Police Cat-burglar Steals Tattered Flag : Melbourne Indymedia

A work of art depicting a burning Australian flag was last night removed from an exhibition in Victoria by State Police. Representatives of the Authorities took the exhibition's centrepiece from a wall in a Melbourne gallery after entering the gallery-space surreptitiously in the dead of night by virtue of a relationship with the owner of an adjoining business. The gallery's operator had not been advised of any plans for an officially sanctioned cat-burglary of the premises in the exercise of censorship. For some reason the Police Media Unit had, on this occasion, deviated from its usual practise, neglecting to report the clandestine and dangerous adventure to the for-profit media in sufficient time that a suitably equipped camera crew might be on the scene.

The work, by artist Azlan McLennan, is the sole piece in an exhibition entitled Proudly unAustralian, a confrontational theme in the light of new and Draconic sedition legislation introduced into and passed through Parliament late last year, and debate over the nature of pluralism, unity, and the Australian character. The broad-ranging suite of new sedition charges endorsed by sinister Attorney-General Philip Ruddock provides for sentences of seven years imprisonment and caters for a variety of modes of expression that undermine the authority and reputation of the State and its principles.

As to the origins of the grievance against the work of art that resulted in the deployment of Officers of the Law for a quiet midnight raid, little is known at present. It is perhaps unsurprising that Authorities saw fit to undertake their clandestine operation the night before Australia Day, an officially sanctioned national festival that is this year being celebrated with hysterical fervour after the national character was besmirched late last year in the wake of Sydney's racial tension. Certainly the secretive operation, conducted without the knowledge of the gallery's owner, reflects a desire to keep the official censorship from reaching the media, and is indicative of the same that has major commercial television networks well-informed and on the scene when anti-terrorist divisions of the police perform five am raids on the homes of suspected Islamic insurgents.

The aesthetic merit and political subtlety of the work itself is not at issue here, being rather a subject for critics and academians.The broader irony in this story that authorises its appearance on these pages may be lost on those surreptitious Victorian policefolk that undertook the intrepid mission of removing the singed flag of Aslan , the large, jowly politicians that ordered it's removal, and the sad, brittle State-loving citizens that took it upon themselves to make the necessary initial complaint.

By limiting free expression in Australia with heavy-handed, secretive policing, the Authorities are themselves putting the torch to the symbols and ideals of Australian cultural life and the local character. Their fierce protection of the State and Empire in the representative image is the antithesis of a style of Australian patriotism that refutes all that their Stars and Union Jack national flag represents - an Australian spirit that refutes and heckles oppressive authorities, rather than applauding and celebrating ceremonial representations of centralised power.

This Australian character, 'forged' in the convict era and the era of the gold rush and settlement and bushranger, and in the madness of Imperial and National wars, and in the later eras of beach and suburban culture has long stood in fundamental, honourable opposition to the industrialised, systematic, fascist instruments of State power, and the collection of power and wealth in the hands of a few privileged holders of stock and titles.

The Eureka flag, hoisted in 1854 by those such as Raffaello Carboni (quoted below) that stood then against the idea of State control, of close manipulation and control of the people, does represent this patriotic Australian sentiment, of which we might, despite a bleak history, be proud. The flag that the Prime Minister and his Government insist should be hoisted in every schoolyard in the country will always represent the agents of brutal oppression from which almost all of our ancestors suffered.

Rafaello Carboni, one of those acquitted after the Eureka Stockade uprising, had self-published a book on the incident and the subsequent trial within twelve months of its conclusion, from which the following patriotic excerpt is taken:

"I came from old Europe, 16,000 miles across two oceans, and I thought it a respectable distance from the hated Austrian rule … The old style: oppressors and oppressed. A sad reflection, very sad reflection, for any educated and honest man.

For what did we come into this colony? Chi sta bene non si move, is an old Roman proverb. If then in old Europe, we had a bird in the hand, what silly fools we were to venture across two oceans, and try to catch two jack-asses in the bush of Australia!

I had a dream, a happy dream, I dreamed that we had met here together to render thanks unto our Father in heaven for a plentiful harvest, such that for the first time in this, our adopted land, we had our own food for the year; and so each of us holding in our hands a tumbler of Victorian wine, you called on me for a song. My harp was tuned, and in good order: I cheerfully struck up, "Oh, let us be happy together."

Not so, Britons, not so! We must meet as in old Europe - old style - improved by far in the south - for the redress of grievances inflicted on us, not by crowned heads, but blockheads, aristocratical incapables, who never did a day's work in their life. I hate the oppressor, let him wear a red, blue, white, or black coat." - and here certainly, I tackled in right earnest with our silver and gold lace on Ballaarat, and called on all my fellow-diggers, irrespective of nationality, religion, and colour, to salute the "Southern Cross" as the refuge of all the oppressed from all countries on Earth. - The applause was universal, and accordingly I received my full reward: Prisons and Chains! Old style."

from The Eureka Stockade, by Rafaello Carboni .

What the....!
by marcusneofitou@hotmail.com Thursday January 26, 2006 at 06:57 PM

This is a low act by the authorities.

I do not know what is worse-the act itself or that the it was not reported widely in the media on Invasion Day.

This censorship is bullshit.

I agree 100% with the author of the article regarding the Eureka flag.

The Australian flag as it stands signifies the domination of Empire-specifically Anglo domination.

I agree that the establishment is feeling threatened by the Cronulla race riots hence the repeated calls on televised Invasion Day celebrations for all Australians to come to-gether. How are Australians of Middle Eastern descent (so-to-speak) supposed to happily come to-gether under the Australian flag that was worn by hundreds of violent racists bashing up random Middle Eastern-looking citizens. The use of the flag in this race riot was sanctioned by the Prime Minister.

You are, we are, we are proudly UnAustralian (as defined by John Howard and his ilk!)

Eureka Flag!
by marcusneofitou@hotmail.com Thursday January 26, 2006 at 07:16 PM

This sounds like absolute crap. Tell us the name of the gallery, its address and the name of the person who is the source of this rubbish.

Naturally, Marcus B assumes the worst and launches into his usual uninformed diatribe from a prejudiced perspective; the cops are alleged to have done something so it must be true.

Get the full facts, cockhead, before ranting and raving about police states and don't play us for a bunch of gullible fools. We're not al like Marcus you know.

Arts Hub Australia
Monday, January 16, 2006

Proudly unAustralian, by artist Azlan McLennan, will be on show at Trocadero from the 18th January – 25 February.

http://www.artshub.com.au/ahau1/news/news.asp?Id=88454

TROCADERO Art Space is one of Melbourne’s newest contemporary arts venues. Located in the heart of Footscray, only 5 minutes from Melbourne’s CBD, TROCADERO Art Space provides a professional platform for the exhibition of new and contemporary art.

http://www.trocadero.cjb.net/

there's this abc article..

I believe this is the actual painting allegedly censored in the story posted by David.

Its not the first time this artist has been censored either.

from Slack Bastard
_______________

This month, Azlan's at it again, this time with a poster campaign which I was again unable to see thanks to MiniCult (= "Yarra Trams, the Victorian Government and the City of Melbourne": the posters in question having been removed three weeks ago). Inspired by the much loathed Metlink (= Melbourne's privatised and naturally detiorating 'public' transport system) propaganda campaign against The Glorious Proletarian Struggle for a Means to get from A to B, Azlan has once more had the temerity to use his 'art' to question more than our sense of aesthetics. According to Mark Moor writing in the January 10, 2006 edition of the Herald Sun:

A CONTROVERSIAL artist was censored for the third time in 18 months yesterday after posters that seem to discourage Muslims from using public transport[!] were ripped down.

Victorian College of the Arts student Azlan McLennan allegedly made two posters imitating the Metlink Pay Your Way advertisements, but his version was deemed offensive and obscene by members of Government, transport operators and advertisers.

One poster, in a tram stop on the corner of Victoria Pde and Latrobe St, read "Attention passengers -- in the interests of personal safety non-Anglos are advised not to use public transport."

The second, on the corner of Collins and Spencer St, warned: "Muslim commuters may be subject to suspicion."

Interestingly, the liberal broadsheet The Age characterised this as a case of an artist victimising Melbourne transport companies and an advertising company! 'Fare game! Shelters feel the brush of protest', The Age, Chris Evans, January 10, 2006:

MELBOURNE transport companies and an advertising company that maintains sponsored bus shelters in the city are the latest victims of an artist who two years ago upset the establishment with a work attacking Israel.

Azlan McLennan... has attacked Australia's part in the war against terror with a parody on MetLink's campaign against fare evasion...

Outdoor advertising company Adshel, which provides and maintains the shelters, had donated the exhibition space to the Urban Art Collective.

http://slackbastard.blogspot.com/

_______________

A CONTROVERSIAL artist was censored for the third time in 18 months yesterday after posters that seem to discourage Muslims from using public transport were ripped down.

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,17775119%255E2862,00.html

Sedition?
by marcusneofitou@hotmail.com Thursday January 26, 2006 at 09:08 PM

From aforementioned ABC article...

"Police say they are assessing whether the artist should face charges."

Reports of an impending flag burning ceremony have not been confirmed.

Perhaps a bon-fire at the Albert Park beach in full view of the new CCTV camera's would be a good spot for such an event?

NKI frequently participates in public burning of the Israeli flag. The pictures above were taken throughout the years, some depict Purim celebrations, a holiday celebrating the defeat of the forces of evil. Costumes are costumetic at that time.

http://www.nkusa.org/activities/demonstrations/israeliflag.cfm

A comwad weliably informs me that Dimmeys are selling Austwalian fascist flags clevewly disguised as beach towels for $5.99 - and what is worse she saw a number of Sudenese buying them!

Do they know they are being subtley bwainwashed and exploited by the unconscienable capitalist Dimmey's to accept wacism? NO! Comwad Amanda twied to explain it all to them but they just looked dumbfounded and bought them anyway!

No wonder there is so much fascism on the beaches!

Flag burning is a particularly offensive mode of protest. And that's exactly why it should be tolerated in a democracy like ours. The values which the Australian flag represent include the rght of free speech and dissent.

Easy values to espouse in marches and activist 'events'. Harder to practice when someone with whom you vehemently disagree dares to vent their right to free speech at the top of their lungs or in a way you deem offensive.

The true test of commitment to the right to flag burning is when an Aboriginal flag is burnt as a form of protest.

If burning an Australian flag is a legitimate form of protest (and I believe it is) ANY flag is fair game. To deny otherwise is the height of selective indignation and hypocrisy.

And we never witness those qualities here. Do we?

Flag burning is a very touchy subject, because it stirs up deep feelings of anger in people who are loyal to that flag. People who want to do it, therefore, need to think carefully. I have criticised people who performed the action several times in the last few years because it was taken without any follow through - it was just an isolated act for the enemy to portray how they desired.

This is not to say that burning the Australian flag shouldn't be done. It should - nationalism is a curse & has to be confronted. If this makes nationalists angry, it's part of the price for making them (or, at least, some of them) think. The issue is that the burning needs to take place in a context which will provoke the maximum of thought and draw attention to the arguments of the people doing the action.

Doing it as part of an art exhibition is a good idea, since it provides an opportunity to put it in a context which will explain it and lead to greater understanding. Putting it up outside the gallery, however, isn't a good idea, because it makes it harder to explain to people.

Ideally, a flag-burning would be accompanied by a leaflet distributed by one's comrades, so that people could see for themselves that it is a justified, if spectacular, criticism of nationalism.

The above analysis, of course, only applies to the burning of the national flag of the country in which one lives. I would only burn the Australian flag, for example, except for some situations in which I would be prepared to burn the US flag in addition to the Australian one (though never without it).

Burning the flag of a country with which your own country is in conflict is a very different act. It is an act of national hostility, a calculated insult from one country to another. During the protests against the Indonesian massacres in East Timor in 1999, for example, a few people burnt an Indonesian flag. I criticised it at the time & still regard it as a destructive thing to do - though I would support Indonesians who do the same thing out of opposition to Indonesian nationalism.

And finally, "Fuckwit Watcher" wants to know how people feel about burning the Aboriginal flag. This is not a national flag. It does not represent any State. Rather, it represents an oppressed people and their struggle for survival and liberation. I oppose burning the Aboriginal flag because I am on their side - but I still wouldn't want to see it made illegal.

Ablokeimet.

P.S. It would be interesting to see what, if any, legal basis the coppers have for stealing the flag & "considering charges".

This is how an 'Old Time Flag Burning Party' happened in Santa Cruz last year.

flag burning party in Santa Cruz
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/18079/index.php

photo's by Hilda
http://www.indybay.org/news/2005/07/1750535.php

So now not only is the physical act of flag burning illegal, visually representing a burning flag is too? Makes me wonder if I was to draw or paint any other seditious acts - not so much as lift a finger to physically engage in such acts, mind, but merely to artistically represent them, what would happen to me?

You know, I get itchy fingers sometimes. I want to burn flags. I want to burn McDonalds. I want to burn my passport. As Ralph said,

.................I LIKE TO LIGHT FIRES..............

I've written articles about burning flags. Sometimes I even talk about it, sometimes with as many as 2 or 3 other people at once.

I have never burnt an Australian flag, but what is the difference between me verbally representing an image of a burning flag, even if I'm just talking about it with my mates, or writting about it (admittidly, often on bathroom walls) and Azlan visually representing it?

It's not that I'm complaining, as such, it's just that I'm confused. I don't know a lot about art, you see, it's quite easy for me to mistake creative expression with sedition. I'd really like to know which are the seditious acts and art which are good clean Aussie fun. Just for future reference, you understand.

See, heres my problem. What is the first act of a fascist state? To censor creative expression until, eventually, overt coercion in no longer needed, self-censorship means we crackdown on our own creative expression until............

....................WE USE A LOT OF WHITE PAINT................

I'm suprised this hasnt been more widely reported, since traditionally this kind of censorship tends to be an exercise in public intimidation - doesnt seem to be much point in cracking down on individual artists unless everyone hears about it - "dont step out of line or this is what will happen..."

Here's my proposal: let's start plastering the city with images of burning flags - not just Australian flags either.... Let's push it. Let's start talking about it at every oppertunity. Let's start writing about it, not just on bathroom walls, either.

Finally, I feel like I have to say nice work to Azlan. I admit I dont know much about art, but I know what I like......

What happens, if someone rolls up in paper printed with the flag on it, then lights up and smokes...?
Surely the prosecutor in any court case would have fun finding multiple laws, whichever is the most punitive one, will then apply.
1.] The printing with intent of subsequent burning...
2.] The rolling act with intent of burning...
3.] The burning of printed material...
4.] Thinking of connecting the flag, with the fag, and the burning...

Well Johnny Howard told us yesterday that he doesn't think flag burning should be made illegal, and according to this report - it was the Vic Police that broke into the gallery and stole the painting - not the Feds!

I can only conclude then, that this act of totalitarianism was ordered by the government of Steve Bracks - who is a huge fascist. Interesting that a man of Lebanese extraction would head a state government that would allow the Police to commit such an act - considering that the flag is supposed to be a symbol of white supremacy! Just shows that political issues are more complex than that! It also shows that flag burning is a pretty stupid and ineffectual way of protesting the injustices committed by our Federal and State governments against us (the workers, poor, unemployed, homeless, Aboriginal, refugees and everyday people of this country) and in our name (those killed and injured in Afghanistan, Iraq and around the globe by our government and it's allies). Flag burning does nothing to help any of these people.

So please, let us stop being so quick to praise stupid pranks like flagburnings, which only act to alienate the common people of this country, so we can engage in intelligent debate and protest and get the support of everyday people that we need to change our authoritarian system to one of equality and democracy.

So much courage, so much strength!
Why don't flag-burners take up heavy weight boxing or shot-putting. They must be so strong. Perhaps they are too busy burnuing flags. After all it must take so much training and dedication. I reckon they could take Mike Tyson to 15 rounds. Why don't we reward these Herculean efforts. Holding that oh so heavy flag and lifting a whole lighted match up to it.

Do you feel that all this exciting talk of heroic flag-burning shenanaguns may distract us from the key issue? Correct me if I misinterprit events, but this is an artwork - a visual representation of an event, in this case a flag burning, which has been seized and branded criminal. Does it seem that something is really wrong with a society that criminalises artwork?

Not that I'm implying that it's cool to symbolically burn a flag but wrong to literally burn a flag. Flag burnings is just another type of art - performance art. We can argue about if it's an effective form of protest, but lets not go nuts.

It's not burning bodies, it's not burning oilfields, it's not burning trees, it's not burning books... it's burning the symbolic representation of a nation-state that engages in or condones all those things. But the main point is this debate is about exercising the freedom to artistically represent ideas in a public forum.

Can I burn a flag in public?
Can I burn a flag in private?
Can I burn a flag on TV?
Can I burn a flag onstage?
Can I burn a flag online?
Can I draw myself burning a flag?
Can I paint myself burning a flag?
Can I film myself burning a flag?
Can I sculpt myself burning a flag?
Can I write about burning a flag?
Can I sing about burning a flag?
Can I think about burning a flag?
Can I dream about burning a flag?
Can I burn a flag in my prison cell?

Am I bad if I think burning a flag might be fun?

I don't think he really is a flag burner, Zagovor, its just an image.

The painting (or artwork) looks good on the feature I reckion!

It'd be good for somebody to get an interview with that artist. For the Melbourne Indy Radio show, or as an article? He sounds like an interesting guy.

I so hope this flag burning fad doesn't become parse as i've a theatre show to produce at the end of the year and the budget is on a show string.

There's virtually no $$$$ for publicity so...

I am shocked that this story has received so little mainstream press. It has all the ingredients of a great story - censorship, controversy, nationalism and flag burning and all of this occured the day before Australia Day.
Yet a Google new search reveals this story barely rated a mention with only a few online stories popping up. I think the Herald Sun had a story on it, the Age had an online story but nothing in the paper to my knowledge and I dont know if it made it on the televsion.
This act of censorship points the growing march of fascist nationalism in this country. First it was the facist mobs draped in the flag at Cronulla, then a seventeen youth was given three months in gaol in NSW for burning the flag and now the Vic Cops have stolen a picture of a burning flag. What next!
The lack of media comment on this issue only adds to the disturbing nature of this story. I am glad indymedia exists as a source of information in these worrying times.

I have a couple of theories why the lack of coverage. They are only theories mind you, and if any are correct I'd hope it is the former.

(a) Remember the Pissed Christ? That was all over the papers and the TV. I went to see the exhibition at the national gallery but some religious nut had already taken to the 'controversial' image with a hammer. Is some group trying to stop Azlan getting any kind of publicity in case somebody decides to give him a more high profile exhibition?

(b) Remember the Pissed Christ? That was all over the papers and the TV. I went to see the exhibition at the national gallery but some religious nut had already taken to the 'controversial' image with a hammer. Has some group threatened the gallery? It would explain why the cops took the image down the way they did, and the media told to shut-up about it, you know, if they were protecting the gallery from being fire bombed by religious or nationalist nuts.

Think about who Azlans pissed off in the past. Anyway, as I said before, an interview with that artist would be a good idea.

Azlan had nothing to do with the Pissed Christ it was just another art-crime censorship issue a few years ago.

It was called Piss Christ and was by A Guy Called Gerald. No, hang on, it was... Andres Serrano. And the religious nuts went apeshit at in in October 1997.

http://www.renewal.org.au/artcrime/pages/serrano.html

If McLennan can arrange for an exhibition at the National Gallery, good luck to him!

PS. Pisschrist the band kicks arse!

http://floppymohawk.nomasters.org/

Piss Christ, thats right, thanks Andy. I remember his other shots of rat poisoned victims and other dead bodies now.

Oh and I didn't mean to suggest that UnAustralian shouldn't be shown at the national gallery. I think that would be tops! It's just the other idea I came up with was a bit sinister.

What I am amazed at is that Azlan STILL is able to get state sponsored institutions to display his stuff.
Don't get me wrong, I have liked each of his statements and as a cultural terrorist myself (and YES I have burned Australian flags and copped the fallout) would like to congratulate him on his vision and encourage him to do more. I myself enjoy spreading subversive political art but wonder how he has managed to get such wide coverage and sponsorship from bodies such as Metlink and the Melbourne city council.

Personally as "radical" as some people consider his work, surely the real artistry lies in being able to get it displayed at all, given the conservative attitude of society and the state. I would be interested in Azlan's comments on the process he went through to get his work displayed and why the censorship issues only got raised belatedly. Considering I have never had an official "showing" of my work I am also wondering what sort of provisions are made by the displayer as far as indemnifying the artist against these sort of censorious attacks.

Anyway apart from all the politcal and pratical issues I can only congratulate Azlan on another great performance art and hope to see many more...
(:p)

Davey is right when he writes this story has every element neccessary for a huge media beat-up. The fact that this hasnt happened is deeply concerning. So what sould we do about this?

I think it might be time to reframe this debate away from the ethics of flag-burning and the effectiveness of flag-burning and especially away from the right of individuals to express themselves artistically in public forums, and towards the many pragmatic issues of how one actually does burn a flag.

Enquiring minds need to know.

For example, what is the best accelerant to use? Petrol? That smacks of ecocide. Would vegie oil be just as good? It certainly seems more sustainable. Would pissing on the flag first help or hinder the fire? What kind of kindeling might help? Would a nice mix of Amerixcan and Israli flags fuel the fire? But in what proportions? Given the syntetic nature of modern flags, how exactly does one achieve perfect blossoms of flame, as in Azlans picture, and not just masses of stinking black smoke and mealted plastic?

So many questions, so many hypotheises, yet so far, so little empirical data.

I propose we run a series of tests, under laboratory conditions of course, to determine, with the aide of science, how best to burn flags.

Science is the only way, in my view, to allow the debate to progress away from hyperbole and at times hysterical rhetoric, and towards the kind of logic and calm, detached rationality so badly needed at this time.

It is a strange coincidence that a piece of artwork was removed from a gallery at the same moment that John Howard was actively promoting a stronger sense of history for our young aussies. Of course his history is probably just that…HIS history. In reality history is about understanding the range of interpretations and viewpoints about a common issue. Artworks are an essential source of evidence in history, not necessarily about what happened, but about how people interpreted an event and reacted to it.

Painting a picture or creating any artwork about an act of violence does not mean that the author has committed that crime. Pablo Picasso’s famous “Guernica” depicted the violence of the Spanish Civil War. Controversial at the time of its production (and since) nobody has ever suggested that Picasso committed the atrocities of the Spanish Civil War. Who would take them seriously if they did? Similarly when Jacques-Louis David painted the “Death of Marat” it was never suggested that David actually serve time for murdering Marat.

Both these paintings have become extremely valuable to understanding world history, whether or not either of them supported what was a popular viewpoint at the time. So for the sake of not being silly and accusing artists of crimes they have depicted, not committed and also for the sake of encouraging the learning of valuables lessons through history…just give the gallery back their artwork!

A work of art by a radical artist may have been illegally seized by police in Melborune, even though no crime has been committed.

As police lobby for more numbers and more powers, their duties seem to now extend to seizing a half-burnt Australian flag outside of a Melbourne art gallery.

The artwork, Produly unAustralian, was removed several days ago from outside the Trocadero Art Space in Footscray. Simon Beckett, president of Australian Lawyers for Human Rights, said the removal of the flag was an act of censorship and that defacing the flag was not a federal offence, according to the Age of January 30.

"It is extraordinary and potentially unlawful that the police have seized an artwork before they appear to have determined whether an offence has been committed," he said.

The artist, Azlan McLennan, is a regular target of conservative views, with at least two other art works by him being censored. As the political culture of the state moves further to the right, it seems that individual police officers feel confident enough to exercise powers which have no clear legal basis.

According to a statement by the Victoria Police Media Unit, "An investigation is currently being conducted into the circumstances surrounding the display of the flag and to establish if any offence has been committed."

In situations of censorship, I think the first question that needs to be asked is "what are we trying to hide?"

In the case of removing a piece of social commentry expressed as an IMAGE of a burning "australian" flag, I think we need to ask the police force why they would behave so dishonestly in removing the image under the cover of darkness?

In the end it all just confirms that the minds in positions of power in our country think that social control is best excercised in unseen, unobserved, uncommentaried moments. the sedition laws will enable this process to become even more subversive.

So back to the original question....what exactly are we trying to hide by removing this piece?

I think it's that Progress at any cost has become an unnacepptable paradigm.

At a guess I'd suggest this is one of the points behind the artwork, and it's subsequent removal.

Perhaps many "Australians" are not so proud of what the flag represents.

Even though we as a society are marching toward fascism,the fact that the removal was carried out in such a covert way also points to the fact that those who work for their own greedy motives are becoming aware that we, as a people are going to demand more from them morally, ethically and spiritually in the future.

Perhaps it's time for mainstream Australia to understand that it's the ideas that we don't challenge that ultimatley represent us as "australians".

Interestingly in my most recent foray (now many years ago in a different state) into incendiary public art I found that many flags are now made of incombustible material. Even the cheap plasticy ones are difficult to light with only a lighter (as I found out to my dismay).
However, all you really need is good flame to start them off, I suggest the strong flame from an aerosol can (such as Glen -20 or most spray paints) or one of those high temperature "cigar" lighters.
I DON'T suggest dousing it in anything other than meths unless you are well away from people and want a REALLY quick burn. Here, yet again I suggest that a can of Glen-20 (which is basically pressurised methylated spirits) is the best friend of the incendiary insurrectionary. Check the labels of stuff before you use it as nowadays many aerosols are NON Flammable.

Is this seditious? Fuck'em, I mean any high school chemistry student knows as much....

(:p)

On a further note, DO be safe with your fires, I know that in the fall out from one "performance piece" the only thing I regretted wasn't the whinging and accusations from other "activists" but the fact that some people WERE dangerously close to the event. I don't think that I would do an incendiary action at a big crowded demo again but NOT because of self censorship...

if i may add, it would seem the weight of thought control is the more alarming when such an unoriginal, uncreative, unspecific cliche such as flag burning that has been done to death and really says very little in my opinion about anything is considered worthy of censorship. I mean, what planet are we, or should I say, is our government living on?

The last time I saw a flag get burned I cringed, then blushed, then forgave my innocent flag burning teenage friends.

Come now! Un-Australian sentiment, burning flags, clandestine operations, outraged patriots, even more outraged subversives?

I think we need to be a little more sympathetic to the sensibilities of our self appointed 'Leaders'. Carrying off this farcical reality they call 'democratic freedom' is hardly getting any easier.

So you’re saying you disagree with the annihilation of the globe in the pursuit of profits? - But there are bad guys, terrorists, and if we don’t spend billion’s marginalising them they will kill us all. What do you mean the monopoly of violence is central to OUR existence? Yeah, but that’s because we protect you, we look out for you, we want you to feel safe and warm, here, huddle under this flag, it’s getting cold out.

Sure, there’s the odd rip, maybe even a hole or two, but you can hardly expect our beloved flag to hold up forever? I mean, with education and communication advances, people were bound to cotton on. Doesn’t evolution demand that we at least try to better ourselves; surely it couldn’t hurt to consider alternatives, could it? We’re all Australian’s, so lets give the current system a ‘fair go’, and when the system fails to accommodate the views of the majority or to safeguard the planet for future generations, perhaps it’s time to entertain new ideas. Does ‘mateship’ extend to the third world, to Muslims, to our grandchildren?

No, I cannot help but smile wryly at the notion of being ‘Un-Australian’, - Is there any merit in discouraging a critical evaluation? I wonder if there was a group of adamant ‘Walkers’ subverting the development of the wheel? We need to dispense with our dangerously narrow framework of conception. Return to the basics. What is freedom without the ability to disagree?

Showing an image of a burning flag doesn't achieve much except for the notoriety of the artist, which the public feeds off anyway, and for all the wrong reasons. Burning a symbol gives the unintended result of creating more power for it. Look at the success and power of the swastika used by the Nazis. It's difficult for most people to appreciate the beauty of this symbol in it's real original cultural and spiritual origins and meanings after the Nazis appropriated it. Burning a flag is the same as burning an effigy. It serves a kind of catharsis for the energy which could have been used in a more intelligent way.

The Australian Cultural Terrorists' stealing of Picasso's Weeping Woman in 1986 was also a waste of energy. They demanded more money from the government for the arts. As was the stealing of the Mona Lisa in 1911, which the Cultural Terrorists' theft echoed. The thief wanted the painting returned to Italy. Both of these acts, however comical they may appear, also serve to inflate the capital and the preciousness of the symbols. Does this artist also want the value of his work to be inflated?