Defend the right to offend!

When we look at the “modern” Internet and compare it to the Internet of about ten years ago or even five years ago the improvements seem impressive. HD/4K videos, lots of free social media faster loading times. At first glance the modern day version of the Internet looks like a huge improvement. However when we take a closer look at the modern day Internet there is a huge problem as compared with the old Internet.

That problem is censorship. I make political documentaries that are controversial to some so when I started suffering from harsh censorship I always assumed it was because of the content of my videos. In recent years however YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and Google have received millions of complaints from annoyed users that like me feel their channel or videos have been oppressed, hidden or sometimes even removed from the site. Not long ago (when researching the level of censorship that is actually happening) I watched a YouTuber that spent a lot his time talking about suicidal feelings and how to cope with them, this YouTuber was not allowed to advertise due to the “offensive material” he was posting (something that has happened to me on multiple videos and occasions.)

I watched a couple of his videos and seen nothing that offended me in fact what offends me more than anything is when some got nothing better to do “dogooder” thinks they have the right to dictate what people read and watch!

This is financial censorship by financially starving “offensive” videos of financial gain and profit the videos will eventually stop being made and stop appearing on YouTube because people will learn that the subject is a no go for YouTube. Will this improve the quality of YouTube videos or information that we can find on YouTube? No in fact it is much more likely to have the exact opposite effect!

The excuse the establishment and governments use for this selective online advertising policy is the “fear” that extremists and even terrorists could potentially profit from online advertisements and maybe they could! But I ask you this; who funded these terrorists in the first place? who made them powerful? The British and American governments of course to fight the British and American governments enemies.

This is how they feed from terrorism they use terrorism to justify censorship, Internet regulations and restrictions on freedom but they created the problem, freedom of speech did not create the problem yet freedom of speech is lost because somehow the government have concluded that if we (the people) shut the fuck up and surrender our freedoms the terrorists have lost!

It sounds like the opposite to me as well as losing our freedom of speech and freedom of expression we also lose our freedom of knowledge and freedom of information and we lose all these just to ensure that a few small groups of pissed off people lose their freedom. That means the cost of the war on terror is losing our freedom but the reward from the war on terror is they (the terrorists) lost their freedom as well!

IF YOU BELIEVE VIOLENCE IS NOT THE ANSWER ARE YOU A TERRORIST SYMPATHIZER?

IF YOU BELIEVE VIOLENCE IS NOT THE ANSWER YOU ARE A TERRORIST SYMPATHIZER. That was the amazingly ignorant and arrogant claim of terrorist David Cameron today. I believe if you sympathize with the greed and war mongering Conservative government you are the REAL terrorist Sympathizer! How can David Cameron make claims like this when he supports Israel’s oppression and terrorist acts in Palestine? Britain is sleep walking into another war.

It is not that I sympathize with people that kill people (like the British and US armies,) I sympathize with the children that are in the wrong place at the wrong time and the mothers that have to witness the massacres our taxes fund. I sympathize with our brainwashed soldiers (that have been programmed to KILL and follow orders without asking questions) and the families they leave behind, I sympathize with the innocent civilians as they become death stats.

I find it hard to sympathize with rich, greedy, elitist, war mongering, propaganda using governments and their corporate and aristocratic masters. After all David Cameron’s children will be cozy, safe and sound in their huge mansions with their expensive minders surrounded by security. Why should the working class British public defend a country and a government that has spent much of its time oppressing and ripping off the poor and working classes?

If the elite want war I say go for it but do not ask or expect us (the poorer classes) to support or fight for them, the Conservative government have cut public services, incapacity benefits, child tax credits and the NHS for us while handing tax breaks to Google, News Corporation, Facebook and many other corporations, billionaires and millionaires but now we are expected to defend them? Lets keep this simple, FUCK EM.

Lets see the elite fight this war without us, if rich little weaklings like David Cameron, Barrack Obama, Mark Zuckerberg and their masters are so pro war let them fight a war. I would happily work and pay taxes if our government promise to drop these weakling, warmongers in the middle of Syria to fight terrorism themselves.

David Cameron believes that we are terrorist sympathizers, I believe he and his government are terrorists which makes their supporters terrorist supporters! USA, UK and their allies attack, exploit, kill, loot, thieve, bomb and murder but they still have the nerve to suggest that they stand for peace and against terrorism. The Conservative government and their masters stand as much against freedom as ISIS do, who by the way were funded by American taxes!

syria

STOP THE WAR ON SYRIA.

BRITISH AND AMERICAN GOVERNMENT’S ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR LIBYAN MIGRANT DEATHS?

On the 20th October 2011 Muammar Muhammad Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi more commonly known as Colonel Gaddafi was killed and the Libyan people were freed of an oppressive dictatorship. The oppressive dictatorship of Gaddafi offered free health care, government grants for marriage and children and a free education system that put Libya top of the literacy league tables in the whole of Africa. The oppressive dictatorship of Gaddafi also left Libya with a national debt of between zero and five billion pound depending on what source you use compared to Britain’s debt of one and half trillion pound and America’s 18 trillion dollars, Libya had state owned banks therefore the Libya government controlled the banks this allowed Libya to print interest free money unlike Britain and USA there banks are essentially corporations that charge huge interest on printed money that is at least part of the reason that so many countries have huge deficits.

Team Great Britain and USA to the rescue “we will free the Libyan people” David Cameron told the British TV audience and as usual we lapped it up, “people are dying in the streets” David Cameron said. The disgusting British media celebrated his death “that’s for Lockerbie” Rupert Murdoch’s Zionist loving and propagating the Sun newspaper declared. “The people of Libya are saved” we were told, than Libya disappears from the news completely not a mention.

Weeks before the general election 2015 in Britain and the Libyan war comes back to remind us of the impact that governments in Britain and USA have on the world as hundreds of migrants drowned in a desperate attempt to flee recently liberated Libya.

The British voter and taxpayer should be asking a few questions about the Libyan migrants drowning, questions that the mainstream media will completely ignore as they will be too busy talking about some celebrities private life or rating how good celebrities look in bikini’s or something along those lines.

How bad of a state is Libya since the “liberation of the Libyan people” and the death of an “evil and cowardly” dictator as described by the British media for people of Libya that have families and children to even consider getting on one of them boats?

How much to blame are our elected government’s that insisted the Libyan war was a humanitarian mission?

Would this be happening if Great Britain, USA and NATO stayed out of Libya?

Were people ever this desperate to escape Libya under Gaddafi? Have we just taken the treasure and ran?

Independence, Kingdom of Libya and Libya under Gaddafi

King Idris I led the country into independence in 1951 and became its first head of state
On 24 December 1951, Libya declared its independence as the United Kingdom of Libya, a constitutional and hereditary monarchy under King Idris, Libya’s only monarch. The discovery of significant oil reserves in 1959 and the subsequent income from petroleum sales enabled one of the world’s poorest nations to establish an extremely wealthy state. Although oil drastically improved the Libyan government’s finances, resentment among some factions began to build over the increased concentration of the nation’s wealth in the hands of King Idris.[citation needed]
Gaddafi (left) with Egyptian President Nasser in 1969.

On 1 September 1969, a small group of military officers led by 27-year-old army officer Muammar Gaddafi staged a coup d’état against King Idris, launching the Al Fateh Revolution.[49] Gaddafi was referred to as the “Brother Leader and Guide of the Revolution” in government statements and the official Libyan press.[50]

On 2 March 1977, Libya officially became the “Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya”. Gaddafi officially passed power to the General People’s Committees and henceforth claimed to be no more than a symbolic figurehead.[51] Dissidence against the new system was not tolerated. At around the same time the Jamahiriya was established, Gaddafi authorized the execution of twenty-two officers who had participated in a 1975 attempted military coup, in addition to the execution of several civilians.[52] The new “jamahiriya” governance structure he established was officially referred to as “direct democracy”,[53] though the government refused to publish election results.[54]

Libya’s system of governance during the Jamahiriya era was based on Gaddafi’s theories outlined in his The Green Book, published in 1975. Under the Jamahiriya system, political issues for debate were raised at local level around the country, convened by any one of about 2,000 local “people’s committees”. The committees would then pass their votes to a central general committee formed by elected members, where votes at the local congresses would finally influence the outcomes of national decisions.[55]

In February 1977, Libya started delivering military supplies to Goukouni Oueddei and the People’s Armed Forces in Chad. The Chadian–Libyan conflict began in earnest when Libya’s support of rebel forces in northern Chad escalated into an invasion. Later that same year, Libya and Egypt fought a four-day border war that came to be known as the Libyan-Egyptian War, both nations agreed to a ceasefire under the mediation of the Algerian president Houari Boumediène.[56] Hundreds of Libyans lost their lives in the war against Tanzania, when Gaddafi tried to save his friend Idi Amin. Gaddafi financed various other groups from anti-nuclear movements to Australian trade unions.[57]

From 1977 onward, per capita income in the country rose to more than US $11,000, the fifth-highest in Africa,[58] while the Human Development Index became the highest in Africa and greater than that of Saudi Arabia.[59] This was achieved without borrowing any foreign loans, keeping Libya debt-free.[60] The Great Manmade River was also built to allow free access to fresh water across large parts of the country.[59] In addition, financial support was provided for university scholarships and employment programs.[61]

Much of the country’s income from oil, which soared in the 1970s, was spent on arms purchases and on sponsoring dozens of paramilitaries and terrorist groups around the world.[62][63][64]An American airstrike failed to kill Gaddafi in 1986. Libya was finally put under United Nations sanctions after the bombing of a commercial flight killed hundreds of travellers.[65]

Muammar Gaddafigained power in a 1969 coup and was “leader of the revolution” until his overthrow in 2011

A gathering of more than 200 African kings and traditional rulers, meeting on 27 August 2008 in the Libyan town of Benghazi, conferred on Colonel Gaddafi the title “King of Kings of Africa”. Sheikh Abdilmajid of Tanzania said traditional rulers were more influential in Africa than their respective governments.[66]

2011 Civil War

Demonstrations in Bayda on 22 July 2011

After the Arab Spring movements overturned the rulers of Tunisia and Egypt, Libya experienced a full-scale revolt beginning on 17 February 2011.[67] By 20 February, the unrest had spread to Tripoli. On 27 February 2011, the National Transitional Council was established to administer the areas of Libya under rebel control. On 10 March 2011, France became the first state to officially recognise the council as the legitimate representative of the Libyan people.[68][69]

Pro-Gaddafi forces were able to respond militarily to rebel pushes in Western Libya and launched a counterattack along the coast toward Benghazi, the de facto centre of the uprising.[70] The town of Zawiya, 48 kilometres (30 mi) from Tripoli, was bombarded by air force planes and army tanks and seized by Jamahiriya troops, “exercising a level of brutality not yet seen in the conflict.”[71]

Organs of the United Nations, including United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon[72] and the United Nations Human Rights Council, condemned the crackdown as violating international law, with the latter body expelling Libya outright in an unprecedented action urged by Libya’s own delegation to the UN.[73][74]

On 17 March 2011 the UN Security Council passed Resolution 1973,[75] with a 10–0 vote and five abstentions including Russia, China and Germany. The resolution sanctioned the establishment of a no-fly zone and the use of “all means necessary” to protect civilians within Libya.[76] On 19 March, the first act of NATO allies to secure the no-fly zone by destroying Libyan air defences began when French military jets entered Libyan airspace on a reconnaissance mission heralding attacks on enemy targets.[77] In the weeks that followed, American forces were in the forefront of NATO operations against Libya. More than 8,000 American personnel in warships and aircraft were deployed in the area. At least 3,000 targets were struck in 14,202 strike sorties, 716 of them in Tripoli and 492 in Brega.[78] The American air offensive included flights of B-2 Stealth bombers, each bomber armed with sixteen 2000-pound bombs, flying out of and returning to their base in Missouri on the continental United States.[79] Clearly the support provided by the NATO airforces was pivotal in the ultimate success of the revolution.[80]

By 22 August 2011, rebel fighters had entered Tripoli and occupied Green Square,[81] which they renamed Martyrs’ Square in honour of those killed since 17 February 2011. On 20 October 2011 the last heavy fighting of the uprising came to an end in the city of Sirte, where Gadhafi was captured and killed. The defeat of loyalist forces was celebrated on 23 October 2011, three days after the fall of Sirte.

At least 30,000 Libyans died in the civil war.[82]

WHO FUNDS ISIS?

isis

Published on Sep 2, 2014

Along with this good friend Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) penned a New York Times op-ed this weekend calling on President Barack Obama to “confront ISIS now” and criticizing him for saying “We don’t have a strategy yet.” But asked by Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren what the U.S. should do about ISIS Tuesday afternoon, his first response was two short words: “Kill ‘em.”

“They’ve got to be destroyed, and you’ve got to have a goal, the president does, and we have to have a strategy to fit that goal and policies that will implement it. We have none of the above,” McCain said on Fox. He called Obama’s recent comments about the “messy” world “one of most unbelievable comments ever made.”

McCain continued his push for war in both Iraq and Syria, saying the fight requires the “full weight of American air power” as well as “some more boots and support on the ground.” He added, “All this didn’t have to happen. We could have left a force behind in Iraq that would have stabilized Iraq. And we are paying an incredible price for the president’s leading from behind, whether it be in Iraq, in Syria, in Libya, or a number of countries in the Middle East. We are seeing the chickens coming home to roost.”

The senator proceeded to seriously misspeak when he described a 2013 meeting in the White House in which everyone on the administration’s national security team “recommended arming ISIS.” But, he explained, “the president, by himself, turned it down.”

What McCain likely meant to say was that Obama’s team, including then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, wanted to arm the “moderate” Syrian rebels in their fight against President Bashar al-Assad, but Obama did not want to. Van Susteren neglected to correct his mistake.

As Obama decided at the time, the lack of distinction between the “moderate” rebels and the Islamic extremists, including ISIS, who were fighting Assad made the idea of arming any opposition in Syria an extremely risky proposition.

Published on Sep 17, 2014

UGLY TRUTH: Testimony of Senator John McCain & Hillary Clinton, America FUNDING & ARMING Terrorists: Al-Qaeda & ISIS

THE TRUTH IS: America & Saudi Arabia has been FUNDING Civil War, Bloody Conflict, Radicalism & Terrorism to justify OIL WAR. This is a FACT not to be denied. STOP BIGOTRY & SECTARIAN HATRED!

Amerika & Arab Saudi MEBIAYAI perang saudara, konflik brutal, radikalisme & terorisme di Timur Tengah adalah FAKTA yang tidak perlu disangkal. HENTIKAN PEMIKIRAN SEMPIT & KEBENCIAN SARA.

Hassan Firouzabadi, the chief of the general staff of Iran’s armed forces, told reporters on Wednesday that Iran will never cooperate with the U.S. in fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).

ISIL terrorists have seized the north of Iraq in the past week, threatening to dismember Iraq and unleash all-out sectarian warfare with no regard for national borders.

Major General Firouzabadi said ISIL was created by the U.S. and Israel to increase the security of the Zionist regime in the region.

He added that the ISIL attacks in Iraq are in fact a reaction to the victory of Bashar al-Assad in the Syrian presidential election.