SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Calling the ban "a gross overreach of the powers afforded to the Minister for Immigration," one critic of the government's efforts said that "Ms. Manningdoes not pose a threat to the Australian public, and to block her from entering the country is to take away Australians' right to hear her story." (Image: Think Inc.)
Global Outcry After Australia Moves to Ban Entry of Whistleblower Chelsea Manning
"As a democracy, we should be encouraging not banning public contributions from people like Chelsea Manning."
Aug 30, 2018
Human rights groups and free speech defenders around the world are speaking out on Thursday after the Australian government moved aggressively to block Chelsea Manning--the U.S. Army whistleblower who was imprisoned by her own government after leaking hundreds of thousands of military and diplomatic documents, including evidence of war crimes--from entering the country as part of a global speaking tour.
"By refusing her entry, the Australian government would send a chilling message that freedom of speech is not valued by our government."
--Claire Mallinson, Amnesty InternationalThe company organizing Manning's tour, Think Inc., according to NBC News,
said it had received a notice of intention from the government to deny Manning entry on Wednesday. The group is calling on her supporters to lobby new Immigration Minister David Coleman to allow her into Australia. While she can appeal, past precedent suggests the decision has already been made.
Think Inc. said it had given the government more than 10 letters of support from individuals and organizations who support Manning's entry to Australia.
Hugh de Kretser, the executive director of the Human Rights Law Centre, told Guardian Australia: "As a democracy, we should be encouraging not banning public contributions from people like Chelsea Manning."
He added that Manning is "generating vital debate around issues like secret mass surveillance of citizens by governments. The visa should be granted."
The Australian Privacy Foundation, which advocates for privacy rights and free speech, tweeted:
In its statement, Amnesty International accused the newly-formed right-wing government of trying to silence Manning. "By refusing her entry, the Australian government would send a chilling message that freedom of speech is not valued by our government," Claire Mallinson, Amnesty International's national director in Australia, said in a statement.
According to the Guardian:
Manning, an occasional Guardian columnist, was due to arrive in Australia on Thursday. She is scheduled to give a speech at the Sydney Opera House on Sunday night as part of the Antidote festival, as well as addresses in Brisbane and Melbourne.
A spokeswoman for the Department of Home Affairs, which oversees immigration, said it would not comment on individual cases, but that all non-citizens entering Australia must meet the character requirements of the Migration Act.
"A person can fail the character test for a number of reasons, including but not limited to where a non-citizen has a substantial criminal record or where their conduct represents a risk to the Australian community."
But her defenders say it is proposterous to consider Manning a "risk" to Australia's security.
Australian attorney Greg Barns, who has represented Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, said in his statement that people with criminal records have been allowed into Australia in the past and that "no one would seriously suggest" Manning was a risk.
Tim Singleton Norton, chair of the Australia-based Digital Rights Watch, called the move "nothing more than a political stunt designed to appease the current US administration, and an unnecessary imposition on the movements of a world-renowned civil rights activist."
Calling the ban "a gross overreach of the powers afforded to the Minister for Immigration," Norton said that "Ms. Manning does not pose a threat to the Australian public, and to block her from entering the country is to take away Australians' right to hear her story."
The Australian government, Norton added, frequently talks "about freedom of speech, but this rarely seems to be extended to defend those who profess opinions that are not aligned with their own."
With supporters using the #LetChelseaSpeak hashtag to promote the story, Amnesty International launch this petition as a way to pressure the Australian government.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Human rights groups and free speech defenders around the world are speaking out on Thursday after the Australian government moved aggressively to block Chelsea Manning--the U.S. Army whistleblower who was imprisoned by her own government after leaking hundreds of thousands of military and diplomatic documents, including evidence of war crimes--from entering the country as part of a global speaking tour.
"By refusing her entry, the Australian government would send a chilling message that freedom of speech is not valued by our government."
--Claire Mallinson, Amnesty InternationalThe company organizing Manning's tour, Think Inc., according to NBC News,
said it had received a notice of intention from the government to deny Manning entry on Wednesday. The group is calling on her supporters to lobby new Immigration Minister David Coleman to allow her into Australia. While she can appeal, past precedent suggests the decision has already been made.
Think Inc. said it had given the government more than 10 letters of support from individuals and organizations who support Manning's entry to Australia.
Hugh de Kretser, the executive director of the Human Rights Law Centre, told Guardian Australia: "As a democracy, we should be encouraging not banning public contributions from people like Chelsea Manning."
He added that Manning is "generating vital debate around issues like secret mass surveillance of citizens by governments. The visa should be granted."
The Australian Privacy Foundation, which advocates for privacy rights and free speech, tweeted:
In its statement, Amnesty International accused the newly-formed right-wing government of trying to silence Manning. "By refusing her entry, the Australian government would send a chilling message that freedom of speech is not valued by our government," Claire Mallinson, Amnesty International's national director in Australia, said in a statement.
According to the Guardian:
Manning, an occasional Guardian columnist, was due to arrive in Australia on Thursday. She is scheduled to give a speech at the Sydney Opera House on Sunday night as part of the Antidote festival, as well as addresses in Brisbane and Melbourne.
A spokeswoman for the Department of Home Affairs, which oversees immigration, said it would not comment on individual cases, but that all non-citizens entering Australia must meet the character requirements of the Migration Act.
"A person can fail the character test for a number of reasons, including but not limited to where a non-citizen has a substantial criminal record or where their conduct represents a risk to the Australian community."
But her defenders say it is proposterous to consider Manning a "risk" to Australia's security.
Australian attorney Greg Barns, who has represented Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, said in his statement that people with criminal records have been allowed into Australia in the past and that "no one would seriously suggest" Manning was a risk.
Tim Singleton Norton, chair of the Australia-based Digital Rights Watch, called the move "nothing more than a political stunt designed to appease the current US administration, and an unnecessary imposition on the movements of a world-renowned civil rights activist."
Calling the ban "a gross overreach of the powers afforded to the Minister for Immigration," Norton said that "Ms. Manning does not pose a threat to the Australian public, and to block her from entering the country is to take away Australians' right to hear her story."
The Australian government, Norton added, frequently talks "about freedom of speech, but this rarely seems to be extended to defend those who profess opinions that are not aligned with their own."
With supporters using the #LetChelseaSpeak hashtag to promote the story, Amnesty International launch this petition as a way to pressure the Australian government.
Human rights groups and free speech defenders around the world are speaking out on Thursday after the Australian government moved aggressively to block Chelsea Manning--the U.S. Army whistleblower who was imprisoned by her own government after leaking hundreds of thousands of military and diplomatic documents, including evidence of war crimes--from entering the country as part of a global speaking tour.
"By refusing her entry, the Australian government would send a chilling message that freedom of speech is not valued by our government."
--Claire Mallinson, Amnesty InternationalThe company organizing Manning's tour, Think Inc., according to NBC News,
said it had received a notice of intention from the government to deny Manning entry on Wednesday. The group is calling on her supporters to lobby new Immigration Minister David Coleman to allow her into Australia. While she can appeal, past precedent suggests the decision has already been made.
Think Inc. said it had given the government more than 10 letters of support from individuals and organizations who support Manning's entry to Australia.
Hugh de Kretser, the executive director of the Human Rights Law Centre, told Guardian Australia: "As a democracy, we should be encouraging not banning public contributions from people like Chelsea Manning."
He added that Manning is "generating vital debate around issues like secret mass surveillance of citizens by governments. The visa should be granted."
The Australian Privacy Foundation, which advocates for privacy rights and free speech, tweeted:
In its statement, Amnesty International accused the newly-formed right-wing government of trying to silence Manning. "By refusing her entry, the Australian government would send a chilling message that freedom of speech is not valued by our government," Claire Mallinson, Amnesty International's national director in Australia, said in a statement.
According to the Guardian:
Manning, an occasional Guardian columnist, was due to arrive in Australia on Thursday. She is scheduled to give a speech at the Sydney Opera House on Sunday night as part of the Antidote festival, as well as addresses in Brisbane and Melbourne.
A spokeswoman for the Department of Home Affairs, which oversees immigration, said it would not comment on individual cases, but that all non-citizens entering Australia must meet the character requirements of the Migration Act.
"A person can fail the character test for a number of reasons, including but not limited to where a non-citizen has a substantial criminal record or where their conduct represents a risk to the Australian community."
But her defenders say it is proposterous to consider Manning a "risk" to Australia's security.
Australian attorney Greg Barns, who has represented Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, said in his statement that people with criminal records have been allowed into Australia in the past and that "no one would seriously suggest" Manning was a risk.
Tim Singleton Norton, chair of the Australia-based Digital Rights Watch, called the move "nothing more than a political stunt designed to appease the current US administration, and an unnecessary imposition on the movements of a world-renowned civil rights activist."
Calling the ban "a gross overreach of the powers afforded to the Minister for Immigration," Norton said that "Ms. Manning does not pose a threat to the Australian public, and to block her from entering the country is to take away Australians' right to hear her story."
The Australian government, Norton added, frequently talks "about freedom of speech, but this rarely seems to be extended to defend those who profess opinions that are not aligned with their own."
With supporters using the #LetChelseaSpeak hashtag to promote the story, Amnesty International launch this petition as a way to pressure the Australian government.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.