The state censorship, if not imposed by an occupying foreign power or by a coup d’etat, is not usually imposed overnight. It creeps imperceptibly. And we know or we ought to know, in Australia comrade Conroy, Australian Labor Party (ALP) federal minister, is assiduously working on it. For example. At the end of the last year (2011) Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) capitulated to “lobbying” by the Immigration Department and imposed additional restrictions on local television networks showing images of so called asylum-seekers arriving by the smugglers’ flotilla. The ostensible reason is a “protection of privacy of these vulnerable clients”. The Australian of 28th December, 2011:
“Under the new privacy guidelines, broadcast media will be subject to the protection of “seclusion”, effectively guarding a person’s privacy from being invaded — even if they are in a public place. The new rules would potentially prevent broadcast media from showing images of asylum-seekers arriving by boat.”
Out of sight, out of mind, so hopes the Greens/sold-outs/Labor unholy alliance. [A slightly of the tangent question – what other Labor dominated government departments successfully “lobbied” ACMA in the past? Can any journalist tell?]
The scope of the ban, because that what it is, is frightening. Let’s say that Mohammed bin Abdullah from Port Said, who flew to Jakarta, paid US$10,000 to 25,000 for a ticket, ditched his passport, arrived by a ferry boat in Australia, and now resides in a taxpayer funded Brisbane motel, goes to watch a cricket match at the ‘Gabba, because it was always his most fervent wish. If his happy face is shown, say as TV cameras pan the crowd – “
Note also the emphasis on “arriving by boat”. These seafaring “genuine refugees” and “asylum seekers”, or whatever tear-jerking euphemism the Left can come up with “are discarding their passports at soaring rates, sparking renewed calls for boat-people to be penalised for destroying their identity documents in a bid to help their refugee claims.Of the 3237 asylum-seekers who admitted to flying to Indonesia on a passport, 3200 did not have any travel documents when they arrived in Australia. People-smugglers routinely advise their clients to discard their identity documents before arriving in Australia.The refugee status assessment process operates primarily on a risk model, meaning there can be significant advantages to inventing false identities and claims of persecution.” / right here/
Great. So the protection of whom really? Julia Gillard? Kevin Rudd? Are they “the vulnerable clients”? Protection of ALP/Green policy from public scrutiny? Surely ALP does not care about people, whom they are luring to their deaths? How many since Labor got to power? See http://sievx.com/articles/background/DrowningsTable.pdf For that matter, since when has ALP cared about people?
Amnesty International, the organisation which now slid from the support of prisoners of conscience, sometimes even those persecuted by socialist governments, into an organisation of impeccable political correctness, (and conscience be damned) also objected against the ban, albeit mildly and from different motives. AI apparatchiks would wish more, but carefully selected pictures of crying mothers and children; and then the photoshoped images of oh so happy, peaceful and grateful new arrivals, preferably almost European looking, so as not to frighten those Australian racists.
Prior to the ban one could see that majority of the so called victims of something or other looks like very fit men of military age, all of them more than capable of looking after themselves even in the environment of vicious religious warfare and in the environment devoid of the Western benign multicultural welfare. There used to be a chance that faces of terrorists among them could be recognised by some of their victims. Not likely now. The almost incredible number of passports disappearing ought to ring large bells if not in the ALP secretariats, then at least in those ASIO offices still staffed by Australians. I recall that there were no problems with images of the refugees coming here after WWII and one could venture a guess that, perhaps, had there been more pictures, less Nazis would had slipped in.
Of course, the chance that any Australian Immigration official would act on information received about a terrorist or potential terrorist is infinitesimally low. I recall being told a few years ago of an occurrence in one of our “clearing” centres in Pakistan. An applicant, my informant, overheard another applicant at the adjacent booth spinning a story of his persecution in his native village in Afghanistan. My informant happened to have relatives in that village and knew that the “asylum seeker” never set a foot in it and moreover did not speak the dialect. My informant said that to his interviewer. You can guess what happened. The fraudulent applicant managed to get to Australia even faster. The Australian official was not interested; nor for that matter was his ex (maybe) al-Qaeda interpreter. Our , i.e. Australian taxpayer funded “gate-keeper” could not be bothered to buck the policy, official or not, that cheats should have the preference in the immigration queue. If you wonder why it should be so, consider the possibility that when the time comes such fraudulent migrants are susceptible to blackmail. A cynic could say that Labor is importing “sleepers”.
If a substantial number of the documents-less arrivals are temporarily tired or bored terrorists or criminals, and if it is a covert Labor policy to allow such people in to be able to use them as general, almost untouchable (racism! Islamophobia!) forces of disorder and corruption, as obedient voting blocks and as the more focused activists* when the time is right, then the ban on images makes imminent sense. I noticed that the people smugglers, or as some Labor judge decreed them to be, farmers and fishermen, have in the media their faces obscured. You can read about high moral standards of those farmers and fishermen . Spanish and other European television stations pixel out faces of police officers instead of those of the offenders, but in Australia we do the reverse. No child molester has to live in fear of any inconvenient publicity, and the murderous smugglers, after a slap on the wrist will sail here again and the public would not know any better. Farmers they may well have been in their previous, perhaps legal lives. After all, even Himmler used to be a chicken farmer before he answered the call of socialism. A National one at that, not the international one of ALP, the Greens and the most of our media.
% % % % %
*/ “activists”, remembered in Europe as SA ( Sturmabteilung; Stormtroopers), or “aware grass-root earth-citizens” in a Brown-speak