Friday 9 July 2010

Australian internet filter blocked till after election

In the latest of a string of deferrals and backflips, the Federal Labor government has just announced that the widely distrusted internet filter, akin to communist state-controlled access to information, will be "shelved until a review can be conducted into what sort of material should be banned."

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy today admitted Australians were concerned about what kind of material could fall into the "refused classification" category, and said he would push for a review of the classification guidelines.

"Some sections of the community have expressed concern about whether the range of material included in the RC category, under the National Classification Scheme, correctly reflects current community standards," Conroy says.

The much-lauded internet censorship plan, joins the emissions trading scheme, and the home insulation programme on the pre-election scrapheap.

Lance Royce of Northern Truth popped up this 'spot the difference' today.

He says there's no real difference. "Both National Socialist! Heil Julia!"


Michael Thompson said...

When they start selective ethnic cleansing by allowing incidents such as SIEV X, children overboard and Tampa, or giving hundreds of millions of dollars to oppressive tyrants such as the Hussein regime through bribes from the then government controlled AWB, not forgetting also the oppressive work choices and the importation of cheap labour from overseas with special 'work' visas to work the mines there may be some similarities with Gillard and Hitler, but I think the rodent still wins hands down. I'm sure Mr Royce wouldn't see it that way though. And that's the truth.

hesus said...

Hell mike showing syd the jew knocker that salute will send him into a frenzy .

Bob Beamon said...

I don't think the internet filter was ever 'lauded' i.e. praised, quite the opposite - which is why it has been postponed/canned like everything else this government has tried to do. Embarrassing really

A different Mike said...

The government doesn't listen! The government doesn't listen! The government does... Um... The government back flips! The government back flips!

Syd Walker said...

Mike. Can you please delete the comment by the anonymous coward hesus, which is defamtory, untrue, offensive, irrelevant and pollutes what might otherwise become a reasonable discussion?

Leuco Gaster said...

No real difference! Likening Gillard to Hitler is not only not funny, it is offensive. But then, anyone who has looked at Lance's blog already knows that he is as nutty as a fruitcake. A sad, bitter, irrelevant old man - please go back to Amerika, the Tea Party would love to have you.

Syd Walker said...

I'd hoped to get a take down of the anonymous and defamatory slur by 'hesus'. Maybe I should have emailed CairnsBlog instead of posting my request as a comment?

Anyhow, he/she is either (a) an idiot, or (b) someone trying to cast slurs on my credibility for nefarious reasons.

Either way, a short Saturday morning quiz is an appropriate response:

Who said "the Zionist movement as a whole... makes demands that are arousing the antagonism of the Moslem world... endangering world peace and imperiling some of the most sacred associations of the Jewish, Christian, and Moslem faiths. Besides their inherent injustice to others these demands would, I believe, seriously and detrimentally affect the general position of Jews throughout the world" and "the honour of Jews throughout the world demands the renunciation of political Zionism"?

Was it:

(1) Adolf Hitler
(2) Yasser Arafat
(3) Isaac Isaacs

After Googling up the answer, he/she might also like to also consider the ethnicity of Dr Alan Sabrosky, former Director of Studies at the US War College, who wrote recently:

“If... Americans and those like them ever fully understand just how much of their suffering - and the suffering we have inflicted on others - is properly laid on the doorsteps of Israel and its advocates in America, they will sweep aside those in politics, the press and the pulpits alike whose lies and disloyalty brought this about and concealed it from them. They may well leave Israel looking like Carthage after the Romans finished with it. It will be Israel’s own great fault.”

A Proud American said...

Syd, the truth is always a proper defense to accusations of defamation.

And (without agreeing that they don't) if Americans fully understood how much suffering is attributable to protection of the Jews, they would do it all again. While you have no shame in hating them, Americans understand that the highest calling is protection of the downtrodden.

yk said...

Of course there are differences; one is a dictatorial meglomanic who ruthlessly put all rivals and enemies to death in a desperate bid to retain power. One who can never be trusted and one who would imprisoned, in foreign concentration camps, all alien travellers of dubious backgrounds and religions beliefs which are unpopular with the masses. The other is a German leader of the 1930s and 40s

Syd Walker said...

"Americans understand that the highest calling is protection of the downtrodden."

Your trolls are beyond satire today, Mike.

This latest one must live in a Hollywood Fairytale.

KitchenSlut said...

I think there is a subtle difference in Julia's hand gesture which differentiates her from the nazi salute? It reminds me far more of some of the old Soviet propoganda posters calling for workers solidarity? Although they were significant allies for a while!

Well we didn't have to wait long for Godwin's Law on Hitler to enter this thread :-)

S Panse, sorry not my real name said...

Yep KS, Godwin was right.Perhaps yk and Lance need to have a chat to someone with some real knowledge of what life was like in Europe back in those days before making such stupid comparisons.

KitchenSlut said...

Maybe this is a closer comparison ... except for the hairstyle of course ... although at least Kruschev knew to use his left arm!? Get it right Julia .... err maybe I mean get it left Lance? Oops sorry couldn't help it :)

Peter W said...

Syd, you seem to like multiple choice questions.


Q1. Would the world have been a better place with Hitler / Mussolini & Hirohito in control from 1945 - 1960 or with Stalin / Democratically elected US President / Democratically elected UK Prime Minister?


Q2. Do you think PNG belongs to Papuans or Japanese?

1) Japanese
2) Papuans

Q3. Which countries would have been better served by German rule (you can pick multiple answers):

1) France
2) Poland
3) Sweden
4) Denmark
5) UK
6) Greece
7) Hungary
8) Serbia
9) Slovakia
10) Netherlands
11) Belgium

Feel free to add any other countries you feel German had a legitimate claim on and should have ruled.

Q4. Who would have you preferred to win WW2 in Europe:

1) Axis
2) Allies
3) You wish that WW2 was still going

Q5. Who would you have preferred to win the war in the Pacific

1) US / Allies
2) Japan

Now I dont want any waffling answer, just pick 1) 2) or 3)

Syd Walker said...

"Now I dont want any waffling answer" says Peter W.

Memo to 'Peter W': I'm not feeding trolls today.

I am, however, thankful my parents both survived the holocaust that was World War Two. Some 60 million human beings didn't, including members of my extended family.

The Second World War, incidentally, really began in March 1933, when it was reported that 'World Jewry Declares War on Germany'.

It is clearly not over yet.

If World War Two was truly over, people would be free to discuss the war-time propaganda of both sides - and other historical assertions made about the war - without fear of imprisonment or other more brutal forms of persecution.

Nor would European scholars need to travel as far as Iran in order to freely discuss European history in an open forum.

Destiny said...

"Mike. Can you please delete the comment by the anonymous coward hesus, which is defamtory, untrue, offensive, irrelevant and pollutes what might otherwise become a reasonable discussion?"

Is it only Cairns Blog you would like to see censored or do you think the government should perhaps move to delete from our screens any content which might be 'defamtory, untrue, offensive, irrelevant' or could possibly pollute 'what might otherwise become a reasonable discussion?'?

Syd Walker said...

@ Destiny

Co-incidentally, I emailed Mike earlier today to clarify my position on this, as follows:

"The problem with the comment by 'hesus' being published - which prompted my initial request that it be snipped - is that it has predictably derailed the discussion from the main topic of the article.

"What I would find totally unacceptable is if people were allowed to defame me without any right of reply. As long as you don't mind the consequences, I don't mind taking time out responding to the hysteria of these folk with, what I hope, are rational arguments. Actually, I'm used to it."

I hope that answers your question Destiny. I didn't want this discussion to be dominated by a somewhat off topic debate. I believe the subject of Internet censorship is vitally important; I didn't want to distract from it.

However, I shall attempt to defend myself against false accusations from anonymous cowards if they are published.

Furthermore, 'Destiny', if you can't see the difference between a single website editor deleting material if he/she chooses to do so - and a mandatory, government censorship scheme which potentially affects everyone in the nation, then I think you may not have a firm grasp the issues.

Unknown said...

"Nor would European scholars need to travel as far as Iran in order to freely discuss European history in an open forum."

Any country that allows women to be stoned to death for adultery has no credibility whatsoever...

Can you demonstrate without being shot or locked up in Iran ? No.

Can you do that in Israel ? Yes

Is Iran a fascist theocratic regime ? Yes

is Israel a democracy ? Despite all its faults, yes !

Carl Butcher said...

This is the second time the Internet Filter has been delayed so I'm really hoping that the Labor party quietly shelves it altogether.

It will be ineffective and a waste of money. When will politicians learn that the Internet can't be regulated like TV, Radio or Movies. It's an entirely different medium that is so complex it can't come under the same old laws.

I'm also sick of Conroy and others spreading false accusations or failing to properly address the fact that this filter will not protect children at all. They'll still be able to access pornography, still be targeted by cyber bullying and illegal material will continue to be spread by peer to peer sources or move further underground.

If the Government simply came out with a filtering plan that would only target child pornography, no one would argue with that. It's the "Refused Classification" that is open to so much debate and could potentially be abused by future governments should it the filter ever be introduced.

A good example of where RC becomes grey is gaming sites talking about games that don't meet Australia's highest rating of MA15+ but would be considered R18 in every other western country in the world. These are legal games.

Since Australia does not have an R18 classification for video games, forums, websites and trailers for these games would be considered illegal under the RC rules and thus be subject to the filter.

The former Government's approach to keeping children safe was with its NetAlert program that offered free net filters. This should have never been canned.

Destiny said...

My grasp of the issue is a non argument - who of us believes anyone who disagrees with us understands the issues like we do?

And yes, Michael can choose to put whatever he likes on his blog - but once you start asking that something you disagree with or find offensive be taken down, we have censorship - and when you mention defamation in your request, I, if no one else, sense an inherent threat to the owner of the blog. Typical of how censorious dictatorial regimes start.

I have been opposed to censorship all my life. But now I find myself in a quandry. I accidentally come across crap I don't want to see - and am horrified kids are seeing it. And they are seeing it - they are better at finding this shit than we are. And most of their parents are oblivious - and it is having enormous consequences on the society we all have to live in - therefore we all should take an interest - and the avenue we can do that through is OUR government. The government is us, elected by us - and turfed out by us. Please I hope that silly American contagion of 'the government is the enemy' doesn't become rife here.
I don't know what we do about the internet - I'm sure the government did not have it right - I doubt anyone has the right answers yet - but at least they are trying something - and no one dies if they get it wrong. I am against the stridency of some of the arguing - it's not black and white - there's shades of grey.

As for your apostrophisation of my name, Ive been known as Destiny for over 30 years and more people know me as that than my birthname - I have no wish to be anonymous - if you wish to know more about me my facebook page is Destiny Rogers.

Syd Walker said...

@ Nick

The truth, IMO, is that we live in a diverse multicultural world. All societies, cultures and nations have good aspects and bad aspects. Additionally, what's good and bad is substantially a matter of personal belief and preference.

Singapore, for example, has a very high rate of execution, which personally I find abhorrent. But it also has a vibrant, advanced economy. China has a (partially-applied) mandatory one child policy; many people find that offensive. In India, cases of suttee still occur.

The USA has robust free speech but also high incarceration rates. Russia has its own positives and negatives.

I'm not saying all nations are equally good and bad. But what's good and what's bad is not an absolute. It's a matter of preference and ideology.

There are things about Iranian society that I dislike. There are other things I do like. I'd say that about Israel too.

However, nations do not invade and/or attack other nations because they dislike some of their cultural practices. At least they shouldn't.

Over its short history, Israel has repeatedly attacked other nations – and the Israel Lobby is now pushing for yet another attack on a sovereign nation: Iran. Apart from a potentially horrific death toll, this could bring the world economy to its knees.

The USA has a huge budget - pushed through Congress by the Israel Lobby - for 'destabilisation' of Iran, which helps fund the repetition of distorted negative stories about the country. Imagine how outrageous that would feel to most Iranians?

IMO, Iran must NOT be attacked.

Countries have a right to take a different view from Israel and its international Lobby. Jewish supremacism and Israeli exceptionalism are not acceptable.

I'm also outraged that the English-speaking world has become so tainted -in my own lifetime - by a series of illegal invasions, most notably Afghanistan and Iraq - each based on a pack of lies. In some ways we are as bad as Israel.

But not in others. Israel is exceptional in crucial respects. Example: no other country has staged a deliberate attack on the USA military, only to have it covered up by the US Government and mass media.

The hyper-violent Israeli State presents a danger to the world. To their great credit many Jewish commentators are saying this too (though they don't get much airtime).

For Palestinians, of course, Israeli cruelty is beyond the comprehension of most westerners.

Iran has problems no doubt - but it's also subject to deliberate destabilisation and lives under constant threat of attack. That is totally unacceptable.

IMO, the best way for someone like me to help stop another war based on lies is to speak openly about the direct involvement of the Israel Lobby in pushing for this attack.

If, God forbid, the world is plagued by another war, people should know who to blame.

Of course, that's too late. We need to stop this war before it starts.

Wise Jews in countries such as Australia should use their influence to halt the Zionist Lobby's push for war. Some are doing that - good on them!

The rest of us (ie non-Jews) need to develop backbone and stop behaving like its shocking to point to the obvious.

Blind Freddy can see the influence and media presence of the Zionist Lobby is grossly disproportionate. Clearly, this is supported with vast sums of money.

Whatever happened in the past, in this era Jewish people, taken as a whole, are very prosperous. The suggestion made above that Jews - as a whole - are 'downtrodden' is simply laughable.

interesting said...

Syd WALKER for a bloke who attacked hesus .
you do a good job of showing he had a point ,you have not stopped moaning about israel since.

CBD Warrior said...

You're right Syd, we live in a multicultural world. You must be proud to have such deep-seated hate of so many.

Unknown said...

So what is the issue, Syd ?

The State of Israel, Israelis, Israeli Jews, Israelis who are Zionists, Zionists in general, Jews that live in Israel, Zionist Jews or all Jewish people ?

The fan boys and girls that post on your blog certainly don't seem to make any distinction. Some of them even have a very unhealthy admiration for Adolf Hitler.

As for Iran, yes a wonderful country with wonderful people, run by fascist mad men.

I was there shortly before the Shah was overthrown and the streets were oozing with hatred towards anything "Western". For a good reason, I am sure, but very scary and unpleasant just the same.

If you tried to live there the way you are allowed to live here and demanded the same freedom of expression that you enjoy here, I guarantee you, you would not last very long.

The State of Israel has issues. There is no doubt. I just wish that you and your fan boys and girls applied your disapproval in the same measure to atrocities and outrages that occur in many Muslim countries ,including Israel's neighbours as well as places like Zimbabwe and North Korea.

You would have a bit more credibility that way.

A nice example is Turkey. On the same day it accused israel of murdering "peace activists", it was bombing Kurdish "terrorists" in Iraq.

Did anybody mention the Armenian massacre ?Well, don't mention it in Turkey, because you will be locked up.

The world is full of evil regimes, hatred and injustice. Blaming it all on "the Jews" is so 20th century...

KitchenSlut said...

Nick! Stop arguing with Syd! Oxygen is essential for life but is not always wise!

Unknown said...

But Mr. Slut I like arguing with Syd. I especially like to hear his views on the treatment of Palestinians by the Jordanians, the Egyptians and the Syrians. I also like to hear his view on the atrocities that have been carried out by these same countries on their own Muslim minorities. And then there are the atrocities carried out by the PLO and Hamas on its own people. Put all that into context with the undeniable outrages that are carried out by Israel and maybe we gain some perspective and insight about this whole mess.Since he keeps bringing up the issue on this blog, it warrants some response. Trying to debate it on Syd's blog is pointless as it will result in immediate attack by one of his fan boys, some of whom have very scary, bordering on the paranoid, world views indeed.

Destiny said...

Hey Syd,
You forgot to mention they killed Jesus.

Syd Walker said...

Just so it's clear, I don't enjoy arguing with Nick. I don't particularly like arguing, period. I especially dislike debating with people about serious topics, when they seem to treat the discussion like a game.

No-one who considered their 'opponents' human beings could make sneering, blame-the-victim comments like he does, when world peace is at stake - and when the people most directly oppressed by Nick's favourite ('Team Israel') are subjected to unbelievable suffering.

Nicks comments disgust me, to be blunt. It seems pointless citing more references to someone who treats human affairs like a football game ("my team right or wrong"). But some of you people out there may be interested in the facts.

By now, despite the best efforts of Zionist cheerleaders like Nick, most of us in Ausdtralia have a fair idea of how desperate conditions have become for the people living in Gaza - after years of blockade compounded by Israel's savage attack that decimated the city's infrastructure and left many thousands dead or injured.

Not so well known is the extent of Palestinian suffering on the West Bank. This is what Save the Children UK reported very recently:

“Areas of the West Bank under complete Israeli control have plummeted into a humanitarian crisis worse than Gaza, Save the Children warns.

“A new report, "Life on the Edge", released today, states that an estimated 40,000 Palestinians living in Area C - the 60% of the West Bank under Israeli control - are unable to make urgent repairs to their sewage systems, schools, homes or hospitals under Israel's strict permit system.

“Israel's restrictions on Palestinian access to and development of agricultural land – in an area where almost all families are herders - mean that thousands of children are going hungry and are vulnerable to killer illnesses like diarrhoea and pneumonia.

“Conditions for children in Area C have reached a crisis point:

“79% of communities surveyed recently in Area C don't have enough nutritious food - this is higher than in blockaded Gaza where the rate is 61%.

“84% of families rely on some form of humanitarian assistance to survive.

“Rates of stunting in Area C are more than double than in Gaza. More than 15% of children under-5 surveyed were underweight.

“An alarming 44% of children in the surveyed area have diarrhoea – the biggest killer of children under-5 in the world.”

Nick will probably blame the Palestinians for this - or Iran... anyone except the fanatical Jewish supremacists who are carrying out this sadistic torture of fellow human beings.

It's that kind of one-eyed self-righteousness that makes the Israel Lobby so dangerous - and such a huge threat to world peace.

Destiny said...

They inflict a lot of suffering those Jews! Pol Pot was a Jew, as is Robert Mugabe - and a lot of people have no idea Kim Jong Il is Jewish, but he looked just like Shylock before his nosejob.

Unknown said...


All the facts you mention are undoubtedly true. Similar outrages exist in many places, but you only ever focus on Israel. Not only do you continue to attack Israel, while ignoring similar outrages elsewhere, you constantly extend your attacks to "Jews" in general. You also ignore the cynical role some of Israel's Arab neighbours play in this endless conflict.I don't like fanatical Jewish extremists, neither do I like the fanatical Muslim extremists who together with their extremist Jewish and western opponents keep this conflict alive.

You keep hijacking this blog to push your anti-Jewish view on every occasion . And, as is the case on your blog, anyone who disagrees with you or your fan boys is immediately labeled a Zionist, Jew lover or worse. On your blog you provide oxygen for some very unstable, scary people to air their extremist,uniformed views and racist hatred.I think it is disgraceful.

I maintain that a country which allows women and young girls to be stoned to death for 'adultery" cannot be taken serious and its regime deserves to be overthrown. You are defending the indefensible and conveniently overlooking any atrocities committed by others than Israel.

This post was about internet censorship. You used it to attack Israel and defend Iran, as you always do, no matter what the original subject. Israel's shooting of Turkish peace activists was terrible.I did not hear any comment from you about the bombing of "Kurdish" terrorists by the Turks. Did I mention the massacre of Armenians ? (The one that did't happen according to the Turks). How about massacres in Jordan, Syria and Egypt. Not carried out by Israelis,Jews or Zionists, but by their own governments. Events in Gaza, while terrible, pale into insignificance in comparison.

If you had a more balanced and honest take on events, you might have some credibility.In my eyes you don't.

Syd Walker said...

Nick. You wrote: "This post was about internet censorship. You used it to attack Israel and defend Iran"

On the contrary. An anonymous troll used this thread to make a vile comment about me which I reject. I asked the comment be deleted. Instead, my request was published.

Since then, I have simply respponded to comments that have come in from others, mainly by you.

I'd much prefer that the thread stuck to its original topic, as I indicated right at the beginning anhd have already repeated once.

I do not only 'attack' (that is, criticize) Israel. In this discussion I've also criticized Anglo-Saxon countries for breaking international law and starting illegal wars.

I have also explained why I think Israel is an exceptional case. Your only response seems to be "other countries do the same thing". It a half-truth at best - and no real answer.

FWIW, I loathe the fact that Iranian Government still has anti-homosexual laws on its statute books, for example. They date from long before the Islamic revolution (when there was precious little concern shown by the general community in the west).

But if you want Iran to be a better place, and Iranians to have a better life, may I suggest you OPPOSE the Zionist-inspired push to bomb that country into the sort of chaos we now see in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's if you actually care about Iranians, whatever their sexuality.

In reality, I suspect you speak with forked toungue.

FWIW, the Turkish Government is wrong, IMO, to try to impose its view of history on its citizens. But at least there's no Turkish Lobby in Australia, the USA, Europe etc, trying to impose its view of history on everyone else! That's what the Jewish/Israel Lobby does. It sucks.

FWIW, I oppose the death penalty, period - irrespective of where it is carried out. 'Extra-judicial assassinations without any kind of trial - a speciality of the Zionist State - are especially abhorrent.

I do believe in free speech, passionately. It's one reason I live in a western country such as Australia. I'm proud of the western liberal tradition (John Stuart Mill and all that). That's why I put effort into defending it. But the notion of 'exporting' freedom by bombing and invading other countries is misguided, cruel and (IMO) quite insane.

If you really prefer not to have threads 'derailed', take Mr Sluts's advice. He's probably wiser than you.

Oh - and I don't have an 'anti-Jewish view' as you put it. Not as such. If I did, why would I approvingly cite so many Jewish authors? I never use terms such as 'Jew lover'. Please stop misquoting me and misrepresenting my opinions.

@ Destiny: If your best defence of Israel's disgraceful sysematic brutality towards Palestinians is to make comparisons with Pol Pot and Mugabe... perhaps you're coming round to my way of thinking?

Alison Alloway said...

I wish you blokes would stop arguing. I have already told you that some restrictions on the internet have occurred. I fear another "iron curtin" is coming down, bit by bit, in the name of "security".
If all you are worried about is your unfettered access to pornography, you might like to think that some social scientiests are pointing out that the unrestricted access to pornography via the widespread use of the internet has
"hyper-sexualised" our society to an unprecedented level. Some effects are already apparent.

Syd Walker said...

Alison. Not sure if your comment was intended to be taken seriously - or whether you're taking the mickey out of all of us.

I've been interested in seeing whether cime statistics bear out the assertions, often made, that our society has been "hyper-sexualised" and influenced in negative ways by the greater availability of pornography since the advent of the World Wide Web.

If you've got research data on that, please share it. I'm finding it hard to locate material that backs it up.

I notice, for instance, that in the USA the incidence of rape has declined somewhat over the 15 year period since the web became widespread. I doubt that's because reporting rates have declined.


One could, of course, make a case that the reverse is actually true. It COULD be that people with victimless outlets for their sexual kinks may be less likely to commit sexual crimes against other persons.

I'm not saying that's true - just that it might be true (in the absence of real information).

IMO we need more, truly disinterested, reasearch to help make better sense of our rapidly evolving culture.

As for myself, my principal concern about mandatory Internet censorship is that it will eventually be used for political censorship. The so-called 'filter' is next to useless for weeding out images and videos (most pornogaphy, after all, is graphic). It is, however, quite superbly pre-adapted to block multiple instances of text. I can't believe that's pure co-incidence.


Syd Walker said...

Co-incidentally enough, I just came across this comment posted on the 'hyper-active' Whirlpool Forum on mandatory Internet censorship. I haven't read the research papers it mentions yet. If anyone has creible rebuttals to offer, please do:

A study by Milton Diamond is worth looking at when looking at the relationship between pornography and crime.

He says in his conclusion:

The concern that countries allowing pornography and liberal anti-obscenity laws would show increased sex crime rates due to modeling or that children or adolescents in particular would be negatively vulnerable to and receptive to such models or that society would be otherwise adversely effected is not supported by evidence.

Diamond also wrote another paper titled "Pornography, Public Acceptance and Sex Related Crime: A Review" which was Published in: International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 32 (2009) 304-314

The abstract is worthy of note.


A vocal segment of the population has serious concerns about the effect of pornography in society and challenges its public use and acceptance. This manuscript reviews the major issues associated with the availability of sexually explicit material. It has been found everywhere scientifically investigated that as pornography has increased in availability, sex crimes have either decreased or not increased.

It is further been found that sexual erotica has not only wide spread personal acceptance and use but general tolerance for its availability to adults. This attitude is seen by both men and women and not only in urban communities but also in reputed conservative ones as well. Further this finding holds nationally in the United States and in widely different countries around the world. Indeed, no country where this matter has been scientifically studied has yet been found to think pornography ought be restricted from adults.

The only consistent finding is that adults prefer to have the material restricted from children’s production or use.

His latest paper "Porn: Good for us?" includes the following:

In terms of the use of pornography by sex offenders, the police sometimes suggest that a high percentage of sex offenders are found to have used pornography.

This is meaningless, since most men have at some time used pornography. Looking closer, Michael Goldstein and Harold Kant found that rapists were more likely than non-rapists in the prison population to having been punished for looking at pornography while a youngster, while other research has shown that incarcerated non-rapists had seen more pornography, and seen it at an earlier age, than rapists.

What does correlate highly with sex offense is a strict, repressive religious upbringing. Richard Green too has reported that both rapists and child molesters use less pornography than a control group of “normal” males.

Destiny said...

Syd, thou doth protest too much - your answer to too many things is 'the Jews did it'. I was posting seriously till I looked at your blog and saw they started WW2 in 1933 or some such nonsense. As for Israel, they do some terrible things I disagree with strongly but I believe them to be far from the worst offenders. And they face people like Hezbollah, Iran and a substantial percentage of Palestinians whose stated aim is to kill them all. I feel terribly sad for the Palestinians but to paraphrase someone whose name I've forgotten, 'Rarely have a people shown such an ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.' (That's an 'a' in jaws :) )

The persecution of homosexuals in Iran is terrible, but mentioning it as an example is misleading because the nutty nasty old despots who run the place persecute all their citizenry. It is not a few statutes that need rewriting - it's an entire regime needs obliterating - though despite my choice of word I don't agree with bombing them either.

As far as Internet censorship goes, I think Alison's observation is astute. I am quite willing to consider opinion, anecdote and observation when pondering issues particularly in an era when research and statistics are so manipulated.

When I was a kid old blokes would be frothing at the mouth in anticipation because tonight was the night they got to have their monthly bonk with the same woman they'd been bonking for 50 years. These days people 2 months into a relationship are complaining the sex is a chore. I attribute this to the hyper-sexualisation of society the internet has exacerbated. It's such a difficult issue - I believe adults should, within reason, be able to look at what they like, but like Alison I believe this hyper-sexualisation has far greater consequences than my example and more importantly we as a society are not protecting kids from this stuff and it will come back to punch us in the face. Aside from pornography do you want any Tom, Dick and Harry to be able to Google how to build a nuclear weapon? Do you want the dysfunctional anti-social kid down the street to be able to Google various punishments he can inflict on you for giving him a dirty look as he walks by your place? How easy do we want it to be for kids to look up how to make chemical concotions that will get them off their face? Do we want anti-semites to face no consequences for spreading lies that lead to violence against Jews? - Ok - strike the last one - I actually don't believe in that sort of censorship - let people say what they like and argue with them, prove them wrong - or laugh at them, I think.

I've said before I don't think the government had it right but we have to do something and kudos to them for trying - leaving it to parents to install software is only going to work with the responsible parents who realise this is an issue - walk around a shopping centre and then tell me how many responsible parents are out there.

Syd Walker said...

Destiny... when you put words in quotation marks, it typically means you are quoting someone directly.

I challenge you to find ONE instance where I have EVER said 'the Jews did it', except for this sentence in which I'm actually quoting YOU. It's not the kind of language I use. PLEASE stop misquoting me.

An apology would be nice, but I shaln't hold my breath.

You write "and they (the Israelis) face Hezbollah...". Funny you mention that. I had a converation with an aspiring politician some time ago, and she made much the same remark.

Are you - like her - REALLY unaware of the origins of Hezbollah?

Do you really not know that Hezbollah came about because the Israeli military invaded The Lebanon about 30 years ago, infiltrated, corrupted and bought off Lebanese opposition as much as it could - but ran out of luck when resistance was organized along religious lines. That's Hezbollah - an authentic resistance movement, which came about BECAUSE Israel (yet again) was occupying another country. Hezbollah has since shown that it can outwit and defeat the IDF. Perhaps you'd rather The Lebanese lie back and take Israeli occupation, so they become as impoverished, desperate and marginalized in their own land as Palestinians? No chance, thanks to Hezbollah. Good on them, I say.

Turning to Internet censorship, you write: "As far as Internet censorship goes, I think Alison's observation is astute. I am quite willing to consider opinion, anecdote and observation when pondering issues particularly in an era when research and statistics are so manipulated."

So Destiny - you're happy with anecdotes, but distrust statistics which you say may be 'manipulated'.

Has it ever occured to you that anecdotes can be 'manipulated' too?

You write: "let people say what they like and argue with them, prove them wrong - or laugh at them, I think."

I do agree with that. :-)

You write: "I don't think the government had it right but we have to do something..."

Really? And why would that be? Why should government 'have' to do something - even if it's counter-productive and worse than useless?

The statistically-grounded academic paper you so distrust did arrive at one conclusion:

"Looking closer, Michael Goldstein and Harold Kant found that rapists were more likely than non-rapists in the prison population to having been punished for looking at pornography while a youngster, while other research has shown that incarcerated non-rapists had seen more pornography, and seen it at an earlier age, than rapists. What does correlate highly with sex offense is a strict, repressive religious upbringing."

Must the Government 'do something' about that too? Would you like policemen to arrest parents who give their children a strict religious upbringing?

Is there no end to the self-righteous determination of busy-bodies to re-arrange the lives of their neighbours because they (think they) know best?

Unknown said...

Some quotes from Syd's blog. To be fair, none of these are Syd's own words, but the word of the fan boys who like posting on his blog. Some of them have scary blogs of their own.I couldn't find the one where I was accused of working for Mossad.

"Nick asks if I could reconcile myself with a nuclear armed Indonesia?"With customarily bizarre Zionist logic, Nick FAILS to ask himself how and why should the Arab states have to reconcile themselves with a nuclear armed Israel?"

"I’m afraid old Nick is making my Zionist bullshit artist detector ring off the dial. I owe whining Zionist apologists nothing."

"There is something very dark, sad and subterranean about the Jews and what they represent. Where ever they go, they are accused of defiling innocence."

"The Jews feign paranoia….The design is simple. Someone’s got to kill millions of Arabs to make way for “Greater Israel”."

"The only political figure of substance (besides Ghandi) who acted like he knew something like this could happen was JFK, and he died from Zionist guns just like the designated patsy did two days later."
"We have been force fed Zionist propaganda from childhood. While Jews were definitely persecuted by the Nazis, the actual facts are a little different to what we have been indoctrinated into believing. i.e. Hitler was the most evil man in history—WRONG, he had redeeming qualities. 6 million Jews were killed by the Nazis—WRONG, the number has since been revised downwards (grudgingly)."

"The similarities between Nazi Germany and Zionist Israel are remarkable."

"Jews don’t need to tell lies about their WW2 experiences to elevate themselves. They have Israel, that ‘shining beacon on the hill’, the one that day after day shows what Jews are capable of."

Alison Alloway said...


From Naomi Wolf:

"....Well, I am 40, and mine is the last female generation to experience that sense of sexual confidence and security in what we had to offer. Our younger sisters had to compete with video porn in the eighties and nineties, when intercourse was not hot enough. Now you have to offer—or flirtatiously suggest—the lesbian scene, the ejaculate-in-the-face scene. Being naked is not enough; you have to be buff, be tan with no tan lines, have the surgically hoisted breasts and the Brazilian bikini wax—just like porn stars. (In my gym, the 40-year-old women have adult pubic hair; the twenty somethings have all been trimmed and styled.)

Pornography is addictive; the baseline gets ratcheted up. By the new millennium, a vagina—which, by the way, used to have a pretty high “exchange value,” as Marxist economists would say—wasn’t enough; it barely registered on the thrill scale. All mainstream porn—and certainly the Internet—made routine use of all available female orifices."

"..But the effect is not making men into raving beasts. On the contrary: The onslaught of porn is responsible for deadening male libido in relation to real women...."

Destiny above made a valid observation about the short-lived sexual euphoria in relationships
today. Naomi Wolf's research would validate that.

As a society we do need to focus more on the full impact of internet pornography.

Destiny said...

Geez Syd - you use every hoary old internet cliche known to geekdom to avoid having to argue the substance of other people's posts. Quotation marks are often used also when folks sum up or paraphrase. I doubt one person who read my post believed that was a direct quote.

As for an apology, I am sorry every time I am tempted into a rational discourse with you and regret not just making the bitchy barbs you are such an easy target for, but I do encourage you to hold your breath.

Of course I know how Hezbollah came about - I'm 50 years old and addicted to news and history. I've said before that I do not see Israel as blameless, but I do understand (but not forgive) why they behave as they do. And we can quote examples of such behaviour from both the Jews and the Palestinians going back centuries.

Of course anecdotes can be manipulated. That's why we consider what we read and hear in relation to what we already know. I am sorry I wasn't clearer in my wording because I didn't actually mean to denigrate the research you quoted - it sounded okay to me. I am in complete agreement that a repressive religious upbringing can produce a sex offender. I would go further and say that the increased sexual knowledge of children probably helps protect them from the sexual predation that so often stayed secret in the past. But I don't believe children's increased sexual knowledge should include pornography but it increasingly and overwhelmingly does and anyone who denies that knows nothing about kids. I think we are going to face terrible consequences from boys learning about sex from movies intended for guys who can't get a bit fantasising that women are slutty bitches who can't wait to get a bit from anything with a cock and enjoy being treated like a piece of shit while they get banged by 10 guys at a time.

And yes I do think the government has to do something and sorry, but I'd rather they did something wrong, find out it doesn't work, and move on, than do nothing. I learnt long ago you gain nothing in this world if you do nothing for fear of fucking up.

I do not believe one is a sticky beak for wanting control on behaviour which infringes on the rest of societies rights so I do not wish children to see pornography and I want Kim Jong Il to have to try harder to build a nuclear bomb than just googling.

Finally I do not want the parents who give their kids a repressive religious upbringing arrested - I would prefer we put stocks in the centre courts of shopping centres and we could all gather on Sundays to throw rotten tomatoes at them. I would quite enjoy that, and I really need some upper body exercise.

Syd Walker said...

I might bow out of this fascinating discussion after this comment, unless I get insulted again :-)

A few parting comments.

Nick apparently is offended by this comment on my blog. He's sufficiently insulted to include it in his 'worst of Syd's blog' list. Here it is again:

"Nick asks if I could reconcile myself with a nuclear armed Indonesia? With customarily bizarre Zionist logic, Nick FAILS to ask himself how and why should the Arab states have to reconcile themselves with a nuclear armed Israel?"

If you find that offensive, Nick, I am sorry for you. You're in for a tough time - until there's some parity, fairness and genuine peace in the middle east - because people will say it again and again.

Alison seems concerned that porn-loving men are losing their attraction to "real women". I'm sorry for you too, Alison. But why would you want to to copulate with such vile specimens anyway?

Maybe you could try living in China or Iran, where Internet pornography is 'filtered' and men are still real men?

Destiny would also like Internet censorship, but for a different reason. She believes porn-addicted men are turning into savage beasts. She'd therefore like the government to do something - even if it's the wrong thing.

Given there's not even agreement about what 'the problem' is (let alone the solution), that's just about 100% certain I would have thought.

Destiny would also like to pillory parents who give their kids repressive religious upbringings in the stocks, preferably on Sundays at shopping centres. I guess that's extra harsh punishment for Christian offenders, but may not be so bad for the Iranian Internet censors she presumably applauds when they're busy repressing at work, but not when they're doing it at home.

All most interesting. You might all like to add this to your banned list as well.

Unknown said...


You allowed the following to be posted on your blog :

"There is something very dark, sad and subterranean about the Jews and what they represent. Where ever they go, they are accused of defiling innocence."

This really sums it up and shows what you and your fan boys stand for.

Alison Alloway said...

**Sigh** you miss the point Syd, but I agree, let's leave the subject.

Destiny said...

Syd has no intention of seeing the point - we cite examples - Syd takes them as our entire argument. And any points he can't counter he just doesn't notice.

Syd - simple question - should people be able to Google how to make a nuclear bomb?

As a man of such certainty I'm sure you can give a definitive answer.

You have already shown an inclination to support censorship when it suits you. Despite your vociferous insistence, we are not debating whether there should be censorship - we are arguing what level it should take and whether the government should have a role, or if it should be left to citizens and courts to fight out in defamation cases.

Oh - and in future I will write [THIS IS A JOKE SYD] when I use levity in my posts.

Once again for your amusement I will repeat that I have no problem with governments making mistakes in non-critical matters - and I still believe it's better sometimes to make a mistake than to do nothing.

And please don't go - it's difficult to find similar amusement with Werner Klemperer's enforced absence from our television screens.

Syd Walker said...

So squeamish Nick? Read the Israeli press - as I do quite often. It may you grow hairs on your chest.

Yesterday Ms Zoabi, an Arab MP in the Knesset, was 'stripped' of Parliamentary privileges. She is one of a handful of powerless elected Arabs in Israel's Parliament, whose existence helps maintain the pretence that Israel is not an Apartheid State..

Her crime? Participation in the Gaza Freedom flotilla – the attempt seix weeks ago to bring toys, clothing, food and medicines to a city deliberately wrecked and economically strangled by Israel's worse-than Apartheid regime.

Haaretz has a report in today's edition. Here are a few of the comments it published. (Haaretz, BTW, is a 'liberal' Israeli paper: 'Apartheid-lite'.

"Zoabi is guilty of treason and aiding and abetting an enemy of the state she has sworn loyalty too. No Arab in Israel who assists the enemy should be permitted the privilege of Israeli citizenship. she should be de-naturalized, imprisoned and after serving an appropriate sentence, deported. It's time to get tough with these traitorous vermin in our midst."

There's another article in Haaretz about the Libyan relief vessel that's trying to assist Gaza right now. Here are three more comments published today in Haaretz:

"Just another example of the harrassment of Israel by demented, Islamic radicals. I hope israel sends it to the bottom of the Med."

"Another attempt to humilate the Israeli legal blockade of the terrorist enclave. Blow the MF's out of the water if they proceed."

"We can sink this vessel here. So I say let them come! Let them come! Come on! Come on!"

Shall I quote some more examples,this time from 'right-wing' Israeli papers? How about some comments published by the New York Times about Arabs, Moslems and others not favoured by the NYT's Zionist owners?

How about I give examples of anti-Moslem, anti-Arab bile spewed from that great Murdoch institution, US Fox News?

In conflict, people use strong language and make assertions that arouse emotions. I don't see why anti-Jewish rhetoric should be suppressed, while anti-Moslem and anti-Arab rhetoric is now mainstream (as is anti-Christian rhetoric, incidentally).

If YOU know of a reason why the Jewish religion, or Jewish people, or the so-called 'Jewish State', should be immune from harsh criticism when the rest of us are not, please let me know what it is.

That's as long as it's a reason we're both allowed to debate, free from the threat of legal suppression. In other words, references to COMPULSORY religious beliefs, such as the Holocaust of the SIX Million, are inadmissible.

I'd also prefer you don't give reasons based on the contents of a book that's thousands of years old - or on the alleged sayings of an alleged God who has favourites and picks winners. But that's up to you.

At least those bizarre claims can be debated without risk of prosecution at the hands of an irritating, bullying Lobby, apparently determined to impose its view of reality on the whole of humanity.

An article I wrote last year on this general subject of bias in general public discourse is here, FWIW.

Syd Walker said...

Destiny - are you saying that a mandatory Internet 'filter' is needed to protect Austalians from the mass public release of advanced military secrets?

I hadn't thoght of that, to be honest. I don't think Conroy had either. You're more creative than he is.

Now really, I can't spend all day here, not unless Mike pays me by the hour.

Have a nice day :-)

Pro-Jew, anti Israel said...

@ Destiny.

Your quote ... 'Rarely have a people shown such an ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.'

Perhaps you'd care to explain one of these "victories" the Palestinians have missed out on?

Your quote, or a very similar quote, was made after the collapse of the Camp David peace initiative.

This is what was 'offered' by Israel ....

"Barak offered to form a Palestinian State initially on 73% of the West Bank (that is, 27% less than the Green Line borders) and 100% of the Gaza Strip. In 10 to 25 years the West Bank area would expand to 90-91% (94% excluding greater Jerusalem). As a result, "Israel would have withdrawn from 63 settlements." The West Bank would be separated by a road from Jerusalem to the Dead Sea, with free passage for Palestinians although Israel reserved the right to close the road for passage in case of emergency. The Palestinian position was that the annexations would block existing road networks between major Palestinian populations. In return, the Israelis would cede 1% of their territory in the Negev Desert to Palestine. The Palestinians rejected this proposal."

.... the Palestinians, quite rightly rejected it. The plan included the annexation of Jerusalem, no Palestinian military, and Israeli control of Palestinian airspace.

Your quote ... 'Rarely have a people shown such an ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.'

Some 'victory', eh?

Destiny said...

Sorry to keep you from your other activities Syd. What are you up to? Building a bunker? Stocking up on canned food?

I have not been advocating a mandatory internet filter - I have been saying I believe we need some censorship - something I do not like at all, but there are some things which need to be kept secret on behalf of us all, and some things which children need shielding from.

Currently this is not being done effectively - I believe discussing the matter and various alternatives instead of just stridently opposing everything might lead us to a solution.

Unknown said...

Not squeamish at all Syd. It would appear that the Israelis (not Jews) despite their best efforts can't quite match their neighbours in ruthlessness.

"September 1970 is known as the Black September. Hashemite King Hussein of Jordan moved to quash the militancy of Palestinian organizations and restore his monarchy's rule over the country.The violence resulted in the deaths of thousands of people, the vast majority Palestinian.Armed conflict lasted until July 1971 with the expulsion of the PLO and thousands of Palestinian fighters to Lebanon."

"The Hama massacre occurred in February 1982, when the Syrian army bombarded the town of Hama in order to quell a revolt by the Muslim Brotherhood. An estimated 7,000 to 40,000 people were killed, including about 1,000 soldiers and large parts of the old city were destroyed. The attack has been described as possibly being "the single deadliest act by any Arab government against its own people in the modern Middle East".

But I am sure you or one of your fan boys has evidence that the Zionists were behind it all...

After all they are supposed to have killed JFK as well. Ironically it was a palestinian who shot his brother..