Comments on: The Response from Internal Affairs http://thomasbeagle.net/2009/05/10/the-response-from-internal-affairs/ Mon, 08 Mar 2010 00:16:55 +1200 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: puddlenuts http://thomasbeagle.net/2009/05/10/the-response-from-internal-affairs/comment-page-1/#comment-26420 puddlenuts Sun, 07 Feb 2010 21:45:13 +0000 http://thomasbeagle.net/?p=79#comment-26420 CP blockage, most definitely but now the systems up & running properly they are blocking more than you know. Try using IP changes if you are with ihug and see what happens to your interwebz experience. CP blockage, most definitely but now the systems up & running properly they are blocking more than you know.
Try using IP changes if you are with ihug and see what happens to your interwebz experience.

]]> By: Oh yeah? http://thomasbeagle.net/2009/05/10/the-response-from-internal-affairs/comment-page-1/#comment-5225 Oh yeah? Wed, 15 Jul 2009 17:49:25 +0000 http://thomasbeagle.net/?p=79#comment-5225 Shane: I do not condone blocking anything other than child abuse at the moment, but I do see the need for the government to police the Internet. I do not like political views, religious vews or any other views for that matter, to be controlled - unless they promote something that, by itself, is illegal. Was wikileaks.org or only selected articles blocked in Australia?? Shane: I do not condone blocking anything other than child abuse at the moment, but I do see the need for the government to police the Internet. I do not like political views, religious vews or any other views for that matter, to be controlled – unless they promote something that, by itself, is illegal. Was wikileaks.org or only selected articles blocked in Australia??

]]> By: Shane http://thomasbeagle.net/2009/05/10/the-response-from-internal-affairs/comment-page-1/#comment-5121 Shane Mon, 13 Jul 2009 04:16:06 +0000 http://thomasbeagle.net/?p=79#comment-5121 Oh yeah? I hope you don't mean Australia as there are a number of examples of that filter blocking legitimate sites, Wikleaks.org included. Oh yeah? I hope you don’t mean Australia as there are a number of examples of that filter blocking legitimate sites, Wikleaks.org included.

]]> By: Oh yeah? http://thomasbeagle.net/2009/05/10/the-response-from-internal-affairs/comment-page-1/#comment-5111 Oh yeah? Sun, 12 Jul 2009 23:34:53 +0000 http://thomasbeagle.net/?p=79#comment-5111 Torleif, can you please provide some solid evidence of your claim. And no, wikileaks comments or iamnotparanoid-theyarereallyafterme.com is not solid evidence :-) I live in a country where we have had this for many years, and our Internet is working fine. We are also able to object to authorities, state our political or religious views and generally go about our business as long as we do not crave raped children. I have never, ever been affected by this myself, and I use the Internet quite a lot, but from the news I have learned that you are shown a page with information rather than child pornography. Nothing is logged or stored, they claim, and no people has been put in jail because of this. All this information is according to the police authorities in my country, and you can claim that they are lying, falsifying informaton and reall are storing everything for later - but then again - you can also claim that they never reached the moon in 1969 and that the 911 events were all masterminded by the US government. You will find many who support your views, but they are not necessarily true.. If we are ever going to have an Internet that is functional, in addition to providing warez and free porn, there is a screaming need to clean it up. Starting with the images of child pornography is a good idea. We all live under the burdon of censorship, and all the books, newspapers, TV-programs and public announcements you see every day, is subjected to the same. Does this limit the freedom of expression or the right to speak? I think not. Torleif, can you please provide some solid evidence of your claim. And no, wikileaks comments or iamnotparanoid-theyarereallyafterme.com is not solid evidence :-) I live in a country where we have had this for many years, and our Internet is working fine. We are also able to object to authorities, state our political or religious views and generally go about our business as long as we do not crave raped children. I have never, ever been affected by this myself, and I use the Internet quite a lot, but from the news I have learned that you are shown a page with information rather than child pornography. Nothing is logged or stored, they claim, and no people has been put in jail because of this.

All this information is according to the police authorities in my country, and you can claim that they are lying, falsifying informaton and reall are storing everything for later – but then again – you can also claim that they never reached the moon in 1969 and that the 911 events were all masterminded by the US government. You will find many who support your views, but they are not necessarily true..

If we are ever going to have an Internet that is functional, in addition to providing warez and free porn, there is a screaming need to clean it up. Starting with the images of child pornography is a good idea. We all live under the burdon of censorship, and all the books, newspapers, TV-programs and public announcements you see every day, is subjected to the same. Does this limit the freedom of expression or the right to speak? I think not.

]]> By: Nimchimpskii http://thomasbeagle.net/2009/05/10/the-response-from-internal-affairs/comment-page-1/#comment-5064 Nimchimpskii Sun, 12 Jul 2009 01:41:25 +0000 http://thomasbeagle.net/?p=79#comment-5064 Hey, as long as it's only child porn sites that are blocked I have no problem with it. However it's probably going to end up sliding down the slippery slope towards more objectionable censorship. Hey, as long as it’s only child porn sites that are blocked I have no problem with it. However it’s probably going to end up sliding down the slippery slope towards more objectionable censorship.

]]> By: Torleif http://thomasbeagle.net/2009/05/10/the-response-from-internal-affairs/comment-page-1/#comment-5060 Torleif Sun, 12 Jul 2009 00:34:13 +0000 http://thomasbeagle.net/?p=79#comment-5060 What a waste of tax dollars. All it will do is slow down the internet so the government can censor internet sites. This program mirrors the Communist Chinese program or the Communist North Korean program. The Australian filter list is 90% political sites, so you can see it's not really there to protect the children. This outrages me. Why not use this money to hire a few more teachers or plant some trees. What a waste of tax dollars. All it will do is slow down the internet so the government can censor internet sites.

This program mirrors the Communist Chinese program or the Communist North Korean program. The Australian filter list is 90% political sites, so you can see it’s not really there to protect the children.

This outrages me. Why not use this money to hire a few more teachers or plant some trees.

]]> By: Ekkoboy http://thomasbeagle.net/2009/05/10/the-response-from-internal-affairs/comment-page-1/#comment-3825 Ekkoboy Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:46:30 +0000 http://thomasbeagle.net/?p=79#comment-3825 A very impressive answer from the authorities, I must say. I checked a bit and the CIRCAMP group has a website if you are interested: http://circamp.eu. Openness is a good thing and filtering like this is less threatening when they are transparent about it :) A very impressive answer from the authorities, I must say. I checked a bit and the CIRCAMP group has a website if you are interested: http://circamp.eu. Openness is a good thing and filtering like this is less threatening when they are transparent about it :)

]]>