Showing posts with label journalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label journalism. Show all posts

1 October 2016

'Oil companies should pay for damage done by fracking'

The Blog


Considering the "firm link" between hydraulic fracturing (fracking) and earthquakes established by scientists, the oil companies responsible ought to pay for the damage.


Garrison Center director Thomas Knapp made this argument in a recent Medium post also found at the Garrison Center website.

Knapp asks "What’s the difference between a drunk driver who totals your car with his reckless, intoxicated driving, and an oil company that damages your house’s foundation with its reckless, earthquake-inducing fracking?" He writes that journalists have unfortunately "prostituted themselves out to the fracking industry, attempting to justify that kind of privilege and favoritism in the name of cheap energy and economic growth".

Hydraulic fracturing, a method of shale oil extraction, is subsidized by some governments as a type of alternative to conventional petroleum and natural gas. As well as causing earthquakes, scientists believe fracking is responsible for poisoning ground water and increasing cancer.

Fracking stands in contrast with cleaner renewable energy such as solar and future "bright green" energy industries that may arise with emerging technologies.

Link: Crony Capitalism and Political Privilege: Earthshaking. Literally.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

2 August 2016

Hurt Hillary faces wicked WikiLeaks

The Blog


Asked if he had anything personal against Hillary Clinton in the midst of emails exposing the Democratic National Convention's (DNC) lies and biases to support her, WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange rejected false media stories.


CNN journalist Anderson Cooper confronted Assange with the allegations that WikiLeaks may be unduly interfering in the US election, that he may be helping Russia interfere in the US election, and that he may be acting on his own personal contempt for Clinton.
Despite the fact Hillary Clinton is opposed to press freedom and the circulation of the truth about the US regime, and despite the fact Hillary Clinton is a war criminal, Julian Assange defended the "pristine" nature of information published by WikiLeaks. The organization is not motivated by anything personal against Clinton, he said. All WikiLeaks does is expose raw data given to it in a timely manner and with minimum curation, so it can allow the public to form their own opinions. It is for this reason that the US regime has been so devastated and humiliated by WikiLeaks and is losing the information war with its critics.

Hillary Clinton has already been vetted and nodded in as the next president by the undemocratic regime. The criminal has already played a key role in planning and orchestrating catastrophic aggression by the US regime in the Middle East and intends to continue such crimes once in office.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

17 May 2016

Mont Order-related research available

The Blog


Research into the writings of Jean-Paul Marat in 1774  and their possible reapplication in the modern world has been made available at Dissident Voice and other websites and pages of the Mont Order society.


Quoting Marat's 1774 book The Chains of Slavery at length, the L'Ordre essay relates strongly the origins of the Mont Order's legendary name in the chaos of the French Revolution. As such, it is an attempt to guide the Order and keep its overall philosophy in concert with its origins and associations.

Some conspiracy theorists believe the Mont Order and the Montagnards who created the French Republic and executed Louis XVI before apparently disappearing into the chaos are one and the same.

Theories aside, the L'Ordre essay is an authentic Mont Order document at the Dissident Voice publication, and does express great interest in the revolutionary rhetoric responsible for inspiring the French Revolution. It calls for this to be reapplied in the modern world, with western democracies having gone astray and failed to accomplish what the French and American Revolutions hoped to do.

Jean-Paul Marat was a French physician, journalist and key influence on the "Mountain", who became a martyr of then-new liberal nationalist ideas following his assassination in 1793. Marat lived with a debilitating skin disease, often in exile and hiding in sewers to escape persecution during his political life, while he ran the dissident newspaper The People's Friend.

In its conclusion, the Mont Order essay asks the Order's members to emulate Marat. "Being strongly related to the Mont Order association's own name and hopes, Marat is an ideal role model", L'Ordre argues. Dissidents should therefore be encouraged to be powerful, awe-inspiring individuals who "act bravely against the unproven government and international system" and in Marat's words, "bring the ax to their root" when it comes to dealing with injustices.

Notable differences between the Mont Order and the French Revolutionary thinkers include a lack of interest in patriotic nationalism, with this being archaic in a high-tech modern environment with everyone connected through the internet.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

29 January 2016

West dissidents go after Vladimir Putin?

The Blog


As Vladimir Putin steps up his opposition to US hegemony in Syria, Ukraine and other theaters of confrontation between the powers, supporters of US global dominance demonize all their critics as supporters of Putin.


In response to the demonization, some Western dissidents are starting to focus their criticism partially on Russia and its President Vladimir Putin. Any criticism of Putin will suffice, even if it doesn't make any sense. This new behavior is based on hysteria and the intense fear of being dismissed as "apologists" for Putin.

Severe punishment is already given to Western journalists for being supportive of Russia or even for being neutral on issues to do with Russia. Journalists have been fired or denied a platform even for being suspected of sympathizing with Vladimir Putin.

Recently, new laws are being drafted in the United States to make anti-Russian propaganda the official editorial policy of all news media establishments. The hysteria produced by such moves is pushing some major dissident journalists and celebrities into issuing anti-Russian remarks, often with no idea what they are talking about.

Because these celebrated dissidents had dedicated their lives to criticizing their own governments, not Russia, they find themselves not knowing what to say to satisfy the hysterical anti-Russian media. Take a look at the different examples below, ranging from the noblest to the most sold-out dissidents.

Snowden the Russian troll?



The noblest. The example of a Western dissident who still doesn't criticize Russia at all despite the hysteria, Edward Snowden leaked information on US illegal domestic surveillance against its entire population. He is a particularly obvious victim of demonization as a pro-Putin spy, due to being lost in transit in an airport in Moscow when the US cancelled his passport and later having no choice but to claim asylum in the Russian Federation. However, Snowden (as well as former Guardian journalist who covered Snowden's story, Glenn Greenwald) has maintained his belief that the US is the primary threat to civil liberties and human rights in the world. Not Russia - and Snowden realizes it is his prerogative as an American to criticize his own "regime" in the US rather than Vladimir Putin's government.

Assange the antiPutin?



Julian Assange, who is also accused of being an agent or otherwise instrument of Putin, has made some token effort to make it look like he not only criticizes the West but also Putin. He has met with members of the anti-Putin group P***y Riot, although it isn't clear that he really supports them or the dark figures at the US Capitol who made them into celebrities.

Assange also confused many in the audience at a televised RT network anniversary discussion, when he claimed that Russia would definitely shoot down British warplanes if they were operating in Ukraine. This, despite the fact that Russia has not directly shot down any warplanes in Ukraine to date, including Ukrainian ones engaged in bombing pro-Russian rebel forces in Donetsk and Luhansk.

Assange seemed to argue that Russia is hypocritical to condemn Turkey's shooting down of a Russian bomber aircraft in Syria, as the downing was typical of the perfidy of the Russian government itself. However, the claim is ill-considered at best and tongue-in-cheek at worst. Perhaps Assange only said it to confuse some of his own critics, who might have seen him as a Russian agent. Whatever the case, Assange's anti-Russia comment was of poor quality, and not quote-worthy material for anyone who wants to actually build a case against Putin. No political ammunition was really given by Assange for attacking Putin.

Owen Jones, the universalist leftist



Although not as extreme as the next case, Owen Jones wrote a recent shallow article in the Guardian called "Putin is a human rights abusing oligarch. The British left must speak out". Again, as with the Assange remark above, there is nothing quote-worthy in the content there for anyone who really opposes Putin. It appears to be a token article, designed less to support Putin's opponents and more to make Owen Jones look like a "good boy" who the British press will still be happy to tuck into bed.

The actual content just doesn't make any sense and is a dummy case, useless to anyone who opposes Putin. Jones calls for leftists in Britain and the West in general not quite to protest against the Kremlin instead of our own government (as our next case does), but to hope for regime-change in Russia by leftists who oppose Putin. No analysis of Russian politics is given, Jones does not elaborate which "leftists" he is talking about, and the actual leftists in Russia overwhelmingly praise Vladimir Putin's record and have no desire to overthrow him. Jones did subsequently tweet something about Russia's bombing of ISIL as an example of a Russian crime to be criticized alongside Western crimes. However, Russian actions in Syria are massively different from the West in the sense of being legal and based on an indigenous request for help, which differs starkly from Western imperialism.

The level of cross-party support in the Russian political spectrum for Owens' "Putin regime" is massive, and the "embattled democrats and leftists" in Russia to whom Jones is appealing don't merit mention or consideration. Even Jones admits that they are too insignificant to mention by name, insofar as he does not mention them.

Moreover, serious critics of Western foreign policy know that the anti-Putin groups in Russia are all funded by the US State Department. Jones knows it would be insane for him to support those groups and also maintain his role to "criticise Western foreign policy".

Peter Tatchell, lunatic who attacks the anti-war left for not supporting Western regime-change



The most extreme example. Even Owen Jones made a small jab at this guy in his aforementioned article, saying "there is something rather absurd about the baiting of the anti-war left for not protesting against, say, Putin or North Korea". Peter Tatchell's case is already covered by us. Read our special report on his warmongering and advocacy for "no bomb zones" which would require bombing Russians, Syrians and anyone else who gets in the West's way.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

1 January 2016

Steve Topple on the future of media

The Blog


Britain-based blogger Steve Topple reflected on his writing career so far and his views on the future of media, in a recent post.


The following commentary offered is of great relevance to The clubof.info Blog's mission and readership:
I do this because in the current political and socioeconomic climate we are barraged day in, day out, with lie after lie after lie – and I’m of the opinion that the more people out there shouting at the tops of their voices in any way they can to counter these lies can only be a good thing.
Our mainstream media is corrupt – we all know that
Unfortunately, our “new media” (many of the sites you can find on Twitter)... are all (still) a Russell Group, self-serving chumocracy, albeit one which tows the line of what is fast becoming the new centre-left (that is, “Corbynism”), and will not deviate from the message which they perceive will garner them the most views, followers, re-tweets – whatever. 
This is not the future of journalism. The future of journalism (in my opinion), is one where every person, if they feel inclined, can write, record or express in any way they see fit “their truth”, and share it with the world – then the world can make up their own mind.
Steve Topple can be followed on Twitter here. In addition to his writing accomplishments, he is connected up with the Mont Order society's loose coalition of bloggers. His effective role as a firebrand on the British political blogosphere is the main reason people are drawn to his work and the causes he supports.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

18 December 2015

Erdogan cries "treason" over interview

The Blog


The Erdogan "caliphate" regime in Turkey has accused an MP of "treason" for telling the truth about Syria.


That case was opened by the Chief Prosecutor's Office against Istanbul MP Eren Erdem (Republican People's Party CHP) after he explained Turkey's role in supplying chemical weapons to terrorist groups in Syria at the Russian news network RT.

As shown in the video below, Eren Erdem told the RT network that ISIL received the needed chemicals to produce deadly sarin nerve gas via transit through Turkey. This was based on evidence from a criminal case. Erdem pointed out that there may have been a cover-up by the ruling Erdogan regime in Turkey.

The authorities had actually arrested 13 suspects for aiding ISIL in procuring chemical weapons. Erdem said the prosecution was abandoned and the suspects were allowed to cross the Turkish-Syrian border.

Erdem confirmed that Western-backed terrorist groups, not Syrian Army soldiers loyal to Bashar al-Assad as reported in Western media, carried out a chemical attack on civilians in East Ghouta in 2013. It may have been done using the weapons supplied through Turkey.



Turkey has been accused by many different powers of supporting the ISIL terrorists in Syria and Iraq. In addition, Turkey has acted aggressively and capriciously, invading Iraqi territory and shooting down a Russian warplane while it was bombing ISIL positions near Turkey.

Turkey's pro-ISIL actions have brought Turkey's Erdogan regime to the brink of war with Moscow, with Russia even massing troops against the Turkish border in Armenia, according to Fort Russ, and surrounding Turkey with anti-aircraft missiles including those of its naval cruisers.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

15 December 2015

John Kirby hates "tough questions"

The Blog


US State Department spokesman John Kirby refused "tough questions" from a Russian journalist and returned several questions angrily during a press conference.


During the press conference, Kirby was asked questions by the RT (Russia Today) network’s Gayane Chichakyan, who asked if the Iraqi government should have no concern over the US refusing responsibility for settling divisions in the so-called coalition against ISIL.

  • State Dept: US leads a 60-nation coalition
  • State Dept: US not responsible for coalition members and disputes, they work bilaterally

While at the same time bragging about the size and scope of the US-led campaign against ISIL, Kirby kept saying the US does not take responsibility for the actions of these forces and they must resolve any of their own problems bilaterally. The Russian journalist's apparently too "tough" and unanswerable question was a follow-up question to that apparent contradiction in Kirby's points.

Rather than answering the question, Kirby tried to insult Chichakyan on the air and condemn the RT network for asking "difficult questions". Kirby pointed out that RT does not pose this type of question to the Russian government's Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), as if this indicated double standards in the network's reporting. This is despite the clear difference that Russia is not offering arrogant propositions to lead 60-nation coalitions or trying to dominate the world - behavior that at least requires RT to ask a few more challenging questions.



The questions Kirby would like RT's Gayane Chichakyan to ask of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs were never mentioned. However, Russia's MFA has openly asked the State Department itself to pose any questions for it to answer. The State Department refused that opportunity, feeling it better to imagine and speculate about Russians than talk to them.

This arrogant refusal to listen to the Russians and desire to ignore them may be why the US strategy in Syria has proven such a failure while the Russian strategy is succeeding.

It does not occur to Kirby that the reason Russia is not being asked "tough questions" of the variety asked by Chichakyan is because no one has tried. Kirby instead insinuates another explanation: Russian diplomats escape tough questions by getting RT and other Russian media to screen them out. There is no evidence of that behavior by the Russians, but there is evidence of the State Department hiding from tough questions. Just look at John Kirby himself.


The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

27 November 2015

France to exploit terror for censorship

The Blog


France and other Western countries will conflate terrorists with critics and dissidents and use the ISIL-inspired attacks in Paris as an excuse to target their own people.


This is the prediction of journalist Geroid O'Colmain speaking to the RT network, as shown in the embedded LiveLeak video below.



Members of the Mont Order society of dissidents and writers were recently interested in the video and discussed it as a model interview.

O'Colmain named alternative media as a likely target of Western governments' measures supposedly aimed against terrorism. The "established order" will be defended, he argues, by going after people who tell the truth about the state's domestic and foreign policy atrocities and mistakes.

The prediction given is similar to that of other analysts, who have quoted the British regime threatening to silence its citizens if they believe conspiracy theories or try to point out British and American crimes in Iraq. Such critics, the regime reasons, need to be silenced because offer a narrative that indirectly supports terrorist groups such as ISIL.

UK Prime Minister Cameron wants to silence "extremist" speech in the UK. Meanwhile, the British regime and its allies are directly arming ISIL by parachuting weapons into the Syrian battlespace for supposed "moderate" terror.



The clubof.info Blog

Read More »

20 November 2015

Petition: Google must end its censorship

The Blog


Following up on the post last week on Google's stifling of political news coverage at YouTube, we want to draw your attention to Representative Press's petition to get advertising revenue restored to alternative media videos.


Created via Change.org, the petition can be signed by our readers at the following link. It is really important to get this petition to Google's attention, if a victory for small alternative media channels is going to be scored.

YouTube, Please Restore Ad Revenue for Journalists Reporting on War + Political Conflicts

In a lengthy appeal to the public at the petition, Representative Press offered the following commentary:
Whatever the motivation for imposing the new policy, depriving independent journalists posting videos on Youtube or writing on their websites of the same financial opportunities which major media’s network news profit from is misguided and unfair. It puts those who challenge the dominating news outlets at a enormous disadvantage.
As we stated last week, alternative media is a vital part of the daily routine of millions of people who struggle to stay ahead of the mainstream media's unreliability and corporate-sponsored biases. Many political controversies and scandals have only reached the public via alternative media channels, and Representative Press itself has enjoyed a vast audience.

The channel's author writes that Google's suppression of advertising features on politically "sensitive" videos amounts to "effectively economic censorship imposing political censorship".

"Please don’t sit back and allow YouTube/Google to take away the same opportunities of revenue earning which major media outlets can and still do benefit from on TV and websites", the author asks the signatories of the petition.

StormCloudsGathering, another alternative media channel, simply gave up on advertising as a result of Google's changes, and moved to requesting donations from their vast audience. However, with this petition, at least a small chance exists to do something about the problem rather than bypassing it.

The clubof.info Blog is part of the alternative media blogosphere too, although by no means dependent on advertising revenue. If alternative media is an important part of your online experience, don't let it wither away by refusing to do anything about it. At least take the time to sign the Change.org petition today.


The clubof.info Blog


Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

13 November 2015

Google tries to stifle political expression

The Blog


Concerns continue to prevail that Google may be pulling advertising features from "hot" videos and other content on politically "sensitive" subjects.


Evidence of such concerns in the blogging community can be found at lone wolf publications such as StormCloudsGathering and Representative Press.

A video from StormCloudsGathering goes through the issue, as embedded below. StormCloudsGathering notes that challenging the mainstream narrative often results in a sudden loss of advertising features that normally appeared with the video content.


Representative Press, for its part, made much the same points. YouTube states that it reserves a right to "suspend monetization feature" on videos for a number of potential violations, which include publishing content on "Controversial or sensitive subjects and events". This vague language is referenced by both Representative Press and StormCloudsGathering as perhaps the reason why Google can justify its discrimination against lone alternative media reporters.

Google's top minds have themselves shown a profound ignorance of censorship and political freedom, including in their book The New Digital Age. This ignorance is matched only by their bizarre, chauvinist assertion in the book that Western countries are not applying censorship but "compliance with the law", as if to say that the law in China or North Korea isn't quite the law.

If Google can't see the difference between censorship and "compliance with the law", it's not surprising that it can't see the difference between inconvenient content and "sensitive" content.


The clubof.info Blog is utilizes advertising but is in fact a zero-cost endeavor, using the free Blogger platform offered by Google to publish. So, although Google is not being very supportive of full-time self-employed journalists, it does maintain several powerful platforms for people around the world to publish less ambitious content.


The clubof.info Blog


Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

30 October 2015

US targets its own people instead of ISIS

The Blog


The US government is more concerned by its own people than foreign terrorist threats such as the so-called ISIL Takfiri terrorist group, the founder of We Are Change has alleged.


Luke Rudkowski, founder of the American grassroots alternative media team We Are Change, has lashed out attempts to label his organization an extremist group. In one video, he confronted mainstream media journalist Chris Matthews for using just such a description of his organization. The video shows a stumped Matthews refusing to answer questions about his slander of the media activist group, and trying to flee.

In a stunning analysis in a different video, Luke Rudkowski connected the mainstream media attack on his organization with the US Department of Justice's "pivot" away from foreign terror groups like ISIL towards its own people. Much of this attack, Luke says, will consist of misrepresenting progressive or nonpartisan groups who merely criticize the US government as "racist" and "bigots", as Matthews did in a televised broadcast mentioning We Are Change.



Fixated on what it sees as the internal threat of vigilant armed Americans and Americans exercising other Constitutional rights such as their free speech, elements of the US government would like to abandon the almost farcical few airstrikes the US carries out against ISIL. Their idea is to focus instead on targeting Americans, who are described as "domestic terrorists" in the regime's clouded language of murder and deceit.


Vowing never to stop his reporting, no matter what threats and intimidation come from the US federal government, Luke described the regime as "power-hungry parasites" and "insane". The final portion of the video called for viewers to counter the regime's lies by tuning in to his videos and other media.


The momentum of US efforts to censor criticism of the regime appears to be growing, and alternates between calls to prosecute Americans for speaking to shutting down foreign news broadcasters. A think tank led by US Senator John McCain recently called for alternative media channels like the RT network to be taken off the air in the US. While the think tank described its agenda as stopping "propaganda" from Russia's President Vladimir Putin, it must be seen in view of the larger pressure to censor all alternative media and criticism of the regime.


The clubof.info Blog


Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

8 September 2015

"Propped up" Ukrainian regime doomed

The Blog


The Ukrainian regime imposed by the 2014 Coup in Kiev is increasingly weak, fractured and being propped up by foreign powers.


Ukraine's debt has been steadily mounting as the broken, civil war-plagued puppet state has continued to beg its American owners for more money. Recent violence in the streets of Kiev has been sparked by the same extremists who led the Coup and have been involved in massive war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Donetsk, Luhansk and Odessa Oblasts.


Russia has been placed under sanctions by bellicose "democracies" such as the UK and US for its military maneuvers near the unstable state and its reintegration of the Crimean Peninsula with Russia, as well as its diplomatic protests against Ukraine's massacres of civilians. A recent analysis by Mark Chapman argued that sanctions against Russia have failed. They were founded upon a familiar "arrogant", colonial, condescending view of Russia (much like the view informing the campaign of failed sanctions against Iran). They were quickly circumvented by the Russian people, who feel no dependence on the arrogant powers and financial institutions and see a growing moral duty to not cooperate with discredited war criminals and murderers in Washington.

Russian officials have already challenged the US to place more sanctions on their country, saying that they refuse to obey the arrogant powers and will instead confront them if necessary.

The following embedded television debate covered many of the main points about the immorality, confusion and futility of the costly war being waged by the US-backed regime in Ukraine. Most significantly, the way that US regime leaders openly associated and posed with neo-Nazis in Kiev and are now trying to dismiss these same Nazis as "a few bad apples" is exposed by the speakers on the program.

Mark Sleboda portrayed the Ukrainian regime as doomed and argued that it "would have collapsed many times over" if it was not being "drip fed" by the US regime and European puppet states which fear the collapse of the current oligarchy.



The regime ruling Ukraine has censored the media, killed and arrested thousands of civilians, assassinated journalists, assassinated and intimidated political opposition, banned opposition parties, and waged war against all dissenting elements of its own people since it came to power illegally in 2014. The US has refused to condemn the regime and has eagerly supplied it with training, weapons and funding to support its terrorism. There has also been a silence from alternate media and civil society bodies on the escalating and inconvenient war crimes of the dysfunctional and fake "democracy" supported by the US.


The Blog


Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

31 July 2015

UK's Cameron regime tries to ban truth

The Blog


The ruling Cameron regime in the UK now sees telling the truth about British war crimes in the Middle East as a form of extremism.


Saying anything compatible with the rhetoric of terrorist groups such as ISIL (the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant or Daesh as it's Arabic acronym goes) will now be considered extremist, including statements of fact. This was the analysis of antistatist writer Billy Christmas at C4SS (the Center for a Stateless Society), an antistatist think tank based in the United States.

The trend towards censorship and persecution of dissidents in the UK is especially worrying considering that UK subjects do not have any constitutional right to freedom of speech.

When asked what "extremist" speech is, Home Secretary Theresa May couldn't answer and suggested that it was vague and nebulous, left to regime officials to arbitrarily label anyone an extremist criminal and kill them if it doesn't like them. According to Christmas' analysis, this amounts to fascism, and it is all the more offensive because it is wrapped in rhetoric about "British values" while actively undermining the rule of law and even trying to erase people's inalienable rights.

The antistatist writer reminded his readers that the British government - like the US government - is hypocritical and responsible for atrocities in the Middle East. If Islamist extremists use this fact to justify their terrorism, that doesn't make it any less true:
According to Sean Gabb: “the British State is committed to an American-led campaign of war and destabilisation throughout the Islamic world, and shares responsibility for millions of civilian deaths and maimings there.” As Gabb says, the statement is not only reasonable, but “obviously true.” Yet to speak the obvious truth is now a heresy. We can soon expect to not be able to point out this simple truth, lest we offend “our British values.”
An even greater paradox lies in the fact that Cameron's desire to persecute dissidents is itself an extremist goal, and it is made all the more destructive because it has successfully captured control of the state machinery. Islamist fanatics may intend to kill people who criticize them, but the more apparent regime issuing such threats to the British people is Cameron's own government.

The Zionist parasite Cameron ranted in a paranoid speech that the millions of people, including academic bodies, who currently boycott and oppose the apartheid regime of Israel should be considered terrorists.


The Blog


Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

14 July 2015

The #MontOrder's growth in tweets

The Blog


The growth of the new Mont Order society can be seen on Twitter through the use of the #MontOrder hashtag.


New items on the Mont Order society are appearing frequently. The following are a special selection of tweets illustrating the current priorities and causes carried under the umbrella of the Mont Order society.

The Blog


Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

5 June 2015

UK web dissident repressively censored

The Blog


Despite attempts by the British regime to silence dissident Simon Tomlin, he is continuing his publishing.


An indefinite gagging order issued on 12 December 2014 has prevented Tomlin's investigative journalism addressing the thuggery and connivance of UK police and authorities. According to Tomlin's new blog the Dissident, which succeeds the censored Daily Agenda blog before it, authorities invented their case against him in order to silence the inconvenient truths he sought to report.

From the new Dissident blog:
Simon would like to welcome everyone to his new blog, aptly titled ‘The Dissident'; on 27 March 2015 at Nottingham Crown Court, barrister Adrian Langdale said Simon was now “a dissident” and after being inspired by the top-ranked lawyer, Simon found a new purpose to continue the battle after 5 months in prison for thought crimes. 
The battle for freedom of speech affects everyone in Britain and indeed across the world, so Simon has to finish the job he set out to do in April 2002 in The Sunday Times. 
This new blog will concentrate on current issues in the news and he will not shirk from embarrassing those who abuse positions of public trust. Misconduct in a public office is unacceptable and the masses must have a voice to represent them against the big battalions.
Tomlin became a political prisoner for his dissident actions. He was arrested and imprisoned for his political reporting, which authorities deemed to be threatening their hold on sensitive information, and so they attempted to silence him.

Despite the attempts by UK authorities to portray Tomlin as a criminal, he is still favorably received in international dissident circles and his freedom of speech is still protected by civil liberties and human rights law in the interests of freedom of speech and conscience.

The Blog


Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

14 April 2015

NSA claims to end spying are like satire

The Blog


Headlines saying the US National Security Agency (NSA) was going to stop spying on Americans before Snowden's leak sound like something from the Onion satirical paper, a C4SS analyst writes.


In an analysis of the reporting at The Week and the Associated Press, C4SS's Nick Ford wrote:
Most people’s reactions to this is to laugh. The idea that the NSA, an organization all but synonymous with spying on the American people, was going to self-regulate is worth a good chuckle indeed.
Workers lower in the NSA's hierarchy are likely to be more cognizant of the mass surveillance program's ineffectiveness than  higher ranking officials, Ford writes, but are afraid of being punished if they bring their grievances to their superiors. This also matches Edward Snowden's own account of why he chose to disclose the program's details to the public via anti-establishment journalists rather than going via Congressional options or the NSA's own internal system. It also refutes many of the arguments made against Snowden as a traitor by pointing to the "loyalty" of others in the NSA, who are really only held back by fear of punishment rather than sincere support for mass spying abuses.

Ford argues that the NSA's desperate media tactics are laughable and reveal the organization's incompetence and uselessness to the American people:
So here we have an incompetent but incredibly powerful organization saying, “oh yeah we would have stopped spying on everyone if you hadn’t exposed us!” 
Come on NSA, pull the other one.

The clubof.info Blog


Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

3 February 2015

#Freedom: Know Your Bloggers' Rights

@EFF.


One of EFF's goals is to give you a basic roadmap to the legal issues you may confront as a blogger to let you know you have rights and to encourage you to blog freely with the knowledge that your legitimate speech is protected. To that end we have created the Legal Guide for Bloggers a collection of blogger-specific FAQs addressing everything from fair use to defamation law to workplace whistle-blowing.

In addition EFF continues to battle for bloggers' rights in the courtroom:

Bloggers can be journalists (and journalists can be bloggers).

We're battling for legal and institutional recognition that if you engage in journalism you're a journalist with all of the attendant rights privileges and protections. (See Apple v. Does.)

Bloggers' Rights at EFF

Bloggers are entitled to free speech.


We're working to shield you from frivolous or abusive threats and lawsuits. Internet bullies shouldn't use copyright libel or other claims to chill your legitimate speech. (See OPG v. Diebold.)

Bloggers have the right to political speech.


We're working with a number of other public-interest organizations to ensure that the Federal Election Commission (FEC) doesn't gag bloggers' election-related speech. We argue that the FEC should adopt a presumption against the regulation of election-related speech by individuals on the Internet and interpret the existing media exemption to apply to online media outlets that provide news reporting and commentary regarding an election -- including blogs. (See our joint comments to the FEC [PDF 332K].)

Bloggers have the right to stay anonymous.


We're continuing our battle to protect and preserve your constitutional right to anonymous speech online including providing a guide to help you with strategies for keeping your identity private when you blog. (See How to Blog Safely (About Work or Anything Else).)

Bloggers have freedom from liability for hosting speech the same way other web hosts do.


We're working to strengthen Section 230 liability protections under the Communications Decency Act (CDA) while spreading the word that bloggers are entitled to them. (See Barrett v. Rosenthal.)

If you'd like to spread the word about our work consider adding an EFF Bloggers' Rights Badgeto your blog or website.

Read More »

27 January 2015

“#Terror” as Victim Rhetoric

@RcLibertine .


The entire purpose of the language of terrorism is to cloak the sentiments of war in a victim rhetoric. You see, France isn’t “at war,” they’re merely responding to “terror” attacks. Those wretched, vile gunmen are not warriors or soldiers, they’re madmen, lone wolf terrorists.


The attack on Charlie Hebdo‘s office on January 7 might otherwise be considered an invasion, an attack from outside forces France has declared war on. But war is far too brutish for the 21st century, where of course violence is on an inevitable downturn and world peace is just around the corner if not for a few meddling terror cells.

Calling such events “terrorism” is just a way of defamiliarizing people with the concept of war. No matter what, an attack on any western nation’s soil is terror, wholly undeserved, never the result of an ongoing worldwide conflict but merely the work of crazed individuals.


Delude yourself no longer with these politically correct terms. There’s a war, many western nations are involved in it, and attacks on your home turf are a result of it. Maybe the neocons would be a little less annoying if they stopped trying to dress this up as something else. Maybe people would be more hesitant to simply pick a side and declare the other side nothing more than barbarous lunatics if we actually talked honestly. It would at least do us all the service of clearing up people’s intentions and allow those around us to judge the situation more accurately.

All acts of war involve terror. The horror of war is not a byproduct, it is the intention. One cannot divorce terror from war anymore than one can divorce pleasure from sex. Treating an entire side of a conflict as the mere triggering of emotions among a geopolitical constituency reinforces that society’s self-righteousness and blinds them to the environment of terror present constantly throughout middle eastern nations that the west has established.

Perhaps this victim rhetoric has been generated by western militaries and media mouthpieces because they know the painful truth: Islamic terrorists are simply more efficient in provoking a feeling of helplessness. While the psychological effects of the west’s war of terror on the Arab world (and beyond) cannot be overstated, it is not difficult to notice just how much more reactive and frightened westerners get when these attacks occur, because they have been sheltered from the results of war for so long.

This is not to say their panic is not without justification. It is perfectly normal to become fearful and aggressive when you realize that no public space is safe, that a group of extremists could, at any moment, decide to make you a target of their violent political agenda. But since theirs is an act of terror and ours an act of defensive war, or more sickeningly twisted, a humanitarian intervention, we as a civilization do not have to come face to face in our discourse on this most horrifying of realities.



Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

Missing Comma: The Pen and the Sword

@illicitpopsicle .


This morning, there are twelve people who are dead who should not be.


Nine journalists, a maintenance worker and two police officers were killed at the Paris headquarters of French satire newspaper Charlie Hebdo on Wednesday. Eleven more were injured; four are still in critical condition as of this writing.

Here is a list of the dead (source: The Guardian):

Stéphane Charbonnier, 47, cartoonist and publisher of Charlie Hebdo
Jean “Cabu” Cabut, 76, Charlie Hebdo’s lead cartoonist
Georges Wolinski, 80, Tunisian-born artist
Bernard “Tignous” Verlhac, 57, a member of the group Cartoonists for Peace
Bernard Maris – known as “Uncle Bernard”, 68, economist and Charlie Hebdo columnist
Philippe Honoré, AKA Honoré, 73, Charlie Hebdo cartoonist since the paper’s founding in 1992
Michel Renaud, former journalist and political staffer, visiting Charlie Hebdo
Mustapha Ourrad – Algerian copy editor at Charlie Hebdo
Elsa Cayat – Charlie Hebdo analyst and columnist
Frederic Boisseau – building maintenance worker
Franck Brinsolaro – 49-year-old police officer appointed to head security for Charb and father of a one-year-old girl
Ahmed Merabet – 42 and a French Muslim police officer and member of the 11th arrondissement brigade.

*

This morning you will read countless editorial boards repeating the line about freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Even my local state newspaper, The Oklahoman, has seen fit to take a break from its usual fare to publish an editorial cartoon in solidarity with Charlie Hebdo.

You will also read plenty of pieces of analysis from commentators of all stripes — worrying about the fuel this will add to the fire of French nationalism and anti-Muslim sentiments, incensed that journalism has been attacked, perhaps even adding some of that Islamophobic fuel themselves.

All of these columnists, from the left to the right, from the libertarian to the statist, will miss the point.

For all the talk of Charlie Hebdo’s anti-authoritarianism, commitment to freedom of expression, their courage and bravery in the face of Islamic fundamentalism, their “equal-opportunity” sartorial stance, what everyone seems to fail to recognize is that the attack on Charlie Hebdo had nothing to do with Islam, or indeed, religion to begin with.

The attack on Charlie Hebdo was as political as the statements Presidents Obama and Hollande made condemning the actions.


*

Vaneigem once wrote: while it flays us alive, power cleverly persuades us that we are flaying each other.

Charlie Hebdo sometimes mocked French heads of state, sometimes laughed at power, but it never openly challenged it. It was, by all accounts, a paper perfectly willing to engage in satire only so long as it could be allowed to blindly fire in any direction. To this end, it was a useful tool of power.

This should not be taken as a showing of disrespect for the dead. Any time a journalist, or an editorial cartoonist, or a photographer is killed, it is a deep, searing tragedy that fills my — and every fellow journalist’s — heart with rage and anguish. This time is no different. We are an industry that takes to heart “An injury to one is an injury to all.” Recognizing that an outlet — that Charlie Hebdo — serves the interests of power does not reduce the pain or lessen the loss. Even, in this instance, are the deaths of the police officers that were on the scene tragic. That does not change the universal purpose of the police: to serve power.

According to the Guardian, one of the primary suspects in the attack, 32-year-old Chérif Kouachi, was imprisoned in 2008 on terrorism charges for “helping funnel fighters to Iraq’s insurgency. He said at the time he was outraged at the torture of Iraqi inmates at the US prison at Abu Ghraib, near Baghdad.”

Eyewitnesses said one of the suspects proclaimed that they were from al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula. AQAP is based in Yemen, which has, in recent years, been subject to numerous American drone strikes, resulting in the death of numerous men, women and children. If Kouachi and his brother, Said, are in fact the gunmen, and did end up in AQAP, then it is certainly reasonable to surmise that American/coalition foreign policy up to and including drone strikes may have been a motivating factor for them. Of course, this is just an assumption. For now, the gunmen’s motivations are “whatever we write them to be.”

*

Yesterday Laurent Joffrin, the publishing director of Liberation, a French left-wing paper similar to the Guardian, remarked, “The terrorists have not attacked the ‘Islamophobic’ as the enemies of Muslims, those who constantly cry Islamist wolf. They targeted Charlie.”

And yet, today the reactionaries, the National Front and other right-wing nationalist groups, are making their bid for the highest political offices in France, using the Charlie Hebdo attack as their springboard. Did the paper speak for them?


The latest cover of Charlie Hebdo is a lampoon of French author Michel Houellebecq’s upcoming novel, which imagines a France run by a “Muslim Fraternity.” By all accounts, Charbonnier had been attempting to pull the paper back towards its left roots, especially after the 2011 firebombing of their offices. If this is true, then why would the National Front try to use the attack as an electoral boost?

Because the images that Charlie sometimes published, the ones that many label as Islamophobic and racist, have just as much of an audience as the images that attack the rich, powerful, bigoted. Because when something like this happens, it somehow justifies all the twisted logic of modern-day Nazis.

This attack took place in a country whose last several presidents have signed laws into being that actively ban aspects of Muslim life and freedom of expression. It took place in a Europe that has seen increasingly vitriolic anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant sentiment, and where, as recently as this month, the state has actually ordered pre-school and daycare teachers to spy on Muslim toddlers. It took place in a world that has been at war for the better part of two decades. Charlie’s work was not being done in a vacuum. It served, and continues to serve, power.



Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

16 January 2015

It’s Only Censorship When They Do It

@jfrost. #WikiLeaks. #CharlieHebdo. #journalism. #JeSuisCharlie.


Racist cartoon used by the controversial magazine Charlie Hebdo

The deplorable attack on French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo, in which terrorists killed 12 and wounded 11, incited several reactions from the public, the sensitized media, and heads of state who hope to extract political gain from the matter. Amidst the generalized panic, Islamophobia has risen once again (due to the religious motivations of the attack) and Charlie Hebdo has been raised to icon status — contra the newspaper’s celebrated iconoclasm — with the #JeSuisCharlie campaign.

The human tragedy here, however, tends to multiply manyfold with its political exploitation by western governments, which have already started agitating their propaganda machines to foster a civilizational clash. French president Francois Hollande states that the attack was an act of “exceptional barbarism” against “a newspaper … in other words, an organ of free speech.” According to Hollande, it was an “act against journalists who had always wanted to show that in France it was possible to defend one’s ideas.”

US president Barack Obama doesn’t forget to highlight the obvious fact that terrorists, in sharp contrast to the state he represents, “fear freedom of speech and freedom of the press.” According to him, terrorists nevertheless will not be able to silence the fundamental idea shared by French and American peoples, “a universal belief in the freedom of expression.”

UK prime minister David Cameron reinforces that Britain stands “united with the French people” in opposition to terrorists and in defense of free speech. To German chancellor Angela Merkel, the shooting was also an attack against the “freedom of the press.” Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff, not to be left out, declared the shooting an “unacceptable attack against a fundamental value of democratic societies: the freedom of the press.”

Despite the barbarism and extreme violence of the attack on Charlie Hebdo, it’s not surprising to find that western governments are absolutely ecstatic with this event, which easily lends itself to their narratives of intrinsic western superiority relative to Muslim backwardness. Maybe they’ve waited for this all along: Something that makes their “they hate our freedoms” rhetoric sound less puerile.

After all, none of the countries so collectively outraged are prime examples of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Charlie Hebdo itself adopted its current name in the 1970s to sidestep a ban on the newspaper put in place by the French government. France today occupies the unenviable 39th spot in Reporters Without Borders’s World Press Freedom Index, which highlights the weak source confidentiality protections in the country and steps the French government took to censor corruption-related recordings. The French state’s reiterated attacks on the Internet slide into the path of handing over total power to bureaucrats.

The USA, always looking after western freedom, apparently has no problems with suppressing information, seizing journalistic institutions’ phone records without warrant or due process, and arresting whistleblowers and journalists themselves. Not to mention the draconian and frankly ridiculous “intellectual property” laws used to silence dissent and maintain the corporate status quo.

We should ask ourselves if the UK’s new pornography censorship laws would allowsome of Charlie Hebdo‘s covers to be published. Germany’s politicians can barely control their happiness in censoring the Internet. And if Charlie Hebdo’s political cartoons appear harmless, what should we say about the extensive modification and mutilation of video games to match German bureaucrats’ sensibilities?

It is true that terrorists hate freedom of speech. But in that they differ little from western countries. They only employ different methods.

By Erick Vasconcelos - More articles by Erick Vasconcelos

Originally published at C4SS on 9 January 2015

Image credit: not required. To avoid hypocrisy, please do not censor.

Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
Read More »

Featured

From Hormuz To Malacca: How The Iran War Is Reshaping The Indian Ocean

From Hormuz To Malacca: How The Iran War Is Reshaping The Indian Ocean By Uriel Araujo The crisis around the Strait of Hormuz and the US-Ira...

Follow Me on Twitter