2022-05-18 - Government of Australia: URGENT class 1 removal notice from the eSafety Commissioner [SEC=OFFICIAL:Sensitive]

Status
Not open for further replies.
While I haven't watched this video, as I find watching people getting really killed is kinda ghoulish, I fully support Null having in on here.

Can I echo the sentiment of 'why is australia of all places sperging about it'?
The current government's about to lose an election so they're throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks, I imagine we'll be hearing about their "policy of banning cyberbullying" soon.
 
Well, firstly, LOL, of course. That said, what on earth were they thinking/trying to accomplish here? Do they believe the Farms is based on Australia, or do they think they are somehow empowered by their little local law to police the entire internet? I would genuinely like to know the thought process - as, I'm sure, would at least some part of the tax-paying Australian public whose dollars are being wasted on this.
 
For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds.

2 Corinthians 11:13-15​

 
God, they are getting desperate. The current Government is 3 days away from an election where they are likely to lose badly and are doing anything they can to be relevant, and scare people into voting for them. Watch Australian Media with either Peter Dutton, Josh Frydenberg, or Scott Morrison talking about how you need to vote for them to stop "online harrassment". IMO this is a headline grab where they scapegoat the farms in order for the to come out on the front foot about cyber-security and how the opposition will be weak in "protecting children online".
Ironic considering all the pedophiles in Australia's government. Same here in Canada. I hope that Australia 1 wins, I like Riccardo Bossey.
 
The buffalo shooting is news/history at this point and it will clearly be used as a example for future laws or to ilustrates /take down certains ideologies.
It's informative for us and future generation in a way that the rape/murder of a random child isn't.
There is also a very large cut out in a lot of people’s worldview regarding sexual violence, violence against children, and especially sexual violence against children. These things may be viewed in some ways as being worse than murder— if you murder someone they’re dead, but sexual assault violates and degrades the victim beyond what shooting them dead does (from a certain point of view).

There is also, I think, an unspoken rule that material that can serve as titillation and inspiration for degenerate sickos should probably be suppressed. Nobody’s going to literally masturbate to a shooting video. Child getting raped, someone would.
 
Why can't lawfags just write like normal human beings for fuck's sake. I swear to god, the entire notice could fit into a single page if they just went "Hey, these pages are bothering us, please take them down or we'll personally visit your house and fuck you in the ass and steal all your money". Instead they just keep going in circles talking about The Material™ for four pages and how your hands will literally fall off if you fail to comply
 
Ooooh, class 1 materials, la-di-dah. Maybe this "esafety" minister just has a crush on Null since it's pretty fucking weird that they're trying to censor an american-based site of information regarding an american crime.

Well this was a slightly less antagonistic reply from Null than that offered to the NZ govt but I think this still applies
 
Not to open a can of worms here but for the purposes of expressing the nature of free speech - would anyone on here find it disturbing if someone tried to ask a website to remove content relating to the rape and murder of a child?

Given that this horrid act is also illegal as well as acts of terrorism, are we really expressing that we are open to free speech, or just that we think that Terorism isn't so bad and should be viewed at ones leisure? Because some find the idea of a gunman shooting lots of people for joy just as disgusting as other things - like the raping and killing of children.

A comment purely for the purpose of showing are we actually fighting for free speech or just what we think is acceptable? Because threatening others too is free speech but that is even bared on KF.

Would a video of a terrorist going through a school and blowing children away be met with the same response as "its free speech"? Just putting it out there to see what everyone else thinks.
I believe the video should remain up as a reminder of the gruesome reality of these attacks, not because I'm a white supremacist who supports it. Censoring it does absolutely nothing but embolden the sick fucks who do support it and makes it harder for people who don't to face the true reality of what happened. Primary sources of highly newsworthy events deserve to be publicly accessible, even if it's hard to stomach them. CP is a different story because it only exists to harm kids and get pedophiles off, there's no non-criminal reason to possess or want to view it, unlike this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back