Henning Witte – The Sinking of M/S Estonia & The Illuminati
August 14, 2008
Lawyer and author Henning Witte talks about the sinking of M/S Estonia. Henning talks about how he became involved in the M/S Estonia disaster, what happened, the official story, contradictions, evidence, speculation and the alternative view. For the second hour, Henning talks about who is responsible for sinking of M/S Estonia and we discuss the connection to the Illuminati and the similarities to 9/11 and the 7/7 bombings in London. More Topics Discussed: threatened witnesses, NATO exercise during the same time the M/S sank, the cover up, S�PO (Swedish Security Police) and the delayed rescue operations, Bonniers, military operation and the Swedish Board of Psychological Defense, the Bilderbergers, Carl Bildt & Mona Sahlin, corruption within the legal system, Christopher Bollyn, Mossad and much more.
Month: September 2015
The Sinking of Estonia
By Christopher Bollyn | bollyn.info
Listen to our Red Ice Radio interview with Lawyer Henning Witte on The Sinking of MS Estonia
Excerp from the article: When Terror Drills Turned Real: 9-11, the London Bombings & the Sinking of Estonia
…during the official dive for evidence to the wreck of Estonia, on which more than 852 people are known to have died, the crucial locking bolt from the bow visor, which officials blame for having caused the catastrophe, was thrown back into the sea.
The bolt from the Atlantic lock had been detached by divers and brought to the surface for investigation only to be thrown back to the sea by B�rje Stenstr�m, the Swedish navy commander who was the head of the technical group of the international investigation commission.
Stenstr�m’s throwing the bolt back to the sea was clearly the destruction of “one of the most important pieces of evidence,” according to his own scenario of what had caused the sinking.
The Cult of the Bow Visor
Estonia’s bow visor, seen open here, is blamed by corrupt investigators for causing the sinking. The crucial evidence that would prove otherwise was thrown back into the sea. The Swedish government’s effort to support their “official lie” with a computer simulation of the sinking has failed because the model of the vessel simply won’t sink absent a hole below the waterline.
The Estonia Catastrophe
The unexplained sinking of the Baltic ferry Estonia on its way to Stockholm from Tallinn in late September 1994 is the third mega-disaster (not in chronological order) that occurred within the framework of a military exercise.
The day before it sank Estonia had also been the scene of a terrorism exercise in which the scenario was a terror bombing of the ferry. Looking at the NATO military assets that were assembled nearby and the terrorism drill that had just been conducted on the ship, the stage was clearly set and the actors were in place for what turned out to be a real disaster.
The Estonia catastrophe is Europe’s worst maritime disaster since World War II. 852 people are known to have died when Estonia sank in the early hours of September 28, 1994, but more than 1,000 may have perished, if, as reported, some 150 Iraqi Kurds were being smuggled to Sweden in one of the trucks on its car deck.
Scores of people died in the frigid water of the Baltic Sea waiting for rescue boats and helicopters that came too late. More than ninety bodies were retrieved from the life rafts.
NATO’s “Search & Rescue” Exercise
Although it is seldom mentioned, the Estonia catastrophe occurred on the first day of a 10-day NATO naval exercise called Cooperative Venture 94, in which more than 15 ships and “a number of maritime aircraft” were prepared to conduct “humanitarian and search and rescue operations” in nearby waters.
The NATO exercise, which involved 10 NATO member states and the Baltic “partner” nations of Russia, Sweden, Poland, and Lithuania, was to be staged in the Skagerrak, between Denmark and Norway, and the Norwegian Sea, according to the NATO press release about the exercise from September 16, 1994.
The NATO nations who participated in the exercise were Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, United Kingdom, and the United States. Many other allies and partners sent observers to the exercise, according to the NATO press release.
The fact that Estonia sank as the submarines, ships, planes, personnel, and satellites from the navies of 14 nations were preparing to begin their 10-day “search and rescue operations” exercise off the coast of Sweden raises several obvious questions that deserve to be answered: First and foremost, if NATO had 15 ships and a number of aircraft assembled and prepared to conduct “search and rescue operations,” why didn’t NATO assist in the early morning rescue operation for the victims from the Estonia catastrophe?
The Swedish rescue helicopters were ill-prepared and ill-equipped, which resulted in a fatal delay for those waiting to be rescued.
“Were there specially-equipped rescue helicopters or other aircraft that could have assisted?” Drew Wilson, author of The Hole (2006), a book about the Estonia catastrophe, wrote:
Survivors who didn’t die from hypothermia while floating on upturned boats or flotsam in the biting water waited four-six hours for rescue. NATO search-and-rescue personnel and equipment could have saved some lives. Flying time was under 1 hour. Why didn’t they respond to the distress traffic? What happened?
The evidence indicates that the Mayday signals from Estonia had been jammed, as were all radio communications in the area.
“A series of comprehensive malfunctions in regional communication systems all at once, and all at the exact time the ferry had sunk suggest involvement by a military or intelligence services,” Wilson writes in The Hole. “Was a distress call intentionally blocked? If so, why? Communications throughout the Northern Baltic Sea were disrupted during the time of the accident.”
As Wilson documents, VHF Channel 16, the international Mayday channel, and Channel 2182 were blocked. “Signal jamming of all radio communications apparently occurred on the Southern coastline of Finland as the accident unfolded.”
The NSA of the United States, the intelligence and spy agency which monitors signal intelligence around the world, reportedly has a file of documents about the Estonia catastrophe which remain classified more than 13 years after the passenger and car ferry supposedly sank due to a faulty bow visor. Why would the NSA maintain top-secret files about an innocent ship wreck in the Baltic Sea in 1994?
Wilson wrote:
Werner Hummel, the German investigator, said that his Group had documentation showing that the regional telephone network servicing the catastrophe site failed just as it was needed most. The malfunction was truly a startling coincidence. The telephone company stated its entire radio communications network, for unknown reasons, had been down from 1:03 to 1:58 a.m. � almost exactly the time the Estonia first encountered trouble until the time it disappeared from radar.?
Didn’t the NATO communications units prepared for the “search and rescue” exercise overhear the distress calls coming from Estonia? NATO, with state-of-the-art satellite and airborne surveillance assets in place over the Baltic Sea certainly must know who was blocking the SOS calls.
Why has this information been kept secret since 1994? Blocking SOS calls and jamming distress signals is a violation of international law. Why has this crime not been investigated?
The intentional blocking of the Mayday signals from Estonia points to complicity in mass murder. “Naval exercises are meant to be as realistic as possible,” Olivier Schmidt, author of The Intelligence Files: Today’s Secrets, Tomorrow’s Scandals, writes.
What was the “search and rescue” scenario of NATO’s Cooperative Venture 94 exercise, which was commanded at sea by the Dutch submarine commander Gijsbert Goofert Hooft?
I sent a series of pertinent questions to Robert Pszczel, NATO’s press officer for Baltic issues, about NATO’s response to the Estonia catastrophe:
Did NATO have any naval assets in the Baltic Sea on the night of September 27-28, 1994 and what actions did NATO take in the immediate aftermath of the Estonia disaster?
Did NATO pick up the Mayday signals being sent (and jammed) from Estonia? Why didn’t NATO assist, given the urgent need to retrieve hundreds of freezing people from life rafts? What was the scenario of NATO’s search and recovery exercise?
Despite telephone calls and email exchanges with the press office at NATO headquarters, Robert Pszczel failed to respond to a single question about NATO’s response to the Estonia catastrophe for this article.
Drew Wilson ran into the same wall of silence at NATO when he asked questions about Estonia for his book The Hole.
If NATO has a reasonable explanation for its failure to respond and assist during Europe’s worst maritime disaster since World War II, why is it unwilling to provide it? To whom is this organization accountable?
NATO had 14 ships, submarines, aircraft, and personnel from the United States, Europe, Sweden, and Russia assembled near the scene of the sinking of Estonia, Europe’s worst maritime disaster since World War II. The purpose of the NATO exercise included “search and rescue” operations, yet when disaster struck, NATO did nothing to help. Why? What was NATO doing that was more important than saving the lives of their citizens? Why won’t they even talk about it? If not the citizens, to whom is NATO accountable? What kind of organization is this?
Estonia’s Bomb Drills
The Estonia ferry had been the object of bomb threats and had participated in at least two terror bomb exercises in 1994, one in February and another just the day before it sank.
On February 2, 1994, Estonia was the subject of a major mock bomb exercise conducted with RITS, Sweden’s maritime fire and rescue agency, and the Stockholm police. The Stockholm police had requested to take part in the exercise and used bomb-sniffing dogs to find explosives. The terror simulation involved a scenario in which “bombs” had been placed in the sauna and swimming pool area on the lowest deck, below the waterline in the bow of the ship. A second “bomb” was placed in the sleeping quarters on the first deck, also below the waterline.
In the Estonia terrorism scenario, the explosives in the sauna were to be found by the dogs, while the second “bomb” was to explode. The purpose of this terrorism drill was to train with the ship’s crew and include shore-based terrorism experts and police with bomb-sniffing dogs, brought to the ship by helicopter. In the simulation, the “bombs” were set to explode about half way between the Estonian and Swedish coasts, which is where the ship actually sank in September 1994 after a similar mock bomb threat exercise.
When Estonia sank, another mock bomb exercise on the ship had just been concluded. Survivors from the sinking actually reported hearing two huge explosions immediately before the ship listed to starboard. Several crew members testified to having heard the coded fire alarm “Mr. Skylight to No. 1 and 2” over the ferry’s public address system at about 1:02 a.m. after the vessel had listed severely.
This is the exact same message for the crew that was used during the previous bomb drill in February 1994. “Mr. Skylight” was a signal for the fire fighters to proceed to their fire stations 1 and 2 and prepare for damage control. The fact that this coded alarm was given indicates that there was damage caused by a fire or explosion that required immediate attention. The ferry sank within 30 minutes.
Eyewitness testimony from survivors plus the fact that the ship sank extremely quickly strongly suggest that explosives were used to tear a large hole in the hull below the waterline. Swedish policemen who had just conducted training involving a mock bomb threat on the ferry were returning home when Estonia sank. Of the 70 policemen, only 7 survived.
Estonia was being used to ferry drugs and Soviet military contraband, which probably included advanced space weapons technology, when she sank. The highest officials in Swedish customs, the government, and military were aware of the sensitive and illegal shipments that put the ferry at risk. Is this why they are so dedicated to protecting the lies about the sinking?
Copyright 2008 Christopher Bollyn. All Rights Reserved
Article excerpt from: When Terror Drills Turned Real: 9-11, the London Bombings & the Sinking of Estonia
‘We heard them screaming’: US troops told to ignore Afghan soldiers abusing boys – report
US troops stationed in Afghanistan came to the realization that some Afghan commanders were sexually abusing local boys and though they often heard the boys screaming, the US Army told them to ignore it, a New York Times report says.
“At night we can hear them [Afghan boys] screaming, but we’re not allowed to do anything about it,” Lance Corporal Gregory Buckley Jr. reportedly told his father Gregory Buckley Sr before being killed in 2012.
Buckley Sr said he told his son to tell his commanders about these incidents. “My son said that his officers told him to look the other way because it’s their culture,” he told NYT.
What Buckley Jr described to his father resembles Bacha bazi, an illegal practice that involves sexual abuse of prepubescent and adolescent boys.
READ MORE: National Guardsman indicted for allegedly producing child pornography
One more US officer, a former lance corporal recalled a terrible incident when he entered a room in a base and saw three or four men lying with children between them.
“I’m not a hundred percent sure what was happening under the sheet, but I have a pretty good idea of what was going on,” he told NYT on condition of anonymity.
Another witness of similar practices was Dan Quinn, a former special forces captain. He witnessed several cases of Afghan militia abusing local children, boys and girls.
“The reason we were here is because we heard the terrible things the Taliban were doing to people, how they were taking away human rights…But we were putting people into power who would do things that were worse than the Taliban did — that was something village elders voiced to me,” he said.
READ MORE: US troops, contractors sexually abused Colombian girls with impunity – report
Quinn’s story goes back to 2011 when he and Sergeant Charles Martland started receiving complaints about Afghan local police units who US soldiers were training.
Australia military failed to protect soldiers in Afghanistan: Coroner
(L-R) Sapper James Martin, Private Robert Poate and Lance Corporal Stjepan Milosevic, who were gunned down by an Afghan soldier in Afghanistan in 2012. (File photo)
A coroner’s inquest has accused the Australian military of failing to protect its troops in Afghanistan, saying the 2012 deaths of three Australian soldiers could have been prevented if proper measures had been taken to tighten security at their base.
John Lock, the deputy coroner in the Australian state of Queensland, released the findings on Tuesday after an inquest into the deaths of the soldiers. The 34-page report was concluded in June.
The coroner’s finding revealed that the three Australian soldiers were killed by an Afghan soldier as the Australian army’s top brass at the respective base failed to pass down an order for tighter security.
Lance Corporal Stjepan Milosevic, Sapper James Martin and Private Robert Poate were fatally shot by Afghan National Army Sergeant Hekmatullah in August 2012 while on a mentoring mission at a small patrol base in the southern province Uruzgan.
The Australian soldiers were reportedly gunned down while relaxing at their patrol base north of Tarin Kowt.
Lock said that the deadly attack may not have happened if the security recommendation from NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) had been passed down to the platoon level.
The leadership team at the base made “personal errors of judgment on the ground,” Lock found, adding “the greater readiness of the platoon could have provided more opportunity to take immediate defensive action, which could have prevented at least some of the deaths.”
The coroner also said that a “guardian angels” system – in which more than one armed guard are present whenever soldiers were mentoring local troops – should be used to prevent such incidents.
In a Tuesday statement, the Australian military acknowledged Lock’s findings, saying, “Where a review or inquiry identifies safety or security issues, Defense will take action to address these issues.”
According to Lock, Hekmatullah fled the scene of the deadly attack, and was later arrested in Pakistan on October 2, 2013. He had been found guilty of murder and sentenced to death; however, Lock said it was not clear whether the sentence had been carried out.
The United States and its allies invaded Afghanistan in 2001 as part of Washington’s so-called war on terror. The offensive removed Taliban from power, but insecurity still remains across the country.
US-led NATO forces ended their combat mission in Afghanistan last December; but forces, mostly from the US, remain for purported training and counter-terrorism operations.
Israel shooting of Palestinian woman extrajudicial execution: Amnesty
Sat Sep 26, 2015 1:42AM
A photo released by the activist group Youth Against Settlements purportedly shows a soldier pointing a gun at Hadil Salah Hashlamoun, an 18-year-old Palestinian student who was left for about 30 minutes to bleed after being shot in al-Khalil, West Bank, September 22, 2015.
Amnesty International has censured the recent killing of a young Palestinian woman by the Tel Aviv regime’s troops in the occupied West Bank, and described it as an illegal execution.
In a detailed public statement released on Friday, the rights group called the shooting death of the 18-year-old Hadil Salah Hashlamoun an “extrajudicial execution,” a prohibited act that constitutes crimes under international law.
The incident occurred on Tuesday morning at a checkpoint in al-Khalil (Hebron). A video published by PalMedia shows Israeli forces and settlers standing around, smiling and laughing in some cases, while the young woman bleeds to death.
The Israeli regime accuses the victim of having a knife and posing a threat to the soldiers guarding the checkpoint, but the four-page statement — based on interviews with two eyewitnesses — refuted the claim.
“This account of events is contradicted by statements made by the two eyewitnesses interviewed by Amnesty International and photographs of the incident show Hashlamoun standing still,” adding that “even if Hashlamoun did have a knife, Israeli soldiers, who are protected with body armor and heavily equipped with advanced weapons, could have controlled the situation and arrested her without threatening her life”.
According to the report, Israeli soldiers warned her to “go back” in Hebrew, a language she did not understand. They also firmly rejected one of the witnesses’ offers to mediate between the two sides and translate the warning for her. The soldiers then shot her in the right knee and left heel before firing multiple times in her abdomen and chest.
The soldiers denied her any medical help, left her to bleed in the scene, and did not put her into an ambulance for 30 or 40 minutes after they had shot her. She finally died of multiple organ failures as a result of several gunshot wounds in a hospital in the Israeli-occupied Old City of al-Quds (Jerusalem).
The Israeli military claims that it has opened an investigation into the killing, but Amnesty’s statement says that “such internal investigations have consistently failed to identify those responsible for previous unlawful killings or to hold anyone accountable.”
The shocking death of Hashlamoun came hours after Israeli forces killed a young Palestinian man identified as Diyaa Abdulhalim Talahmah in the same area. The 21-year-old was killed during an overnight raid on the village of Khursa.
IDF shoots 18yo Palestinian woman 10 times, lets her die in street
An 18-year-old Palestinian girl was shot by Israeli troops at a Hebron checkpoint for allegedly refusing to show her purse or face and “trying to attack” a soldier. She died of multiple wounds in a hospital after bleeding in the street for 30 minutes.
READ MORE: Israel approves use of police sniper fire against Palestinian rock-throwers – reports
Hadil Hashlamoun was shot 10 times by Israeli Defense Forces at an Israeli checkpoint in Hebron near the entrance to Shuhada Street on Tuesday.
IDF soldiers did not let paramedics approach the teenager, who the Israelis claimed had tried to stab one of them. Photos posted online, however, appear to contradict the accusation.
The 18-year-old died of her wounds in the Shaare Zedek Medical Centre later in the day.
The hospital’s spokesperson said Hadil had been “terribly injured, and underwent surgery upon her arrival,” Maan News Agency reported.
“Three operations were performed on my daughter,” Salah Hashlamoun, Hadil’s father told local reporters. “A part of her intestines had to be removed. But the bullet in her chest was what killed her.”
According to reports in local Palestinian media, the woman was shot after she refused to open her purse or lift her face veil, the niqab, upon request by IDF troops. She was then left out in the street to bleed for 30 minutes before Israeli soldiers allowed doctors to approach her, the Middle East Eye news agency reported.
The Israeli army, in turn, claimed that the teenager was a terrorist who had attempted to stab one of its soldiers. According to the IDF’s story, Hashlamoun was in critical condition after being shot in the legs, and later succumbed to her injuries.
BREAKING: Palestinian attempts to stab soldier at military position in Hebron. Forces responded with fire at the attacker & identified hit.
— IDF (@IDFSpokesperson) September 22, 2015
However, photos taken by the Youth Against Settlements group shortly before and after the shooting appear to contradict the IDF’s statement.
One of the group’s members claimed that the woman made no attempt to stab a soldier, adding that she most likely was shot after refusing to lift her veil.
صور حصرية : تسلسل إطلاق الرصاص على المواطنه هديل صلاح الهشلمون التي يتدعي الجيش انها حاولت طعن جندي . See the photos before and after the shooting of the Palestinian woman in Hebron .
Posted by Youth Against Settlements شباب ضد الاستيطان on Tuesday, September 22, 2015
‘Throw a stone? Catch a bullet!’
The incident comes just few days after Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat declared “war” against Palestinian stone-throwing, giving police a green light to use live ammunition to counter rock attacks against officers and Jewish civilians. The measure was approved on Friday. In response, Palestinians staged a ‘Day of Rage’ in protest.
The first weekend after Israel approved the new rules, pro-Israel 0404 news shared a Facebook video of IDF snipers shooting a Palestinian boy, encouraging people to “spread it.”
Goldman Strikes Again: Did A Probe Into “Global Warming” Fraud Cost A Prime Minister’s Job
When Tony Abbott became Australia’s prime minister in September 2013, the chain of events that would prematurely end his tenure may already have been in motion: just a few months later China would order its out of control shadow banking system to put on hold its debt issuance machinery, which as we reported a year ago, ground to a complete stop around November 2014 (which also was the explanation for the dramatic slowdown in the US economy over the winter as the collapse in China’s Total Social Financing growth sent a deflationary ripple effect around the globe), which – as we warned at the time – would have dire consequences on all of China’s “feeder” economies, namely Brazil and Australia.
But while we have been tracking the implosion of Brazil’s economy since December, long before the rest of the world noticed the calamitous collapse of what was once Latin America’s most vibrant economy, it was a very recent event in Australia – not the country’s parallel economic slowdown also due to China’s hard landing: that was painfully clear long in advance – that took many by surprise. Namely, the resignation of Tony Abbott almost exactly two years after becoming Prime Minister.
And while it is easy to blame his admission of failure on external factors, namely the Chinese slowdown, a very surprising finding has emerged over the past few days, one which reveals Abbott’s “ouster” in a totally different light.
According to Freedom of Information documents obtained by Australia’s ABC, now-former prime minister Tony Abbott’s own department discussed setting up an investigation into the Bureau of Meteorology amid media claims it was exaggerating estimates of global warming.
Yes, it appears that the prime minister himself had dared to question to prevailing status quo on “global warming.”
ABC reports that in August and September 2014, The Australian newspaper published reports questioning the Bureau of Meteorology’s (BoM) methodology for analyzing temperatures, reporting claims BoM was “wilfully ignoring evidence that contradicts its own propaganda.”
Naturally, the BoM strongly rejected assertions it was altering climate records to exaggerate estimates of global warming. Nevertheless, as the following document obtained by the ABC shows, just weeks after the articles were published, Mr Abbott’s own department canvassed using a taskforce to carry out “due diligence” on the BoM’s climate records.
As it turns out, late in 2014 the Australia government set up a taskforce to provide advice on post 2020 emissions reduction targets ahead of the United Nations Paris climate change conference in December 2015. The Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet originally wanted the taskforce to also conduct “due diligence to ensure Australia’s climate and emissions data are the best possible, including the Bureau of Meteorology’s Australian temperature dataset”.
US spent $2.7b on failed defense system: Report
The system, known as JLENS, was meant to provide warnings in case the US had ever been attacked with cruise missiles, drones or other low-flying weapons, but failed to do so.
The Pentagon had spent $2.7 billion developing a system of giant radar-equipped blimps which was supposed to provide an early warning in case of an attack against the US.
The system, known as JLENS, was meant to provide warnings in case the US had ever been attacked with cruise missiles, drones or other low-flying weapons, a report by Tribune News Service says.
However, after nearly two decades of disappointment and delay, the JLENS – Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor System- proved to be a fiasco on April 15.
On that day, a Florida postal worker flew a single-seat, rotary-wing aircraft into the heart of Washington, which was intended to be spotted by JLENS, but 61-year-old Douglas Hughes flew undetected through 30 miles of highly restricted airspace before landing on the West Lawn of the US Capitol.
Rep. Jason Chaffetz, at a congressional hearing soon afterward, criticized the US for its inability to detect “a dude in a gyrocopter 100 feet in the air” who was able to successfully carry out such an audacious stunt.
“Whose job is it to detect him?” Chaffetz asked.
JLENS was supposed to perform the task, but it was “not operational” that day, as the head of the North American Aerospace Defense Command, Adm. William E. Gortney, told Chaffetz.
JLENS is a clear example of what Pentagon specialists describe as a “zombie” program: costly, ineffectual and seemingly impossible to kill.
According to The Los Angeles Times, JLENS had difficulty tracking flying objects and distinguishing friendly aircraft from threatening ones in tests.
Also, a 2012 report done by the Pentagon’s Operational Test and Evaluation office revealed the system to be in four “critical performance areas,” rating its reliability as “poor.”
The revelation came as some figures show an 8 percent increase in the base military budget in 2015.
The base budget includes $126.5 billion for the Army, $137 billion for the Navy, $24 billion for the Marine Corps, and $152.9 billion for the Air Force.
The other $94.0 billion would fund other wide programs of the US military.
Some $177.5 billion would be for modernization programs, including about $11 billion for the Joint Strike Fighter.
Judge Fines 67 Year Old Woman $1,000 for Submitting a Negative Yelp! Review
67-year-old Emily Fanelli of Staten Island was fined $1,000 for leaving a negative Yelp review for a business owner that she says gave her terrible service. According to Fanelli, the owner of a local floor refinishing business called “Mr. Sandless” destroyed her home and did not provide the service he promised her.
After being entirely unsatisfied with the experience, she decided to leave negative reviews for the company because after all, that is what reviews are for: to warn other customers about potentially unpleasant situations.
Writing on Yelp! Fanelli said,
“This guy mat the owner is a scam do not use him you will regret doing business with this company I’m going to court he is a scam customer please beware he will destroy your floors he is nothing by a liar he robs customers, and promises you everything if you want s— then go with him if you like nice work find another he is A SCAM LIAR BULL—-ER.”
Staten Island Civil Court Judge Philip Straniere decided that since she used the terms “scam” and “con artist,” she was guilty of libel, ruling she owed $1,000 to Matt Gardiner, the owner of the Mr. Sandless.
Fanelli responded to the ruling in an interview with the Daily News, saying, “People do reviews all the time. I shouldn’t have to pay anything. It’s freedom of speech.”
However, Judge Straniere said that her rights to free speech went out the window when she used the word “scam.”
“Terms such as ‘scam,’ ‘con artist,’ and ‘robs’ imply actions approaching criminal wrongdoing rather than someone who failed to live up to the terms of a contract. They were personal in their invective and were designed to impugn his integrity and business practices with the intent to damage his business reputation,” Straniere said.
A spokesperson for Yelp expressed disapproval of the lawsuit, saying, “Consumers have the right to express their opinions about truthful experiences online. Because of the First Amendment, it is rare that we hear about consumers being sued for exercising their right to free speech. We frequently find that a better course of action, rather than suing your customers, is publicly responding to a critical review in the same forum.”
Fanelli is planning to file an appeal against the lawsuit immediately. Just before leaving the court, she told the judge, “I’m not letting him get away with it. I’m a fighter. I’ll fight you tooth and nail.”
Unfriending a Facebook ‘friend’ could constitute bullying, Australian tribunal finds
Deleting a friend on Facebook could have serious consequences, after an Australian work tribunal found a woman in Tasmania, who unfriended a colleague on the social network following an argument, guilty of workplace bullying.
The Fair Work Commission ruled that Lisa Bird, who works at the View estate agency in Launceston, was guilty of bullying sales administrator Rachel Roberts. Bird was accused of showing a “lack of emotional maturity” for having the nerve not to say “good morning” to her colleague and subsequently deleting her from Facebook.
Bird decided to unfriend Roberts after an argument. Roberts had complained that Bird, the wife of the agency’s principle, James Bird, had acted aggressively towards her in order to put her down in front of the other workers. Bird called Roberts a “naughty little schoolgirl for running to the teacher.”
Insecure, narcissistic people more likely to post on #Facebook – report http://t.co/bNWY2UarIfpic.twitter.com/P8a77PXWEr
— RT (@RT_com) May 23, 2015
Roberts subsequently wanted to check the social network to see if her work colleague had written anything on the platform about the altercation. However, Roberts found that Bird had decided to delete her altogether.
“The ‘schoolgirl’ comment… is evidence of an inappropriate dealing with Ms Roberts which was provocative and disobliging. I am of the view that Mrs Bird took the first opportunity to draw a line under the relationship with Ms Roberts on 29 January 2015, when she removed her as a friend on Facebook as she did not like Ms Roberts and would prefer not to have to deal with her,” the tribunal stated, as cited by the News.com.au.
Other complaints listed by Roberts include Mrs Bird failing to say hello to her in the morning and for not giving her copies of printouts, which were given to all the other staff members.
READ MORE: ‘Marauders Map’: App exposes ease of tracking Facebook Messenger users
However, legal experts have stopped short of saying that deleting someone from Facebook automatically constitutes bullying.
“The Fair Work Commission didn’t find that unfriending someone on Facebook constitutes workplace bullying,” Josh Bornstein, a lawyer at the firm Maurice Blackburn, told ABC News.
“What the Fair Work Commission did find is that a pattern of unreasonable behavior, hostile behavior, belittling behavior over about a two-year period, which featured a range of different behaviors including berating, excluding and so on, constituted a workplace bullying.”
phi in the sky 