The Forum > Article Comments > Terrorism proposal extension of censorship laws > Comments
Terrorism proposal extension of censorship laws : Comments
By George Williams, published 7/6/2007The Attorney-General should not widen Australia's censorship laws: publications could be caught in the net that should not be banned.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- Page 2
-
- All
I guess Ruddock is not wanting to take any chances, by not allowing any radical or anti-Western views and ideas in to our culture and minds and not allowing any credence to these views to get through either, then surely there is less chance of them spreading and less chance of impressionable people in our midst being influenced by them?
Isn't it true that impressionable youth especially have minds like "sponges" and they will soak up anything that they hear? So it's only logical to at least try to prevent them hearing anything radical, anti-Western, undemocratic, racist, hate-filled, violence-inciting, etc. Am i right?
Prevention is the best kind of cure is it not?
And the other thing is how do we know who is a terrorist and who is not? We know from the media that they are generally of "middle-eastern appearance", but then again Hicks wasn't, so it really could be anyone couldn't it? And they seem to be always hiding and doing things secretly so it makes it very hard for them to be detected and caught. So surely if we stop the ideas that encourage this kind of activity from getting through and being heard, then these people will not be urged to carry on with terrorist activities. I guess the destructive ideas are the root of the problem aren't they, so it makes sense to cut it off at the source doesn't it?
I'd say Ruddock and the Government has already thought all this through anyway so the rest of us can relax and not think about it too much. It does seem to be all very logical after all, doesn't it?