
I do wonder which Australian party would offer to host WikiLeaks in parliament and get radical on improving (read "creating") free speech in Australia.
My first thought was The Greens, but they have too many other issues on their agenda to risk their political future on this where the legal system is not conducive to free speech, not even in parliament.
Pirate Party of Australia were free enough from other issues to put everything into such issues, but they are in their infancy and unprepared to run in this election. Sociallist Alliance are crazy and altruistic enough to do so, but are equally unelectable.
Free speech just isn't valued here by the people nor the law, not even in parliament. Should a person, even an elected official make a statement in parliament which the other politicians don't like : they will be asked three times to recant their words before they are officially recorded in the hansard.
It's time to get angry Australians! Do it now, before the issue of free speech is put to rest 1984 style once "the filter" is put in place.
Of course we can trust good American corporations like google, there's never been unethical behavior in the corporate sector!
Election soon make your choice giant douche or turd sandwich. Whoever wins we get censorship like china mark my words.
Under the guise of humor or cynicism you Sneakily present a false dichotomy... suggesting the options Labour (left) and Liberal (right) are mutually exhaustive. This is not the case and our choice for an open or shut internet is not the catch-22 many dread! The above exaggeration -however amusing- perpetuates dangerous ignorance.
Admittedly some third-party candidates will -through preference deals and coalitions- support the election of one of two potential prime ministers. Also lower-house elections -having such small electorates where only one candidate can victor- does favor a two party system : even coalitions will continue the drive for mediocrity to win over the median voter.
On the other hand : the Senate is more proportionally representative of society's diverse views because whole states and territories are the electorates or so to speak. Minority views, parties and independents have a decent chance there. Take the Greens senators for example, who happen to be opposed to the filter. Huzzah for democracy! I still want more of it only the demoralizing two-party fallacy restricts true proportional representation.
The current Labour government relies upon the Greens (+ 1 more senator) to pass much legislation the Lib's don't condone (because KRudd does not wield a majority in the upper-house). To be my own devils advocate, one may worry the Greens could 'sell out' on the issue to achieve a higher strategic objective (e.g. save the world - perhaps through a reduction in carbon emissions targets). The Lib's could also make bargains. Such flip-flops are unheard of in the federal Australian senate.
But would any man suggest the Pirate Party of Australia would compromise and vote in such threats to liberty? Tell him he's dream'n!
they can tell me how fast Osama Bin Laden is driving!
Swap read error. You lose your mind.