APR 25 2013
They say that you haven’t made it as a blogger until you get censored by Facebook. In which case, I’ve made it. It failed to provoke a sense of validation in me though, just nausea and quiet fury. This is yet another case where bloggers filling the gaps left by the main stream media are finding themselves censored on social media – the printing press of the masses.
Yesterday I wrote and published the article The Man Who Pushed a Toy Pig to Downing Street to Save our NHS. It was intended to raise awareness and support for The Artist Taxi Driver’s art based protest of the privatisation on the NHS.
On publishing the article on my Facebook page I was asked (unusually) to fill in a captcha (the little box that asks you to type the letters you see so they know you aren’t a computer). Shortly after, people were reporting that they were being asked to complete captchas to share it. People who tried to open the article were warned by Facebook it was spam and the content unsafe, to dissuade people from reading and sharing the piece. Despite all this, the article spread and had totalled over a thousand shares direct from the blog. Then something weird happened. It disappeared.
The article was removed Facebook, from everywhere it had been shared. It was removed from every personal wall, groups and page where it has appeared. It disappeared from the wall of any user that had posted it. The comments and conversations underway on people’s pages were erased. It was like it had never happened.
I received confused and angry messages from Facebook users who had noticed it vanish from their pages and pages they manage. Now, anyone trying to share it receives the message in the above picture.
This is not an isolated case; Facebook has form on this. Fellow blogger Tom Pride faced the same treatment yesterday when he satirised the Jobcentre and a disgruntled official had his article removed from Facebook as spam. Another Angry Voice has also covered the issue after being branded spam.
More broadly, Facebook has been found censoring users, employing temporary and permanent suspensions of their accounts, after unjustly labelling them as spammers.
Noone Mention the NHS!
The House of Lords debated and approved new S75 regulations which force the NHS to put all but a tiny minority of its services out for competitive tender. The MPs and Lords voting through this legislation were effectively voting to increase their own fortunes. The excellent work of Social Investigations demonstrates this legislation has been prepared and voted through by MPs, Lords and Ladies with a personal financial interest in the outcome.
This should be a scandal. It should be on the front page of every newspaper and the leading item on every news channel in the UK: CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN NHS SELL OFF!
This story did not appear on the BBC, ITV or Channel 4 flagship news programmes last night.
In aims to prompt mainstream coverage of the Lords debate, The Artist Taxi Driver (Mark McGowan) crawled four miles across London, pushing a toy pig. He pushed the pig all the way to No. 10 Downing Street, where he handed in a letter signed by his children. He did all this while suffering from bowel cancer. He was followed by hundreds of people with banners and placards while Twitter and Facebook raged with coverage and the #wheresdaddyspig hash tag trended at various points in the day within the UK, and spread around the world. Thousands tuned in to watch live coverage broadcast by individuals via bambuser online.
There was not a single UK based mainstream media article on this extraordinary event. You couldread about it in New York, but not in London.
Yet, for some individual or group, the mainstream media blackout was not enough; they wiped Facebook clean of our dissent too.
Facebook is not your Friend
We must take this as a note of caution and a reminder that Facebook and other social media sites are not free spaces, they are owned by corporations. If someone came and clasped their hand over your mouth in the street, there would be avenues for redress. If Facebook does the same, options are limited. Perhaps the most sinister element of this is not that we cannot now share this article on Facebook, but the disappearance where it had been shared. This could happen to anyone, and it is happening to more of us all the time. Could there come a day when our entire blogs disappear from the web as ‘spam’? Possibly. This is why we cannot overlook these incidences of censorship. All those with an interest in free speech and dissent ignore it at their peril.
You can follow me on Facebook and let them know I am not spam
You can contact Facebook and complain about this censorship
Share this article and let people know what’s happening.
You can see pictures of the #wheresdaddyspig protest here
You can see videos of the protest here
SOURCE | http://scriptonitedaily.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/facebook-censors-users-during-media-blackout-on-privatisation-of-the-nhs/
Christof Lehmann (nsnbc),- In an recent interview, Syria´s President al-Assad stated that the Syria crisis indicates an end to a uni-polar, US-dominated world. On Friday, insurgents shelled the predominantly Christian Damascus suburb Jaramana, killing one, injuring seven, and causing structural damage to several buildings. Meanwhile, the Syrian military continues operations throughout Syria, including the north-eastern areas of Damascus. Assad blamed Turkey for sponsoring terrorism.
In a televised interview with the Turkish channel Ulsal Kanal, the Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad accused Turkey of supporting terrorists in Syria. In the interview, al-Assad stressed, that western countries have no right to establish democracy in Syria as they bear responsibility for homicide in the country and the region.
The Syrian President continued the interview, stating, that the crisis in Syria is not a local but an international crisis, and that he believes, that the crisis is an artifact of a struggle between large countries of the world, for changing the existing state borders in the region. The crisis in Syria is as much an international crisis, Assad said, as it is a war that is being waged against his country by the international community.
Al-Assad emphasized, that the establishment of the BRICS has sent the signal to the whole world, that the USA no longer can remain the sole pole of global power, and that others will now have to bear in mind the opinion and interests of the BRICS countries. He continued stating, that the BRICS countries were not assisting his government or the Syrian state per se, but that they instead made an effort for stability in the region.
Al-Assad stressed, that there was a need to fully understand, that if the crisis leads to the breakup of Syria, or if it fills the country with terrorists, then the crisis will inevitably spill over into neighboring countries. He continued stating, that he believes, that “that is why the BRICS is facing up to the West and is foursquare behind the principle of a political settlement in Syria.”
On Wednesday al-Assad blamed the Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, stating, that he has not uttered a single word of truth since the beginning of the crisis, and blamed the Turkish government for being a key backer of the Syrian opposition and state sponsored terrorism.
In a statement released on Thursday, al-Assad criticized the Arab League for handing a seat to the Syrian opposition´s National Coalition, and stated that the Arab League lacks legitimacy. It is a league that represents the Arab states, not a league that represents Arab people. It cannot grant or retract legitimacy, he said.
Al-Assad´s statement, that the rise of the BRICS implies an end to a uni-polar world, dominated by the United States came shortly after the 2013 BRICS summit in Durban, South Africa, and the BRICS member states decision to, among other initiatives, create a BRICS Development Bank as an alternative to the World Bank and the IMF.
The red line, which the BRICS has drawn with regard to Syria, and with the establishment of a BRICS Development Bank are two among a series of red lines and signals which the BRICS has issued over the past month. Some of the western nations however, have responded with covert acts of aggression, which could not only aggravate and widen the conflict in Syria into a wider war, but result in a global currency war as well.
Subsequent to the failure to reach an agreement between the EU and Russia over the European Union´s Third Energy Package, Russian top diplomats have become increasingly assertive and open in their warnings against a widening of the conflict over energy security, which includes Syria.
In early March the Deputy Governor of China´s National Bank, Yi Gang, called on international players to avoid a currency war, stating, “China is fully prepared in terms of monetary policies and other mechanisms, to deal with a possible currency war, and China will take full account of the quantitative easing policy conducted by the central banks of some countries“.
The western response however, seems to be a continuation of aggressive military and economic politics, including among other, the continued aggravation of the crisis in Korea and Syria, the continuation of economic protectionism, enforced by military proxies or direct military intervention in central Africa.
Shortly after the BRICS summit in Durban, South Africa, western media initiated a campaign, positioning the South African President Jacob Zuma as a potential war criminal over the involvement of South African troops in the Central African Republic (CAR), where 13 South African soldiers were killed during attempts to help the government and military of the CAR to prevent a western backed coup d´etat with the help of a “rebel alliance” as proxy.
The concerted campaign against the 2013 BRICS Summit host, South African President Jacob Zuma, led the Russian expert on international law and governance, Alexander Mezyaev, to voice his concerns, that the western backed coup in the Central African Republic may have been a precursor for a coup d´etat in the Republic of South Africa.
There is a general consensus among analysts, that the statement of the Syrian President al-Assad, that the BRICS increased assertiveness spells an end to a US-dominated, uni-polar world. Whether the world will be heading to a global currency war and a widening of the worlds simmering conflicts into an open and direct military confrontation between the two blocks however, is far more uncertain and for the time being difficult to assess.
- BRICS Summit draws clear red lines on Syria, Iran
- Syria War is turning into Regional War. South African President declares BRICS Support for Geneva Declaration
- Central Bank of China Dep.Governor Yi Gang; Calls to avoid Currency War but China is prepared
- Permafrost; Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov Blasts USA and Allies for Arming Syria´s Opposition.
- Russia´s Top Diplomats signal increased assertiveness regarding Syria, Africa and NATO.
- Central African Intrigue; The Coup in the Central African Republic
- South Africa; Zuma accused of violating Constitution in Central African Republic Coup d´Etat
Christof Lehmann - Dr. Christof Lehmann is the founder and editor of nsnbc. He is a psychologist and independent political consultant on conflict and conflict resolution and a wide range of other political issues.
SOURCE | http://nsnbc.me/2013/04/06/assad-syria-crisis-marks-the-end-of-the-uni-polar-world-and-the-rise-of-the-brics-as-global-power/
All what these BDS movement and Electronic Intifada and all the NGOs working in West Bank and foreign countries care about is preventing the World Solidarity Movement from connecting with the armed Resistance against Israel as personified by Hizbullah of Lebanon and- behind it- the Islamic Republic of Iran . Because now- with the latest development of the last years – the Resistance to Israel or the effective armed Resistance against Israel, has shifted from Palestinian hands to Lebanese hands, in the hands of the heroic freedom fighters of the Lebanese Resistance who evicted the Israeli s from South Lebanon after 18 years of Israeli occupation after which the country became free and the villagers returned to their villages and resumed their lives and activities .
The Lebanese Resistance worked in coordination with Syria and Iran who provided it with weapons , equipment and unconditional support . The Lebanese Resistance of Hizbullah achieved thus the first military victory ever achieved over Israel and- for the first time in Arab history – the Israelis were forced to evacuate occupied Arab land and leave the Lebanese soil without condition and without shameful peace agreements or recognition or normalization with the usurping Israeli state .
This was the greatest Arab victory in year 2000 followed by another victory in year 2006 when the victorious Lebanese Resistance succeeded in defeating Israel and its allies in the war that lasted 33 days after which the Israelis where chased again out of Lebanon without any condition shamefully defeated , fleeing the battlefield and leaving their tanks burning behind them and their equipment all over the place . This Resistance of few determined men led by the most committed leadership succeeded not only in defeating Israel , but succeeded in defeating the allies of Israel and the world order itself on behalf of which Israel was acting .
The sole worry of the World Order- after this shameful defeat that witnessed the fall of the so- called mightiest army in the region and exposed the state of Israel Itself – became first : to isolate this victorious Resistance from its natural Arab and Muslim environment – and to isolate it- next- from the World and International Solidarity Movements against Israel .
As far as Arabs and Muslims are concerned, the World Order -using the fact that this honorable Lebanese Resistance belonged to one sect of Islam – worked on setting one Muslim sect against the other introducing thus the scheme of division and conflict between brothers and launching the war on Syria from the same sectarian stand .This sectarian alignment was supposed to take care of the unity desired to achieve the rallying of Arab and Muslim masses around the victorious armed Resistance to Israel .
Regarding the Solidarity movement against Israel , the World Order created multiple pro Palestinian so called NGOs – among them BDS and EI and so many others that are linked internationally and linked also- in some cases – directly – to the state of Israel. The International Solidarity Movement will be thus prevented from connecting to the actual effective Resistance on the ground- that has achieved real success – and provide it with due help and support, and will be connected – instead- to fictitious groups on the ground financed by and working for the World Order and who promote fictitious goals and fictitious theories about Israel being an Apartheid that needed anti Apartheid policies .
Most of this international activity around Palestine has for goal to isolate and shun the victorious armed Resistance against Israel and not to promote the Palestinian cause as it pretends . It works rather on giving the usurping state the legal status of Apartheid State consecrating thus its legal existence on Palestinian land while pretending to work on its so called segregationist policies.
Long time no see , no hear , this does not mean that eminent professor Chomsky was idle, there he goes lecturing people and students about the situation. This time, the dull professor -whose dullness is meant to mislead and misinform - reveals again his true affiliations and devotion, except that now he sounds more like a revolutionary rather than a US patriot or a Zionist Jew .
Certainly his beard has grown and Mr. Chomsky of the multi folded agenda and multiple tendencies- ranging from moderate left to Zionism- is now expounding his views about Syria., We had to wait long before our erudite expert grant us the pleasure of hearing his last statements, but it was worth while waiting because what we heard taught us more about the eminent professor than about Syria.
You have to admit that the eminent professor has been a riddle for a long time. A Zionist unusual figure armed with knowledge, objectivity and notoriety rather than nuclear weapons and bully. A mild Jew who would go to the length of denying the holocaust if this had for effect to increase his fans among Arabs and Muslims and cause him to win the hearts of some lost Palestinians.
The Zionist professor who- according to his soul mate- Finkelstein -of the staged lectures with cries and tears- became a Zionist as early as he learned how to put on his trousers, is now standing with the Syrian revolution against the so called dictatorship of president Assad.
Mind you, the smart sneaky professor - as appears in his statement - does not want- in any way- to be associated with the NATO group who is triggering the Syrian events and backing the so called opposition on the ground, because such an association, would not look good on the record of the free thinker and mild leftist he pretends to be.
For this reason, we see the eminent professor casting himself aside and presenting himself as a supporter of the so called Syrian revolution declaring that this is in antagonism with the US administration who is backing –according to him – the Syrian dictatorship.
Really! We are here in the presence of real erudition in the form of political Zionist manipulations that we are supposed to believe, and political maneuvers in which we are to partake. Of course the US administration could not be revolutionary; therefore-if revolution there is- then US administration is on the side of dictator, and if revolution is true and it is so - according to Chomsky - then Chomsky is on the revolutionary side against the US.
This is neither erudition nor free thought, nor moderate left, this is utter Zionism dressed in something else; this is the kind of reasoning Chomsky must have learned and taught at the linguistic department of the MIT.
There is logic in the reasoning except that the first premise is false, if there were revolution then all the reasoning would have been correct, and Chomsky could have kept his good place and the US administration would have to back the dictator. But there is no revolution in Syria, and the US is interfering by way of armed hired thugs paid by gulf countries and trained by the CIA in Turkey in order to operate a regime change. This makes this reasoning a well formulated trick and turns Chomsky into a US version of Bernard Henry levy.
by Daniel Mabsout
Four Zionists, two good Zionists and two bad ones . That the Jews or anybody else , for that matter , dream of having their own nation ,or anything else , that is fine , especially if they are lying in their bed in their homes while doing so ; they have the right to dream . But if they start dreaming of taking someone else’s land and killing them off and living in their homes and farms and making it their own , this is when things start turning evil for dream is one thing and physical reality is another ; certain religions and cultures require that a man who wrongs someone in a dream apologizes from him upon waking up .. If this dream of a nation is carried out to become an actual reality involving chasing out people from their houses and villages then this is really bad and requires a measure of some sort to stop this violation. We import good things from dream state to waking state and suppress evil things in the waking state.
The Chomsky and Finkelstein syndrome , never go that far in applying ethics to the matter , they never question the right of Israel to exist and, as Zionists, they seem to start all their reasoning from the evident fact of Israel’s right to exist ; this is their starting point and their final point as well , and , between the starting point and the final one they are ready to raise many issues in favor of Palestine and Palestinian rights and give many concessions , but they will not back up on the fundamental point which is Israel’s right to exist , in fact they are so keen on letting it exist that they want to protect Israel from any misadventure or excess of retaliation and reaction that will expose Israel and spoils its image and threatens therefore its existence , . For this reason when the Chomsky /Finkelstein syndrome exposes Israel’s excesses and violations they do so because both of them are intelligent enough to guess the repercussions of such violations on Israel itself , on its existence , survival and reputation and on the other hand to promote an imaginary co existence with Israel (such as a horse with wings) by infiltrating the intelligentsia and creating confusion.
The ethical issue of the original theft , ‘that of the land, is not raised , not even tackled , there is desire to limit the expansion of Israel and call for the formation of a Palestinian state out of sympathy and identification with Israel and not out of recognition of Palestinians’ right for their land which covers the whole of Palestine . There is no doubt that our two dedicated academicians add a scholastic flavor to Zionism, a flavor especially used to fool people like us who go on applauding them and praising them for serving Israel and helping Israel acquire an irreversible legitimacy and recognition while Arabs and Palestinians should be satisfied with the horse with wings.
Chomsky and Finkelstein both secure for Israel the academic laisser passer that makes Israel turn from a racist country to a some sort of “legitimate”country that hosts a certain culture and a religion namely : the Jewish one.The other two bad Zionists are non other than ‘Azmi Beshara and Bernard Henry Levy and each one of them is a school by himself . Azmi Beshara acquired the status of Arab thinker until he ended up in the arms of prince Khalifa of Qatar heading in Dawha a research center and working for the pro Zionist project of the prince . This is when we discovered that the Arab thinker stinks more than he thinks ,and serves an agenda that benefits Israel in the first place, and this after playing the victim and fooling Arabs claiming that he was the victim of Israel’s ban and eviction and acquiring thus their sympathy , support and respect . Evidently he was endowed with the mission to acquire this sympathy and support and direct them to Israel , mission in which he succeeded for some time , until many Arabs discovered the truth of his fake endeavor and fake personality.
As for the other Jew : Bernard Henry Levy , he stinks too much to have anything to add to the matter.
The lies of Hiroshima live on, props in the war crimes of the 20th century
The 1945 attack was murder on an epic scale. In its victims' names, we must not allow a nuclear repeat in the Middle East
By John Pilger
When I first went to Hiroshima in 1967, the shadow on the steps was still there. It was an almost perfect impression of a human being at ease: legs splayed, back bent, one hand by her side as she sat waiting for a bank to open. At a quarter past eight on the morning of August 6, 1945, she and her silhouette were burned into the granite. I stared at the shadow for an hour or more, then walked down to the river and met a man called Yukio, whose chest was still etched with the pattern of the shirt he was wearing when the atomic bomb was dropped.
He and his family still lived in a shack thrown up in the dust of an atomic desert. He described a huge flash over the city, "a bluish light, something like an electrical short", after which wind blew like a tornado and black rain fell. "I was thrown on the ground and noticed only the stalks of my flowers were left. Everything was still and quiet, and when I got up, there were people naked, not saying anything. Some of them had no skin or hair. I was certain I was dead." Nine years later, when I returned to look for him, he was dead from leukaemia.
In the immediate aftermath of the bomb, the allied occupation authorities banned all mention of radiation poisoning and insisted that people had been killed or injured only by the bomb's blast. It was the first big lie. "No radioactivity in Hiroshima ruin" said the front page of the New York Times, a classic of disinformation and journalistic abdication, which the Australian reporter Wilfred Burchett put right with his scoop of the century. "I write this as a warning to the world," reported Burchett in the Daily Express, having reached Hiroshima after a perilous journey, the first correspondent to dare. He described hospital wards filled with people with no visible injuries but who were dying from what he called "an atomic plague". For telling this truth, his press accreditation was withdrawn, he was pilloried and smeared - and vindicated.
The atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a criminal act on an epic scale. It was premeditated mass murder that unleashed a weapon of intrinsic criminality. For this reason its apologists have sought refuge in the mythology of the ultimate "good war", whose "ethical bath", as Richard Drayton called it, has allowed the west not only to expiate its bloody imperial past but to promote 60 years of rapacious war, always beneath the shadow of The Bomb.
The most enduring lie is that the atomic bomb was dropped to end the war in the Pacific and save lives. "Even without the atomic bombing attacks," concluded the United States Strategic Bombing Survey of 1946, "air supremacy over Japan could have exerted sufficient pressure to bring about unconditional surrender and obviate the need for invasion. Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that ... Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."
The National Archives in Washington contain US government documents that chart Japanese peace overtures as early as 1943. None was pursued. A cable sent on May 5, 1945 by the German ambassador in Tokyo and intercepted by the US dispels any doubt that the Japanese were desperate to sue for peace, including "capitulation even if the terms were hard". Instead, the US secretary of war, Henry Stimson, told President Truman he was "fearful" that the US air force would have Japan so "bombed out" that the new weapon would not be able "to show its strength". He later admitted that "no effort was made, and none was seriously considered, to achieve surrender merely in order not to have to use the bomb". His foreign policy colleagues were eager "to browbeat the Russians with the bomb held rather ostentatiously on our hip". General Leslie Groves, director of the Manhattan Project that made the bomb, testified: "There was never any illusion on my part that Russia was our enemy, and that the project was conducted on that basis." The day after Hiroshima was obliterated, President Truman voiced his satisfaction with the "overwhelming success" of "the experiment".
Since 1945, the United States is believed to have been on the brink of using nuclear weapons at least three times. In waging their bogus "war on terror", the present governments in Washington and London have declared they are prepared to make "pre-emptive" nuclear strikes against non-nuclear states. With each stroke toward the midnight of a nuclear Armageddon, the lies of justification grow more outrageous. Iran is the current "threat". But Iran has no nuclear weapons and the disinformation that it is planning a nuclear arsenal comes largely from a discredited CIA-sponsored Iranian opposition group, the MEK - just as the lies about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction originated with the Iraqi National Congress, set up by Washington.
The role of western journalism in erecting this straw man is critical. That America's Defence Intelligence Estimate says "with high confidence" that Iran gave up its nuclear weapons programme in 2003 has been consigned to the memory hole. That Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad never threatened to "wipe Israel off the map" is of no interest. But such has been the mantra of this media "fact" that in his recent, obsequious performance before the Israeli parliament, Gordon Brown alluded to it as he threatened Iran, yet again.
This progression of lies has brought us to one of the most dangerous nuclear crises since 1945, because the real threat remains almost unmentionable in western establishment circles and therefore in the media. There is only one rampant nuclear power in the Middle East and that is Israel. The heroic Mordechai Vanunu tried to warn the world in 1986 when he smuggled out evidence that Israel was building as many as 200 nuclear warheads. In defiance of UN resolutions, Israel is today clearly itching to attack Iran, fearful that a new American administration might, just might, conduct genuine negotiations with a nation the west has defiled since Britain and America overthrew Iranian democracy in 1953.
In the New York Times on July 18, the Israeli historian Benny Morris, once considered a liberal and now a consultant to his country's political and military establishment, threatened "an Iran turned into a nuclear wasteland". This would be mass murder. For a Jew, the irony cries out.
The question begs: are the rest of us to be mere bystanders, claiming, as good Germans did, that "we did not know"? Do we hide ever more behind what Richard Falk has called "a self-righteous, one-way, legal/moral screen [with] positive images of western values and innocence portrayed as threatened, validating a campaign of unrestricted violence"? Catching war criminals is fashionable again. Radovan Karadzic stands in the dock, but Sharon and Olmert, Bush and Blair do not. Why not? The memory of Hiroshima requires an answer.
John Pilger - The Guardian, Wednesday 6 August 2008
SOURCE | http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/06/secondworldwar.warcrimes
SOURCE | http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/06/secondworldwar.warcrimes