Anti-porn conference in Manila
The Religious Alliance Against Pornography has been holding a biggish conference in Manila; the focus is on child pornography, and a major topic of discussion is the evil of electronic networks. The Interpol is among those participating; the head of their kiddie-porn division claims Britain is the source of most European stuff, and bemoans the fact that too little is spent on monitoring traffic, as the war against drugs is considered more important. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rishab Aiyer Ghosh "In between the breaths is rishab@dxm.ernet.in the space where we live" rishab@arbornet.org - Lawrence Durrell Voice/Fax/Data +91 11 6853410 Voicemail +91 11 3760335 H 34C Saket, New Delhi 110017, INDIA
rishab@dxm.ernet.in wrote:
The Religious Alliance Against Pornography has been holding a biggish conference in Manila; the focus is on child pornography, and a major topic of discussion is the evil of electronic networks. The Interpol is among those ^^^^^^^^^^^^ participating; the head of their kiddie-porn division claims Britain is the source of most European stuff, and bemoans the fact that too little is spent on monitoring traffic, as the war against drugs is considered more important.
Perhaps it will become "Internetpol"? Seriously, there is considerable danger that the growing chorus of alarmist nonsense about the Net being used for child porn, for snuff films, for weapons secrets deals, etc., will result in the U.S. Net.Cops linking up with their European and Asian associates. The recent stuff on "international key escrow," a la the conference last September, is worrisome. (I don't think they can win, of course, but any accleration of their efforts is cause for increased vigilance.) --Tim May -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. Cypherpunks list: majordomo@toad.com with body message of only: subscribe cypherpunks. FAQ available at ftp.netcom.com in pub/tc/tcmay
tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May) writes:
rishab@dxm.ernet.in wrote:
The Religious Alliance Against Pornography has been holding a biggish conference in Manila; the focus is on child pornography, and a major topic of discussion is the evil of electronic networks. The Interpol is among tho
Perhaps it will become "Internetpol"?
The Interpol, like many national police agencies, already does attempt to police the Net. While their work against narcotics and money launderers deals primarily with the phone network, _child_ pornography (which is legal in places, but like all porn is illegal if non-consensual, as is usually the case with kidporn), software piracy, and conspiracy/terrorism is hunted for in cyberspace. For instance, there was this noise a while ago when they stumbled on a xenophobic European BBS that had a hit-list of 'black' sympathizers. Naturally they aren't particularly good at net.policing, and no one can ever really be. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rishab Aiyer Ghosh "In between the breaths is rishab@dxm.ernet.in the space where we live" rishab@arbornet.org - Lawrence Durrell Voice/Fax/Data +91 11 6853410 Voicemail +91 11 3760335 H 34C Saket, New Delhi 110017, INDIA
Timothy C. May says:
Seriously, there is considerable danger that the growing chorus of alarmist nonsense about the Net being used for child porn, for snuff films, for weapons secrets deals, etc., will result in the U.S. Net.Cops linking up with their European and Asian associates.
I was rather amused at the forum given by the New York City Bar Association on Clipper. The FBI representative not only trotted out the four horsemen of the infocalypse -- in order, in a single sentence! -- but also at one point spoke of snuff films. He said, in what I found to be the greatest denial of logical thinking I've seen in years, that he's not ready to give up and say that the genii is out of the bottle -- as though he could put it back by force of will. I spoke with Stuart Baker for a while, during which time he informed me that he didn't think the internet could possibly last.
The recent stuff on "international key escrow," a la the conference last September, is worrisome.
Dorothy Denning is running another such conference soon. Perry
On Sun, 22 Jan 1995, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
I spoke with Stuart Baker for a while, during which time he informed me that he didn't think the internet could possibly last
I find that most statists on the internet assume that the internet is some kind of government service. When they discover that it is not, they wonder how it can possibly exist, and assume it will soon collapse. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.catalog.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. | jamesd@netcom.com
"James A. Donald" says:
On Sun, 22 Jan 1995, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
I spoke with Stuart Baker for a while, during which time he informed me that he didn't think the internet could possibly last
I find that most statists on the internet assume that the internet is some kind of government service.
When they discover that it is not, they wonder how it can possibly exist, and assume it will soon collapse.
I got the distinct impression that he didn't know that the internet was in real use by big companies to conduct their daily affairs. When I asked him if he'd ever heard of Cisco, he said he hadn't; he seemed slightly suprised when I explained that it was a Fortune 500 company that basically did nothing but sell internet routing equipment. I don't know if the bastards are posing or are legitimately ignorant but either way they are dangerous. .pm
On Mon, 23 Jan 1995 rishab@dxm.ernet.in wrote:
The Religious Alliance Against Pornography has been holding a biggish conference in Manila; the focus is on child pornography,
These international conferences are usually held in pleasant tourist spots, and most of the participants usually members of QUANGOs -- nominally private organizations that directly or indirectly receive large amounts of government funds. The major tourist attraction of the Phillipines is of course the large number of whores available at very cheap prices -- many of them extremely young. Now the American religious right receives very little money from the government (as yet) so I doubt there are too many US Christian rightists attending the conference. Both Australia and England have government established religions, so I expect there was a major turn out from those two nations. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.catalog.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. | jamesd@netcom.com
On Sun, 22 Jan 1995, James A. Donald wrote:
Both Australia and England have government established religions, so I expect there was a major turn out from those two nations.
An extract from the Australian Constitution: 116. The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth. Do please explain. -- Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU) | dave@esi.com.au | VK2KFU @ VK2AAB.NSW.AUS.OC | PGP 2.6 Opinions expressed are mine. | E7 FE 97 88 E5 02 3C AE 9C 8C 54 5B 9A D4 A0 CD
On Mon, 23 Jan 1995, Dave Horsfall wrote:
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 17:11:20 +1100 (EST) From: Dave Horsfall <dave@esi.COM.AU> To: cypherpunks@toad.com Subject: Re: Anti-porn conference in Manila
On Sun, 22 Jan 1995, James A. Donald wrote:
Both Australia and England have government established religions, so I expect there was a major turn out from those two nations.
An extract from the Australian Constitution:
116. The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.
Do please explain.
Church of England in Australia was, and I believe still is, government funded by the Australian government. Furthermore when my kids went to government school in NSW, Australia, they were taught Church of England religion by my neighbor, Mrs Law, in school, in the classroom. If it quacks like a duck ... I was unaware of the portion of the constitution that you mention. I suspect that the government and the church are none to clear on it either. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.catalog.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. | jamesd@netcom.com
On Jan 23, 12:06am, James A. Donald wrote:
Church of England in Australia was, and I believe still is, government funded by the Australian government.
Please substantiate. I am aware of no government funding to the Anglican Church in Australia.
Furthermore when my kids went to government school in NSW, Australia, they were taught Church of England religion by my neighbor, Mrs Law, in school, in the classroom.
When I went to school (government school) the religion taught depended on exactly who they could get to teach it. If they could get COE, they got COE. If they could get Catholic, they got Catholic. If they couldn't, the rest of the kids got shoved into whichever group seemed most appropriate, or allowed not to attend scripture at all. This led to some interesting mixes, and some interesting people to teach it (my favorite was a guy who had been in the Belgian Resistance during WWII, and had been war-wounded by a German soldier. It took us the whole term to get it out of him that he'd been shot in the butt.) I'd also point out the funding to private religious schools does not discriminate on the basis of religion. Hardly indicative of a state religion, surely.
If it quacks like a duck ...
And if it doesn't, it's not a duck.
I suspect that the government and the church are none to clear on it either.
Hmmm... try as I might, I cannot think of a recent decision which received any specific denominational influence. Even the Festival of Light is becoming a political irrelevancy. Ian.
On Mon, 23 Jan 1995, James A. Donald wrote:
Church of England in Australia was, and I believe still is, government funded by the Australian government.
As are many other schools of various religious persuasions. So?
Furthermore when my kids went to government school in NSW, Australia, they were taught Church of England religion by my neighbor, Mrs Law, in school, in the classroom.
It's not compulsory - as an avowed atheist I always avoided them.
If it quacks like a duck ...
Not necessarily... If they fund one school, they can hardly refuse to fund others.
I was unaware of the portion of the constitution that you mention.
Obviously - it's handy having an on-line copy of the Australian Constitution. Anyone want a copy? I don't run an FTP site.
I suspect that the government and the church are none to clear on it either.
You might be amused to know that our Governor-General (the "Queen's Man") is himself an avowed atheist - is it likely he would have been appointed by a pro-religious government? -- Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU) | dave@esi.com.au | VK2KFU @ VK2AAB.NSW.AUS.OC | PGP 2.6 Opinions expressed are mine. | E7 FE 97 88 E5 02 3C AE 9C 8C 54 5B 9A D4 A0 CD
On Tue, 24 Jan 1995, Dave Horsfall wrote:
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 10:56:06 +1100 (EST) You might be amused to know that our Governor-General (the "Queen's Man") is himself an avowed atheist - is it likely he would have been appointed by a pro-religious government?
Establishing a religion is usually an act of hostility towards religion, not an act of support He who pays controls. Recollect how the Church of England originally came to be established? The King put the church on his payroll, after confiscating its independent sources of revenue. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.catalog.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. | jamesd@netcom.com
On Mon, 23 Jan 1995 rishab@dxm.ernet.in wrote:
source of most European stuff, and bemoans the fact that too little is spent on monitoring traffic, as the war against drugs is considered more important.
What weenies... It's a nice metaphor to use, "monitoring traffic". It sounds like such a harmless thing. Funny how they don't use phrases like "invading privacy", "spying", and "searching without a warrant". -Anthony
participants (7)
-
Anthony Ortenzi -
Dave Horsfall -
Ian Farquhar -
James A. Donald -
Perry E. Metzger -
rishab＠dxm.ernet.in -
tcmay＠netcom.com