getyourselfhigh200
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2006
- Messages
- 145
Greens have said they will vote against the filter when/if it hits the senate.
http://www.zdnet.com.au/greens-will-vote-against-filter-bill-339301580.htm
-
-
AADD Moderators: Tronica
Bluelight and the Aussie Internet Filter – Will it affect us?
- Thread starter belarki
- Start date
Greens have said they will vote against the filter when/if it hits the senate.
http://www.zdnet.com.au/greens-will-vote-against-filter-bill-339301580.htm
Mr Blonde
Bluelighter
Divine Moments
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2009
- Messages
- 1,782
belarki
Bluelight Crew
Sameria
Bluelighter
^That is THE single most rediculous thing I've heard come from the government, and that is no light statement.
Time to start saving for those one-way overseas plane tickets people...
Time to start saving for those one-way overseas plane tickets people...
thestudent14
Bluelighter
wtf is going on with our country?
TripppAR
Bluelighter
Ha..
student.
Its GOING DOWN THE SHITER! Fast!
And its only getting worse from here on in. I mean it has been ever since they took are guns away with that bullshit government massacre at port arthur.
They are still working HARD on getting major gun control implimented in the US. Its really the only thing that sorta is holding them back from total tyranny over their citizens.
Yeh Australia and the rest of the world is doomed sadly. One world government is coming soon... sounds crazy but there will be a MASSIVE catylyst. One that will require us all to unite...but for the worst.
2012 comes into platy here as well...my bet is WWIII .. The US is allegedly ALREDY in IRAN fighting and taking oil. The caspian sea is a major gateway. The media controls everything including your views... its their to shape your mind essentially.
When was the last time there was a REALLL news story? Think about it!
PEOPLE NEED TO THINK MORE! I MEAN REALLY THINK!
student.
Its GOING DOWN THE SHITER! Fast!
And its only getting worse from here on in. I mean it has been ever since they took are guns away with that bullshit government massacre at port arthur.
They are still working HARD on getting major gun control implimented in the US. Its really the only thing that sorta is holding them back from total tyranny over their citizens.
Yeh Australia and the rest of the world is doomed sadly. One world government is coming soon... sounds crazy but there will be a MASSIVE catylyst. One that will require us all to unite...but for the worst.
2012 comes into platy here as well...my bet is WWIII .. The US is allegedly ALREDY in IRAN fighting and taking oil. The caspian sea is a major gateway. The media controls everything including your views... its their to shape your mind essentially.
When was the last time there was a REALLL news story? Think about it!
PEOPLE NEED TO THINK MORE! I MEAN REALLY THINK!
Lovegrud
Bluelighter
It might take a little longer than 2012 bit yeah I can pretty much see it happening. It's scary just how much zeitgeist is becomming a reality.
Anonymous1119
Greenlighter
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2010
- Messages
- 4
ATTENTION
This is a website my friend made http://www.bypasscleanfeed.org/
It should bypass Clean Feed (Aussie Filter)
This is a website my friend made http://www.bypasscleanfeed.org/
It should bypass Clean Feed (Aussie Filter)
dextrous
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2007
- Messages
- 155
Nice to see someone else who is awake. Listen to this guy.
Don't be so sure!
Sameria
Bluelighter
hehe nice to see someone else who doesn't watch and believe in trash news. Wikileaks.org had real news
Mr Blonde
Bluelighter
Zeitgeist. 8)
TrippAR: You're saying the Port Arthur massacre was organized by the government? For fucks sake that is ridiculous and offensive.
Gun control laws are being overturned in the US right now, just last week or the week before Chicago's gun control laws were overturned by the Supreme Court. And that was a city where the gun control laws were a success in reducing the murder rate.
I won't go into 2012 (apart from saying John Cusack is fucking awesome) but as for Iran, do you really think the US could be in there fighting and taking oil without anyone knowing? I mean, consider the elections there and how people managed to get out video and information about the crack down by authorities, there's no way that even in Iran the US could do that and keep it under wraps.
I half agree with you about the media, especially when you consider the motives and ideologies of those who control the media, but I don't see it as part of some big conspiracy.
All this tin foil hat talk just clouds the fact that the government is trying to exert control over us, not because of some plot to become one big world government, but because they think that it's in our best interest to have as little freedom as possible.
TrippAR: You're saying the Port Arthur massacre was organized by the government? For fucks sake that is ridiculous and offensive.
Gun control laws are being overturned in the US right now, just last week or the week before Chicago's gun control laws were overturned by the Supreme Court. And that was a city where the gun control laws were a success in reducing the murder rate.
I won't go into 2012 (apart from saying John Cusack is fucking awesome) but as for Iran, do you really think the US could be in there fighting and taking oil without anyone knowing? I mean, consider the elections there and how people managed to get out video and information about the crack down by authorities, there's no way that even in Iran the US could do that and keep it under wraps.
I half agree with you about the media, especially when you consider the motives and ideologies of those who control the media, but I don't see it as part of some big conspiracy.
All this tin foil hat talk just clouds the fact that the government is trying to exert control over us, not because of some plot to become one big world government, but because they think that it's in our best interest to have as little freedom as possible.
TripppAR
Bluelighter
lol ignorance.
phase_dancer
Bluelight Crew
thestudent14
Bluelighter
Interesting read as always P_D,
personally I found it a bit insulting to the general public. I can see his points and there definately is some but I think people these days say from the age of 16-30 listen to statistics more then they do anecdotal cases.
I find anecdotal cases work for my parents, which always suprises me because they are both highly intelligent, university graduates. But when they hear of individual cases they seem completely intent on letting me know. When statistics show something completely different apart from the highlighted extreme case. Alot of my friends parents are the same way.
But most of my friends or people who are younger then 30 seem to listen to reason much more then people older then that. I don't know what causes such a distinguishable difference but it's definately something I've always noticed. This is why I wish their was a young young priminister. No older then 35 and ideally not older then 30. The country should be governed by people who understand the country the way it is and not the way it was.
I feel perfectly safe walking the streets of Melbourne alone at 2am on a saturday night. There is cops at every corner, shops that are open 24/7 and the majority of people are just out to have a good time. But my parents would have us all believe that it's a dangerous place and I should avoid doing this at every chance. They say "there is more violence now then their has ever been and people use weapons now and they never did when I was growing up". As true as that may be, the population of Melbourn from 1996 - 2010 has gone from 3.186 to 3.892 million people http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=population+of+melbourne+2010
So in the last 15 years it's gone up by 700,000 and in the 15 before that I'm sure it was probably another 500,000. Thats a very significant difference, and with all these extra people on the streets of course there is gonna be more violence. but with the 100,000's of people that go through the streets on a friday or saturday night, hearing about one person getting beaten up by a couple of guys doesn't sound that shocking.
I very much feel this is the same with the internet filter, it's people from a different era, who are at the helm. Who see something beautiful (the internet) but are so shocked by a few bad cases or even worse... potentially bad cases that they feel they have to stop their kids generation from living their own life. No one goes on google and randomly stumbles across child porn (unless you click the "do I feel lucky button" and are sadly extremely unlucky).
But they see potential for harm so it's restricted or with drug use banned before reasonable assessment.
You know what the real kicker is though, no party will put a young person at the helm because then all the people over 35 would be so much less likely to vote for them. I was curious about this so I asked around and I was correct even though I only spoke to a few people (parents, friends parents) and they pretty much all said "well experience is very important and someone that young just won't have enough yet" BULLSHIT. I'm 21 years old and I have more common sense in my left testicle then most of the politicians I see today.
They say experience is something you learn right after you need it, how about we start letting the people who know what it's like to be on the streets at night to decide what needs to be "done" about such a problem. The Internet filter is something that should without doubt be a majority vote from the people, it is a tool that is TOO important and TOO powerful to let it's fate be decided by a handfull of numbskulls at the top.
So what can we do about it? As informed youngsters who have a better understanding of CURRENT living in Australia, how do we take the next step to get people on our side. It's something I've been pondering over for awhile now, and I think I have a solutuion. How can us normal civilians get our voices heard. The internet has always been something that allows us to speak freely and reach out to others who share our thoughts and beliefs. Sadly our cries often fall on deaf ears, I think their needs to be a shift in how democracy is run.
If I was ever to run for a party, I would love to do an overhaul of our whole democratic system. Democracy is no doubt the way, but the idea that affectively electing one party out of two when there is such a massive amount of policies, more often then not, people are voting for a few policies but disagree on some of the parties views. Their needs to be a way people can vote for policies aswell as parties. If Labout gets 60 % of the people voting, but of that 95% of them are apposed to the internet filter. Shouldn't that carry enough weight to have some impact? So how is this fixed? By doing exactly that, you would have to tweak the voting system to include individual policies, but on the voting slip let people tick a box saying if they are for or against a policy. And also have a box at the start that says N/A so people who have no idea aren't forced into voting on something they have no understanding of.
One of the problems with this is then the voting process stops being quick and easy but for major things in this country I hate the idea that we can have 99% of people vote against something, but it can still be instantly overlooked by people at the top who then go on to say that we must be pedo's for feeling such a way. The problem is, parties hate the idea of working so hard on a policy to have it rejected when they feel they are the experts on the topic. But our country still has one of the highest educations in the world, nearly everyone can read, write, do basic math etc. So what makes our parties feel that we should only vote for who gets the final say, rather then a true democracy where we ALL have a true say?
Sorry for the mega rant. Just one of those topics >.<
I should vent more often, that felt good =)
Things bolded are in reguards to the internet filter
personally I found it a bit insulting to the general public. I can see his points and there definately is some but I think people these days say from the age of 16-30 listen to statistics more then they do anecdotal cases.
I find anecdotal cases work for my parents, which always suprises me because they are both highly intelligent, university graduates. But when they hear of individual cases they seem completely intent on letting me know. When statistics show something completely different apart from the highlighted extreme case. Alot of my friends parents are the same way.
But most of my friends or people who are younger then 30 seem to listen to reason much more then people older then that. I don't know what causes such a distinguishable difference but it's definately something I've always noticed. This is why I wish their was a young young priminister. No older then 35 and ideally not older then 30. The country should be governed by people who understand the country the way it is and not the way it was.
I feel perfectly safe walking the streets of Melbourne alone at 2am on a saturday night. There is cops at every corner, shops that are open 24/7 and the majority of people are just out to have a good time. But my parents would have us all believe that it's a dangerous place and I should avoid doing this at every chance. They say "there is more violence now then their has ever been and people use weapons now and they never did when I was growing up". As true as that may be, the population of Melbourn from 1996 - 2010 has gone from 3.186 to 3.892 million people http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=population+of+melbourne+2010
So in the last 15 years it's gone up by 700,000 and in the 15 before that I'm sure it was probably another 500,000. Thats a very significant difference, and with all these extra people on the streets of course there is gonna be more violence. but with the 100,000's of people that go through the streets on a friday or saturday night, hearing about one person getting beaten up by a couple of guys doesn't sound that shocking.
I very much feel this is the same with the internet filter, it's people from a different era, who are at the helm. Who see something beautiful (the internet) but are so shocked by a few bad cases or even worse... potentially bad cases that they feel they have to stop their kids generation from living their own life. No one goes on google and randomly stumbles across child porn (unless you click the "do I feel lucky button" and are sadly extremely unlucky).
But they see potential for harm so it's restricted or with drug use banned before reasonable assessment.
You know what the real kicker is though, no party will put a young person at the helm because then all the people over 35 would be so much less likely to vote for them. I was curious about this so I asked around and I was correct even though I only spoke to a few people (parents, friends parents) and they pretty much all said "well experience is very important and someone that young just won't have enough yet" BULLSHIT. I'm 21 years old and I have more common sense in my left testicle then most of the politicians I see today.
They say experience is something you learn right after you need it, how about we start letting the people who know what it's like to be on the streets at night to decide what needs to be "done" about such a problem. The Internet filter is something that should without doubt be a majority vote from the people, it is a tool that is TOO important and TOO powerful to let it's fate be decided by a handfull of numbskulls at the top.
So what can we do about it? As informed youngsters who have a better understanding of CURRENT living in Australia, how do we take the next step to get people on our side. It's something I've been pondering over for awhile now, and I think I have a solutuion. How can us normal civilians get our voices heard. The internet has always been something that allows us to speak freely and reach out to others who share our thoughts and beliefs. Sadly our cries often fall on deaf ears, I think their needs to be a shift in how democracy is run.
If I was ever to run for a party, I would love to do an overhaul of our whole democratic system. Democracy is no doubt the way, but the idea that affectively electing one party out of two when there is such a massive amount of policies, more often then not, people are voting for a few policies but disagree on some of the parties views. Their needs to be a way people can vote for policies aswell as parties. If Labout gets 60 % of the people voting, but of that 95% of them are apposed to the internet filter. Shouldn't that carry enough weight to have some impact? So how is this fixed? By doing exactly that, you would have to tweak the voting system to include individual policies, but on the voting slip let people tick a box saying if they are for or against a policy. And also have a box at the start that says N/A so people who have no idea aren't forced into voting on something they have no understanding of.
One of the problems with this is then the voting process stops being quick and easy but for major things in this country I hate the idea that we can have 99% of people vote against something, but it can still be instantly overlooked by people at the top who then go on to say that we must be pedo's for feeling such a way. The problem is, parties hate the idea of working so hard on a policy to have it rejected when they feel they are the experts on the topic. But our country still has one of the highest educations in the world, nearly everyone can read, write, do basic math etc. So what makes our parties feel that we should only vote for who gets the final say, rather then a true democracy where we ALL have a true say?
Sorry for the mega rant. Just one of those topics >.<
I should vent more often, that felt good =)
Things bolded are in reguards to the internet filter
^^ yeah but in some cases leaders need to lead. im all for democracy but a famous quote goes along the lines of "democracy is the domination of 51% of people over the other 49%"
new taxes would never be voted for by the people while handouts would get a rousing endorsement.
i understand what ur saying and that it can be frustrating to feel like we arent being listened to but having every major policy voted on wouldnt be workable especially when roughly 60% of the population are morons
new taxes would never be voted for by the people while handouts would get a rousing endorsement.
i understand what ur saying and that it can be frustrating to feel like we arent being listened to but having every major policy voted on wouldnt be workable especially when roughly 60% of the population are morons
thestudent14
Bluelighter
Yeah top quote and I know people obviously aren't going to vote for new taxes against more funds and I agree that leaders need to leed.
But there still needs to be some level of change, not all things would be voted by the public but definately deserve more control then what we have at the moment. Especially when it comes to new laws or things that help the government control peoples lives and lifestyles.
But there still needs to be some level of change, not all things would be voted by the public but definately deserve more control then what we have at the moment. Especially when it comes to new laws or things that help the government control peoples lives and lifestyles.