The Lockerbie Case: The Lockerbie Case blog "blocked for your protection"

Wednesday, 5 March 2014

The Lockerbie Case blog "blocked for your protection"

[From Sharyn Bovat (@sharynbovat) on Twitter:]

@rblackqc Sir - your #lockerbie blog suppressed at my #dc hotel & it's NOT the only place it's suppressed http://youtu.be/c21dHOjyRFQ #panam103 #ap

[From me to Sharyn Bovat:]

@sharynbovat Thanks for this, Sharyn. I must be doing something right!

[Here’s the link again: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c21dHOjyRFQ&feature=youtu.be. And here’s what came up when Sharyn tried to access this blog:]

We’re sorry.

For your protection http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com has been blocked.

4 comments:

ebol05 March, 2014
MISSION LIFE WITH LOCKERBIE, 2014

Each State needs a Intelligence Agency and a Secret police - YES - but please do not abuse data and events for their own "business"!
+++
Jeder Staat braucht einen Geheimdienst und einen Nachrichtendienst - JA - aber bitte Daten und Ereignisse nicht für ihren eigenen "Business" missbrauchen !

by Edwin Bollier, MEBO Ltd, Telecommunication, Switzerland. Webpage: www.lockerbie.ch
ReplyDelete
Replies
Rolfe05 March, 2014
I woudln't get too excited. It's probably an automatic thing because the text has triggered a key word alert.

A guy with a bird-watching site found it was blocked because of "adult content". (Work it out.)
ReplyDelete
Replies
Rolfe05 March, 2014
No sign of the documentary "If not Megrahi, then who?" on tonight's Al Jazeera English schedule. This was the second of the two dates noted as possibilities for the broadcast of the programme.
ReplyDelete
Replies
baz07 March, 2014
I wonder if the keyword is "Bovat"!
ReplyDelete
Replies

Add comment

Comments

Readers are invited to comment on blog posts. All comments require to be pre-moderated by me, and I shall reject all (a) that are not related to the Lockerbie disaster or (b) that fail to meet my -- perhaps idiosyncratic -- standards of courtesy towards other contributors. Comments will not be rejected simply because I disagree with them or because I, or other contributors, find them irritating. But comments will be rejected if they distort or misrepresent the evidence; are defamatory; or if they risk embroiling me, as publisher, in defamation proceedings. I am perfectly relaxed about being sued in respect of material which I personally have posted -- but not in respect of material that others wish to post as comments and which, in any case, I often strongly disagree with.

Particularly during my sojourns in South Africa, it may not be possible for me to perform the moderation function speedily. I regret the necessity of moderation but it has been rendered inevitable by the behaviour of a particular commentator whose contributions will always and without exception be rejected.

No correspondence will be entered into regarding moderation decisions.