Free Speech

About Mandatory Internet Filtering

Mandatory Internet Filtering has been proposed as a way to supposedly prevent the exploitation of women by preventing or, at least controlling, access to pornography. It is presumed that (1) all pornography is degrading to women; and (2) that mandatory filtering will end or, at least, drastically reduce the availability of pornography. Given the increase in the trafficking of heroin and other illegal drugs after the decades long "War on Drugs", it seems no less likely that a ban on Internet pornography will be end of pornography. Rather, it will make it more costly and give more business opportunities for gangsters as has occurred with narcotics drugs as a result of its criminalisation.

Links to web-sites and pages about Internet Filtering



(23/7/14) includes YouTube
(10/7/14) by Bryan McDonald
(12/3/13, includes video),
(12/3/13, includes video),

From , Candobetter

The articles below describe attempts by the Australian government to use the claim, that all pornography degraded and exploited women, as a pretext to give the government power to filter all of our Internet usage. The government came much closer to success than it otherwise would have been able to, as a result of support for Internet Freedom by , author of "Silencing Dissent" (2007). They no doubt counted that vocal support from an ostensible supporter of free speech would reassure many who would otherwise be concerned about an attempt by government to control the flow of information through the Internet. The proposal aroused furious public opposition. Articles about this on include:

(22/8/09) by James Sinnamon, (21/8/09) by , (7/5/09) by Catherine Manning, (2/12/08), (21/8/09), a press release by Greens Senator

The outcome, as described in the Wikipedia article , is somewhat ambiguous. Much of the flow of Internet traffic is still free, but some is also subject to filtering and a number of web-sites have been by the Federal Government. The Federal Liberal/National coalition government which had previously voted down attempts by Labor Senator Stephen Conroy to introduce the filter, now appears to be moving towards mandatory filtering. For further information, please see the of . Articles include:

(6/9/13), (6/9/13), (5/6/13), (31/5/13), (28/5/13), (17/5/13), (16/5/13), (11/9/12), (27/5/11), (3/2/11).


includes YouTube

Appendix: articles about the United States' alleged "war on drugs"

– Global Research (Jun 2014), (May 2014) – RT, – RT Op-Edge (Apr 2014), – Global Research (Sep 2006), (Apr 2014) – VoltaireNet, – Information Clearing House (22/3/14) , (6/3/14) on – re-published from , (Nov 2013), (Oct 2013) – Global Research, (May 2010) – Global Research, – Global Research (Apr 2007), – VoltaireNet, by F. William Engdahl, (21/9/06) by Prof Michel Chossudovsky, , .

Hoax: Lorde speaks against war criminal global elites in suppressed Grammy acceptance speech

You can read report and watch video on the New Zealand Herald front page here:
You can see why the hoax was so successful; so many people would have liked someone like Lorde to do something like this - but she would probably have completely ruined her career, had she done so. And it was rather hard to imagine a 17 year old being that politically aware - right to the references. A good speech, but not Lorde's. Below and inside is the hoax that was:
In (18/2/2014), writes: "It took a pop singer, Lorde, to declare in her Grammy Award acceptance speech last month that the emperor has no clothes: "Planet Earth is run by psychopaths that hide behind slick marketing, 'freedom' propaganda and 'economic growth' rhetoric, while they construct a global system of corporatized totalitarianism. This core yields an 'inverted' totalitarian state that few recognize because it does not look like the Orwellian world of Nineteen Eighty-four."
17 year old New Zealand singer-songwriter Ella Marija Lani Yelich-O'Connor, whose stage-name is Lorde, courageously used the acceptance of her Grammy award on 26 January to warn people of the world of the criminality of the global elites who have killed many hundreds of thousands of people in order to maintain their unjust rule. In doing so they have laid whole countries to waste, including Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. This acceptance speech has been censored by the Grammy apparatchick and virtually the whole of the world's corporate media. Her speech, including the sources on which it was based are included below.

Lorde's Suppressed Grammy Award acceptance speech (Full Transcript)

26 January 2014

Thank you soo much everyone for making this song explode because this world is mental. (Laughter). Planet Earth is run by psychopaths that hide behind slick marketing, 'freedom' propaganda and 'economic growth' rhetoric," id="txtSubj1">1 while they construct a global system of corporatized totalitarianism.

As American journalist Chris Hedges has identified, a corporate totalitarian core thrives inside a fictitious democratic shell." id="txtSubj2">2 This core yields an 'inverted' totalitarian state that few recognize because it does not look like the Orwellian world of Nineteen Eighty-four." id="txtSubj3">3

This corporate totalitarian core is spreading outward from America. Planet Earth is being rapidly militarized by the world's major and significant states, including their police forces." id="txtSubj4">4 Meanwhile, state surveillance is becoming universal" id="txtSubj5">5 and torture is outsourced to gulags." id="txtSubj6">6

Can we not imagine that in past times, simple folk found it hard to work out exactly how they were being manipulated by the Royal monarchies, and the Papal monarchy, who claimed a 'divine right to rule'? Ordinary people from classical times through to the demise of the Ancienne Regime could not see how the rivalrous network of elites and oligarchs were linked, not least because the illiterate masses were indoctrinated to believe in their humble lot, to obey divinely-endorsed authority and to live in fear of damnation.

So, in today's mental world, it should become clearer now that Planet Earth is ruled by super-wealthy people, who use their outrageous fortunes to steer the trajectories of whole societies for their own material and political gain." id="txtSubj7">7 These oligarchs are, in fact, colluding for economic gain and conspiring to augment more political power." id="txtSubj8">8 Armies of professional, political, religious and military elites serve them." id="txtSubj9">9 Together, they comprise a highly-networked trans- national capitalist class that has been traced in studies by: Peter Phillips and Brady Osborne;" id="txtSubj10">10 William K. Carroll;" id="txtSubj11">11 David Rothkopf;" id="txtSubj12">12 Daniel Estulin;" id="txtSubj13">13 and Laurence H. Shoup and William Minter." id="txtSubj14">14

As Canadian journalist has argued in her book, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, 'free markets' were slickly marketed in the 1980s and 1990s with the idea that they would deliver individual freedom and prosperity for all." id="txtSubj15">15 Klein also wrote that the use of military violence to facilitate the spread of 'free markets' in the field-testing stage from the mid- 1960s to the mid-1970s has continued into the 2000s. Her view is supported in Eugene Jarecki's documentary Why We Fight, which compellingly showed that America fights wars to make the world secure for its corporations." id="txtSubj16">16 So, get reading and viewing! (Lorde giggles and half the audience rises to their feet applauding. The other half remain fixed in their chairs. Some reluctantly clap). Thankyou soo much everyone for giving a shit about our song, 'Royals'. May you all find the balls to help construct a world based on resilient community, bona-fide freedom, and peace. To do that, we will need to redeploy the psychopaths that currently run the world to the planet's prisons." id="txtSubj17">17 Peace cannot happen with reconciliation. That was Nelson Mandela's mistake." id="txtSubj18">18 The first step to peace is justice firmly served.

Speech Source References

" id="fnSubj1">1. ">⇑ Snoopman. (2013, August 31). A Poorly Understood 'Bargain': How Democracy and the 60s Movements became Orphans in the 'Free Market' Era. Snoopman News. Retrieved from

" id="fnSubj2">2. ">⇑ Hedges, Chris. (2014, January 6). The Last Gasp of American Democracy. Truthout.

" id="fnSubj3">3. ">⇑ Orwell, George. (1993). Nineteen Eighty-Four (5th ed.). London, England: Compact Books. (Original work published 1949).

" id="fnSubj4">4. ">⇑ Chossudovsky, Michel. (2014, January 29). Imperial Conquest: America's "Long War" against Humanity. Global Research. Retrieved from

" id="fnSubj5">5. ">⇑ WashingtonsBlog. (2013, December 18). Former Top NSA Official: "We Are Now In A Police State". Retrieved from http://www.washingtonsblog. com/2013/12/former-top-nsa-official-now-police-state.html; World Social- ist Web Site. (2013, December 18). "Almost Orwellian": US Judge indicts NSA spying. Retrieved from; Burghardt, Tom. (2013, November 10). The U.S. Secret State and the Internet: "Dirty Secrets" and "Crypto Wars" from "Clipper Chip" and ECHELON to PRISM. Global Research. Retrieved from

" id="fnSubj6">6. ">⇑ Lendman, Stephen. (2013, November 12). America's Global Gulag: Challenging Wrongful Convictions Global Research. Retrieved from http://www.; Lendman, Stephen. (2013, July 19). US Courts Approve Indefinite Detention and Torture. Global Research. Retrieved from

" id="fnSubj7">7. ">⇑ Engdahl, F. W. (2009). Gods of Money: Wall Street and the Death of the American Century.Wiesbaden, Germany: edition.engdahl; Rowbotham, M. (1998). The Grip of Death: A Study of Modern Money, Debt Slavery and Destructive Economics. Charlbury, England: Jon Carpenter; Winters, J. A. (2011a). Oligarchy. New York: Cambridge University Press.

" id="fnSubj8">8. ">⇑ Edwards, Steve. (2012). It's the financial oligarchy, stupid: A study of Anglo-American news coverage during the 2007-2008 financial crisis and bank bailouts Retrieved from

" id="fnSubj9">9. ">⇑ Winters, J. A.(2012, February 27). Oligarchy in the U.S.A.: The wealth defense industry protects the richest of the rich. In These Times. Retrieved from

" id="fnSubj10">10. ">⇑ Phillips, Peter & Osborne, Brady (2013, September 13). Exposing the Financial Core of the Transnational Capitalist Class. Global Research. Retrieved from

" id="fnSubj11">11. ">⇑ Carroll, W. K. (2010). The Making of a Transnational Capitalist Class: Corporate Power in the 21st Century. London: Zed Books.

" id="fnSubj12">12. ">⇑ Rothkopf, D. (2008). Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They are Making. London, England: Little, Brown.

" id="fnSubj13">13. ">⇑ Estulin, D. (2009). The True Story of the Bilderberg Group (North American Union ed.). Walterville, OR: Trine Day LLC.

" id="fnSubj14">14. ">⇑ Shoup, L. H. & Minter, W. (1977). Imperial Brain Trust: The Council on Foreign Relations and United States Foreign Policy. New York, NY: Authors Choice Press.

" id="fnSubj15">15. ">⇑ . (2007). The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. Camberwell, Australia: Penguin Books.

" id="fnSubj16">16. ">⇑ Jarecki, Eugene (2006). Why We Fight. [Motion Picture]. Sony Pictures Classics.

" id="fnSubj17">17. ">⇑ Snoopman. (2013, August 31). A Poorly Understood 'Bargain': How Democracy and the 60s Movements became Orphans in the 'Free Market' Era. Snoopman News. Retrieved from

" id="fnSubj18">18. ">⇑ (2014, January 28). The Audacity of Obama: A Black Wolf in Corporate Clothing. Snoopman News. Retrieved from

See the full story "Clipping Queen Bee's Wings: Lorde's real Grammy speech
suppressed" at
And also:
The inside story behind Lorde's meteoric rise: "Queen Bee Mentor: The profes-
sor who fed Lorde's mental buzz"

Snoopman News:

Facebook: Snoopman News
Twitter: Snoopman@SnoopmanNews

Snoopman News: The revolution in your mind will not be televised!

Debate about Libya, Syria on impaired by slow moderation

This blog entry consists of a comment I -157268">posted to , which, I have been advised, more than eight hours after I posted it, is still "awaiting moderation" and as, appendices other comments on that page related to that comment. A number of other comments including -157277">one (), which is critical of an -157257">earlier post of mine have been published since.

As ">Appendix 4, I have written my response to ">post . I won't attempt to post that response to until at least my earlier post, still "awaiting moderation" is published. In the meantime, I am going to attempt to post as a very short comment to -157277">that discussion on a link to this page so that those who want to be able to judge for themselves can come to this site and have a look.

Also, you may find of interest the related discussion on a page of ABC Radio National's Background Briefing Program, . A comment I made, which referred to Professor John Quiggin's drew Professor Quiggin's attention. It seems that as a result of that discussion, I was able to have one comment, but only one comment so far, -157257">published on his web site. The subsequent comment, which is still "awaiting moderation" follows.

Thank you, Professor Quiggin for publishing my previous post.

">Tim McNay (@ ), whilst I greatly appreciate your inclusion of that quote from George Orwell, I fail to see its relevance to Mulga MuggleBrain's " id="app1_mm">previous comment (@ ).

If Orwell were alive today, he would almost certainly be speaking out against the invasion of Libya and Syria, and pointing out how the lies that are being used to justify those wars is precisely the kind of deceit he warned against in 1984.

If Orwell's critique of Pacifists opposed to the use of violence to oppose Nazism in 1940 has any relevance to the Libyan war it would be to Libyans who may have opposed the use of violence to defend their country against NATO and its local proxies on Pacifist grounds.

Following on from what I mentioned in my -157257">previous post (@ ), those interested in learning the truth about NATO's invasion of Libya and its threatened invasion of Syria should send time reading articles on and pages and broadcasts linked to from there.

A good place to start is the 38 minute Global Research TV report (linked to from, , which features Canadian journalist Mahdi Nazemroaya, "a research associate of the Centre for Research in Globalization who spent two months in Libya before escaping after the rebel siege of Tripoli."

of 18 September by Finian Cunningham. (So why hasn't NATO declared a "no-fly zone" over Bahrain after its brutal repression of dissidents?)

of 30 August by Tony Cartalucci,

of 19 September by Michel Chossudovsky

- of 15 September. - Interview with former US Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, who was present in Libya during NATO's bombing campaign.

There is vast wealth of meticulously researched papers and broadcasts on that site. I counted 41 articles just concerning Libya published in 2010 and 2011

I await with interest any response by supporters of the invasion of Libya to any of this material, but, of course, I won't be holding my breath.

" id="app1_mm">Appendix 1: -157199">Post by "Mulga Mugglebrain"

John, I find the categories ‘dictator' and ‘democracy' to be amazingly fluid. In Syria you have a supposed ‘dictator' Assad, who is, in fact, merely the figure-head for a possibly ‘dictatorial' regime. If you are inferring that Assad is equivalent to Stalin, well I think that is bollocks. The regime he heads is a complex alliance of interests that has ensured peace in Syria, despite its fractious religious and ethnic mix, which is now being targeted by those foreign forces who wish either to cause regime change or foment civil war. Assad has broad support in that Syrians do not wish to share the fate of Lebanon, where foreign interference provoked a vicious civil war. The Syrian regime, in fact, leaves its people well alone, unless they are actively working to overthrow the regime, in which case they can be famously brutal, but are they any more brutal than the USA or Israel? I would say, emphatically, not.

In any case in our so-called ‘democracies' the ‘elected' leaders (often blessed with minorities, in electorates where barely half, or less, of those eligible vote)almost invariably these days, govern as elected dictators, only having to balance the forces within their regimes, just like Assad. In fact I doubt that Assad is any more ‘dictatorial' than, say, George Bush, ‘the Decider' or Tony Blair who dragged his country to the infamy of the aggression in Iraq.

" id="app2_tm">Appendix 2: Post quoting Orwell in response to post

Comments like ">Mulga's always remind me of this excerpt from :

Pacifism. The majority of pacifists either belong to obscure religious sects or are simply humanitarians who object to the taking of life and prefer not to follow their thoughts beyond that point. But there is a minority of intellectual pacifists whose real though unadmitted motive appears to be hatred of western democracy and admiration of totalitarianism. Pacifist propaganda usually boils down to saying that one side is as bad as the other, but if one looks closely at the writings of younger intellectual pacifists, one finds that they do not by any means express impartial disapproval but are directed almost entirely against Britain and the United States. Moreover they do not as a rule condemn violence as such, but only violence used in defence of western countries. The Russians, unlike the British, are not blamed for defending themselves by warlike means, and indeed all pacifist propaganda of this type avoids mention of Russia or China. It is not claimed, again, that the Indians should abjure violence in their struggle against the British. Pacifist literature abounds with equivocal remarks which, if they mean anything, appear to mean that statesmen of the type of Hitler are preferable to those of the type of Churchill, and that violence is perhaps excusable if it is violent enough. After the fall of France, the French pacifists, faced by a real choice which their English colleagues have not had to make, mostly went over to the Nazis, and in England there appears to have been some small overlap of membership between the Peace Pledge Union and the Blackshirts. Pacifist writers have written in praise of Carlyle, one of the intellectual fathers of Fascism. All in all it is difficult not to feel that pacifism, as it appears among a section of the intelligentsia, is secretly inspired by an admiration for power and successful cruelty. The mistake was made of pinning this emotion to Hitler, but it could easily be transferred.

" id="app3_tm">Appendix 3: -157277">Post in response to my post and on this site


Malthusista, I couldn't open the link (the URL in the link was mis-typed as ''. Had Professor Gigging approved my -157268">next post at any time in the 3 hours 15 minutes before this was posted, Tim would have been able to find other links to Global Research that were not mis-typed.), but I had a look at to, and I'm sad to say I was disappointed. The writer of that article decided to become a personal fan of Gaddafi on the basis of a 4 minute Youtube video? Hardly an improvement over getting your information from two minute reports on CNN, and it does not speak well for the level of intellectual rigour on that site.

" id="app4_tm">Appendix 4: My response to ">post

Readers should view for themselves the article and decide for themselves whether the author had became a 'personal fan' of Muammar Gaddafi and whether any of his comments favourable to Muammar Gaddafi were justified.

It seems to me that the point that Geoffrey Taylor was trying to make was that if, in a past about Gaddafi's 41 year career linked to by an in the Australian which had been beating the drum so hard for war against Libya, so little could be found against him, then we could hardly consider the Australian's efforts elsewhere to demonise him elsewhere as credible. Furthermore, the broadcast showed how, on a number of occasions, Gaddafi had displayed inspired and outstanding leadership for Arab and other Third World countries against the interests of powerful countries like the US, so the motives of governments which are now waging war against Gaddafi's Government could be better understood.

" id="app4_js">Appendix 5: My post of 21 September to Background Briefing forum

This is to be posted to the ABC Radio National Background Briefing to await the moderator's approval, but as of 1.04PM, this is yet to be done. - JS

Three comments, which I posted yesterday to (one of which concerns wind power and not Libya) are still "awaiting moderation". Since 2.15pm yesterday when I posted there the -157268">comment referred to above, 21 other comments have been posted including -157277">one attacking my views on the page "The just fight not fought" referred to in my previous post.

My most recent post was simply this:

"Please visit the web site (/node/2596) for my most recent comment which includes a response to Tim Macknay’s most recent post ()."

At there is a proposed "Truthseeker's code of conduct". This proposal requires that all, who agree to abide by this code, at least allow anyone, with a view contrary to those expressed on any page of that site, the right to have posted, to that page, a link back to a page where the contrary views are expressed, together with a small amount of explanatory text.

For example, if a site which made the claim that, in 1990, brutal Iraqi occupiers of Kuwait took babies out of incubutors and left them to die on a hospital floor, abided by the "Truthseeker's code of conduct" it would be obliged, if requested by a site visitor, to have a link posted back to the YouTube video "The Kuwaiti Incubator Babies - LIE" at where other site visitors could learn that the 15 year old "Nariyah" who moved so many to tears with her testimony was, in fact, the dughter of the Kuwaiti ambassoadr to the US, was coached in acting by Hill and Knowlton and had fabricated the whole story.

If Professor Quiggin had agreed to abide by the proposed "Truthseekers' codeo of conduct", then he would have at least tried to enable the publication of that smaller post which would have allowed his site visitors to view material which I consider shows up NATO's case for the bombing of Libya to be no less fraudulent.

Whether those three posts were not published because of a flaw in Professor Quiggin's web management software, inattentiveness or a deliberate choice, the fact remains that many visitors to, who may be interested in views contrary to Professor Quiggin's support of NATO's actions will not be able to find material there, or linked to from there, which I consider demolishes that view.

Of course, it is Professor Quiggin's right, as it should be, to publish or not publish material on his own web-site as he chooses, but if it is his intention to prevent vistors to his site from knowing of those views, then I think he owes it to his site visitors to tell them forthrightly. Then, at least, those visitors who wish to know the other side of the debate will know that they need to go elsewhere.