Readers may have noticed a number of postings from Sentinel complaining of censorship in some threads.
The background to this is that Sentinel has sought to post a number of comments that want to frame the debate about crime around the context of immigration. He has also posted comments that we feel inappropriate about Jews.
These comments have been deleted, as we do not want to provide a platform for these debates, and readers interested are referred to Sentinel’s own blog. Sentinel keeps re-posting them, and we keep deleting them.
We regard the accusation of censorship is inaccurate. We are not preventing Sentinel’s views being published elsewhere, but we do wish to exercise editorial control, to ensure that the SU blog remains a discussion forum for the left, and is not a space that colludes with the promotion in racist attitudes.
Sentinel may not personally be a racist, I don’t know, but to debate race and crime in the terms that he wishes to debate would provide a space for racists to join the discussion. There are plenty of other forums where that can take placed, and we do not wish to join them.
Currently, Sentinel is repeatedly posting nuisance comments to this blog, with the stated intention of forcing us to introduce comment moderation. We have no intention of introducing moderation, which would stifle debate, and instead we will delete inappropriate comments from Sentinel.
22 comments:
Fair enough. Sounds like a right-wing troll to me.
Absolutely, TWP. And good post AN!
And his comments are not in good faith as they have a deep nasty ideological meaning. We are a socialist forum promoting, debating and arguing socialist ideas not offensive reactionary rubbish. That's my position and I also support no platform.
I have a strong suspicion that Sentinal workd for the police, cerytinlsy there is an IP source with xxx.pol.uk among our regular returning visitors.
Censorhip:
Main Entry: cen·sor·ship
Function: noun
Pronunciation: 'sen(t)-s&r-"ship
1 a : the institution, system, or practice of censoring b : the actions or practices of censors ; especially : censorial control exercised repressively
2 : the office, power, or term of a Roman censor
3 : exclusion from consciousness by the psychic censor
Your actions are very clear. It is not 'editorial control', it is censorship.
And you have no interest in any debate but merely seek self-affirming kindred commentators. Be clear on that; be honest about that at least.
What you have done is very underhanded, you have allowed a couple of your friends to insult me, tar me with labels and ask for explanations but have then deleted my responses leaving them with the last insulting word and the illusion that I am some rabid, expletive-using, abuse-mongering monster incapable of articulate and rational output.
Whereas the truth is, I have only presented sourced facts, with minimal commentary; thus, ultimately it is facts that you have problem with, and by extension the pursuit of truth. A truth that may not suit your belief.
As always, the truth is objective but it is the presence of these facts that you find so threatening, and the fact that you and your friends seem incapable of interpreting them in a fashion that conforms to your end goals.
All censorship is shrouded with some cloak, usually made out to be benign or protective but all censorship has the same result: The suppression of human freedom.
You have chosen to use a tired old mantra 'no platform' which obviously means no debate, but you try to invoke some moral superiority and higher good to justify it; strip the dressing away and we see intolerance.
You are in the public domain, and post articles and theories that have some serious flaws but you do not want them challenged or checked; you say that to disagree is inappropriate debate and again invoke some moral superiority and higher good in order to justify it; when you pull this cloak away we see the methods of the totalitarians.
You glean facts from various sources to support your contentions but when I do the same you judge these facts to 'offensive' or 'inappropriate' whilst employing the same mechanism described above and again, when the shroud is lifted all we can see is hypocrisy, shallowness, deliberate obfuscation and underhanded omissions.
My outlook is moulded by vast personal experience of countries in serious internal strife and as such I have a vast amount of experience of the causes of these implosions; I am not guided by any preconceived ideology or even by any political motivations at all. I am neither 'left' or 'right', nor 'centre'. I am a free thinker.
I would have thought that you would welcome debate that collides with your position because you must surely have some conviction in your beliefs and as such should be able to easily direct the debate to the kernel of your belief and refute any misinterpretations. If any comments were to go too far and use inexcusable language, then of course in the public interests they need to be removed. That has not happened here though. All dissent has been suppressed.
The fact that you are frightened by such debate says much more about you then it does about me.
This country is heading for a serious meltdown sometime soon, and the sands of time for this are hastened with every act of suppression that is performed. I know this from hard experience.
And as for me working for the police that is either another smear trick or plain paranoia. I am a private citizen, and given the subversive direction of the contemporary police I would imagine not only would they agree with your every utterance but would like to expand upon it further.
This accusation, like the labels you place upon me are really just manifestations of hate and conscious malice. A 'nazi,' or 'fascist' or 'anti-semite' or an 'embedded establishment agent' is not really a person in the conventional sense and as such any opinion they hold can be disregard, any abuse they encounter is justified and any violence directed at them is deserved.
That is the function of these labels and that is why the 'left' use them as quickly as opposition rears its head. It is medieval witchhunt tactics, it is the philosophy of the inquisition.
That is one major reason why we are all heading for a conflagration the likes of which this isle has never seen. All of these tactics are government policy and are practised at every level. Suppression, more then any other action is the catalyst for revolt.
Ironically, when it comes I am more then capable of dealing with the results, as are most of the people who have shared my experiences and are aware of the direction this going in.
Are you ready for the whirlwind you will have, in part, created?
Andy, you bad boy, you've created a partial "whirlwind" that, according to Mr Sentinel, will cause a "meltdown" and "conflagration". From where sid you get these awesome powers. Perhaps you are a Sith Lord? I'm going to stay clear of you, oh powerful "whirlwind" man.
Sentinel
I apologise for saying I suspected you are in the police, if that is not in fact the case.
I also regret that some of the replies to you comments are still avialble, while your original remarks to wich they are repsonding are no lolnger there. i apologise if any imsleading impression is given by that, but it is too editorially complex to deal with, and I am leaving your current post here, so that other readers can judge for themselves.
Your posting here does read a little like: "As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding. Like the Roman, I seem to see 'the River Tiber foaming with much blood'."
twp
-
"Fair enough. Sounds like a right-wing troll to me."
Based upon what? As I have said, I do not fit into any neat little category, but consider myself to be a free thinker, but your position seems to be that any one on the 'right' is an enemy, purely because they do not agree with all that you stand for.
Surely it is their right to disagree without nasty insults like 'troll.' If you really believe you and your stance are infallible then in essence you are saying that there is no need for democracy, because you have already all the answers, everyone else who disagrees is wrong and therefore they are best superfluous.
louisefeminsta
-
"his comments are not in good faith"
You have absolutely no grounds at all for that extraordinary statement. It is made out of political prejudice, not personal reality. You do not know me.
"have a deep nasty ideological meaning"
No, they do not. That is just the way you chose to read them.
Tawfiq Chahboune
-
"you've created a partial "whirlwind"
Why did you bother with this nonsense? What did you aim to achieve?
I said "are you ready for the whirlwind you will have, in part, created?" not anything about a 'partial whirlwind.' You clearly do not understand this simple statement but go on to attempt to ridicule me from a position of ignorance nonetheless.
an
-
I accept any and all the apologies made as you seem to have some interest in fairness. The practice of labelling and what has been termed 'affirmative action' is so prevalent in society today that most people cannot see that is merely intolerance and censorship with a fashionable twist. Censorship, intolerance and abuse are the same things even when they are purportedly carried out to prevent censorship, intolerance and abuse. It is an insane duality.
Incidentally, I am no prophet but just a man who has studied history and seen the breakdown of nations, its causes and its effects first hand in just about every corner of the globe.
Just today, in the city that was the scene of the last real riots in the UK, we have seen the incredible emergence of a plot to kidnap, torture and behead a muslim member of HM forces, whilst filming the proceedings. It was not too long since we saw four people blow themselves up on public transport in an expression of hatred for the British, followed the next day by another attempt to replicate it.
The riots in Birmingham were not between whites and another racial group but between blacks and asians, all sparked by fantastic nonsense but leaving people dead in its wake all the same.
The problems that caused these events have not gone away. The divisions not only remain but become more defined as each day passes.
Despite all the problems we face, we have an authority that tells us everything is just fine, when most peoples lives are in lived in direct contrast to that statement. I myself have suffered gross unfairness and racial discrimination, and I am far from alone.
The only reason these problems, cracks and divisions have not become prevalent so far is only due to the fact that this establishment acquiesces in most demands made by every group making it, except for the indigenous Britons. If they express any unease at all, it is hysterically shouted down as some kind of 'ism.' People are aware of the power of this new 'witch-word' and its inquisition type aftermath and are kept in line by the merethreat it.
That will only happen for so long. History (and commons sense) tells us that. Add to it the very real problems we are facing here and we are looking at a highly explosive mix.
I truly wish it were not so.
Sentinel
I am not going to delete your last post, but I do repeat that we have no desire to conduct a debate on these terms on this blog.
The contributors to this blog are opposed to immigration controls, and welcome newcomers to these islands of all cultures and races.
We will simpy have to agree to disagree. I suggest that as we do not wish to debate these issues with you, that you stop posting comments to this site.
Thoise interested in your views can look at your blog.
My last comment was a direct response to the other comments made and to your last statement. It was an explanation.
And no, I will not stop posting comments. I have as much right to as anyone else.
I'm really, really tired of people whingeing about 'censorship' on other people's blogs.
No one has any right at all to comment on another's blog. It is a privilege extended by the blog owner.
In a world where there are more and better ways than ever before to spread your ideas, snivelling about 'censorship' just reveals you to be someone desperately grasping for victim status.
Get over it.
david j
-
I though all property was theft?
Besides, these blogs are owned by no one other then the hosting company; and they are in the public domain with the aim of reaching the public. That makes it everyone's business.
Your choice of words 'whinging' and 'snivelling' reveals a very contemptuous personality, a person most people move across the bar to get away from.
I like the way you believe freedom of speech to be a 'privilege.'
Interestingly, though you say no has any right at all to comment on 'another's blog' you have gone ahead and done so anyway. You seem to presume that statement applies to everyone else, but, of course not to you.
You must be special.
Get over it.
No actually Sentinel, I have the power to delete your comments, you do not have the power to delete mine. that demonstrates that i am the owner of the blog, and you are here at my discretion.
Imagine this is a public house, as the landlord I make it open to the public, but i can bar anyone I want.
This is becomming a slanging match.
Further comments on this thread are closed, and I will delete any more that are posted, whoever they are from.
And sentinel, please note that any further comments from you on any thread are likely to be deleted.
Delete away.
You do not own the blog; you are not even renting it. It is by the grace of 'blogger (tm)' that you are able to use their hard-drives and bandwidth. You are not the possessor of anything here.
The flip side to your coin that you are able to delete my comments and I am powerless is that I have enough expertise to ensure that your blog never see's the light of day again, if I so chose.
I am law abiding citizen however; but never believe that you are ever in any position of detached, lofty anonymous authority.
Mr Sentinel, Andy may be the powerful partial "whirlwind" man, but his powers are as nothing compared to yours. You can, you boast and threaten, "ensure that your blog never see's the light of day again". Are you the Lord God of the web? So that I may believe in your powers, oh powerful deity of the electronic universe, switch us off, and then I shall believe and doubt you no more. You shall be the one and only God, for you are a jealous God, and a racist one to boot.
However, if you persist in blaming the woes of this country on immmigration and progressive values, ridicule is the least you deserve. From what I can gather, you have posted derogatory things about Jews and other ethnic minorities. You feel that you should be free to voice these repugnant views on a socialist website. Well, pal, you've got another thing coming. No one is stopping you from saying these things. We object to you using a socialist platform to air these imbecilic rants.
I have no intention of coming round your house and giving you what for on the means of production and what not. Please do us the courtesy of not using our site to voice your silly billy views. If a newspaper does not print one of your letters, do you scream censorship?
Property is theft is a well-known anarchist phrase. Nevertheless, anarchists and socialists distinguish between private and public property. The shoes I am wearing belong to me; they are not collective property. Natural resources, for example, should be considered a public resource, not a private one. This site is a private site: we choose what can and cannot be presented. We have no intention of allowing ant-Semitic and racist filth to dirty our website.
Your ignorance is astounding and your attempt at mockery is a semiliterate embarrassment.
You spew nonsense about 'anti Semitic and racist filth dirtying your 'website' but admit that you haven't even read the posts. And you do not have a website, you have a weblog- hence the term blog.
It is not a private site (it is not a site at all) because you have chosen 'anybody' under 'who can view this blog'. If you wished for it to be private you could have specified parameters to make it such. You are in the public domain and as such you are public property.
Cracking, better known colloquially as 'hacking' may be beyond the obvious limits of your comprehension, but it is hardly a mythical skill. It is one of many skills for which I am certified and very experienced.
Certain usage of this skill is against the laws of this country but when I contact abroad I go to many countries where no such laws exist. Only a fool would invite an attack, let only taunt for one, but you clearly are such a fool.
Mr Sentinel, my comrades inform me of what you have written. I do not need to read Mein Kampf to know that it is written by Hitler and what it contains. I am confident in what my colleagues have said. Your denial is what is known as a "non-denial denial". You do not deny the charges of anti-Semitism and racism. Your issue is that I have not read your posts. As I said,
If I have offended your blogging sensibilities by inadevertently calling a weblog a website, I apologise. That is all I am prepared to apologise for. This weblog (happy now?) does not exist, and neither do we spend time and effort maintaining it, for racist comments to dirty it.
Now you threaten to hack into this weblog (opening yourself up to numerous charges of the law of the land) because you insist that it is somehow your right to post whatever you want. Like anything else, there are restrictions to what we believe is reasonable and decent. Similarly, we do not allow postings from people who believe paedophilia should be decriminalised. Why it is you cannot fathom this remarkably simple matter is bewildering.
This site is private in the sense that anything is private. My shoes are private. You may try to wear them, but I'll stop you from endeavouring to do so. This weblog is a private affair and we decide who can and cannot access it (like my shoes).
I am "a fool" because I refuse to kneel at your threats? Who is the "semiliterate embarrassment" now? That you are admitting that you are a vindictive thug has clearly passed you by. Indeed, your alleged concern for freedom and hatred of censorship is seen to be a red herring. If we do not allow you to write what you like, you will wreak electronic vengeance on this weblog. What does that say about you?
I know I said I would delte all further comments on this thread, but I have enjoyed Toff's arguments so much I have changed my mind.
Some comrades who i really respect have argued that I should delete all the comments from sentinel, what do other comrades think?
No I'm calling time on this now.
It has just become an exchange of insults. There is a real danger of an intimadatory and abuse arguement putting off other contributers, and I am not prepared to let that happen.
Sentinel, we do not wish to debate with you. Out of common courtesy could you please comply with my polite request and desist from posting again to this blog.
I really will delete any further posts to this thread from anyone.
These are not arguments, but the semiliterate and delusional rantings of a clown, devoid of logic or any foundation in reality.
You have not read the comments I made but have taken the word of your fellow self-affirmers as to their content in what is known as 'easily led' or 'gullible.'
What utter rubbish to say you do not need to read a book to know what it contains! You must have been the top of your class with that miraculous skill.
If you had the read the comments you would have seen that I have 'denied' the 'charges'; not that I have to. Just because a few idiots want to throw labels around in lieu of a refutation it doesn't mean I have to justify myself. To anyone.
Your amazing insight into material you have not perused seems to have failed you on that one. Perhaps it is best to use the conventional practice of actually reading something before commenting and attacking people over the content, lest you risk exposing yourself as an ignorant, intolerant and uninformed idiot.
You have no idea of the difference between a website and a weblog but yet again you taunt and attempt mockery of someone who is technologically superior to you; ignorance must be bliss.
I did not threaten to hack into your weblog, I pointed out that I was not as powerless as 'an' seemed to smugly believe. You actually asked for me to do it and as a blog contributor with the appropriate permissions, under ethical hacker guidelines I may well have had licence to do so on the basis of your request.
But don't tell me about the laws my country, especially in a field you know nothing of. I pointed that certain usage of certain skills could constitute an offence in the UK; you say I have opened myself 'up to numerous charges of the law of the land' so exactly which laws are these you refer to? Or are these just empty words that are known as 'weasel words?'
You seem to have an obsession with your shoes that most Britons would not share, and I can assure you would not have to prevent me from endeavouring to wear your shoes in any situation I can think of or in any plane of existence I can imagine.
I am now a thug as well as: police, 'racist', 'anti semite', 'fascist', vindictive and a troll. Quite a tally of insults so far from you moral crusaders.
I love the way you live in the gutter but preach about utopia.
I made no threats to you nor did I ask you kneel anywhere near me.
You invited an attack, indeed taunted and begged for one and I can tell you that the service you are using is a free service and consequently the possibilities of entry are very numerous and very easy to exploit, even commercial giants cannot secure their systems completely so blogger and bloggers stand no chance at all; take my word for it.
As I pointed out I am a law abiding citizen, but when I travel to countries that do not have any laws prohibiting certain activities on their books, then I still remain a law abiding citizen if I pursue things I could not in the UK due to legal restrictions here.
I have better things to do with my time then to destroy your weblog and all of its deep links, archives and all of the other nasty subterfuge that comes along with it, but I must admit that when I encounter such warped smugness and taunting I am tempted.
All of this is over a few factual posts that you have not even read, but led you and your friends to have circled around me like a pack of animals snarling insults and spitting venom.
But if you want to drag me into the gutter with you, then so be it.
What do you think of that comrades?
AN
-
Believe me, I have no wish to continue in this nest of vipers either.
I was going to leave it at the last comment but yet again I have been left attacked without recourse. I have no intention of posting anymore on this depressing blackhole.
But I ask you, also out of common courtesy, that either you delete all my posts and all third party references to me in this blog (no hard task) primarily because all of the references are extremely derogatory, or you leave me a defence and a response. Not unreasonable, I believe.
I have no real desire or even conscious inclination to counter underhanded actions with more behaviour in a similar vein, perhaps also using unfair advantage, but I cannot allow such gross misrepresentations of myself; it is not in my nature to let it be.
In the final analysis, whilst your conduct has been far from exemplary in this frenzy of hysterical attack, it has the perception of assuming a more reasoned and perhaps more real 'life experienced' tone. Maybe that is just an illusion that you wish to project in order to brush away an opponent, akin to the friendly authority of an old policeman. I cannot assess that with complete accuracy.
But I can say that you are surrounded by people who are very dangerous. You may recall in an earlier post that I am an ex-serviceman (of some variance and time); from long and brutal experience I know that those who use the most flagrant and blatant provocation, those who shout the loudest are invariably those that hide, in confusion and horror, when the backlash eventually arrives.
The lying, corrupt, fraudulent and demeaning government we have, and the authorities set in place over us all by this self-serving filth are filled with people like this.
The anger and the fear (which is just another manifestation of the same root emotion) is tangible in this country because of it.
Ok Sentinel.
Here is the deal.
I'll leave this last post of yours up, on the understanding that this really is the end of it.
And we will agree to go our different ways.
Post a Comment