New Australian Laws To Censor Terror DVDs

An anonymous reader writes "Within a few weeks, Australia may introduce new laws to censor films and literature deemed by the government to be supportive of terrorism. This is not the first time material has been censored in Australia, which has previously censored films and banned publications, including one titled Defence of the Muslim Lands (censored in mid 2006 by Attorney-General Phillip Ruddock). The proposed laws are aimed to target material such as a DVD by Feiz Mohammad containing some of his past controversial sermons calling for jihad and comparing Jews with pigs. The Office of Film and Literature Classification previously classified this DVD as 'PG', suitable for viewing by anyone under 15 years of age with parental guidance."

Optimistically...

Reducing how much exposure such DVDs get may reduce how many are produced, which is hard to argue as a bad thing. On the other hand, giving them the kind of exposure that, say, Slashdotting something does, kinda nullifies that view in the short run ~_^

Re:Optimistically...

So instead of being able to counter racist propaganda with reasoned debate and counter evidence, it all goes underground and spreads unchallenged and unopposed.

Saying that people you disagree with are not allowed to talk makes it look as though you are unable to counter what they say.

No censorship.

You're not debating with the fanatics who're producing the material. You're presenting your counter-claims and viewpoints to the OTHER people who might be listening to them.

Besides, where is the line drawn? When you allow the government to "censor films and literature deemed by the government to be supportive of terrorism", does that mean the DVDs used as an example? Or does that also include any news story that mentions any weaknesses in any industry, port, airline, or in safety procedues? Any news story critical of the military or armed forces? Any book or website that in any way, discusses anything that conceivably (or inconceivably) could be used as a weapon?

Is disagreeing with your government's stance on terrorism "supportive of terrorism"?

Is all of our news subject to redaction by official goverment goons?

Sorry, but censorship is not "appropriate".

Re:Optimistically...

Do religious videos that convince young people to terrorize people who are different them (say, gay people) considered terror videos? Or do they only mean terror videos that involve someone else's god and belief system?

Re:Optimistically...

In any given human conflict, the attacked side will end up mirroring the enemy to win.
The Bolsheviks are the most obvious case of this- attacking the Czar for classism and his secret police, then setting up the NKVD/KGB and creating a two-class society of party members and dead people.
But also look at the American Revolution- setting up the Constitution in reaction to what they saw as broken about the Magna Carta.
The Islamic extremists are mimicing thier mythology about what the Zionists want to do to them.
Evil always begets evil, no matter what.

Oh really?

deemed by the government to be supportive of terrorism.

Will that include archival news and documentary footage about the US funding of the taliban and Iran contra?

Censor only those who would censor!

Re:Oh really?

Well I hope it at least includes Gigli. Showing that movie to anyone is definitely a terrorist act.

What counts as "terrorist" ideas?

First, "terrorist" means radical Islam.
Next, "terrorist" means minority party.

Re:What counts as "terrorist" ideas?

Could you include: The act of vandalising ships cargos by throwing them into the harbour [wikipedia.org]? The idea that it is the right & duty [wikipedia.org] of every citizen to throw off an oppressive government? Or perhaps the idea that kharma can take a long time to resolve...

Ha ha, Australia

You guys are getting worse than the US, mates. Who would have thought that was possible. Tell you what, bloke, when we're done with Bush we'll send him over to you. Prime Minister Bush. Hmm. That has a nice ring to it.

I nominate this movie

Canadian Bacon [wikipedia.org]

'nuf said

Banned GTA also

The Australian government banned Grand Theft Auto also. They actually had it pulled from the shelves.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/07/29/tech/mai n712700.shtml [cbsnews.com]

Let the terrorists identify themselves

Smarter just to let the terrorists have their DVDs legally. You can easily track the distribution for intelligence gathering purposes. Furthermore even if you fail tracking the distribution say you do a covert house search & find such DVDs: at least, at operational level, this points you out to be on right track. Also post doing a house raid if at least you find some "terrorist paraphenalia" you can allay community fears that the bust was random/purely motivated by racial profiling.

Re:Let the terrorists identify themselves

Smarter just to let the terrorists have their DVDs legally. You can easily track the distribution for intelligence gathering purposes. Furthermore even if you fail tracking the distribution say you do a covert house search & find such DVDs: at least, at operational level, this points you out to be on right track. Also post doing a house raid if at least you find some "terrorist paraphenalia" you can allay community fears that the bust was random/purely motivated by racial profiling.

I would agree, but could you imagine what would happen if the FBI (or Australian equivalent) started demanding the sales records from the local video stores? Hell, people don't want the FBI looking at library records and libraries are tax payer funded!!!

Censor != ban

According to TFA, all they're talking about is changing the designation of films from PG to higher ratings by the *film censors* and not about banning the film from sale or distribution or anything of the sort. The proposed bill would simply require certain topics to have higher censor ratings.

Any free-thinking adult can still buy them.

What an awesome PR move!

The proposed laws are aimed to target material such as a DVD by Feiz Mohammad

Wow - Who does this guy know in government to do him such a favor?

If the US government did this, I'd own his complete works a week later. Hell, I've never even heard of him, and even the threat of another supposedly-1st-world government banning him makes me at least curious.



Good job, guys - Someday, you'll learn that for some problems, ignoring them will do a whole lot more to make them go away than active intervention ever could.

Ah ha, now we know step two

1. Make home movie
2. ???
3. Every teenager wants it! Profit!

Thank you Australia for missing in the lost step in our business model!

That's so dumb. It just gets them attention

Incredibly dumb move. It just draws attention to some material that probably sucks.

Back in 1989, during the 2 Live Crew [wikipedia.org] censorship controversy, I remarked, after listening to their stuff, that without the censorship, they would have never made it off the South Florida club circuit. With the censorship controversy, they hit #29 on the Billboard 200. But by 1991, they'd peaked, and broke up around 1992. There was a "New 2 Live Crew", which went nowhere and broke up in 1995, a reunion in 1998, and another reunion in 2005. Nobody cared much. Wikipedia says "The two core members are still popular within the Miami Bass community and Dancehall goers".

Or, in other words, they're back on the South Florida club circuit where they belong. Censorship gave them their 15 minutes of fame.

How long will it be...

And how long will it be until some religious zealots includes such films as "The Wizard of Oz" because you know the wicked Witch of the West was doing all sorts of things that might be considered "terrorism." Oh, and that Harry potter series THAT has got to go and...

The Passion of the Christ

I wonder if they'll include "The Passion of the Christ" in this?

I mean it is a film of a man being tortured for two hours...

It's a non-event

If it was up to the current junta one should not read anything but the Bible and should not watch anything but romantic comedies and action films where the all-around good American hero beats/shoots/blows the shit out of all enemies of freedom and democracy or possibly where friendship and courage paves the way to a better future and/or eliminates all vampires, evil aliens and those who do not vote the right (pun intended) way.

Don't forget that this is a country which took Fatcat, a children's programme featuring a big cat off screen on the basis that the cat had no clothes and thus indecently exposed him/herself (hard to know with a cat costume, really) to innocent children. On the other hand, the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and the Power Rangers were perfectly OK. This is a country where on a BBC science show about the human reproduction pixelised the placenta (held by the reporter, no woman or baby in sight) for its explicite sexual nature...

There is already a terror censorship on books, now there will be one on DVDs. Business as usual.

I support this absolutely

OK, here goes any karma I may have. First off, I am an Australian. Secondly, I hate our current government, John Howard is George Bushs' lapdog. Thirdly, I totally agree with these measures, if indeed they become law. Why, I hear you ask? Simple, really. People, there are serious NUTJOBS running around, not only in Oz, but all over the world. Why should we as a community fan the flames of their insanity by providing them with inflammatory video material? I see absolutely no redeeming qualities in any pro-terrorist video or book. If somebody, anybody, wants to study this garbage for some obscure reason, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be difficult to import a copy or whatever. Free speech is all fine and dandy in the abstract, but when that extends to exhorting terrorism or violence or jihad, well, fuck off, I prefer that it is not allowed. I am serious.

SONY: Fighting for your Freedom

Ripped Off! That war cost Aussies $3 Billion and now they won't let us watch the movie?

Here's an Idea: Why don't don't they get SONY to distribute the Terror videos?

Most 'customers' would find it doesn't work on their video player. When they try to watch it on their PC, they get a SONY RootKit.
Now imagine the look on Osamas face when he sees a 'Spyware Detected' Popup. I can't think of a faster way to flush a band of Mujahadeen out of their cave.

Having a Constitution would've helped...

But the British Empire never gave its subjects one...

Then, again, even the Free Speech-protecting Constitution is no guarantee of Free Speech, as the presence of rather draconian laws against possessing child pornography in America demonstrates...

We may all be revolted by the child pornography, but we have to remember, that the defense of pornography in general (Larry Flint et al.) was based on the Free Speech argument — not on the usefulness of the art or anything like it.

Final Fantasy Series

Heh; I guess our friends down under can't play the Final Fantasy series anymore! Well, at least George Orwell can live on in Metal Gear... ...for a time, I suppose.

One rule for you, one for Him

Him in this case, being radio broadcaster Alan Jones [abc.net.au], darling of the ruling Liberal Party, who has recently been convicted of encouraging violence against Muslims in remarks he made before the Cronulla Riots last year.This conviction has resulted in a review of the broadcasting guidelines [dcita.gov.au] by Helen Coonan, federal Communications Minister, who indicated she thought the judgement wrong.

• I guess it's ok to incite hatred and violence, provided it's directed at Muslims
• I guess it's ok to call other Australians scum, as long as they are Muslim

Very Welcome Promotion

Any banning of the Sheik Feiz DVDs will only boost their popularity amongst disgruntled western suburbs muslim youth. Illegality increases desirability. And the 'cheap dvd burner' genie has already escaped from the bottle.

What's needed to counter this is not repression - "repress a religion, and it will flourish" (Frank Herbert), but a social outreach campaign to seek to discover why these pissed-off young westies are so easy to reach, and how to entice them into other less destructive outlets for their energies.

Is the 'T' classification taken?

like suitable for terrorists? :P

Including?

Would this include a movie such as V for Vendetta?

No such thing as a free ride

Censorship is a beauty only held in the eye of the beholder. Take for example the "Nappy headed Ho's" off the cuff remark by Imus. Press conferences were held, meetings with the governor and Imus were held, the "Ho's" in question went on Oprah, and also Jesse Jackson wants the word "Nigger" actually banned. BUT, some jagoff can produce a dvd/post on the internet calling for the DEATHS of the Jews, and actually incite violence against another race and religion, but nobody cares. There is no such thing as a totally "free" society. Saying you hate Jews and calling them pigs is one thing. Inciting others to kill, or attack a religion or race is not something that should be allowed but is, especially if the "free speech" advocates are Islamic Extremists.

This would ban Borat, then

comparing Jews with pigs

Doesn't Borat compare Jews to the devil, claim they have horns and can turn into all sorts of nasty creatures? I guess that does it for Borat in Australia then.

yippee kyaaa

the summary says the australian government MAY propose new laws..

I'm not up to par on the finer points of aussie government, but it sounds like this nerd rage wankoff is based simply on speculation of something that might happen. Like the "Canadian DMCA" article.

NATO Terrorism

Imagine I make two DVDs. In the first DVD I argue that it was quite right and proper for NATO to bomb the Serbian TV station during the Kosovo crisis. I argue that although some 15 civilians were killed, it was a legitimate target since it was a Serbian propaganda tool (which is what NATO argued). On the second DVD I argue that it was quite right and proper for the IRAQ to bomb the BBC because the BBC is a tool of British propaganda.

Both should be condemned as terrorist acts and their justifications dismissed. Governments are just as capable of committing terrorist acts as small non-government groups are. The problem is we allow governments to get away with it time and time again, whereas we actually make some effort to pursue the "small guys".

It's an election year

This is just an idiotic election ploy. Clearly this isn't going to affect the distribution of radical Islamic material, nor should that be a valid goal. But for those who have fallen prey to the bullshit propaganda that goes with the 'war on terror', hoWARd's is seen to be much stronger than Rudd, so it's obvious that he'll be looking to beat his chest on the issue in an election year.

Just how many people have been prevented from downloading movies via P2P software with all the efforts of the DVD cartel? Not many. So how many will be prevented from getting access to this material that hoWARd deems to terrible for our eyes and ears? Most likely, none. There is, of course, the chance that some Muslims will be charged over distributing said material, again, because this is an election year. But is this going to prevent terrorism? Not at all.

The biggest factor in raising the threat of terrorism in Australia is not radical Islamic material, nor is it the lack of security, nor the lack of invasions of our privacy, nor the lack of attacks on our civil liberties. The biggest factor in raising the threat of terrorism in Australia is our foreign policy, and the degree to which Dubya's dick is being rammed up our collective arses in the name of democracy.

Intelectual age

It appears that the Australian government doesn't think much of the smarts of the average Aussie.

If you treat people like children , people behave like children. Australia deserves better.

oflc

One thing to note about this story Philip Ruddock when he held a press conference about this issue he had not himself seen the dvd in question as was noted in the abc news (australia) report on this issue. Material is classified by the office of film an literature classificaitons, it is set a series of rules of what is ok and what is not. There already exists law banning "insciteing terrorisum" and the oflc assesed the dvd in question and found in it's independent assesment that it did not break this rule and was therfore fit for general consumption. It seems strange that the government just wants to make noise about something that fully compiles with the classification laws especially when the person in charge has not reviewed thie material itself. There are occasionally some films that are incorrectly classified, what normally happens is the government can request that it be reassesed and they change it's rateing. This reclassification stage (from what i can see) has not been requested

Yep, This Is Gonna Do It Bad To Bin Laden

If the glorious nation of Australia wants to see what good being a Closed Minded Politician is, then one only has to watch Machiavelli's personal nightmare, President Bush. theOnion [theonion.com] goofs on this weekly, but when one listens to the tape, one cannot truly tell if it is a comedian, or the president; It is that close to the real thing.

"The difference between a terrorist, and a baby is?" - Larry the Cable Guy

right... Just another attempt to silence the truth

I give this 1 whole year before it gets twisted and abused to cover ANY anti government movies (eg "the money masters", "peace propaganda and the promised land", "loose change", australian equivalents (dont worry, we've had our share of false flaggers too)

Great, So next time I try to hand out DVDs proving the involvement of certain people within the US administration and elsewhere (not alqueda) in 9/11, or questioning how a mentally disabled guy with an IQ of 60, who had only ever shot a gun a couple of dozen times (and an air rifle at that), managed to get an inverted kill to wounded ratio of 1.6 killed for every wounded, in the port arthur massacre (he actually wounded or killed 31 people with his first 29 bullets!!!! in under 2 minutes!), Im going to be arrested as a "Terrorist" for calling our governments evil and saying they need to go/be removed/replaced? (I can see where this is going),

First post.....

so go easy on me.

I've been a loyal Slashdot reader for years, but have just signed up for an account. It has been apparent that over time the readership has gone from IT professionals with cute little quips to overangsted teenagers who know how to turn on a computer and sign up for an account.

While there have been many articles that have been brought to my attention that would have otherwise been overlooked in my busy schedule, there has recently been a rash of, well put nicely, stupidity being spouted at every chance these keyboard warriors are able.

These comments being brandied about are excellent examples of this downward spiral. Please bear with me whilst I point out the fallacies being brandied about.

1) The government is being racist by banning material?
Since when is Islam a race? Did I miss a memo? Granted the founders of it were Arabic, but since they only constitute ~20% of the total numbers, is it really their religion anymore? If it is, than anybody that hates Christians are racists toward Israelis since they started that religion.

2) Stopping the spread of violent material aimed toward youth means you can not counter it.
This is patently absurd. Remember when you were a kid? And how bitching Britney Spears, MC Hammer, or Christie Lauper was (depending on your age group could be some other 'pop idol')? Could you not agree that the decision making process of a child's brain is not formed well enough to make rational choices? It continues to blow my mind that Christians are crucified on Slashdot, but Muslims are not even though the propaganda they're postulating is so very much more damaging than what comes from the Chistian camp.

3) The government will not know when to stop censoring.
Ahh, the good old "They'll never stop, so we shouldn't have even a little bit". That logic works both ways, remember the Prohibition? For all the hand wringing that goes on in Slashdot, I'd dare anyone to prove that the government has abused their powers to the extent that we have an Orwellian society.

4) Islam is bad. But Christianity is worse.
I want to keep this a short post, but will just throw out some examples of that absurdity. Bombing Internet cafes [zajel.org] Mosques telling people they'll die from a "deadly phone virus" [eweek.com] Spreading racist rumours that melons will give you AIDS [ynetnews.com] Murdering elderly Buddhists [ynetnews.com] The courts giving free reign to serial killers [bbc.co.uk] Attacking university students, vandalising property, and stealing buses [yahoo.com]

Let me reiterate that the proposed Australian bill is not seeking to ban this material, rather change the system to avoid allowing media that is racist and advocating violence towards others from influencing childern. You must remember that their film board, by the very act of allowing the film to recieve a "PG" rating has essentially given the parents that do a poor job of raising their childern a go-ahead to plop them down in front of a tv and watch this filth.

I propose we get rid of the whole "War on Terrorism". You could never win it. Shoot, the Americans entrance into WWII was pretty much spurred by an act of terrorism. And you know what happened? The US didn't say they were going to fight terrorism. They said they were going to go and get rid of Shintoism and baggage that it carried with it. Only after they had broken that were the Japanese ready to rise to the current power that they now enjoy. The same thing needs to happen in Islam. The followers need to realise that the sway that the evil has over them needs to end. Only than will it be a legitima

no smoking

smoking used to be banned in some places. people there just suddenly stopped smoking...

Election posturing

It's probably worth mentioning that Australia has a federal election due sometime late this year. This is likely just the Australian government trying to prove that they're "tough on terror" without having to go to the trouble of actually doing something effective.

It's not about censorship...

... it's about politics.

Figure this. The chief censor is normally chosen by a board consisting of the state censors, and appointed by the Governor-General. A few days before this latest announcement the Federal Attorney-General announced [theage.com.au] he was going to ignore the state's recommendation and appoint an as-yet unnamed person to the position - strongly suspected to be Donald McDonald [wikipedia.org], long-time personal friend of the Prime Minister and previously a politically-appointed chairman of the ABC.

What better way to justify this in an election year than to imply the States are weak on "terror" and require the strong and decisive leadership of John Winston Howard's government?

It's a complicated smokescreen and lever, and there's a whole lot more to the machinations, but that's the surface of it. Throw in the government's favourite attack dogs (Fred Nile [wikipedia.org] & Alan Jones [wikipedia.org]), and you can see it's a little more Machiavellian than the "OMFG, Mooslims are plotting terrah to kill innocent Aussies!" that it's being made out to be...

Solution

Here is a solution to the problem: before censoring the material, force (by law) the producers/protagonists spend a few days with the people they blaim. If, after that, they still have illogical claims, censor their stuff. If not, make their new opinion known worldwide through the internet.

Wait....

Those disks weren't annoying in the beginning. I remember taking a piece of tape and putting it over the WP hole and got a new, free 1.44MB diskette every couple of weeks. I had entire backup sets made with AOL disks. Now the CD's, they're useless, unless you're making something that requires a shitload of CD's; Lamp, blinds, etc.

Mel Gibson's "The Patriot"

Supportive of the insurgency in the British colonies?

Re:But who buys Apple computers ?

Does that mean they're going to outlaw anything that's Pro-US?

Re:This just isn't cricket

Speaking as an atheist, we need to innoculate people against these sorts of stupid memes. If everybody told these jerks to go jump in a lake when they claim God wants people to do (x), then there would be a whole lot fewer acts of extremism in the world. It's extremely difficult to convince an atheist to do something suicidally stupid as we believe this life is all we get. That would take care of external sources, then we 'd just have to work on internal ones. There needs to be a massive education campaign to raise awareness of paranoid schizophrenia and that it is *much, much* more common than direct divine revelation. Perhaps a tag line, "Who do you think you are, Moses?" would help. An appropriately skeptical atheist who starts hearing voices would never think that God is telling him to kill people, but would first check to see if the fillings in his teeth were acting as a rectifier of radio signals, and then failing that, check himself into a mental health clinic.

Re:This just isn't cricket

You're allowed to watch and buy these DVDs, too, unless you have some sort of Cylon module in your head that makes you somehow incapable of buying movies rated higher than PG.

RTFA. All they're talking about are *film censors* and not just banning movies willy-nilly. You can still buy them; they are just arguing that they should have been given higher ratings.

I didn't know they were V-chipping people these days. Makes sense, I guess, since Slashdotters have been having their brain bandwidth throttled for some time now.

Re:This just isn't cricket

...let's just say I'm against islam...

I really hope you meant to say "extremist Islam." If not, then you sir need to go do some more reading and research.

Islamic Terrorists:Islam::KKK:Christianity

Other than that, your post was spot-on. Anyone who believes that God is on their side while they commit terrible acts against other people is a nut, no matter what religion they use to justify it.

Re:This just isn't cricket

"Your right to walk the streets unmolested by the police outweighs my right not to get blown up."

You realize that's only an opinion, right? Some people who are quite intelligent and reasonable can and do hold that the view expressed is wrong and feel that your right not to be murdered outweighs their right to not be 'molested'.