If you're against the filter, you like CP

[Interdictor]

Thankfully someone has a website with our goals in mind and has quite a few interesting quotations from Senator Conroy: http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.c ... filtering/

Senator Ludlam – Just let me finish. In terms of the countries that you have just listed for me, it is mandatory or is it an opt-in system that, for example, concerned parents could take advantage of?

Senator Conroy – Illegal material is illegal material. Child pornography is child pornography. I trust you are not suggesting that people should have access to child pornography.

[SCM]

Tell the people you are being attacked, and denounce protesters of war as unpatriotic....this follows a similar principle, and the same idiotic logic.

[SnapperTT]

He only has a limited number of responses - we can out maneuver him. We need a reliable, umbrella counter that has the capacity to become memetic.

[SCM]

Not sure if I can come up with one myself.

There are simply, allabit technical arguments against it, such as this will have virtually no effect on the distribution of CP, and the fact that any site spammed with CP (or anything else illegal) at any time will then be considered illegal too (such as /b/).

We could come up with some sort of an analogy. For example, a lot of assaults happen at night, so we should institute a nighttime curfew. I trust you are not suggesting that people should be able to assault people at night, etc.

[SnapperTT]

Needs more witt. A counter like the one you've provided would make a good follow through, but a more a statment with more impact should preceed it. Not sure if the following works,

The filter is like using a nuke to kill a spider. But the spider's in Sydney, and you're nuking Perth.

[SCM]

Haha. A bit of a stretch, but I like it.