It takes a nation to protect the nation
Fightback by Blacklist
Information
To record bad behaviour by the media and others, as a public service.
This room can be used to record both Blacklists and Greylists (where it is not clear, but caution should be exercised).
Members: 6
Latest Activity: May 21, 2019
Key Info
The purpose of this room is to try deal with bad behaviour by organisations or individuals, in any of the media - that is: Press, Radio, TV, and Website. The legal system is too cumbersome, lengthy and expensive for all but the most serious cases of bad behaviour. Blacklisting is simple and cost free, and has the following benefits:
- Protect Users: Our readers are able to avoid being similarly caught out
- Deter Miscreants: Seeing the reports, organisations will be deterred from behaving badly.
- Fairness: The blacklisted party is invited to comment on the logged entry, and refute any claims made. The reader is free to judge which story is the more reasonable or credible. We may later introduce a grading system for claims, after refining our objective criteria.
If you have a grievance, please join the site and log it in a forum in one of the categories above. If you log it with an anonymous or fake ID, your entry will obviously carry less weight, but we understand that in some cases this is necessary for security reasons. We will then contact the relevant person or organisation and give them the chance to respond to your entry. All comments are public.
Please title your forum with the person/org being blacklisted, and the alleged misbehaviour, then put the details of the incident in the body of the forum. Try to be as objective and literal and precise as possible. So, don't say:
- "The BBC were nasty and unfair to me and deliberately presented me badly"
Instead say:
- "The BBC's John Smith interrupted me many times when I had just started to respond to a question, and they misquoted me. I said "I hate Fox Hunting and it should be banned", but the BBC quoted "I hate the Fox Hunters and we need to get them". They also made out that every statement was made 'angrily' in order to portray me as seeking violence.
The more objective and literal you can make your listing, the more credibility it will have.
Discussion Forum
Blacklist: Prof. Nigel Copsey - Shoddy Research
Started by Alan Lake. Last reply by Alan Lake Jan 6, 2014. 5 Replies 0 Likes
Comment Wall
Add a Comment
-
Comment by Alan Lake on February 13, 2013 at 17:00
-
Kate Hudson on her love of Brian Cox!
Yes, that was the title on the main page of the BBC news site, and its an outright lie.
Here's the page that heading linked to, where they RE-TITLE the video, in a more correct way:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/21421679Check it. You will find that AT NO TIME does Kate Hudson say she loves Brian Cox, or anything like it. In fact, she struggles to remember what he is (Physicist) and goes for Scientist.
This is typical misleading lies and obfuscation from the BBC. If they do that for a simple matter of an actress's TV viewing, imagine what those Oxbridge Lefties will do to your heretical political views?
-
-
Can we blacklist universities and Christian religious bodies who give house-room if not frank support for Islamism and Islamist groups?
I feel your frustration, but that isn't the idea of this room. Ahh, I see my room description is not adequate. The idea of this room is that if someone in the media is plainly lying or misquoting or misleading the public with their reporting, then they should be blacklisted.
The criterion of judgement is not their political position, its their veracity, or lack of it. Theoretically, you could blacklist someone who has falsely reported on a Leftist, although that would be a bit like King Canute occasionally going on the side of the waves, for the sake of balance :-)
As it happens, I am just about to post another entry here which will demonstrate all these points.
-
-
Good idea, but is this meant to be used as a resource rather than for anything else, so that the blacklisted person is tagged for every subsequent offence? What would / should be done with the information then?
The Blacklisting is a warning sign, like you get before driving over cliffs. It just means: "Do not engage with the person, or if you do, do it with precautions".
Once someone is blacklisted there's not much point in adding to the litany of crimes. If someone is greylisted there is a point, so that you can later regrade them to the Blacklist.
-
Comment by Simon Charles on February 13, 2013 at 14:17
-
Can we blacklist universities and Christian religious bodies who give house-room if not frank support for Islamism and Islamist groups? I have Quakers in mind here, whose social witness programme has to be the most naive and blinkered, and who had to be shamed a few years ago into not allowing Islamists to hold a conference at their main meeting hall in Euston Road in London.
Could university bodies also be included for naming and shaming such as Manchester University's Islamic Society for its treatment of Israel's Deputy Ambassador to the UK, and the University itself for its lack of spine, see http://www.studentrights.org.uk/article/1029/deputy_israeli_ambassa.... That latter could also apply to SOAS and others who allow Muslim students to dictate what goes on in their establishments
-
-
Good idea, but is this meant to be used as a resource rather than for anything else, so that the blacklisted person is tagged for every subsequent offence? What would / should be done with the information then?
-
-
What about bloggers lying about us and libeling us?
A member asked me the above question. Actually, we had already considered the question of politicians, where the answer is just about the same.
Firstly, we all expect politicians to lie. Also, people do not just believe that bloggers tell the truth, since they have no reputation to maintain, and there is no policeman to enforce anything.
Secondly, bloggers and politicans lie so much that if we were to include that category, the website would just get filled up with masses of material of doubtful quality, so the impact and credibility of blacklisting would be weakened.
So the answer is that, for now, we are not including bloggers and politicians.
The situation is different with Academics and Researchers. Their job is purely to report and analyse accurately on the social and political situations around them; its not their job to try mould those narratives by what is, in the end, a form of propaganda. Also, if an academic who is a supposed 'expert' on the 'right wing' is blacklisted for lying, so that in the end no-one from that movement will speak to him - then his role as 'expert' is called seriously into question, since all he has become is a reader of first and second hand material on the internet. Thus such a blacklisting can have a serious effect.
Welcome to 4 Freedoms!
(currently not admitting new members)
Page Monitor
Just fill in the box below on any 4F page to be notified when it changes.
Muslim Terrorism Count
Mission Overview
Most Western societies are based on Secular Democracy, which itself is based on the concept that the open marketplace of ideas leads to the optimum government. Whilst that model has been very successful, it has defects. The 4 Freedoms address 4 of the principal vulnerabilities, and gives corrections to them.
At the moment, one of the main actors exploiting these defects, is Islam, so this site pays particular attention to that threat.
Islam, operating at the micro and macro levels, is unstoppable by individuals, hence: "It takes a nation to protect the nation". There is not enough time to fight all its attacks, nor to read them nor even to record them. So the members of 4F try to curate a representative subset of these events.
We need to capture this information before it is removed. The site already contains sufficient information to cover most issues, but our members add further updates when possible.
We hope that free nations will wake up to stop the threat, and force the separation of (Islamic) Church and State. This will also allow moderate Muslims to escape from their totalitarian political system.
The 4 Freedoms
These 4 freedoms are designed to close 4 vulnerabilities in Secular Democracy, by making them SP or Self-Protecting (see Hobbes's first law of nature). But Democracy also requires - in addition to the standard divisions of Executive, Legislature & Judiciary - a fourth body, Protector of the Open Society (POS), to monitor all its vulnerabilities (see also Popper).
1. SP Freedom of Speech
Any speech is allowed - except that advocating the end of these freedoms
2. SP Freedom of Election
Any party is allowed - except one advocating the end of these freedoms
3. SP Freedom from Voter Importation
Immigration is allowed - except where that changes the political demography (this is electoral fraud)
4. SP Freedom from Debt
The Central Bank is allowed to create debt - except where that debt burden can pass across a generation (25 years).
An additional Freedom from Religion is deducible if the law is applied equally to everyone:
- Religious and cultural activities are exempt from legal oversight except where they intrude into the public sphere (Res Publica)"
© 2023 Created by Netcon.
Powered by
You need to be a member of Fightback by Blacklist to add comments!