Beyond The Fringe

Snitched from Gday World Podcast Network, purveyor of fine web products.

After 50 years practising as a Catholic priest, Father Peter Kennedy of South Brisbane is being dismissed from his service for ‘practices are out of communion with the Roman Catholic Church’.

The decision was that of Brisbane Archbishop John Bathersby alone, without advice from the Vatican.

The thing ‘bringing it to a head’ was a statue which Bathersby claimed was on the altar which some Catholics alleged was a Buddhist statue. Bathersby asked the statue be removed, which it eventually was.

Bathersby decided that Kennedy had breached the rules of the church. At issue for the Catholic corporation are possible invalid baptisms, blessings and marriages.

Bathersby also accused the South Brisbane parishioners of selling books ‘that claimed Jesus was not the son of god’.

“It’s awful when Christians fight with each other”, said Bathersby, speaking of letters from people cursing him to damnation and telling him to retire for his decision. Other letters disagreed with Kennedy.

One of the commenters to the news story says:

I’ve been to the St Mary’s church a few times. Father Kennedy allows
-parishioners to sit anywhere they like – including on the altar,
-freely gives communion to practising homosexuals,
-openly acknowledges the Traditional Owners of the land the church is built on,
-allows the homeless to sleep in the church when it is not in use,
-openly calls some church leaders power hungry and bigoted,
-welcomes Muslims and Jews into the church and allows them to watch or participate in the church and even in the Mass as a means of lowering barriers (after all, all 3 religions worship the God of Abraham and Isaac)
-lowers ‘property values’ by allowing the homeless to work and help themselves to the produce at an orchard on the Church grounds
-says “there are many paths to God, not just through the Roman Church” and actually means it
-and more….

The trigger for this was that someone complained to the Archbishop that there was something that appeared to be a statue of the Buddha in the entrance hall of St Mary’s church. It’s just a nominal excuse – but was good enough.

Another commenter wryly says:

I think that all decent and right-thinking Christians will want to congratulate The Archbishop for taking this stand against the corruption of the ideals of Jesus Christ. All decent and right-thinking Christians know that Jesus Christ founded His Church on some very simple and profound principles:
1. Love your neighbour as yourself unless he or she is gay or poor or otherwise marginalised.
2. Always strive to accumulate as much money and political power as you can.
3. The is only one way to God and that is by following the teaching and rules laid down by the Church Hierarchy who are His representatives on Earth and who are well versed in God’s Laws.
4. Contribute generously to all Church collections.

Bathersby for Pope!!

Kennedy is considering his options – the church considers he can resign or be dismissed on February 21.

“I’ve been here 28 years and I know this community is solidly behind me, and so we could go elsewhere,” he said.

In the letter, Archbishop Bathersby says parishioners cannot be stopped from breaking away but has warned them they will not be in communion with the Roman Catholic Church.

The parishioners are staunchly with Kennedy:

Parishioners at the Brisbane parish say will continue to celebrate mass in their own way.

Margaret Ortiz from the St Mary’s leadership group says the congregation is staying put and Father Kennedy will continue to say mass.

“They would have to come a physically remove us,” she said.

Vince Knauth, also from St Mary’s leadership group, says it is not right that Father Kennedy is being singled out.

“Statistically this week 4,392 priests and deacons of the United States were subject to allegations of child molestation – that’s between 1950 and 2002,” he said.

“Two per cent of those were actually put behind bars.

“Peter [Kennedy] would be in better books with the Catholic church if he’d molested a child than what we’re doing here.”

Father Kennedy has appealed to the Archbishop to reconsider.

Des Houghton throws a petulant fit over at the spurious Mail, to which one commenter replies:

There was no Buddhist statue – it was a praying monk, unlike any variation of a statue of Buddha. The people I know who regularly attend St Marys are definitely not socialist-lefties. Yes, St Mary’s priests have been imprudently defiant regarding Baptisms & gay union blessings but if every Catholic Church showed the vitality and welcome to all shown there our church would be in a much better state. Perhaps the true test of their Christianity will be the way they treat the new appointee.

Parishioners are so committed to Kennedy they are prepared to pay his stipend themselves ‘from the regular money collection take up during masses’.

Archbishop Bathersby has warned any parishioners loyal to Fr Kennedy will be excluded from the church if they followed the priest to any new venture.

…

This week the Archbishop of Sydney, Cardinal George Pell, gave his tacit blessing for the possible excommunication of Father Kennedy.

Some innovative moves could ensue should the sacking of Kennedy proceed.

Father Kennedy says his style of service has attracted many people back to church who otherwise would not attend. Up to 900 people attend weekend Mass at St Mary’s, he says.

The local Aboriginal community has threatened to invoke a “sacred treaty” over the St Mary’s site if the archdiocese sacks Father Kennedy.

Marcus Kuczynski sees other possibilities afoot:

Fr Kennedy and the St Mary’s Community have indicated they will not accept the archbishop’s decision and will continue holding services in the church beyond this deadline.

This sort of protest has been played out in dozens of Catholic parishes overseas, particularly in the United States and England, usually triggered by anger over the closure of a church or parish.

In some places, such as Leeds in England, parishioners have been even known to chain themselves to the church railings and refuse to budge.

Having attended several services at St Mary’s in the past and knowing what a strong sense of social justice they have, I can foresee a similar sort of organised protest emanating from South Brisbane.

…

Under canon law, St Mary’s Church remains the property of the Catholic Archdiocese of Brisbane. But ownership rights could become complicated if native title is invoked. St Mary’s has a close relationship with the original indigenous owners of the land on which St Mary’s is built and the parish community signed a treaty with them last year.

To further aggravate matters, St Stephen’s Cathedral dean Fr Ken Howell has been appointed to also be administrator of St Mary’s in a caretaker role. He is known as a strictly-by-the-book type of pastor, has served as Archbishop Bathersby’s secretary and is one of his closest confidantes. He would not be popular with many of those who currently attend St Mary’s.

Archbishop Bathersby has taken a heavy hand to quash irregular activities within his archdiocese. But, in the process, he risks alienating hundreds of followers who may never step inside another Catholic church again.

Considering Catholic Church census statistics in Australia show it manages to attract only about 13 per cent of people claiming a Catholic identity to Mass each week, the archbishop is effectively dispossessing a sizeable proportion of those who enjoy attending the current services at St Mary’s.

Might we end up with the first Indigenous Church of Australia?

Jesus’s message contained in John 3:17 is clear:

For God sent His Son into the world not to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

Bathersby’s actions undermine Jesus’s position of tolerance. God’s supposed earthly representative, the Pope, usurps Jesus’s power and condemns divorced people and homosexuals amongst others and denies women power within its clergy, in contradiction to the gospels.

Galatians 3:28:

There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Why would one in the first place, want to belong to a discriminatory sect which so clearly departs from logical appreciation of what is after all, only a belief system, with little if any grounding in rational evidence or historical fact?

UPDATE 11 FEB

Recommended – NoCharCom’s cartoon on Christian hate.

TV documentary icon Sir Richard Attenborough can hardly be accused of being an environmental extremist – and now he’s confirming that which we on the Fringe have been saying for donkey’s years – the Old Testament Christian god is an irresponsible, ignorant, environmental vandal. The predominant cause of current planetary environmental devastation has roots in myths inculcated in western unconsciousnesses by primitive idiocies in the Bible, that selective, tarnished collection of fairy stories.

The destruction of the planet is encouraged in the English translation of the book of Genesis. Attenborough points out ‘the devastation of the environment has its roots in the first words that God supposedly uttered to humankind, as detailed in Genesis 1:28: “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”‘

An atheist raised in an academic, non-religious family, Sir David said Genesis peddled untruths about how animals and plants appeared on earth and was also at the root of why there was now serious environmental degradation due to the greedy overexploitation of the earth’s natural resources.

“The influence of the Book of Genesis, which says the Lord God said ‘go forth and multiply’ to Adam and Eve and ‘the natural world is there for you to dominate’, [is that] you have dominion over the animals and plants of the world,” Sir David said.

“That basic notion, that the world is there for us and if it doesn’t actually serve our purposes, it’s dispensable, that has produced the devastation of vast areas of the land’s surface.

“Of course it’s a gross oversimplification, but that’s why Darwinism, and the fact of evolution, is of great importance because it is that attitude which has led to the devastation of so much, and we are in the situation that we are in,” he told the science journal Nature.

How different the planet might have been if Genesis had been translated to say, “live in harmony with the planet and don’t over-populate to the detriment of other creatures with whom you shares its space, for if you do, therein lies your doom.”

Interestingly, the more intellectually advanced New Testament in Revelations 11:18, says: “And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.”

Perhaps not as many people finished reading the book as those who began it.

In contrast, the Koran contains numerous references to the environment, and it’s being used to teach environmentalism in countries like Indonesia.

The Koran, Suaedy says, contains numerous references to environmental protection, including the line: “Don’t do destruction upon this earth.” At one point, the Koran equates a human life with that of a tree: “Do not kill women, elders, children, civilians or trees.”

Saleem Ali, associate dean of graduate studies at the Rubenstein School for the Environment at the University of Vermont, says Islamic environmentalism can be traced back to the religion’s origins in the seventh century.

“The advent of Islam as an organized religion occurred in the desert environment of Arabia, and hence there was considerable attention paid to ecological concerns within Islamic ethics,” he said. “There is a reverence of nature that stems from essential pragmatism within the faith.”

Lo! We offered the trust
Unto the heavens and the
Earth and the hills,
But they shrank from bearing it
And were afraid of it
And man assumed it
Lo! He is a tyrant and a fool

—The Koran 33:72

Buddhism also contains elements of respect for life other than human on the planet.

Environmental efforts based on Buddhism include ordaining selected trees and groves as symbolic members of a Buddhist order.47 With its strong ethical basis, Buddhism has been connected to the Deep Ecology movement, as has Hinduism to a lesser extent.

For atheists like us, science and the history of civilisations more than adequately explain what happens when populations crash after devouring the resources that sustain them.

As recommended by Syd, Bill Hicks gets the last word here:

No improvement to be seen, no word on when Conroy’s useless net censorship trials are to commence – and ratbag Christian fundamentalist wowsers are still prancing their absurdities, flopping their limp wobbly bits for all to see.

Refresh yourself with current ultra-conservative blither and far more intelligent anti-filter rejoinders:

Summary: Mark Newton Vs Jim Wallace on ABC Radio National net censorship debate

Unfortunately, Mr Wallace either doesn’t understand what ‘prohibited content‘ consists of or he has outright lied on air as the ACL’s pro filter website states ‘Despite fear-mongering about censorship, adults will be able to opt in to view some forms of legal porn.’ Just some forms of legal porn Jim?

Life Matters Mandatory Internet Filtering Transcript

Syd Walker comments on the Life Matters program followup forum

Stilgherrian at Crikey writes Who supports compulsory Internet filtering, exactly?

The Christian Right continues to be Conroy’s main supporter. Only last weekend the Fairfax news sites carried the Australian Christian Lobby’s Jim Wallace’s argument for compulsory filtering, which I have deconstructed elsewhere.

Curiously, Wallace uses exactly the same two examples of over-the-top p-rnography, r-pe and b-stiality, that Hamilton used in his polemic for the ABC News website in November. Who’s coordinating whose talking points here?

Stilgherrian again – Jim Wallace’s pro-censorship lies and distortions

Since Wallace promotes himself as a representative of good Christian values, I’ll allow that he may just be ignorant rather than a deliberate liar. Ignorance is no sin: it can be cured with knowledge. But he does use the familiar fraudulent propaganda techniques: misrepresenting his opponents; cherry-picking numbers; failing to explore the implications of those numbers; citing the same suspect Australia Institute report; and wrapping it up in the same old “protect the children” cant.

Websinthe contributes a Response to Jim Wallace’s puddle of misinformation

Time and time again, the assertion that ‘this system is not going to stop any adult from viewing anything that is legal’ has been debunked by close analysis of the relevant legislation. The ACMA black-list bans content that, while illegal to broadcast, is perfectly legal for an adult to view. For instance, where the ACMA receives a complaint about foreign internet content. The content isn’t even forwarded to the classification board; if the ACMA ‘thinks’ it might be prohibited, it is classified as ‘potentially prohibited’ and thrown on the ACMA black-list. It is not illegal until it has been classified as such. Only Australian hosted content is forwarded to the classification board.

A clear example of this occurred only a few days ago. An anti-abortion web site was added to the ACMA black-list despite two things. Firstly, there was no pornographic or child exploitation material on the website, and secondly, the DBCDE had previously claimed that political content would not be blocked.

In The Contents of the ACMA blacklist, Websinthe further reveals the nature of the beast:

The Contents of the ACMA blacklist …are not publicly available. You can, however, determine if a site is ON the list.

Vendors of PC based filters that were offered by the Government can be used to determine whether a site is on the ACMA blacklist by the message given when the site is blocked.

I post this mainly to defer questions about whether or not I have a copy of the ACMA blacklist. I don’t, it is not publicly available. The only way I have been able to tell that the above is possible is because I use Integard on my own PC and it blocked a google result whilst searching for the origins of a meme mentioned on Twitter.

Anyone familiar with Memes knows the particular wiki site to which I refer, but I refuse to link it here as I fear it may be illegal to do so despite the site’s frequent mentioning on perfectly legal websites.

When an ACMA blacklisted site is blocked by a Net Alert filter there is no option for a system administrator to unblock the site and the user is informed that the site is permanently blocked.

Given the nature of this site, it is confirmation that the ACMA does not just filter the illicit parts of sites, but the entire site.

Over at Public Polity, Websinthe strikes again with How legal content will be blocked by the ISP filter

In simpler terms, anything that, if it were a print publication, would be classified as RC, X18+, R18+ or MA15+ will be added to the list of prohibited content if it were hosted outside Australia. There are two interesting provisos here as well.

The MA15+ content would only be blocked if it were a video that wasn’t hosted on a news site. Regardless of who’s hosting it, it is prohibited if transmitted for money over a mobile phone network.

Either way, MA15+ and R18+ content is far from illegal in Australia. Just go down to Blockbuster and hire Interview with a Vampire. Even X18+ print publications are legal in some parts of the country.

Currently it is illegal to host anything in the 4 categories above in Australia. Doing so results in a take down notice.

So when Conroy says “the Australian Government has no plans to stop adults from viewing material that is currently legal”, it is entirely deceptive.

No Character Comic (which is ALSO Websinthe), takes the piss out of Conroy superbly

Syd Walker presents Australia’s Holy Man likes a Good War

In satisfyingly satirical pictorial and literary fashion, machinegunkeyboard says

If you think Australians are serious about their beer, as Razer notes, they’re downright bolshie about their porn. Senator Conroy wants to make the internet conform to Australia’s film and literature censorship laws. In the extraordinarily unlikely event that Labor’s mandatory filtering scam is successful, not only will they bolster the business of ‘restricted premises’ to a degree they’ve never before known (does Conroy or other Labor pol own an interest in any porn shops, I wonder?), but will also very likely create a mountainous public backlash that will see both Labor voted out of government after only one term and the dissolution of the OFLC.

Aside from the unproven claims of a few anti-porn extremists, there’s no psychological evidence that use (or creation) of nonviolent pornography by adults as part of a healthy sex life is in any way harmful to anyone. However, as is usually the case with any manner of prohibition, bans force it all ‘underground.’ Everything from pinup cheesecake to violent rape fantasy porn is far away from public scrutiny, thusly making all porn much more available, inclusive of violent and exploitative sorts.

Won’t somebody think of Helen’s sex life?

Have I missed any other recent worthy contributions to the struggle to maintain decent, liberal Australian internet standards? Please let me know.

We have boycotted Israeli products as far as practicable for all our lives – for the oppressive Occupation and brutality perpetrated by the apartheid pariah state has been going on that long. Perhaps at this point we should make it clear that we regard all people as deserving of human rights and justice, regardless of race, religion and culture. The justice we’d prefer for Israel’s arch mass murderers would be long prison terms.

Barghouti illuminates for us how academic freedom in Israel includes the freedom to call for killing of others including mass murder despite declarations of genocide being a war crime, let alone just the illegality of inciting of violence and racial hatred in most western countries.

Despite its substantial Arab-Palestinian student population, Haifa University harbors, or at least tolerates, a culture of racism — against Arabs in general and Palestinians in particular — which manifests itself in the fact that members of its faculty espouse racist “theories,” publish bigoted research papers, and advocate ethnic cleansing with impunity. The university has consistently and systematically failed to censure such academics or to properly investigate accusations of racism raised against them.

It provides institutional support to racist academics and their research activities. The most notorious of these academics is Arnon Sofer, chair of geo-strategy at Haifa University and vice-chair of its Center for National Security Studies. He is also known in Israel as the prophet of the “Arab demographic threat.” He takes credit for the route of the Israeli apartheid wall — declared illegal by the International Court of Justice in the Hague, on July 9, 2004 — saying, “This is exactly my map.”

Prof. Sofer, who views the high birth rate of the Bedouin Palestinian citizens of Israel as a “tragedy,” and has no patience for “democracy and pretty words,” [6] has for many years openly advocated “voluntary transfer” — or soft ethnic cleansing — of Palestinians in the occupied territories as well as Palestinian citizens of Israel, in order to guarantee “a Zionist-Jewish state with an overwhelming majority of Jews.” In one particularly telling prediction, Sofer says, “When 2.5 million [Palestinians] live in a closed-off Gaza, those people will become even bigger animals than they are today, with the aid of an insane fundamentalist Islam. So, if we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill. All day, every day. If we don’t kill, we will cease to exist. The only thing that concerns me is how to ensure that the [Jewish] boys and men who are going to have to do the killing will be able to return home to their families and be normal human beings.” [7]

According to Barghouti there are however taboos within academia:

“The Zionist ideology which stipulates that Israel must retain its Jewish majority is a non-debatable given in the country — and the bedrock of opposition to allowing the return of Palestinian refugees. The very few intellectuals who dare to question this sacred cow are labeled ‘extremists’.” Ben-Dor attacks those in the Israeli “left” who opposed the boycott as “sophisticated accomplices to the smothering of debate .”

That antisocial, dysfunctional, racist behaviour is tolerated amongst academic leaders may explain in some way how Israeli politicians have made calls to violence so frequently throughout the short, violent existence of Israel without censure, committal to psychiatric institutions or jail. When leaders express sociopathic murderous intent, they can engender it amongst the populace as well. This promotion of violence as a public ethic may also explain the feelings of Israel’s neighbours toward it. Israel – paranoid, sociopathic and suffering from a bad case of Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy.

Boycott calls renewed after Israel bombs University Teachers Assn.

The Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott learned today from its Steering Committee member Dr. Haidar Eid that the headquarters of the University Teachers Association-Palestine, in Gaza, was bombed by the Israeli occupation forces during their indiscriminate, willful destruction campaign in the Tel al-Hawa neighborhood of Gaza City on Friday.

This latest wanton attack on an academic organization is far from being an exception. It is only the latest episode in what Oxford University academic Karma Nabulsi has termed “scholasticide,” or Israel’s systematic and intentional destruction of Palestinian education centers. In its current war on Gaza alone, Israel has bombed the ministry of education, the Islamic University of Gaza, and tens of schools, including at least four UNRWA [the United Nations agency for Palestine refugees] schools, after having largely destroyed the infrastructure of teaching throughout the year and a half of its illegal and criminal siege of the densely populated Gaza Strip.

…

Specifically, and as a minimal response to these Israeli atrocities and grave violations of international law and the most basic human rights, PACBI calls on academics, academic unions, intellectuals, cultural workers and institutions the world over to intensify the boycott of all Israeli academic and cultural institutions due to their complicity in the Israeli occupation and other forms of oppression against the Palestinian people. Putting an end to Israel’s impunity and holding it accountable is the moral responsibility of every conscientious human being today.

Here’s some links to assist you to support Palestinian rights when next you go shopping.

Palestinian Mothers

Boycott Israel Campaign

Israel’s attack on Gaza demonstrated clearly the need for Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions (BDS)

Israel’s bar code prefix is 729. More information here.

Israeli fruit and veg leave a bitter aftertaste

Finally, in case a hasbaranik tries to convince you to rip out the Intel chip in your computer – Intel has 3 manufacturing plants in China, the US and Israel.

For those who try to tell you cell phones were invented in Israel

Veolia looses 3,5 billion EUR contract in Sweden – this is a significant loss for Israeli industry brought about by concerned citizens in Stockholm.

Oxford City Council boycotts Israel

This is clearly another sign of the importance for commercial actors not to have their brand associated to unethical behaviour, in the case of illegal settlements on occupied Palestinian territory we can already see a trend of international companies who are moving out their operations from settlements, says Joakim Wohlfeil at the Swedish development organization Diakonia.

Get involved with the Global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Program to help Palestine and stop Israeli apartheid.

BOYCOTT ISRAEL! Launched in Marawi City – Philippines

A Moral Choice – Divesting from the Israeli Occupation

International Writers and Scholars Endorse Academic Boycott of Israel

We reject as false Israel’s characterization of its military attacks on Gaza as retaliation. Israel’s latest assault on Gaza is part of its longtime racist jurisprudence against its indigenous Palestinian population, during which the Israeli state has systematically dispossessed, starved, tortured, and economically exploited the Palestinian people.

We reject as untrue the Israeli government’s claims that the Palestinians use civilians as human shields, and that Hamas is an irredeemable terrorist organization. Without endorsing its platforms or philosophy, we recognize Hamas as a democratically elected ruling party. We do not endorse the regime of any existing Arab state, and call for the upholding of internationally mandated human rights and democratic elections in all Arab states.

Why I’m Boycotting Israeli Produce:

Fruit and vegetable exports are crucial to the Israeli economy. A consumer boycott of agricultural produce exerts direct economic pressure where it matters

…

Israel’s agricultural exporting company, Carmel Agrexco, is one of the biggest suppliers of fresh produce to the UK.

…

We can use the same tactic against Israel that was so effective in showing up South Africa as the apartheid state it once was. The parallels with South Africa are striking. Writing in the Guardian, Naomi Klein recently reminded us of the words of Ronnie Kasrils, a prominent South African politician, who said in 2007 that the segregation he saw in the West Bank and Gaza was “infinitely worse than apartheid”.

…

So what, exactly, is he talking about? While we have been munching our way through its avocadoes, Israel has demolished Palestinian homes, evicted their occupants and expropriated their land and water resources. It has illegally colonised productive Palestinian land with waves of settlers. A boycott of Israeli fruit and vegetables, as opposed to other sorts of boycott (academic, sporting), is particularly apt because horticulture has been a major plank of Israeli expansion. Medjoul dates in the Jordan Valley, for example, base their operations on confiscated Palestinian land, in contravention of international law and the Fourth Geneva Convention.

As if that wasn’t enough, Israel has effectively imprisoned Palestinians with checkpoints, an illegal wall and an oppressive system of travel permits and colour-coded identity cards, so scuppering Palestinian economic development. As OXFAM told the House of Commons International Development Committee (pdf), costs for Palestinians who want to export products are up to 70% higher than for Israelis. Settlers in the West Bank get direct access to markets in and through Israel without the disruptive road blocks and transfers faced by the Palestinians who are obliged to rely on Israeli intermediaries. The revenue from taxes and customs goes to Israel, which costs the Palestinian economy 3% of its GDP a year.

…

By refusing to buy Israeli produce, ethically-minded consumers can be part of the wider Boycott Israeli Goods campaign (BIG) and add to the international condemnation of Israel’s tactics in Palestine. The reasons for a boycott precede the most recent open conflict and are ever-more important. Even if the current shaky ceasefire holds, Gaza will still be an open prison and Palestine will still be a country whose food economy is actively sabotaged by its powerful neighbour. Just at the moment, many people don’t have any appetite for Israeli produce. A boycott gives us something to do about it.

Outspoken government critic and editor of the Sunday Leader in Columbo, Lasantha Wickramatunga was assassinated as he drove to work yesterday by unidentified gunmen on motorbikes.

There have been several attacks on and attempts to intimidate journalists in Sri Lanka in recent times while the government has been engaged in bloody campaigns against LTTE troops in the northern Tamil areas.

Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa condemned the killing of Mr. Wickramatunga as an attempt to discredit the government while the Leader of the Opposition and a former Prime Minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe, accused the government of silencing its critics.

Mr. Rajapaksa described Mr. Wickramatunga as a close friend and a courageous journalist and maintained “the heinous crime points to the grave dangers faced by the democratic social order of our country, and the existence of forces that will go to the furthest extremes in using terror and criminality to damage our social fabric and bring disrepute to the country.”

Addressing a news conference along with other Opposition leaders, Mr. Wickremesinghe alleged that the murder of the Sunday Leader editor was part of an anti-democratic conspiracy.

The Committee to Protect Journalists “called on concerned ambassadors in Colombo to weigh in forcefully and immediately with President Mahinda Rajapaksa to put an end to the attacks raining down on Sri Lanka’s media.”

The killing follows the January 6 early morning assault by about 15 masked gunmen on Maharaja TV (MTV) studios outside Colombo. Earlier, some state media had called the station “unpatriotic” for its coverage of the war with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). CPJ called for an impartial parliamentary inquiry into the attack, saying the government has been a prime suspect in attacks on journalists in the past. Rajapaksa has condemned today’s killing as well as the attack on MTV.

Bob Dietz, CPJ’s Asia program coordinator said

“The assassination of Lasantha Wickramatunga signals that the government is unable or unwilling to protect the country’s journalists who dare to report critically. The international community in Colombo must act quickly to bring pressure on President Rajapaksa to reverse this murderous trend.”

The Sunday Leader is well known for being critical of Rajapaksa’s government. In a recent editorial, the paper accused the president of stepping up the war with the secessionist LTTE in order to stay in power.

Wickramatunga’s editorial admonished the Columbo government severely for its pre-election tactics:

What is perhaps most offensive about Rajapakse’s attempts to manipulate the electorate in the face of an election is how much he takes for granted the fickleness of his Sinhala-Buddhist following. Nothing could better personify the “Sinhalaya modaya” stereotype than the President’s disdain for his own people. And they love him for it. So long as a steady stream of Tamils are exterminated, there is little to impede Rajapakse’s cruise to yet another victory.

The dead journalist also criticised the UNP opposition for its non-committal policies:

Sadly for both Ranil Wickremesinghe and Karu Jayasuriya, they have failed to convey effectively to the country their concerns about the issues of our time. As a party, the UNP is yet to decide whether or not it supports the war and if so, whether it subscribes, for example, to the present practice of aerially bombarding Tamil villages labelled as LTTE hideouts in the north.

To say it opposes the war but nevertheless congratulate the army on capturing Paranthan or Killinochchi, however, is morally and intellectually dishonest. After all, the government would not dare bombing LTTE hideouts in the south – let us say in Wellawatte – for fear of collateral damage. Yet, in the remote townships of the Wanni, such bombardment has now become routine, with enormous cost to the civilian population.

The attacks on Tamil villages by Sri Lanka’s government mirror those of Israel on the people of Gaza. Both parties under attack have had national aspirations under occupation for 60 years, and both peoples can trace continuous existence in their native lands. Before British rule, Tamil and Sinhalese coexisted in two kingdoms -

the Tamil Kingdom comprising the north and eastern parts and the Sinhalese Kingdom(s) the western & southern parts of Ceylon. There were brief periods when the whole of Ceylon came under a single ruler. Otherwise, there existed two or more Kingdoms and the Tamil Kingdom always one of them. The Tamil Kingdom, later came to be called the Jaffna Kingdom existed as a separate polity for centuries. The first war between a Tamil King who ruled Anuradhapura and a Sinhalese king from the south was fought in the 2nd century BC.

In the case of Palestine however, Zionist colonialisation of Palestinian land began in the 1880s with the advent of kibbutzs set up by European Jews.

When Sri Lanka declared independence from the British in 1948, its constitution incorporated the state with its official religion as Buddhism. The Tamil people are predominantly Hindu. Success in the first election by Sinhalese Buddhist candidates enabled the passing of

“the Ceylon (Parliamentary Elections) Amendment Act No.48 of 1949 which deprived the Tamils of their franchise as well. This category of Tamils who had 7 seats in the Parliament and held balance of power in a further 20-30 electorates failed to elect even a single member in the elections to the parliament held in 1953.”

Tamils were further marginalised in 1956 with the passing of the Sinhala Only Act:

The enactment of this Act, quite contrary to the hitherto official policy of recognising both Sinhalese and Tamil as Official languages, made Tamils second class citizens in their country of birth overnight.

The Tamil people staged a non-violent demonstration against the stripping of their rights and were met with violence.

The peaceful Satyragraha by the Tamils to protest against the Sinhala Only language policy at Galle Face Green overlooking the Parliament in Colombo was broken up by Sinhalese hoodlums. This was followed by Island wide riots in which hundreds of Tamils lost their lives and property worth millions destroyed. The 1956 riots was the beginning of a series of racially motivated Tamil pogroms by Sinhalese covertly encouraged by successive governments and overtly supported by the security forces. These pogroms with increased ferocity and venom were repeated in 1958, 1961, 1977, 1979, 1981 and 1983.

The government of Sri Lanka has still failed to address the just, legitimate rights of the Tamil people, instead pursuing violent means to crush “the Other”. As usual, violence met with violence in return. The Tamil Tigers (LTTE) are claimed to be “the official army of the Tamil people”.

@Jinjirrie http://is.gd/eX8R Lasantha Wickramatunga ed of Sunday Leader & govt critic shot by unidentified gunmen in Columbo http://is.gd/eXak

Any publicity is good publicity, so maybe the faithful will rally to the cause and fill the gap after fallout from the St. Vincent de Paul court loss to ex-volunteer Linda Walsh spreads. Moreover, perhaps they will look askance at a hypocrital organisation which invested a truckload of money and a barrage of lawyers with a shocking, medieval defence against one of its volunteers.

Those of us who thought the shop up the road was all about helping the poor stand corrected. “The primary function of the society,” said St Vincent de Paul’s lawyers, “is to inculcate the Catholic faith in its members.”

From the St Vinnie’s web site:

We follow the teachings of the Scriptures:

“Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, protect the rights of those who are helpless.

Speak out and pronounce a sentence of justice, defend the cause of the wretched and the poor.”
(Proverbs 31:8-9)

Yeah, right. Unbelievable.

There’s few things as repulsive as powerful religious organisations with their hand in the public till who sanctimoniously harass and belittle charitable people for not adherring to their irrational belief systems.

The case also highlights the importance of maintaining freedom from religion as well as freedom of religion in any Bill of Rights heading our way. God save us from those who want to save us!

Muso extraordinaire Darren Hanlon, bringing in 2009 on the Fringe!

Imagine there’s no heaven, I wonder if you can …

“A man who takes away another man’s freedom is a prisoner of hatred, he is locked behind the bars of prejudice and narrow-mindedness. I am not truly free if I am taking away someone else’s freedom, just as surely as I am not free when my freedom is taken from me. The oppressed and the oppressor alike are robbed of their humanity.” – Nelson Mandela

Ghazza bombed again … military might against the occupied and oppressed in a blockaded prison camp, Israel getting away with murder for the past 60 years. As Shalom Rav says:

How on earth will squeezing the life out of Gaza, not to mention bombing the living hell out of it, ensure the safety of Israeli citizens?

We good liberal Jews are ready to protest oppression and human-rights abuse anywhere in the world, but are all too willing to give Israel a pass. It’s a fascinating double-standard, and one I understand all too well. I understand it because I’ve been just as responsible as anyone else for perpetrating it.

So no more rationalizations. What Israel has been doing to the people of Gaza is an outrage. It has has brought neither safety nor security to the people of Israel and it has wrought nothing but misery and tragedy upon the people of Gaza.

Jewish Voice for Peace pleads for an end to the insanity:

Jewish Voice for Peace joins millions around the world, including the 1,000 Israelis who protested in the streets of Tel Aviv this weekend, in condemning ongoing Israeli attacks on Gaza. We call for an immediate end to attacks on all civilians, whether Palestinian or Israeli.

Israel’s slow strangulation of Gaza through blockade has caused widespread suffering to the 1.5 million people of Gaza due to lack of food, electricity, water treatment supplies and medical equipment. It is a violation of humanitarian law and has been widely condemned around the world.

In resisting these humiliations, Hamas resumed launching rockets and mortars from Gaza into southern Israel, directly targeting civilians, which is also a war crime. Over the years, these poorly made rockets have been responsible for the deaths of 15 Israelis since 2004.

Every country, Israel included, has the right and obligation to protect its citizens. The recent ceasefire between Israel and Hamas in Gaza shows that diplomatic agreements are the best protection for civilian life.

Moreover, massive Israeli air strikes have proven an indiscriminate and brutal weapon. In just two days, the known death toll is close to 300, and the attacks are continuing. By targeting the infrastructure of a poor and densely populated area, Israel has ensured widespread civilian casualties among this already suffering and vulnerable population.

This massive destruction of Palestinian life will not protect the citizens of Israel. It is illegal and immoral and should be condemned in the strongest possible terms. And it threatens to ignite the West Bank and add flames to the other fires burning in the Middle East and beyond for years to come.

The timing of this attack, during the waning days of a US administration that has undertaken a catastrophic policy toward the Middle East and during the run-up to an Israeli election, suggests an opportunistic agenda for short-term political gain at an immense cost in Palestinian lives. In the long run this policy will benefit no-one except those who always profit from war and exploitation. Only a just and lasting peace, achieved through a negotiated agreement, can provide both Palestinians and Israelis the security they want and deserve.

While the eve of destruction incorporating stock market crashes exhaled in the last panicky gasps of the print media is ever-present, over in the corner governments are getting busy with plans clamp down on our internet access as if our connections weren’t slow enough already. And now there’s shallow pontifications from UK “Culture” Secretaries … the pestilent, sanctimonious drive for control spreads fast.

The only thing worse than filthy web sites, are the filthy politicians who assure you that they are not launching their campaign to restrict free speech as a campaign to restrict free speech.

The Fringe is preparing a list of the best of the lists of whatever it was about 2008 that got you going. Meanwhile, we’re listening to our collection of live-streaming Darren Hanlon gems.

Christmas is an annoying time of year, what with cards to write, the yearly screed of trivia to interest others to be emailed or posted to the last few remaining computer illiterates, stuffing and cooking turkeys in the heat, enduring folks’ screaming, spoilt offspring, sniping rellies in your face, receiving presents one doesn’t want to be recycled months later for others’ birthdays, and after Boxing Day, all those dishes and floor mess to clean up.

Every year we say, never again, next year we’re going overseas to somewhere not nauseatingly Christian – perhaps the Celestial Mountains in China or Mozambique or even Bali – risking rabies and religious fanatics of other ilks would be worth the escape from the parochial, consumerist Sunshine Coast.

Here’s an early Christmas prezzie to the Fringe from the twitterverse – chuck a shoe at Bush. That Dubya will be history in January is the best prezzie of all.

Labor MP James Bidgood’s peculiar End Times outbursts and behaviour today reminds the Fringe of one of her great ideas – all folks putting themselves up for election should have to undergo rigorous mental health checks before candidature is accepted.

The long-suffering electorate deserves protection from dangerous sociopaths, neurotics, loonies and nutjobs – and the Fringe wagers the overwhelming majority of Australians would support a cleanfeed Parliament. Vote now on the Fringe Poll on the right sidebar to register your approval!

Then ensure all sixpacks have 6 stubbies and no kangaroos are loose in the top paddock of the House – lobby your Federal Member today for mandatory filtering of politicians!

On Nov 24 the UN General Assembly adopted a final draft Resolution with 85 countries affirmative to 50 negative and 42 abstaining, calling on all countries to provide “adequate protection against acts of hatred resulting from defamation of religions and the incitement to religious hatred in general”.

The US Government representative submitted against the Resolution:

While deploring hateful speech, his Government had a strong view that people should be free to express their opinion in challenge to an ideology of hate. He believed that some States were seeking to restrict expression in the name of defamation of religion, when they should be promoting dialogue involving all peoples. The language appeared to suggest that, like race, one’s religion was a characteristic that one could not change, which was in direct conflict to Article 18 of the Universal Declaration, which said that individuals had a right to change and choose their religion, and to manifest their beliefs through its teaching, practice and observance, or to choose not to practice a religion at all. It was unhelpful and incorrect to suggest that race and religion were the same.

On behalf of the EU, France’s delegate, also responded opposing the Resolution:

… the European Union believed that human rights were indivisible. The right to freedom of expression was at the essence of the right to thought, conscience and beliefs … it was necessary to make distinctions between incitement to religious hatred and the right to discuss or criticize religion, adding that only the former should be forbidden. … He also could not accept the idea of defamation of religion being integrated into the human rights framework. International human rights law should be aimed at protecting people in exercising their freedom of religion, not in protecting religions, as such.

Australia voted too against the adoption of the draft Resolution, which will reach a final vote in the General Assembly this month.

In 2004, Abdelfattah Amor (Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief) identified two cases of concern ‘… when religion is the property of the state, and when the state is the property of religion’, in which light, theistic and totalitarian states are problematic.

After several years of intimidation and death threats, Danish publisher Flemming Rose yesterday said:

This is a global struggle for the right to free speech, which is going on every day in different parts of the world where people are trying to intimidate and silence those who are critical of religion, of authoritarian regimes and movements trying to undermine free speech.

We have to make it very clear that on a global level people who are in favor of free speech have to unite in order to get rid of all kinds of laws around the world that limit the right to free speech — blasphemy laws, laws protecting dictators, laws which are being used to silence people who are critical … in a democracy, you cannot insist on special treatments of your religious feelings. That would be discrimination against non-believers. You have to accept that from time to time you may be offended by what people are saying or publishing in a newspaper, and that this is no reason for violence. Dissatisfaction can be expressed through demonstrations, letters to the editor, lobbying parliament.

The Fringe has a fair idea most people, religious or not, have idiosyncratic beliefs of some sort or another and they are welcome to them, along with any associated legal group hugs. Yet whilst applauding the value of a pluralist society, when those who base their particular world views and rule sets on unprovable faith wish to institutionalise these in bodies politic in order to impose them on unwilling others, the Fringe detector fires up.

The proverbial road to hell is paved with good intentions. Kevin Rudd clearly understands the political aspects of Christianity:

… the Gospel is both personal and social. And if it’s social it therefore has a political dimension as well.

Through High Court decisions, Australians have ‘implied freedom of political communication’.

Issues arising from these decisions include defining when communication is ‘political’ and when the freedom should prevail over competing public interests.

Does the spectacle over the past few years of the ALP ‘engaging’ with fundamentalists to woo votes ‘in the suburbs of outer metro Australia’ echo events leading to the DLP split, after which Labor spent more than 20 years in the wilderness?

The Rudd team’s pragmatism may have helped secure electoral victory when there was a ‘desire for certainty in an uncertain country in an uncertain age, in an uncertain world’ concurrent with a major growth spurt in the pentecostal movement. Climates of fear seem to encourage fundamentalism.

However, continuing to accommodate the political goals of the modern, corporatised, morality-obsessed religious right – with a post-secular public intellectual moralist on the left flank – steering Australians ‘beyond the questions of personal, sexual morality into the broader social domain as well’, may run the risk of alienating adherents of healthy scepticism predominant in Australian culture, with a heavy price to pay down a one-way track. Not to mention the old adage that if ‘you lie down with dogs, you tend to get up with fleas’.

Submissions to the Australian Human Rights Commission Freedom of Religion and Belief in the 21st Century Discussion Paper are open till Jan 31, 09. The paper canvasses amongst many issues whether a legislated national Charter of Rights would add to the freedoms of religion and belief contained in the present Australian Constitution.

Section 116 of the current Commonwealth of Australian Constitution Act states that:

The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.

Questions in the discussion paper germane to religion and politics include:

1. When considering the separation of religion and state, are there any issues that presently concern you?
2. Do religious or faith-based groups have undue influence over government and/or does the government have undue influence over religious or faith based groups?
3. Would a legislated national Charter of Rights add to these freedoms of religion and belief?

And more:

1. a) How would you describe the interface between religion and politics and cultural aspirations in contemporary Australia?
   b) What issues does this include?
2. How should government manage tensions that develop between aspirations?
3. How do you perceive gender in faith communities?
4. Do you believe there is equality of gender in faith communities?
5. What do you think should be the relationship between the right to gender equality and the right to religious freedom in Australia?
6. Citizenship and Australian values have emerged as central issues, how do you balance integration and cultural preservation?
7. What are reasonable expectations to have of citizens’ civic responsibility, rights, participation and knowledge?
8. Is there a role for religious voices, alongside others in the policy debates of the nation?

Of contemporary interest related to the Rudd government’s predilection with censoring the internet is this question:

Are there religious or moral implications in the development of new technologies such as the internet and or mobile phones, especially in regard to religious vilification and hatred?

Is it of concern that the proposed HREOC Religious Freedom Act appears to move beyond protection of individual belief to protection of group beliefs?

R2.5

For the purposes of the Religious Freedom Act, religion and belief should be given a wide meaning, covering the broad spectrum of personal convictions and matters of conscience. It should include theistic, non-theistic and atheistic beliefs. It should include minority and non-mainstream religions and belief systems as well as those of a more traditional or institutionalised nature. Religion or belief should be defined as a particular collection of ideas and/or practices:

1. that relate to the nature and place of humanity in the universe and, where applicable, the relation of humanity to things supernatural
2. that encourage or require adherents to observe particular standards or codes of conduct or, where applicable, to participate in specific practices having supernatural significance
3. that are held by an identifiable group regardless of how loosely knit and varying in belief and practice
4. that are seen by adherents as constituting a religion or system of belief.

The definition should not apply to all beliefs but only to those that clearly involve issues of personal conviction, conscience or faith. This definition would not cover beliefs which are caused by mental illness or which are motivated by criminal intent.

R2.6

The obligations in the Religious Freedom Act should apply to individuals, corporations, public and private bodies and all other legal persons who maybe subject to Commonwealth legislation.

R3.15

The federal Attorney-General’s department should convene an inter-faith dialogue:

1. to examine the question of methods of coercion in religious belief and practice and how they should be dealt with
2. to consider whether legal limitations should be imposed on religious groups regarding coercive tactics
3. to formulate an agreed list of minimum standards for the practice of religious groups

R5.3

The proposed Religious Freedom Act should proscribe the advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence as required by ICCPR article 20. The Act should exempt from the proscription of religious vilification, acts done reasonably and in good faith:

1. in the performance, exhibition or distribution of an artistic work
2. in the course of any statement, publication, discussion or debate made or held for any genuine academic, artistic or scientific purpose or any other genuine purpose in the public interest, or
3. in making or publishing a fair and accurate report of any event or matter of public interest

R5.4
The process and remedies available for contravention of the religious vilification provision should be civil remedies similar to those provided for in the racial hatred provisions of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth).

The Atheist Foundation of Australia makes good points in respect to religious coercion and the rights of children:

‘Religion’ falls into an entirely different category for it is an aspect of culture. Religion has no intrinsic genetic link. A person’s religion is almost universally determined by infant brainwashing and indoctrination by the parents, carers and culture of the child.

This occurs generation after generation without any evaluation of the validity of the particular religion that is being implanted in the receptive mind.

While there are laws against the physical abuse of children there appears to be none against the far more damaging mental abuse. This should not be and is a serious flaw apparent in the legislation of every country.

Furthermore:

The A.F.A accepts the scientific viewpoint that there is no evidence of anything supernatural and until some factual evidence is produced this is the logical viewpoint. The onus of proof lies with the proposer of such a concept.

To posit a belief system on presumed or imagined array of supernatural elements, persons, and places yet be unable to produce a shred of evidence, surely must rate as a scam.

Is the above an example of religious discrimination?

We are protected by law against other scams, so why should religious scams enjoy special protections?

Do religious arguments (i.e. arguments without rational proof) have a place in the Australian parliamentary process, and if so, how can these be balanced against primary arguments for individual rights to free speech and expression? Is there a present danger in Australia of the State becoming ‘the property of religion’ and other bodies of anti-rationalist thought and that ‘defamation of religion’ might be codified by stealth in the proposed Religious Freedom Act?

Cartoonist Kurt Westerguaard, who’s still under police protection after years in hiding, expresses his intimate understanding of religiopolitical phenomena:

Increasing religiosity results in greater intolerance and restrictiveness. Things become complicated when all of life is defined by religion. For those gripped by it and even more for all those who are not.

Life on the Fringe is complicated enough already.

The Fringe engaged in some rare blogkeeping today and after scrutinising all linked sites for deaduns and changed ownership, retrieved a few tasty snippets.

Deltoid’s take on Keith Windschuttle’s rejection of Karoly’s criticisms of Quadrant climate change articles:

It seems that Windschuttle has no confidence in the articles on climate science he has been publishing. Windschuttle rejected without even looking at it, an article by David Karoly correcting the errors and misinformation in those articles.

Enlightenment on the continuing Israeli siege on the ghetto that is Gaza:

On the 4th the IDF invaded Gaza and killed a few Palestinians. Minor detail. Anyway, I’m sure you can see that then cutting off food and medical supplies to 1.5 million people, of about which 800,00 are children, for 11 days is quite a reasonable response. It’s not like that would be collective punishment against a civilian population, which would be a breach of international humanitarian law or a war crime.

And they let the trucks in, 33 of them on the 17th. That’s a lot. Never mind that the UN says 15 trucks are needed everyday to maintain a miniumum supply of humanitarian aid.
Let’s see, the crossings were closed for11 days up to the 17th, 11 days x 15 is………..you know, 33 is a lot of trucks.

Israel’s unconscionable blockade continues and broadens, while as is customary when it comes to issues of justice for the Palestinian people, most western governments pretend the hideous collective punishment of one and a half million people isn’t happening.

Choking the life out of the Gazans isn’t going to make them turn against their Hamas overlords. On the contrary, says my friend Azmi, “Everything that Israeli does isn’t harming Hamas in Gaza. It’s making them stronger.” Starving Palestinians and depriving them of medicine certainly isn’t going to make them like Israelis, or their supporters in Washington, any better.

Meanwhile in the West Bank, illegal Israeli settlers are on a rampage.

Essentially Contested America comments on allowing Gates to stay as Secretary of Defence. Is Obama keeping his enemies close or has he transformed himself with miraculous speed into a very conservative Dem?

The EFA highlights recent Senate estimate hearings where the ludicrous obstruction by South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson to introducing an R18+ classification for video games is discussed.

Without an R18+ classification, video games which are not classified in lower classifications default to RC (Refused Classification).

Senator BARNETT: Some of us are dumbfounded as to why we do not have an R rating for video games. Can you share any argument as to why we do not?

Ms Davies: In order to make any changes to the classification code and guidelines, including introducing a new classification, you need to have unanimous agreement from all state and territory ministers and the Commonwealth minister. To date, that has not been obtained.

Senator BARNETT: We have got a real problem here, haven’t we, because South Australia is opposing the position.

Ms Davies: The South Australian Attorney is on record on a number of occasions as opposing the introduction of an R18+ classification.

Senator BARNETT: We have a real problem, and this is something the Senate and the parliament is going to have to address. If we have one state opposing this, South Australia, then clearly we are not going to have any R rating of video games. That simply cannot occur as a matter of course legally.

Ms Davies: That is correct.

And from the EFA site:

The National Classification Scheme (NCS) is administered by the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General – the state and territory Attorneys-General and the Commonwealth Attorney-General. Under the NCS, films can be classified G, PG, M, MA 15+, R 18+, X 18+ or Refused Classification (RC). Video games, however, can only be classified G, PG, M, MA 15+ or Refused Classification. This means that any game that is not suitable for a 15 year-old cannot be sold in Australia.

The result of this absurdity is a constriction of software development in Australia. We are locked out of the international, growing market for adult games. As well, it encourages our software game developers to self-censor.

Why does the crow-eating Attorney General oppose R18+ classification?

From an address to the South Australian Parliament, Atkinson has pontificated illogically:

I have consistently opposed an R18+ classification for computer games. I am concerned about the harm of high-impact (particularly violent) computer games to children … I do not want children to be able to get their hands on R18+ games easily. I understand that the lack of an R18+ classification denies some adults the chance to play some games, however, the need to keep potentially harmful material away from children is far more important.

Where is the evidence that the internet is more dangerous to children than films and books and why is government increasingly usurping the role of parents to discriminate what is hygienic for their childrens’ tender minds and what is not?

We are suspicious that often prudish attitudes can be projections of distasteful penchants in the hidden corners of wowsers’ minds – and the fierier the sermonising, the more sordid are the secrets.

As Germaine Greer sagely observed during the Henson photography affair:

“.. the man who rejects them [Henson's photos] with exaggerated horror is appalled not by the works themselves but by his own response to them. Innocence is not an option.”

Control of the mass media using censorship and attack of free expression in the arts are two of the 14 defining characteristics of fascism according to Lawrence Britt. In combination with a third, exhibited by the repugnant religious right and its repellent rhetoric currently infecting and influencing the Oz parliament, along with the concatenation of threats to national security, the latest being the global economic meltdown, and the naked melding of big business with big government strikingly apparent in recent corporate bailouts, is there reason for concern that Australia is heading down a dark, familiar path?

“The fact is that censorship always defeats its own purpose, for it creates, in the end, the kind of society that is incapable of exercising real discretion.” Henry Steele Commager

The drift of the ALP to the right during Howard’s reign was palpable and now, nearly a year after the ALP winning the last federal election, Christian fundamentalism has inserted its cloying puritanical payload firmly into the Oz body politic. With the Family Fist joyously inserted into its nether regions, whilst ignoring the admonishments of savvy internet doctors and pleas of free speech advocates, the ALP Government is exposing Australia to the risk of serious infection by the sinister Victoriana bacillus. Minister for Broadband, Communication and the Digital Economy, Stephen Conroy, exhibiting the most florid symptoms of technological denial and prudery, is refusing to backtrack on his seriously flawed bleatings that other western democracies employ internet condoms similar to the pricked sheath he proposes. In fact, Conroy’s proposed internet censorship regime is shared only by such human rights champions as China, North Korea, Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Conroy is avoiding the question of exactly what ‘unwanted material’ he’s hoping to block from dainty Australians’ minds, whilst attacking and attempting to gag learned critics of his plans. Is this the thin edge of a totalitarian wedge which Conroy, along with the sexually repressed, intolerant religious right, is pushing?

The Government needs the support of the Greens and Opposition to ram net censorship legislation through, so they are unlikely at present to succeed. However, Conroy is still signalling the commencement of censorship trials from December 24 and has called for expressions of interest from ISPs. Quite possibly the Government has another agenda – their attack on the internet, being pre-doomed to technological failure, may still prove a successful tactic in obtaining the support of Senators Xenophon and Fielding for other Government bills.

What to do? prevention of a nauseating epidemic of Victoriana is better and less costly than cure. There’s an online petition at Computer World worth signing. Folks can also contact Conroy direct here.