "Australian"? Strewth mate, how unaustralian is that? You evidently don't have a love for this country so please move out and join the Americans who's names you substitute for your own.

reply »







CAPTCHA

naive

Posted by naive 8/21/2010

well done charles, you are really on the ball, love your links, have read through them very informative.

DD are you there??? have just been done the booth and did a Julia Gillard

reply »







CAPTCHA

Frances Yule

Posted by Frances Yule 8/23/2010

In aping Tony Abbott..."the term "internet filter" is dead and buried...what is the point in the building of a much faster broadband network only to slow it down with a filter?

reply »







CAPTCHA

naive

Posted by naive 8/25/2010

WELL Getup the word is now out.

What a shame, I thought that this web site would be a clean bloggs centre to view others points of view and be independent of party groups pressures .

I really did hit the nail on the head when I said that underbelly unions were involved in your shameful web site.(1.5mil in donations )
It didn't seem to do any good, what a major hit Labor has taken.

The greens did well and picked up labor votes, now labor will try anything to stop a re election, if there is to be a re election Abbot I think would bolt it home.
I think people thought that there would be a land slide to Libs and gave there votes to other parties as they were not happy with the two big ones.
I watched Australian story on the ABC regarding Paul Howe, the man seems to have a child hood problem and has boiled it over to his radical ideas.
I blame him and his like for labor's failings on the week end.

I believe that Labor is being used by the underbelly unions to gain power in this country , this is very dangerous for Australia and we should be very aware of whats happening inside labor.

The unions are going to have big problem if the three o 'megos make sure that every one is transparent, promises, funding, adds etc, this is going to cramp their style.
I think this is good, as parties wont be able to get away with pulling the wool over our eyes as they have done in past elections.

No doubt, like many of my other bloggs, this one will be pulled off yet again by the left wing Getup SHAME

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/26/2010

Strewth Getup:

"The union movement has emerged as a key financial backer of the advocacy group GetUp!, with six unions pouring more than a million dollars into its election purse in the past three weeks alone."

"The union contributions account for just over half the total $2 million GetUp! has raised for the campaign, with more than 10,000 individuals also donating."

"Some had targeted funds for specific ads while others had made a general contribution."

GETUP: Get smarter about this. Its the kind of stuff that puts a taint on messages from climage change scientists when they're shown to be funded by anti-climate change or pro-climate change groups. It doesn't matter if you really are impartial to either party and focused on the issues, the taint will stay there.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-election/getup-bankrolled-by-unions-20100820-138yq.html

reply »







CAPTCHA

DD

Posted by DD 8/26/2010

For trade unionism to return to its traditional and founding role of direct participatory action to secure the rights of working people would indeed be a step in the right direction, Charles.

Trade unions were founded at the personal risk of imprisonment, transportation, and even execution, to stand against the wage and working condition rigging cartels of enterprise owners and managers. They acted on the basic principle that just as a commodity or a service producer had the right to negotiate the price of his product so the working person had the right to negotiate the price of his work and his conditions of life and work. For ordinary people Trade Unionism in fact BROUGHT democracy and the right to vote, just as it later brought services and welfare

When Trade Unions moved towards founding Labour (sic) Parties they tended to pass their political role on to parliamentary social democratic parties. But it is a problem inherent to party politics that caucus run parties can be corrupted either directly or through political donations - so trade unionism periodically returns to that monitoring role - and so it must. What is hard-won can be easily lost (remember 1933)

If the Trade Union movement - or individual Trade Unions - choose to readopt their direct political role by participating in organisations that are themselves grass roots participatory organisations, then they are merely returning to a role they have perhaps neglected.

In Europe there have been successful experiments using Councils formed from all relevant trade unions in an individual workplace. These in combination with management representatives are able to work together for the good of the enterprise as well as the good of the workforce - thereby strengthening national economies for the common good.

I would like to see trade unionism and management and ownership develop in that way here in Australia too

The people want participation in democracy - a donation to GetUp or to a similar organisation is a powerful way of getting that message across to Government and the community

Democracy is not just about selecting a chosen and all powerful elite every three years out of minimal available and rigorously controlled choices

Democracy is a day by day process that, properly constructed, is of its very nature progressive and if indeed progressive unions have contributed to a grass roots organisation of which I am a member then I am very grateful for that solidarity with our aims. You clearly do not see yourself as a "member" in the same sense as I do. No sympathetic member seeks to be detrimental to his organisation's finances.

I welcome trade unions back to the fight to build a better world and a better and sustainable environment

And Charles I would remind you of some of the terms of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

Article 23
Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.

Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.

Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.

Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Article 24
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Article 25
Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

Article 26
Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.

Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

AND of course:

Article 28
Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realised.

Can we please return to the subject material of the blog. You are really discussing human rights here - not the internet filter

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/27/2010

Well I was hoping to return here and see your recent off-topic posts removed, as you suggested, so I could be inspired and join you in that. Maybe I'll find the situation changed later in the morning.

Apparently Getup actually agree that they should limit their funding from Unions.

"THE left-leaning advocacy group GetUp! would welcome limits on its ability to raise money from unions and other groups as part of a reform package for political donations being negotiated between the Coalition and Labor and three key independents."

Excellent work Getup. This is the way to lead by example. If its good enough for you then its good enough for the other organisations that are less interested in "bringing together progressive people from all political backgrounds and parties, while remaining independent of all parties so they can work with and critique all political parties without fear or favour." This would prevent business groups like the tobacco industry from funding organisations like the Alliance of Australian Retailers to lobby against the government's plain packaging for them. These and other business groups can out-spend the unions, and even the government, any day of the week as we saw with the polluter's lobby against the Super Profits tax. Its no wonder Labor went into the election with no decent plan to address climate change considering it would have to face that juggernaut again which easily drowned out the Government's information ads on the tax and even Getup's iCoal 2.0 ads.

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/26/2010

"Can we please return to the subject material of the blog. You are really discussing human rights here - not the internet filter"

BWAAAAHAHAHAHAAA!! This from the man who kept turning the issue of mental health to a push for socialisim and anti-religious commentary? Set a better example if you plan to push it on others and you could have started by making that statment on it's own, without another rant that it's self was off-topic. In essence, all your message becomes is "I have spoken and I do not wish to face reply."

DD, One call has already been made into the possibility that Getup is an associated entity. As much as that accusation might be by the Liberals, it is never-the-less quite important that Getup keep associations between it's self and the political parties, or their associated entities to a minimum or it will simply be regarded as an associated entity. Its also important for them to keep campaigning on the issues or, if they campaign against the parties, to do it evenly.

COMMONWEALTH ELECTORAL ACT 1918:
"associated entity" means: (b) an entity that operates wholly, or to a significant extent, for the benefit of one or more registered political parties

http://www.aec.gov.au/Parties_and_Representatives/special_matters/AEC_Advice/Getup.htm

reply »







CAPTCHA

charles

Posted by charles 8/26/2010

P.S. Feel free to lead by example and not reply to this conversation but "return to the subject material of the blog" with discussion about the internet filter instead now that I have spoken and do not wish to face reply *PMSL*

Ahh, we need Jean Claude Van Damme to fix this derailment.

reply »







CAPTCHA

BJM

Posted by BJM 8/25/2010

Naive

You are absolutely correct. My recent blog about Labor being a front for the unions has also been removed. There wasn't any abusive, racist or expletive language in it.

Interesting isn't it. I guess we were right - GetUp is FAKE.

It IS political and it's NOT an unbiased representative of grass roots.

At least it's now out there.

reply »







CAPTCHA

DD

Posted by DD 8/26/2010

I actually find your recent (post election) posts a bit peculiar, "BJM" and "naive". I tend to presume that they are political party motivated rather than the products of research, knowledge, and analysis. In particular I rather doubt your claimed innocence. You sound very like my ultra conservative mother in law when SHE hides behind a pseudonym! ("Hi mum" if that is the case)

As far as the suggestion that Labor is some kind of a "concealed front" for the union movement, BJM - all I can say is you just don't know - or are deliberately concealing - the political history of this country.

The ALP has always been a very open party in terms of its structure. Any "behind the scenes" action tends to take place within individual factions. In that it is similar to any other party. If you want to understand the party a good starting point would be the Wiki article on the following webpage. Use "cut and paste" to insert the address. Live links do not always work on GetUp webpages;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Labor_Party

The
election itself is over. Most of us have moved on already. You seem to be having difficulty here and i wonder again if this is feigned ignorance or real ignorance of Australian Constitutional Law. It is perfectly normal for a Prime Minister and his party to remain in Government so long as it does not lose a vital vote of confidence in the House of Reps, and provided it is functioning as a Government not impeded by a hostile Senate. Only the attainment of an absolute majority by a competing party or Coalition would correctly overrule this Constitutional dynamic - it is about "law"

So there really is no need to argue about all this. The Constitutional process will continue and we will have to deal with the result.

So we come to the main allegation that matters to us - relating to the role of an organisation such as GetUp.

You seem to be confusing such organisations with political parties or party factions. They are not - they are issue based. There are times when as a GetUp member I strongly disagree with a particular approach. That is when you will see me posting my disagreement on these blogs

I wonder what exactly you mean by "unbiased" BJM. By definition if you campaign for an outcome on an issue then on that issue you are indeed "biased", meaning you have an an opinion on a particular matter that you may put to the membership. That discussion is what the blogs are for. But surely - since people will exploit blogs (as in political Party astroturfing) it is not unreasonable for there to be a degree of moderation - in fact defamation law etc demands it.

You seem to be wanting GetUp to be apolitical - What do you have in mind instead? - If you want somewhere apolitical you can join a football club or a knitting circle. So what are you doing in GetUp if not pushing your own (party) political agenda? I certainly see nothing in your posts about the Magpies or knitting patterns

I feel you are playing a rather old fashion Menzies type game. When Pig-Iron Bob didn't like something politically, or found it to be a threat to his personal power, he would claim it was "communist" or the work of "faceless Trade Unionists" - Mate it is BORING!

Please get over all that nonsense. We have a golden opportunity to found in Australia a more directly participatory democracy. There are and will be many organisations such as GetUp. I believe that GetUp serves us well. I appreciate its openness in terms of structure and purpose - all clearly stated in webpages accessible from the one you are reading now. I appreciate its physically bringing people together to discuss and campaign on the real issues - and if as an ordinary member I could ask it to do something more - right now - it would be to relaunch the campaign to ensure all potential voters are registered

I believe GetUp has changed the face of Australian politics for the good - giving the people individual and collective voices that can no longer be ignored by established, and sometimes arrogant, parties. I see it as helping to build a new practical and compassionate ethos within existing parties too. If we get mental Health reform instead of promises that are shelved having served their electioneering purpose - it will be GetUp that has made the major contribution to that empowerment of the peoples compassion - people from across the political spectrum

And if all this upsets you - truly I wonder just where politically you are coming from - because to me it does NOT sound like democracy! I feel you are clinging to a political process that has degenerated to a "choice between elites"

No more days like those - I want democracy - I believe in it

reply »







CAPTCHA

Leave a comment

This is the place for yours and others' views on this blog post. Robust debate is great, but please be civil.

For full details see our Terms and Conditions.







CAPTCHA

You can do some limited formatting in comments with BB tags. You just need to put the words you want formatted inside tags. You can [b]bold text[/b], [i]italcise[/i], [u]underline words[/u], [s]strike-through words[/s], and put material in [quote]quotes[/quote].

Latest Comments

 

Your Senate

Find out more about the Senate

Blogs

read more »

News

read more »