Ritual Contrition/Seditious Intention

While "Big Uncle" Howard tries to use the highly publicized recent arrests of Muslim radicals to amp up public support for his recently passed anti-terrorism laws, his political role-models in the United States are under scrutiny for a factor 100 increase in the use of National Security Letters (NSLs) - a sort of "super warrant" that allows government agencies to collect information without judicial oversight.

The real kicker? The existence of these NSLs is supposed to be secret, and anyone that recieves one is placed under a perpetual gag order... so it remains unclear how people can complain about something that can't be officially acknowledged.
Based on what we know about Howard's proposed "Patriot Act" style strengthening of existing terror laws (allowing police to detain suspects for seven days without charge, the use of electronic tracking devices, a legal broadening of the term 'sedition') would it really surprise anyone to find out that Australian Federal Police have been granted similar powers?
Remember, this is a government that describes its own laws as "Draconian...but necessary."

Holy shit, at least they're honest...right?
Right?

Anyone?

Ritual Contrition /
Seditious Intention:

Why Good Comedy May Not Be Safe From Terror (Laws)

In an effort to understand a little more about the broadening of terror laws I managed to track down a legal definition of what 'seditious intention' was...

"A “seditious intention” was defined as “the intention” to “bring the sovereign into hatred or contempt; to excite disaffection against the government or constitution of the Commonwealth [of Australia] or against either house of the parliament of the Commonwealth; to excite her majesty’s subjects to attempt to procure the alteration, otherwise than by lawful means, of any matter in the Commonwealth established by law of the Commonwealth; or to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different classes of her majesty’s subjects so as to endanger the peace, order or good government of the Commonwealth”.

(Info via brazenly pinko Greenleft.org)

This definition has been in use since 1914, but has been altered by the Anti-Terrorism Laws to also apply to "any person" who "urges another person to engage in conduct to assist, by any means whatever, an organisation or country ... engaged in armed hostilities against the Australian Defence Force".

Some say that this change could potentially be used against anti-war protestors (under the rationale that support for ADF troop withdrawl is also support for violent insurgency groups that want the same end via extreme means) and if you don't believe them, then you've obviously never heard of recently deported anti-war activist Scott Parkin.

Further investigation led me to the cyber-doorstep of independant media commentators Crikey. As someone who would like to eventually make his crust in the media industry, this statement from a clued-in Crikey correspondant sent shivery shivers down my already pretty shivery spine:

" Arguably Section 30A: ‘seditious intention' means the death knell to any and all satirical comedy on TV and elsewhere; no CNNNN, no Roy and HG on the election and no John Safran. What a boring old world we live in. Can't help thinking that it is the PM's ‘cunning plan' to bring back Mrs Slocombe and the Are You Being Served team to our screens. Champagne comedy PM style!"

Which is all speculation, of course, but with the way things are going, who is actually going to stop Howard and his goons from doing such a horrible thing?

The Labour party?

Now THERE is a joke.

***

If all this doom and gloom is making you jones for a smoke then I may have some good news...or maybe not.

***

Watch out Team Chaser: Your brand of Funny may not survive the great Comedy Culling of '06.

***