"Even if we do have a law in this area, one of the problems with the current sedition law is the narrowness of its exceptions. It contains no defence for many forms of communication, such as artistic performances or even academic or scientific discussion. The law makes it an offence to say such things even where it is in the public or national interest to do so.

The existing law also fails to provide an exception for satire or comedy, a very Australian way of dealing with something as difficult and troubling as the war on terror. Fortunately, the commission has suggested a redraft to ensure that all these forms of communication are protected. There should be no doubt that they are outside of the criminal law, lest fear of prosecution, or even just a misunderstanding of the law, lead people to censor themselves."

Yawn. More soft-left prattle which basically implies we should ask the nice government not to be mean to us.

Is there really anyone who thinks that an Attorney-General would be so stupid as to launch a sedition case against a comedian? I mean, really? Attorneys-General _don't_ like looking ridiculous. The idea that this law is anything but a final 'nuclear weapon' is ridiculous.

http://www.lastsuperpower.net/disc/members/344535725451/view?searchterm=sedition is an article at Last Superpower.net by a person heavily involved in the anti-Vietnam-war protests in the sixties and seventies. It points out that treason laws were never used against people who openly advocated the defeat of Australian forces in Vietnam. (If that does not fit the legal defintion of treason, what does?)

Retaliation was far more mundane (although still damaging) - police violence, sackings, etc.

How can we make this beetle-spirited vapouring over sedition laws go away?

David Jackmanson
http://www.letstakeover.blogspot.com

Stop and think - relax.

1. Any historical examination of sedition laws shows that those rules have nearly always been framed by the guilty for their own comfort.

2. It's not just the government you have now that is the problem.

3. You are leaving the keys in the ignition for the next and the next regime. And so on.

4. Sedition laws have always been hawked as a method of bolstering democracy through security.

5. Historically, regimes that mandated such controls were only deposed by violent conflict.

Get off your arses and learn your own history. Find out how today's chicken farmer becomes tomorrow's kamp kommondant. Learn how todays bogen becomes the architect of your children's future.

Three blind mice - see how they run.

The writer has "a bob each way" but this suggests he is getting more in touch with the political realities of the law.

His article is in dire need of links to reflect the context of the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) Review of sedition laws.

An overview of the Sedition review is here http://www.alrc.gov.au/inquiries/current/sedition/index.htm

The ALRC's Media release on the Review is here http://www.alrc.gov.au/media/2006/mr2905.htm indicating that "The ALRC is seeking community feedback on the proposals in the Discussion Paper [to which the OLO writer refers] before a final report is completed. Submissions close on Monday, 3 July 2006."

A friendly community message from:
Pete
http://spyingbadthings.blogspot.com

c

NOW you're interested in the smothering of our free speech and the public's right to know. You're disturbed about the free flow of information and the appearance of the law.

Do the names Lionel Murphy and Mick Kirby sound a tocsin George? Satire and comedy somehow come to mind when their names are mentioned.

This article might be a good opportunity to state the 'score' in regard to why we have anti terror laws:

1/ WMD and IRAQ
Iraq invaded for many reaons, but WMD was one of them.
The Left has gloated piously about
a) "huh... no WMD..they LIED to us"
b) "Illegal war"

Now, viola....they have FOUND actual weapons in Iraq, containing Saran etc. Not to mention the testimony from one of Sadaams pilots who admitted taking loads of them to Syria.

Now of course the Left is looking sideways with "Oh.. convenient that they should suddenly find them NOW"...... which of course raises the question "err..when would it NOT be 'convenient' for those who like to say Bush runs on spin rather than facts" ?

2/ 'Islamic Violence/Terrorism/Jihadis are threatening Australia'

Many arrested in Sydney and Melbourne for various charges including Plotting the Assassination of our Prime Minister and his family.

The Left says:
The Muslims arrested in Australia are 'unIslamic' and not representative of 'mainstream' Muslims.

RESPONSE: They might not be representative of 'Mainstream Muslims' but they SURE are representative of 'Islamic law and Mohamed's example'

3/ The Left says Zarqawi is just a bad muslim, thats why he mutilates his victims.
Response:
Refer my post and sources in that thread, he is just following Mohamed's example.

LEFT "0"
CLEAR THINKERS "3"

The greatest danger to Australia from the Anti Terrorism Laws is if they are EVER used to stop legitimate criticism of Islam and its Prophet.

This is what I believe.

Government expects us to be loyal to them when they should be loyal to their people so in effect, the government is committing sedition against the people.

I do not support Democracy as democratic governments spend too much time pandering up the selfish groups rather than running the nation for the people. So, I support the concept of people to overthrow a government(preferably peacefully) should it neglect their own.

Australian Governments of all persuasions are selling out Australian's. When the dosh runs out for us, they will be living all nice and comfy while we starve.

I support and would love to see majority of the Australian's pulling out of work, camping in the streets, temporarily grinding the Australian economy to a halt in order to kick these traitors out.