Sedition and the incitation of terrorism?

[bindi]

Hey all,

Let me start off by saying I don't want this to turn into a political thread (I've been in enough crap recently, thank you very much!) but I would like opinions.

I've been reading and hearing about sedition in the new anti terrorism laws. It basically means that anyone who speaks about terrorism or voices an opinion on (if contrary to government belief) it can be gaoled for up to 7 years.

For example on Lateline last year, John Pilger appeared and said that he believes the war in Iraq is illegal, that the Iraqi people have the right to resist us as we are invading their country and that our soldiers are legitimate targets. (For the full story, go here: http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/tra...s/s1489465.htm) Now there is talk about what he said meaning that under the new laws, he could be in gaol for Sedition.

Anyway, it boils down to the worry that this new law may mean that what is reported can mean that the reporter (and the radio/tv station or newspaper) is locked up in prison. The media are up in arms (well, the real media, not this Today Tonight bollox) and imho, rightly so. If we can't hear about what some Muslim leader has said about implying that young Muslim boys and men should be training to defeat the enemy, then how can Australia be prepared for something that may be potentially harmful? He won't be able to be viewed by Australians as he will be inciting terrorism, Sedition.

What do you think about the right to voice an opinion even if it is contrary to the government's viewpoint, whomever is in power? Shouldn't we all be allowed that right?!

I'm worried for our rights, we seem to be losing them each day. Very worrying.

[BJ]

We lost our rights years ago. The simple fact that you can go to goal for saying what on you mind is something to worry about. I always thought us Aussies were proud of the fact we called a spade a spade, but it looks like we are going down the same path as the US. Paranoia and decit. I for one have a voice and will continue to use it. I thought we had freedom of seach in this country. I for one want be letting some one else take over my way of life because of the knee jerk reaction of the few who goven the many.

[FordFan86]

cough *1984* cough

[MITCHAY]

Originally Posted by bindi

Hey all,
For example on Lateline last year, John Pilger appeared and said that he believes the war in Iraq is illegal, that the Iraqi people have the right to resist us as we are invading their country and that our soldiers are legitimate targets.

They are getting invaded so of course they are goin to resist. If some country invades Australia are we just going to sit on our **** and offer them a coffee, a biscuit and say THANK YOU!

While I'm all for Australia, Im smart enough to realize that no country is going to just give up. As for loss of rights. Well I think the right to free speech has been long gone.

[b2tf]

just waiting until this thread inevitably goes under.....

[Racecraft]

Salem Witch Hunt anyone?

[RED_EL_XR8]

I Quote !

Site Terms & Conditions

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a moderated site, which means that there are a few simple rules in place to ensure that everyone is free to enjoy the community here without fear.

In short, the following things are not permitted:


1. Posts about or containing references to: religion, race, sensitive or controversial subjects.

2. Posts that are (or could reasonably be considered to be): defamatory, threatening, invasive of privacy, or which otherwise violate any law applicable within Australia.


3. Posts containing advertising material in any form except those posted on or on behalf of supporting site sponsors.


Posts which breach any of the points above will be removed at the absolute discretion of the administration team. If you feel that a post has been removed incorrectly then please use the Private Messaging system provided to discuss the issue with a member of the admin team rather than discuss the issue publicly.

[NAK302]

[QUOTE=MITCHAY]They are getting invaded so of course they are goin to resist. If some country invades Australia are we just going to sit on our **** and offer them a coffee, a biscuit and say THANK YOU!

QUOTE]


many countries have invaded here, even in my lifetime. the problem is we have been told to sit on our ***** by successive governments. this government tried to put a stop to it by putting these invaders in to detainment until proof of identity was acheived. minority groups thought this was unfair and forced our government to accept them into society.
now we have suburbs that have foreign languages as the first language. Australia as a country is constantly changing, for me its for the worse.
multi-cultureism does not work, too many invaders bring their shoulder chips with them. god help us if another socialist government gets power again.

[4.9 EF Futura]

Originally Posted by bindi

Hey all,

Let me start off by saying I don't want this to turn into a political thread (I've been in enough crap recently, thank you very much!) but I would like opinions.

I've been reading and hearing about sedition in the new anti terrorism laws. It basically means that anyone who speaks about terrorism or voices an opinion on (if contrary to government belief) it can be gaoled for up to 7 years.

I'd suggest that perhaps you need to extend your reading beyond the sources you have consulted thus far as this appears to be quite a narrow interpretation of the proposed amendments to the Crimes Act of 1914. What you have provided is an incredibly brief synopsis and i dont agree with the summary.

Sedition is not about having views contrary to those of the government. It is inciting dissidence, encouraging action to be taken against government via illegal means etc etc.

And of course, you would be aware that sedition laws have been on the books for decades and you could always be locked up for 3 years over it. But i didnt hear people voicing concerns over sedition laws imposing on their civil liberties until recent times?? An extra 4 years in prision makes all that difference?

For example on Lateline last year, John Pilger appeared and said that he believes the war in Iraq is illegal, that the Iraqi people have the right to resist us as we are invading their country and that our soldiers are legitimate targets. (For the full story, go here: http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/tra...s/s1489465.htm) Now there is talk about what he said meaning that under the new laws, he could be in gaol for Sedition.

As for Pilger... well, his comments were outrageous but I dont see any problem with him saying such things. I think its a slap in the face for any hard working member of the armed forces to have someone back at home making statements like that.

Read Pilger's words carefully. Make no mistake - he approves of Iraqis killing Australian soldiers. That's a despicable thing to say on national television - although personally I think he's entitled to do so.

But let's not accept senior counsel's advice to media watch as gospel. Anyone who has spent any time in court (particularly when it comes to interpretation of commonwealth legislation) will know that there are always two strong sides to any argument. If i had a few grand laying around, im sure I good get counsel's opinion that Pilger would not possibly be eligible for prosecution. You tell legal counsel what opinion you want them to come back with - and they will. Maybe im just a cynic :

Anyway, it boils down to the worry that this new law may mean that what is reported can mean that the reporter (and the radio/tv station or newspaper) is locked up in prison. The media are up in arms (well, the real media, not this Today Tonight bollox) and imho, rightly so. If we can't hear about what some Muslim leader has said about implying that young Muslim boys and men should be training to defeat the enemy, then how can Australia be prepared for something that may be potentially harmful? He won't be able to be viewed by Australians as he will be inciting terrorism, Sedition.

The real media? Like media watch? Whilst it's a great show (possibly the greatest 15 minutes on TV each week) they have just a steep an angle as any 'current affair' show and should be taken with just as much salt. Lol "everyone loves it until they're on it!". But again, this is merely one interpretation of the consequences for the media.

What do you think about the right to voice an opinion even if it is contrary to the government's viewpoint, whomever is in power? Shouldn't we all be allowed that right?!

Well an example trotted out about a month ago when details of the sedition laws were released at the terrorism summit suggested the laws would capture bookstores selling literature which praises terrorism. Or people who praise the insurgency in Iraq.

Well, call me and my opinions draconian if you must but i dont want to live in a community where people are spouting that s***. Frankly, no, i dont think people have the right to express CERTAIN opinions. Should people be allowed to publish books and make speeches claiming the holocaust never happened? Hell no. But that's just me....

And again, i reiterate my point that sedition is not about holding beliefs contrary to the government. It's about what you do and where you do it.

I'm worried for our rights, we seem to be losing them each day. Very worrying.

Well i dont mean to be rude but that's a little melodromatic... How has your life been affected between today and yesterday? What is different in your day to day life than, say, 5 years ago? Its good and well to discuss the idealogies of civil liberty but have you really considered the actual impact on your life?

[Casper]

Originally Posted by 4.9 EF Futura

I'd suggest that perhaps you need to extend your reading beyond the sources you have consulted thus far as this appears to be quite a narrow interpretation of the proposed amendments to the Crimes Act of 1914. What you have provided is an incredibly brief synopsis and i dont agree with the summary.

Sedition is not about having views contrary to those of the government. It is inciting dissidence, encouraging action to be taken against government via illegal means etc etc.

And of course, you would be aware that sedition laws have been on the books for decades and you could always be locked up for 3 years over it. But i didnt hear people voicing concerns over sedition laws imposing on their civil liberties until recent times?? An extra 4 years in prision makes all that difference?



As for Pilger... well, his comments were outrageous but I dont see any problem with him saying such things. I think its a slap in the face for any hard working member of the armed forces to have someone back at home making statements like that.

Read Pilger's words carefully. Make no mistake - he approves of Iraqis killing Australian soldiers. That's a despicable thing to say on national television - although personally I think he's entitled to do so.

But let's not accept senior counsel's advice to media watch as gospel. Anyone who has spent any time in court (particularly when it comes to interpretation of commonwealth legislation) will know that there are always two strong sides to any argument. If i had a few grand laying around, im sure I good get counsel's opinion that Pilger would not possibly be eligible for prosecution. You tell legal counsel what opinion you want them to come back with - and they will. Maybe im just a cynic :



The real media? Like media watch? Whilst it's a great show (possibly the greatest 15 minutes on TV each week) they have just a steep an angle as any 'current affair' show and should be taken with just as much salt. Lol "everyone loves it until they're on it!". But again, this is merely one interpretation of the consequences for the media.



Well an example trotted out about a month ago when details of the sedition laws were released at the terrorism summit suggested the laws would capture bookstores selling literature which praises terrorism. Or people who praise the insurgency in Iraq.

Well, call me and my opinions draconian if you must but i dont want to live in a community where people are spouting that s***. Frankly, no, i dont think people have the right to express CERTAIN opinions. Should people be allowed to publish books and make speeches claiming the holocaust never happened? Hell no. But that's just me....

And again, i reiterate my point that sedition is not about holding beliefs contrary to the government. It's about what you do and where you do it.



Well i dont mean to be rude but that's a little melodromatic... How has your life been affected between today and yesterday? What is different in your day to day life than, say, 5 years ago? Its good and well to discuss the idealogies of civil liberty but have you really considered the actual impact on your life?

People should read this again.. just so that it sinks in. Well said and I think I'll follow the sites conditions:

1. Posts about or containing references to: religion, race, sensitive or controversial subjects.

and let this thread die.
This is a thread that is going to become a political hot spot if allowed to live... so I'm going to kill it now before it does. Nothing against Bindi for posting it or anyone for adding to it, its an issue that should be discussed.. just not here. The political wars that have gone on lately are well documented and no longer acceptable on this site. Any issues, please feel free to PM me.