Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Big Brother / Microchipping / Problem-Reaction-Solution

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-03-2018, 01:33 PM   #401
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by iamawaveofthesea View Post
So in that article is the following passage about that guy who rammed his van into some people leaving a mosque:

''Police said the 48-year-old became radicalised in just three to four weeks, as he read messages including an automated email from Robinson’s Rebel Media website claiming a “nation within a nation was forming just beneath the surface of the UK”.''

So apparently robinson had made a claim that a seperate nation was forming within the UK

That's an interesting claim to analyse and investigate if you want to objectively understand what is going on

So are there any grounds for that claim? The problem is that before long with the clampdown on free speech going the way it is going it won't even be possible for the public to explore questions like that
so another artice in the progressive newspaper 'the independent' today which i've heard is run by an ex KGB guy has a person who survived the conflict in bosnia warning that fracture lines are appearing across europe and that it could lead to violence

However the person doesn't say that its happening because of MASS immigration, instead they do what progressives always do and blames european people for being upset at the MASS immigration

They say the rising tensions are down to “chauvinistic rhetoric” which they claim is stoking “tensions all over the world”.

So their CAUSE and EFFECT is totally out of whack. This problem didn't begin with disgruntled europeans complaining about the flooding of millions of outsiders into europe it began with the flooding of millions of outsiders in to europe.

THEN people began complaining

So the answer is not to stop people complaining. The answer is to stop SCREWING THEM OVER in the first place

Srebrenica genocide survivor warns 'forces of division' in Europe raise chance of more bloodshed
‘We still see mass persecutions and killings all over the world’
Tom [email protected]_tombatchelor
Thursday 1 March 2018 14:12 GMT
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a8231671.html

So why is the mainstream suddenly speaking about this issue of rising tensions but doing so through the prism of looking at the rise in right wing extremism which is the EFFECT rather then looking at this from the angle of the MASS IMMIGRATION which is the CAUSE?

I think they are doing that because they don't want to stop the MASS immigration and instead are going to CLAMP DOWN ON FREEDOM OF SPEECH citing right wing extremism as an excuse to silence any legitimate complaints about their IDEOLOGICAL SOCIAL ENGINEERING through MASS immigration
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2018, 06:51 PM   #402
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default



Nolte: Snopes Fact Checks, Facebook Threatens Satire Site for Mocking CNN
by John Nolte2 Mar 20189222
The Christian satire site Babylon Bee has been fact-checked by Snopes and threatened by Facebook after it published an Onion-style article about CNN about purchasing a washing machine to “spin the news.”

The Babylon Bee openly advertises itself as a satire site. Recent headlines include, “Local Pastor Hoping Curling Metaphors Go Over Big This Sunday,” “Nation That Calls Trump ‘Hitler’ Demands He Take All Guns Away,” “Calvinist Dog Corrects Owner: ‘No One Is A Good Boy’,” and “New Exercise Bike Forces You To Watch Christian Movies Until You Hit Your Calories Goal.”

Not only is this fairly anodyne stuff, but as you can see, the Babylon Bee is more than willing to satirize their own among the Faithful.

Naturally, none of this matters to our left-wing tech overlords, who are becoming increasingly desperate to censor free speech coming from conservatives, Christians, and the like.

This time, in order to protect the far-left CNN from ridicule, Snopes and Facebook worked in tandem to teach the Babylon Bee (and all of us) a lesson about mocking your betters.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journal...paign=20180302
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate

Last edited by iamawaveofthesea; 03-03-2018 at 06:53 PM.
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2018, 11:57 AM   #403
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

Technocracy Could Reign Supreme After The Death Of Alternative Media
Patrick Wood
March 3, 2018



The alternative media industry is about to be crushed by ruthless Technocrats bent on transforming the global society into a Utopian Technocracy. (Technocracy is fully documented in my book, Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation)

For anyone who thought that the threat of Technocracy was non-existent or overblown, they will soon find out just how wrong they were. Furthermore, those who thought Technocracy was benign or benevolent will soon feel the sharp iron teeth digging into them.

The big three social media giants, Google, Facebook and Twitter, are in process of purging en masse popular anti-media personalities and materials. You know the names. It is draconian and ruthless, leaving no room for appeal or reconsideration: “here today, gone tomorrow.”

Unfortunately, many of those who are being targeted will take down countless others (many of whom are innocent bystanders) as they themselves crash and burn.

It is unfortunate because many have collectively adopted the same sloppy and reckless treatment of the truth that they hate about the mainstream media: half-truths, un-truths, a-priori accusations without adequate proof, etc.

This delights the Technocrat steam-roller because all they need to do is point to those journalistic indiscretions as they crush them, as the rest of the world cheers them on. It doesn’t matter how much truth was presented along the way, they are banned for their non-truths.

If there is any takeaway from this, it is the need to return to responsible, fact-based, well-researched investigative journalism. What we say must be so well documented that it is totally defensible before any opposing group. Americans don’t need fist-shaking rants of anger. They simply need the truth, and alternative media has been sending a mixed message for a long time.

Another aspect of “crash and burn” that should be addressed is the use of disinformation and misinformation for the sole purpose of aggregating resistance into one place so they can be nullified.

A perfect example of this was the “Hundred Flowers” campaign started in then-Communist China in 1956. The Communist Party of China (CPC) and Mao Zedong himself publicly encouraged “The policy of letting a hundred flowers bloom and a hundred schools of thought contend is designed to promote the flourishing of the arts and the progress of science.” After all the non-ideologues were identified, Mao ordered their elimination or reeducation in labor camps. Problem solved. To Mao, that was an easy and efficient way to get rid of his detractors.

This writer has observed agents of misinformation and disinformation for over four decades. It is usually pointless in trying to expose them because they have already fortified their defense perimeter in advance, as an intentional part of their campaign. In the end, when it is too late to matter and the damage has been done, they are exposed for who they are. By that time, nobody cares anyway.

Psychologist Irving Janus nailed it in his 1972 book Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. He stated,

I use the term groupthink as a quick and easy way to refer to the mode of thinking that persons engage in when concurrence-seeking becomes so dominant in a cohesive ingroup that it tends to override realistic appraisal of alternative courses of action. Groupthink is a term of the same order as the words in the newspeak vocabulary George Orwell used in his dismaying world of 1984. In that context, groupthink takes on an invidious connotation. Exactly such a connotation is intended, since the term refers to a deterioration in mental efficiency, reality testing and moral judgments as a result of group pressures.

The more amiability and esprit de corps there is among the members of a policy-making ingroup, the greater the danger that independent critical thinking will be replaced by groupthink, which is likely to result in irrational and dehumanizing actions directed against outgroups.

Progressives and Technocrats have been guilty of Groupthink for decades. Various elements of their conservative opposition have been just as guilty. The result: two ideological, opposing “Groupthinks” fighting each other, where the stronger Groupthink ultimately vanquishes the weaker.

In any case, the fact remains that the real and present danger to society is Technocracy, and it is ascending with great power and influence right before our eyes.

In the meantime, cooler heads must prevail to salvage the aftermath. It’s time to get back to the drawing board and figure out how to stop it.



You can read more from Patrick Wood at his site Technocracy News, where this article first appeared.
https://www.activistpost.com/2018/03...ive-media.html
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2018, 03:00 PM   #404
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

YouTube deletes entire Health Ranger video channel; deletes over 1700 videos in latest politically motivated censorship purge
Saturday, March 03, 2018 by: Mike Adams

In the latest gross violation of free speech committed by radical left-wing tech giants, YouTube has now deleted the entire Health Ranger video channel, wiping out over 1,700 videos covering everything from nutrition, natural medicine, history, science and current events.

Over the last two weeks, YouTube has been on a censorship rampage that’s apparently run by the SPLC, a radical left-wing hate group that despises Christianity, the Second Amendment and patriots in particular. Hundreds of prominent conservative video channels have been targeted for termination by YouTube, leading many independent media leaders like myself to call for government regulation of YouTube to protect free speech and end the tyranny.

“It’s just so ironic because our videos are getting flagged for harassment and bullying… That’s the excuse they use to take them down, and eventually take the channel down,” explained Paul Joseph Watson in a Breitbart News Daily interview.
InfoWars’ channel also taken down less than 24 hours earlier

“Conservatives across the internet – including Christian and pro-Second Amendment groups – are being banned by the anti-free speech authoritarians at Google, YouTube, and Facebook in a concerted effort to shut down points of view they don’t agree with,” warns InfoWars, which was also banned at nearly the same time as the Health Ranger account.

Alex Jones has issued an emergency broadcast detailing how their channel was completely wiped out by YouTube, even after YouTube claimed they had “accidentally” banned conservative channels:
Understand that this is the opening salvo of the WAR against America

What you need to understand about what’s happening is that this is the opening salvo of an actual war that the Left will soon take kinetic. First, they silence all the pro-America voices across the ‘net. Then they stage another mass shooting false flag and use it to abolish the Second Amendment. At this point, you have no First Amendment rights left, and you have no Second Amendment ability to defend yourself against left-wing tyrants. From here, they then fabricate fake accusations against their political targets and call for their arrest, knowing that people who have been silenced have no way to defend themselves against false accusations, as they’ve all been silenced by decree.

The evil Left won’t stop at merely silencing their political opponents, of course. They won’t even stop at taking away all your firearms. What they ultimately want is to steal your country out from under you and turn America into a left-wing totalitarian regime… a police state where all dissenting views are criminalized and oppressed.

The Orwellian “thought control” police state is here NOW, as demonstrated by YouTube’s take down of the entire Health Ranger channel for no justifiable reason whatsoever. Yet the Health Ranger account is just one of hundreds (or thousands) that have been terminated in the last two weeks by YouTube totalitarians. This means something much bigger is coming, and they want to make sure the independent media is silenced and unable to speak… (my prediction is that a massive false flag attack is being planned that will double down on the call to abolish the Second Amendment).
What you can do to fight back NOW

Help us fight back against YouTube censorship and totalitarian oppression. Here are some actions you can take:

1) Tweet @YouTube and @TeamYouTube to denounce their censorship. Let them know how much you appreciate the Health Ranger channel.

2) Call on your members of Congress to launch a civil rights investigation into YouTube, Facebook, Google and other tech giants. Their tyranny needs to be called out, and YouTube needs to be regulated to halt their out-of-control censorship.

3) Download and install the Natural News App that brings you videos, articles and podcasts, bypassing Google / YouTube censorship.

3) Help support our YouTube alternative website, which will be announced next week on the Alex Jones show. We are building a video community where the free speech of patriots is protected and honored. Ultimately, this video project can help make YouTube increasingly obsolete.

4) Help support us financially by shopping at HealthRangerStore.com which offers over 600+ lab-verified products for healthy living and self-reliance. We will need your funding support to fund attorneys as part of our legal effort against YouTube and other techno-totalitarians that have now declared total war on free speech.

Most of all, realize that you are now living in a content police state where the techno-giants are literally “memory holing” all the content channels they don’t like. This is not happening by sheer coincidence… it’s all part of a plan to silence conservatives, commit election fraud at the mid-terms, steal the election, impeach Trump and repeal the Second Amendment. Once all that’s accomplished, the call for the mass arrest or mass killing of conservatives will be unleashed by the deranged Left which has been driven into a mindless, seething anger by the propaganda puppet masters.

The war for America has begun, and YouTube has chosen to side of tyranny. We need you to join us in standing for truth, freedom and the ability to think for yourself. Share this post everywhere.
https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-03-...hip-purge.html
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2018, 05:53 PM   #405
madbomber
Senior Member
 
madbomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 2,186
Likes: 1,923 (916 Posts)
Default

Fuck the bastards at Google and YouTube. Utter shower of cunts.
__________________
What if there is no tomorrow? There wasn't one today.
madbomber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2018, 10:29 AM   #406
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by madbomber View Post
Fuck the bastards at Google and YouTube. Utter shower of cunts.
they are just pursuing their IDEOLOGICAL plan to subvert democracy in the west and to replace it with a rothschild-communist technocracy where everyone lives under the shadow of big brother
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate

Last edited by iamawaveofthesea; 05-03-2018 at 08:56 PM.
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2018, 08:57 PM   #407
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

The crack-down is upon us!

YouTube is Now ThemTube: Time to Flee the Failed Platform

__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2018, 09:17 PM   #408
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

EXCLUSIVE: YouTube Secretly Using SPLC To Police Videos
Peter Hasson
Reporter

YouTube is getting help from the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center in its effort to identify extremist content.
YouTube’s “Trusted Flaggers” police the platform for so-called hate speech to terror-related content.
The SPLC has labeled pedestrian conservative groups as hate groups in the past.
The Southern Poverty Law Center is assisting YouTube in policing content on their platform, The Daily Caller has learned.

The left-wing nonprofit — which has more recently come under fire for labeling legitimate conservative organizations as “hate groups” — is one of the more than 100 nongovernment organizations (NGOs) and government agencies in YouTube’s “Trusted Flaggers” program, a source with knowledge of the arrangement told TheDC.

The SPLC and other program members help police YouTube for extremist content, ranging from so-called hate speech to terrorist recruiting videos.

All of the groups in the program have confidentiality agreements, a spokesperson for Google, YouTube’s parent company, previously told TheDC. A handful of YouTube’s “Trusted Flaggers,” including the Anti-Defamation League and No Hate Speech — a European organization focused on combatting intolerance — have gone public with their participation in the program. The vast majority of the groups in the program have remained hidden behind their confidentiality agreements.
http://dailycaller.com/2018/02/27/go...er-censorship/
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2018, 12:02 PM   #409
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

European Union demands Google, Facebook step up Internet censorship
By Kumaran Ira
5 March 2018

In a new attack on free speech, the European Union (EU) is calling on major social media and Internet firms including Facebook, Twitter and Google to automatically and immediately censor online material.

On March 1, the EU Commission called on companies and EU states to ensure “the detection and removal of illegal content through reactive (so called ‘notice and action’) or proactive measures.” It also identified a vast amount of material targeted for censorship. According to the Commission, its recommendations apply to all forms of “content ranging from terrorist content, incitement to hatred and violence, child sexual abuse material, counterfeit products and copyright infringement.”

“Considering that terrorist content is most harmful in the first hours of its appearance online, all companies should remove such content within one hour from its referral as a general rule,” it said.

The measures the EU is discussing would force companies to create programs, answerable to no one, to trawl the Internet and delete users’ content. This would consolidate censorship measures the EU proposed last year via the EU Internet Forum, which called on tech firms to work to develop automatic removal of online content.

The EU hailed moves in this direction that have already taken place. According to the EU, “Twitter reported that three quarters of the 300,000 accounts removed between January and June 2017 were deleted before posting their first Tweet. According to YouTube, more than 150,000 videos have been removed since June 2017. Once aware of a piece of terrorist content, Facebook removes 83 percent of subsequently uploaded copies within one hour of upload.”

The EU justified its policy with shopworn claims about the fight against terrorism. “While several platforms have been removing more illegal content than ever before ... we still need to react faster against terrorist propaganda and other illegal content which is a serious threat to our citizens’ security, safety and fundamental rights,” said Digital Commissioner Andrus Ansip.

Press accounts of the latest EU demand for censorship cited the need, as the Guardian put it, to fight “extremist content on the web” that “has influenced lone-wolf attackers who have killed people in several European cities after being radicalised.”

The argument that EU censorship is aimed at so-called lone-wolf terrorists is a lie, above all because lone-wolf terrorists are largely a political fiction. The major terror attacks in Europe were carried out not by isolated individuals, but by members of Islamist networks active in NATO’s proxy wars in the Middle East, and who were actively watched and protected for that reason by European intelligence.

The organizers of terrorist attacks in France in 2015 and in Belgium in 2016 were well known to the intelligence services. The Kouachi brothers who led the Charlie Hebdo attack, Abdelhamid Abaaoud, the leader of the 13 November 2015 attacks in Paris, and the El Bakraoui brothers who carried out the 22 March 2016 Brussels attacks were all well known to European intelligence. They were allowed to travel freely and prepare their attacks, as their networks were intelligence assets operating under state protection.

Similarly, the links of the Islamic State militia to Berlin Christmas market attacker Anis Amri and Manchester bomber Salman Abedi were well known to German and British intelligence, respectively, before they attacked. These attacks were seized on by the EU powers to intensify police-state measures that shred basic democratic rights, such as the state of emergency in France.

Now, the red herring of the fight against “lone-wolf” terrorists is serving as a pretext for yet further attacks on Internet freedom and freedom of speech.

These attacks are well advanced. The EU wants the same IT companies that work closely on Internet censorship with a wide variety of states, above all Washington and the US intelligence agencies, to use similar methods to trample on freedom of speech and other democratic rights in Europe. This is what emerged from recent remarks by Julian King, the EU Commissioner for Security.

Censorship like that being proposed by the EU, King said, is “not only possible, it’s being done already by a number of the larger platforms.” He called for “proactive measures to identify and remove illegal content, including automated means such as upload filters, where this is appropriate.” He also called on IT firms to cooperate with EU “member States, trusted flaggers and among themselves to work together and benefit from best practices.”
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/201.../euro-m05.html
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2018, 01:20 PM   #410
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

Who decides what a 'terrorist' is?

EU Commission Says Social Media Companies Must Take Down 'Terrorist Content' Within One Hour
from the plus-more-internet-hobbling-guidelines dep
t

Once social media companies and websites began acquiescing to EU Commission demands for content takedown, the end result was obvious. Whatever was already in place would continually be ratcheted up. And every time companies failed to do the impossible, the EU Commission would appear on their virtual doorsteps, demanding they be faster and more proactive.

Facebook, Twitter, Google, and Microsoft all agreed to remove hate speech and other targeted content within 24 hours, following a long bitching session from EU regulators about how long it took these companies to comply with takedown orders. As Tim Geigner pointed out late last year, the only thing tech companies gained from this acquiescence was a reason to engage in proactive censorship.

Because if a week or so, often less, isn't enough, what will be? You can bet that if these sites got it down to 3 days, the EU would demand it be done in 2. If 2, then 1. If 1? Well, then perhaps internet companies should become proficient in censoring speech the EU doesn't like before it ever appears.

Even proactive censorship isn't enough for the EU Commission. It has released a new set of recommendations [PDF] for social media companies that sharply increases mandated response time. The Commission believes so-called "terrorist" content should be so easy to spot, companies will have no problem staying in compliance.

Given that terrorist content is typically most harmful in the first hour of its appearance online and given the specific expertise and responsibilities of competent authorities and Europol, referrals should be assessed and, where appropriate, acted upon within one hour, as a general rule.

Yes, the EU Commission wants terrorist content vanished in under an hour and proclaims, without citing authorities, that the expertise of government agencies will make compliance un-impossible. The Commission also says it should be easy to keep removed content from popping up somewhere else, because it's compiled a "Database of Hashes."
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...one-hour.shtml
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2018, 04:46 PM   #411
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

All I Am Offering Is The Truth
March 5, 2018 | Categories: Articles & Columns | Tags: | Print This Article Print This Article
By Paul Craig Roberts

In the Western world day by day the domain of truth shrinks as does the ability to challenge official explanations. A number of alternative media Internet sites have lost their YouTube platform, and Twitter is censoring what can be posted and preventing access to accounts. Google makes truth-tellers harder to find. All the while official organizations, such as the Atlantic Council and the print and TV presstitutes continue to lie through their teeth. For example, in the face of complete and total evidence that the Russiagate claims are false that the Russian government hacked computers and helped Trump steal the presidential election, the false and orchestrated charge continues to be repeated as if it were proven fact, and the presstitutes continue to call for President Trump’s impeachment.

In other words, truth is of no consequence. Regardless, you will not be told the truth by the print and TV media and by large swaths of the Internet media. I doubt that it is any longer possible for the presstitutes to even recognize, much less tell, the truth, because they are in service to material interests and ideologies.

I remember when Americans were free people. This is no longer the case. The prison in which Americans live is not a physical one with bars, although many Americans including innocent ones do live behind physical bars. It is an informational prison achieved by control over the explanations that Americans are given. Over my lifetime I have observed that official propaganda has become more successful with the passage of time. My generation was educated at a time when truth was still respected, when facts mattered, when integrity was valued, when “victim groups” had not been created and taught that they had a right to be shielded from “insensitive” words, concepts and facts, when “political correctness” and “Identity Politics” did not exist. Arguments and public debate could not be shut down with the charges that it was offensive, racist, sexist, homophobic, white supremacist. Dogmatism was not shielded by the claim that it is insensitive to cause a person in a protected category to confront the validity of their beliefs. In my generation’s day, the struggle was to expand free speech, not shut it down as has occurred today even in academic institutions. Indeed, Identity Politics is in the process of banning free speech as insensitive and as a means of white supremacist control.

I remember when the police were not permitted to brutalize citizens and to shoot them down without cause on the streets and in their homes. I remember when a reasoned position was more highly regarded than an emotional one. I remember when children could go out and play unsupervised without parents being arrested for child neglect. I remember when history was what happened, not a story in service to some ideological or material interest. I remember so much that those born into the current system have never experienced and know nothing about. Perhaps one day I will face the excruciating sadness of writing about witnessing the complete destruction of my country during my lifetime.

In the meantime, remember our deal. This is your website. I write it because you support it. I already know the information that I provide. I provide it because your support shows that you want it. I have no agenda. All I am offering is the truth: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...6&&FORM=VDRVRV

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/201...-is-the-truth/
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-03-2018, 05:11 PM   #412
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default



YouTube,Twitter and Facebook May Soon Use ADL’s ‘Online Hate Index’ to Detect ‘Hate Speech’ on Platforms
by Lucas Nolan6 Mar 2018515
The Anti-Defamation League has stated that social media companies YouTube, Twitter and Facebook may use the group’s “Online Hate Index” to detect hate speech on their platforms.

The ADL published a video on their YouTube page recently outlining the use of their new “Online Hate Index.” The video features Brittan Heller, the director of the ADL Center for Technology and Society. Heller explains the goal of the new index is to “help tech platforms better understand the growing amount of hate on social media, and to use that information to address the problem.” The index will reportedly use machine learning, artificial intelligence, and social science to identify trend and patterns in so-called “hate speech.”

The ADL claims that their machine learning model can identify “hate speech” with a 78 percent to 85 percent accuracy rate. “In the next phase of our project, we will look at specific targeted populations in a more detailed manner, we’ll examine content on multiple social media sites and we’ll identify strategies to deploy the model more broadly,” said Heller during the video. The ADL hopes that the index will help tech companies, “understand the extent of hateful conduct on their platforms.”


http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/0...-on-platforms/
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2018, 09:55 AM   #413
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

Athena in Leicester becomes latest venue to cancel David Icke event following contact from CAA, Leicestershire Police and Leicester City Council...

Campaign Against Antisemitism celebrate the deletion of freedom of speech - but then that's why they exist
Andrew Cheetham
38 minutes ago

__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
Likes: (1)
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2018, 06:10 PM   #414
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

Arizona State University Asks Palestinian Academic to Sign Contract Not to Criticize Israel
Arizona State University asked a Palestinian academic to sign a speaker agreement which included a clause that prohibits criticising Israel or engaging with the BDS movement.
by Middle East Monitor
March 09th, 2018
By Middle East Monitor

Arizona State University is reported to have asked Palestinian academic Hatem Bazian to sign a contract in which he pledges not to criticise Israel at an event organized by the Muslim Students’ Association next month.

Chair of American Muslims for Palestine and lecturer at the University of California at Berkeley, Bazian said Arizona State University asked him to sign the university’s speaker agreement which included a clause that prohibits criticising Israel or engaging with the BDS movement.

Bazian refused to sign the agreement, saying agents loyal to Israel, constitute a real obstacle to freedom of expression and academic freedom in American universities.

He added that asking him to sign an agreement which includes a clause that prevents criticism and boycott of Israel is to ignore the freedom of thought and academic autonomy.
https://www.mintpressnews.com/arizon...israel/238717/
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate

Last edited by iamawaveofthesea; 11-03-2018 at 06:10 PM.
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-03-2018, 11:23 AM   #415
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

If we have to no-platform someone i'd rather see this chris bryant clown no-platformed than RT as i trust RT more then i trust him...

Labour MP Chris Bryant calls for RT UK to be shut down… despite appearing on it himself (VIDEO)
Published time: 13 Mar, 2018 08:52
Edited time: 13 Mar, 2018 11:17

Labour MP Chris Bryant has called for RT UK to have its license revoked for “broadcasting its propaganda.” Does he need reminding that he had no qualms appearing on the channel when he had a book to sell?

Speaking in the Commons on Monday, after Prime Minister Theresa May was updating MPs on the poisoning of ex-double agent Sergei Skripal, Bryant, the MP for Rhondda, asked: “Can we just stop Russia Today [RT] broadcasting its propaganda in this country?” May responded by saying she would update MPs on “further measures” this week.

Bryant is seemingly happy to appear on RT when it suits his interests. In 2014, he was a guest on current affairs show ‘Going Underground’ to get some exposure for his book on constitutional reform.
https://www.rt.com/uk/421111-propaga...ampaign=chrome
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-03-2018, 04:16 PM   #416
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

Where is the Gutless Media as Freedom of Speech Disappears? - The David Icke Dot-Connector Videocast
Andrew Cheetham
3 hours ago

__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-03-2018, 09:51 AM   #417
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

PETER HITCHENS: The 'patriotic' thought police came for Corbyn. You are next
By Peter Hitchens for The Mail on Sunday
Published: 00:02, 18 March 2018 | Updated: 02:05, 18 March 2018

Is THIS a warning? In the past few days I have begun to sense a dangerous and dark new intolerance in the air, which I have never experienced before. An unbidden instinct tells me to be careful what I say or write, in case it ends badly for me. How badly? That is the trouble. I am genuinely unsure.

I have been to many countries where free speech is dangerous. But I have always assumed that there was no real risk here.

Now, several nasty trends have come together. The treatment of Jeremy Corbyn, both by politicians and many in the media, for doing what he is paid for and leading the Opposition, seems to me to be downright shocking.

I disagree with Mr Corbyn about many things and actively loathe the way he has sucked up to Sinn Fein. But he has a better record on foreign policy than almost anyone in Parliament. Above all, when so many MPs scuttled obediently into the lobbies to vote for the Iraq War, he held his ground against it and was vindicated.

Mr Corbyn has earned the right to be listened to, and those who now try to smear him are not just doing something morally wrong. They are hurting the country. Look at our repeated rushes into foolish conflict in Iraq, Libya, Syria and Afghanistan. All have done us lasting damage.

Everyone I meet now thinks they were against the Iraq War (I know most of them weren’t, but never mind). So that’s over.

But Libya remains an unacknowledged disgrace. David Cameron has not suffered for it, and those who cheered it on have yet to admit they were mistaken.

Yet we pay for it, literally, every day. Along with our clinically insane covert intervention on the side of Al Qaeda in Syria, the Libyan adventure created the unending migration crisis across Europe which, in my view, threatens the stability of the whole continent.

Yet I recall a surge of anger from the audience when I doubted some crude war propaganda about mass rapes in Libya on the BBC’s Question Time. War is strangely popular, until it comes to your own doorstep.

I sense an even deeper and more thoughtless frenzy over Russia, a country many seem to enjoy loathing because they know so little about it.

I have already been accused, on a public stage, of justifying Moscow’s crime in Salisbury. This false charge was the penalty I paid for trying to explain the historical and political background to these events. I wonder if the bitterness also has something to do with the extraordinarily deep division over the EU, which has made opponents into enemies in a way not seen since the Suez Crisis.

In any case, the crude accusation, with its implication of treachery, frightened me. I expect, as time goes by, I will be accused of being an ‘appeaser’ and of being against ‘British values’. And then what? An apparatus of thought policing is already in place in this country. By foolishly accepting bans on Muslim ‘extremists’, we have licensed public bodies to decide that other views, too, are ‘extremist’.

Because the authorities are terrified of upsetting Islam, nothing much will happen to Muslim militants. But conservative and Christian views such as mine will suffer.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/ar...#ixzz5A5pMogkt
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-03-2018, 05:01 PM   #418
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

The Denial of the Right to an Opinion - Britain's Inexorable Slide into Fascism
BY JULIAN ROSE
8 hours ago

In Britain, during this last week, something very nasty made its presence known to the nation. And it was not Putin or Russia. It was a coldly executed , psychologically loaded attempt to silence those who wished to express an opinion, other than the one held by the government.

Those who believe that the notion that Vladimir Putin is responsible for the poisoning of a Russian double agent and his daughter in the town of Salisbury, England, is unproven.

The British Prime Minister, Theresa May, stated outright “There is no alternative to the conclusion that Russia was responsible.” This was an order, not a statement of fact. An order to step in line and not court controversy.

It capped months of hysterical anti Russian rhetoric and vilification, which in more ways than one, strongly echoed the George Bush and Tony Blair tirades of 9/11/2001. Tirades deliberately directed to make Saddam Hussein fit the role of the number one villain of that particular moment of time, as the unquestionable holder of non existent 'weapons of mass destruction.' Now Putin is being given the 9/11 treatment. A chilling reminder that this is a repeat of a direct incitement to war.

But those who control the political course of events so as to achieve their sinister goals, know that people forget. So Theresa May no doubt feels quite secure in proclaiming Putin to be the new Mr Evil, and the undoubted purveyor of this particular version of a weapon of mass destruction.

Quite secure in inciting arguments that the Country should be prepared to go to war with this 'Russian monster', all because some obscure Soviet double agent had been poisoned with a nasty organophosphate product on British soil.

And yet, ironically, and in direct contrast to buffoon politicians like Theresa May and Boris Johnson, Vladimir Putin has emerged over the past decade, as the leading statesman on the world stage. A thoughtful, cool head and a genuine diplomat.

But the lather of House of Commons 'rent a crowd' fury directed against the Russian President, carried with it a warning that the Russian media outlet 'Russian Today' (RT) might be closed down in Britain, because it dared to ask questions that the British media dared not ask.

God forbid that anyone should raise their voice in suggesting that this might be a rather over-the-top response to an offense not untypical of things that go on in the obscure and shadowy world of secret agents. But someone did – and that someone happened to be the leader of the opposition, Jeremy Corbin, who stood up in the House of Commons and challenged the Prime minister's opinion on the unsubstantiated facts behind this crime, and the premature pinning of the blame for it on the Russian President.

This entirely sensible challenge drew a howl of dissent from government MP's and even some members of Corbin's own opposition party. No, this was, after all, 'appeasement' and only the weak and stupid would consider offering any form of olive branch to Mr Evil.

If all this had been part of some TV drama series one could at least have turned off the set. But it wasn't. It isn't. And that makes it a blood chilling experience for anyone hoping for some form of rational, measured discussion, to put matters in their proper perspective.

No such human qualities were on display in this witches cauldron of vitriolic accusation and barely hidden call for blood. The British Houses of Parliament.

It sends a shiver down the spine of all sentient human beings when they realize that what is on show is nothing more or nothing less - than the denial of the right to an opinion. That any mortal who dares to ask a logical question is shouted down and accused of working for the devil.

For that was the sentiment of this occasion. And it amply illustrates the pervasive, creeping rise of the fascistic state; everyday more strident, more dictatorial, more authoritarian. An ever more threatening sword held over citizens who have not fallen. Who have refused to be slaves. An ever more sinister clamoring and broadcasting of the vitriol of war.

Freedom of speech and freedom of expression are they key components of a democratic constitution. We have seen them both being methodically eaten into – drip, drip, drip, during the last two decades. We are so close to the full scale return of the doctrinaire, totalitarian dictatorship which many once believed had been buried for good under the rubble of two World wars.

But no, not buried at all. It was the German Nobel Prize winning author Thomas Mann, who recalled in the early 1950's, that what he feared for in the post Hitler era, was “The weak position of Freedom”. His fears have proved ominously correct.

Post World War Two societies in both Europe and America, have failed to recognize and deal with the symptoms of this disease, as it etched its way back into the corridors of power. Until once again exerting a critical influence on daily life.

We should know more about this beast by now. We have failed to absorb the lessons of history. We have witnessed the corrosion of decades of hard won civil liberties in just a handful of years.

We are monitored, surveyed and spied upon via gadgets of the electronic era which most have welcomed with open arms, as the symbol of the age of 'freedom of communication'.
We have allowed our countries to go to war and destroy other nations on the slimmest – or non existent – fabricated evidence of their 'threat' to our nation states.

We have turned our backs one hundred times, on the lies, corruption and criminality of our corporate and government leaders. We have been reduced to spineless, politically correct observers, as our nation's children are ritually abused and sacrificed to the perverted instincts of the political elite. And so much more. So much more.

It is as if all the demons of hell suddenly found a perfect venue to express their treachery. In and amongst the fables halls of Westminster. And others will surely point-out the same symptoms manifesting in their various countries of origin.

For this is not just a national crises, it is a global pandemic. It must be addressed and dealt with wherever it shows its hideous face. There is no excuse for failing in this task. We have no choice. There can be no excuse for slipping into the pacifistic role of the victim when faced by acts of very real evil.

We cannot turn away from our own souls. We did not come to this planet to hide from the truth.

Julian Rose is an international activist, organic farming pioneer and author. He is President of The International Coalition to Protect the Polish Countryside. Visit his website: www.julianrose.info and find out about Julian's two widely acclaimed books: Changing Course for Life and In Defense of Life, which can be purchased direct.
https://www.davidicke.com/article/46...-slide-fascism
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-03-2018, 05:04 PM   #419
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

The London police now have a firm definition of thought-crime
Jon Rappoport
6 hours ago

“Whether he went on with the diary, or whether he did not go on with it, made no difference. The Thought Police would get him just the same. He had committed—would still have committed, even if he had never set pen to paper—the essential crime that contained all others in itself. Thoughtcrime, they called it. Thoughtcrime was not a thing that could be concealed forever. You might dodge successfully for a while, even for years, but sooner or later they were bound to get you.” (George Orwell, “1984”)


Welcome back, George. Things are playing out as you predicted.

From the UK Met Police website, here is the latest official attempt to censor speech. It’s actually more than that. Read carefully while pointing a fan at the screen to disperse the noxious fumes:

“If someone does something that isn’t a criminal offence but the victim, or anyone else, believes it was motivated by prejudice or hate, we would class this as a ‘hate incident’. Though what the perpetrator has done may not be against the law, their reasons for doing it are. This means it may be possible to charge them with an offence.”

Really.

It—an action or statement—isn’t a crime, but the perpetrator’s reasons for “doing it” may spring from hatred—and then it turns into a crime. Magic.

You speak or write publicly, and somebody/anybody believes what you uttered was MOTIVATED by hate. If the police decide that’s true, they can prosecute you.

They have read your intent. They have read your inner thoughts and feelings.

“Mr. Jones wrote a paragraph that, in and of itself, did not constitute a criminal offense, but the thinking behind what he wrote contained hatred and was instigated by hatred. Guilty.”

Imagine something like this happening in the near-future: “A report by the National Crime Prevention Service indicated that a disproportionate number of rapes in British towns were committed by MusXXXX (censored). The report, which was scheduled to be released today, was stopped, when a room-service attendant in a London hotel pronounced that the report was motivated by hate. The police are investigating.”

Or this future absurdity: “After a local journalist reported several killings at a homeless shelter, when a dispute broke out over serving pork for dinner, the journalist was taken into custody by the police. The journalist was charged with a hate offense for using the word ‘pork.’ A co-worker at the town newspaper stated that ‘pork’ was incendiary and motivated by hate. ‘That’s why I called the police,’ he said.”

Imagine a court case like this:

PROSECUTOR: Sir, isn’t it true that you called your brother-in-law a danger to his family?

DEFENDANT: Yes, because he threatened to hurt his wife, my sister.

PROSECUTOR: And your brother-in-law’s religion is MusXXXX (censored)?

DEFENDANT: Yes, but that has nothing to do with my statement to him.

PROSECUTOR: Your next-door neighbor heard the argument you two were having and adjudicated your thoughts were “of hatred.”

DEFENDANT: She read my thoughts?

PROSECUTOR: Exactly. And the State agrees with her assessment.

For those people who claim that paranormal events are a scientific fraud, here is your comeuppance. The UK Met Police have just written these events into law.

Telepathic insight is real enough to warrant an arrest and prosecution.

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-03-2018, 04:00 PM   #420
iamawaveofthesea
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: under the raven banner
Posts: 25,651
Likes: 13,231 (7,598 Posts)
Default

Question Less! ‘Liberal’ witch-finders hunt for heretics in modern Britain
Neil Clark is a journalist, writer, broadcaster and blogger. He has written for many newspapers and magazines in the UK and other countries including The Guardian, Morning Star, Daily and Sunday Express, Mail on Sunday, Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, New Statesman, The Spectator, The Week, and The American Conservative. He is a regular pundit on RT and has also appeared on BBC TV and radio, Sky News, Press TV and the Voice of Russia. He is the co-founder of the Campaign For Public Ownership @PublicOwnership. His award winning blog can be found at www.neilclark66.blogspot.com. He tweets on politics and world affairs @NeilClark66
Published time: 20 Mar, 2018 20:21
Edited time: 20 Mar, 2018 23:01

What would Orwell make of it all? ‘Moderates’ support wars that ‘extremists’ oppose, ‘Free speech’ advocates call to shut down some TV stations, while a ‘Rights Activist’ wants children expelled from school on parentage grounds.

The narrowing of the parameters about what can and cannot be said by public figures in Britain was seen again last week, with the hysterical, McCarthyite witch hunt against those, like Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who simply asked questions about what the government had claimed in relation to the Salisbury poisonings. Corbyn was branded a traitor and an appeaser for doing what opposition leaders should be doing in a democracy – namely trying to hold the government to account. Evidence? You want to see evidence! You must be some kind of Kremlin stooge!

Never mind that the presumption of innocence is a hallmark of a fair judicial system and indeed a civilized country. The Sun says it was Putin who did it, and so does John Woodcock MP, so that settles it. Trial by media and neocon propagandists has replaced due process.

Unlike in the 1970s, when Britain was truly a vibrant democracy, political debate is today vigorously policed with dissident voices hounded by obnoxious ‘Witch-finder Generals’ who clearly model themselves on the late Matthew Hopkins, a man who traveled East Anglia on horseback hunting for heretics. It was said of Hopkins that he had “no specific schooling for his role as witch-finder – he just came with a passionate belief in the righteousness of his own actions.” With such an attitude he’d surely have a nice job working for the Rupert Murdoch media empire today.

Truly, what a state we're in. People – believe it or not – have been banned from membership of political parties on the basis on tweets or Facebook postings they made years ago. Employers are contacted too if the ‘wrong’ views are expressed on social media. Everyone it seems must conform and only express 'politically correct' opinions which the 21st Century witch-finders deem acceptable. That means no questioning of the official War Party narrative on foreign policy – and joining in with the current Establishment-induced wave of Russophobia. Or else. Just look at the vile attacks made by ‘Inside the Tent’ state and corporate media journalists on Craig Murray, the former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, for his daring to challenge the official narrative on the Salisbury poisonings.

On Being a Dissenting Voice in 2018 - I just thought I might give you a little taste of what it means to your personal life to express dissent from the government line in the UK in 2018. Let me start with this combined effort from the UK's most popular https://t.co/UN886iUjEG
— Craig Murray (@CraigMurrayOrg) March 20, 2018

There have been some chilling statements made in the past week, but arguably none more so than those made in a Sunday newspaper column by Ruth Davidson, the ‘progressive’ leader of the Scottish Conservatives. In an article entitled in its hard copy version “Keeping our press free is the best way to counter Kremlin propaganda,” Davidson claimed that Britain was being poisoned “both literally and metaphorically” by “Russian aggression.” In order to protect Britain’s vigorous free media, we must “pull the plug” on RT.

I live less than 15 miles from where George Orwell is buried and I could swear I heard him turning in his grave on Sunday night. Repeat after me: To keep the press free we must close television stations… To keep the press free we must close television stations. War is Peace. Slavery is Freedom!

‘The clamour’?! It’s only coming from you - The Times- who have run an obsessive & very nasty campaign to try and get @RT_com taken off air and second-rate NeoCon politicians desperate to curry favour with your owner Rupert Murdoch. https://t.co/TXmTla4lRW
— Neil Clark (@NeilClark66) March 19, 2018

Davidson is one of a small but vociferous group of witch-finders who want RT taken off air. Lord Adonis is another. The unelected peer, whose only elected office was as a Lib Dem/SDP councilor in leafy North Oxford in the 1990s, was incensed when he saw RT’s witty adverts on the London Underground last year. “Russian state propaganda is no joke & it shouldn't be on London Underground,” the baron tweeted. He then said he would be taking the matter up with ‘the Commissioner.’ As Simon Rite noted for RT: “In simple terms: he doesn’t like the idea of a 'state-sponsored ' message which is not coming from his state, so wants to use the power of the state to make absolutely sure no one hears anything his state doesn’t like. See?”
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/421860-libe...witch-hunting/
__________________
I believe the public should have a say in their own fate and that is why i support free speech. Any media talking heads who argue that free speech must be curbed are arguing that the public should not be allowed a say in their own fate
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:42 PM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.