The following news article is from
 http://abcasiapacific.com/news/stories/asiapacific_stories_1683580.htm


Two books promoting suicide bombings have been banned in Australia under the country's new anti-terrorism laws.

The country's Classification Review Board says the two books, Defence of the Muslim Lands and Join the Caravan can no longer be sold in Australia or imported.

Convenor Maureen Shelley says eight books and one video were submitted for review by the attorney-general, Philip Ruddock.

Ms Shelley says while six books and the video weren't banned, the two in question directly contravened Australian law..

"The commonwealth has outlawed terrorist acts and one of those acts is to incite or encourage people to perform violence against governments overseas," she said.

"These two books specifically promote martydom operations which include suicide bombings."

However, Waleed Ali from the Islamic Council of Victoria says while muslim groups would accept a banning if the books were a threat, this hasn't been demonstrated in this case.

"We understand that the literature is demonstrably unsavoury, but that's different from saying that it necessarily causes a threat."

The Australian Federation of Islamic Councils says if a book is against Australian laws, it should be banned.

ABC Asia Pacific TV / Radio Australia

_________________________________

Nice touch at the end by ABC to deflate any objections. AFIC is gung-ho about banning books (we are led to believe), so no point arguing eh?

I think this post is relevant to the UK as Australian and UK legislation often borrow from each other, so the UK could easily fall under similar legislation now or in the future.

The mechanism to ban books is frighteningly prosaic. the nice chaps at the 'Classification Review Board' take a look and if it makes them spill their tea they ban it.

The way it would work here is that the role of the British Board of Film Classification would be expanded to include books, with a rebranding to 'British Board of Classification'. What could be easier or more reasonable?

Here is the BBFC's disingenuous description of itself from their website www.bbfc.org.uk

________________

The British Board of Film Classification is an independent, non-governmental body, which has classified cinema films since it was set up in 1912, and videos since the passing of the Video Recordings Act in 1984.

Cinema
The British Board of Film Censors was set up in 1912 by the film industry as an independent body to bring a degree of uniformity to the classification of film nationally.

Statutory powers on film remain with the local councils, which may overrule any of the Board's decisions, passing films we reject, banning films we have passed, and even waiving cuts, instituting new ones, or altering categories for films exhibited under their own licensing jurisdiction.

Video
In 1984 Parliament passed the Video Recordings Act. This act stated that, subject to certain exemptions, video recordings offered for sale or hire commercially in the UK must be classified by an authority designated by the Secretary of State. The President and Vice Presidents of the BBFC were so designated, and charged with applying the new test of 'suitability for viewing in the home'. At this point the Board's title was changed to British Board of Film Classification to reflect the fact that classification plays a far larger part in the Board's work than censorship.

_______________

We'll skip over their pathetic excuses about being independent, non-governmental, over-ruled by local councils (who will be more draconian, so be grateful for the BBFC).

The essential point is that the BBFC are clearly struggling to explain away whether their role is to 'Classify' or 'Censor', and as they say themselves had a rebranding exercise from 'British Board of Film Censors' to 'British Board of Film Classification ' just to throw everyone off the scent, before finally admitting in the last sentence that they censor films.

It can be easy to forget that they are censoring films since on the face of it they are simply slapping 18 ratings on films they don't like. However, classification would mean simply labelling the uncut films with an appropriate rating for our guidance and allowing ALL films through with one rating or another. Since they chop out sections which you are then prohibited from viewing, and since a wide range of films are banned entirely, be in no doubt that ALL the films shown legally in Britain have been through a censorship process.

It would take virtually no effort to extend their censorship role to books. The door has been opened in Australia.