Notes From The Margin

February 4, 2008

Notes From The Margin Censored by Both Barbados Political Blogs

Well it was bound to happen at some point. The two most forthright advocates of freedom of expression on the net have censored another blog.  Notes From The Margin would appear to be banned from Barbados Underground (my comments appear to be blocked) and Barbados Free Press.

Yes we on the margin have been harshly critical of these blogs (particularly Barbados Free Press) and we have resisted all sorts of comments about our listing three BLP associated blogs bajan free press, De Stand Pipe, Cat Piss And Pepper. While we were not really surprised by BFP’s actions we have to admit that we are more than a little disapointed in Barbados Underground and their creators. It is however their decision and we accept it.

We do have to say, that as much as these two blogs which are known for their unrelenting criticism of others, it is ironic that their response to the expression of a differing opinion is to resort to censorship. It’s a shame really.

We do hope that they will reconsider their decision but Notes From The Margin will continue in much the same vein as it did before weather or not they choose to link to us.



  1. Notes From The Margin lost all credibility when you linked to a group that threatened to murder and rape.

    Cat Piss etc. is nothing more than BFPE and YOU KNOW IT.

    You know it from the IPs and from the content and noteworthy phrases that populate the blogs belonging to the BFPE group.

    Hey… sucks to be you!

    Comment by What Do You Expect? — February 4, 2008 @ 6:37 pm | Reply

  2. NFTM facilitates violent threats against Adrian Loveridge. I don’t usually come here but I heard about your article at Barbados Forum. Loser.

    Comment by Anonymous — February 4, 2008 @ 7:44 pm | Reply

  3. I’m sure this has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that I’ve been very critical of BFP.

    It’s a pity that the blogosphere has devolved to a point where persons not speaking the “party line” are ostracized. My reasons for putting on Cat Piss et al are clearly ventilated elsewhere, as are the conditions that they have been added under. Also elsewhere is my article in support of Adrian Loveridge.

    Despite the comments above, I have received a number of private and public comments of support, and despite this blatant attempt to smother a contrasting opinion, NFTM isn’t going anywhere.


    Comment by notesfromthemargin — February 5, 2008 @ 7:07 am | Reply

  4. “What do you expect” and “Anonymous”: I suggest that you get hold of a copy of the movie Watership Down. Its a wonderful tale of how the oppressed become the oppressors. NFTM – keep up the good fight. The problem with BFP and BU is simply that they do not want to show both sides of the coin, for fear of someone seeing the tarnish on their side when compared to the other side.
    What all of you who want to suppress free speech need to understand is this: the only way we can EVER get people to commit to something is to tell them the whole truth, all sides of every story – ESPECIALLY the dissenting voices – and let them make up their own minds!! If what you are saying has merit, then you must trust that people will come to the same conclusion you do. To quote a old great US statesman “Tell the people the truth and the country is safe”.

    Comment by its me — February 5, 2008 @ 9:12 am | Reply

  5. A couple of my comments on BU and BFP in support of NFTM were never put up. There should always be room for a dissenting voice.

    Comment by nonsense — February 5, 2008 @ 10:45 am | Reply

  6. Marginal, you haven’t addressed the issue that the new blogs cat piss etc are of the same author as BFPE.

    Why would you support such a person?

    Comment by Anonymous — February 5, 2008 @ 11:17 am | Reply

  7. some people say po-tate-to some po-ta-to .. you say devolved, i say evolved. Life is too sort to put up with sham and scams and be all diplomatic about it … and you marginal were and are a sham from the get go. I’m glad that persons have now begun to shelf diplomatic notions and get real.

    Comment by peppa in de vasaline — February 5, 2008 @ 6:55 pm | Reply

  8. Anonymous,

    Actually I have in my comment on the post “In Defense of Albert Branford”

    If they represent an attempt by BLP supporters to CONSTRUCTIVELY engage the blogosphere, I believe that is worth encouraging. At the moment, the blogosphere is for the most part a group of persons who all say the same thing. I believe that blogs with a different view will enhance the blogosphere. Yes I am concerned that they have a connection to BFPE, for this reason they are “on probation” If they devolve into racist talk or threats then they are off the blogroll. I am not linking to any site that contains either death threats or racisim. To the point where I warned Cat Piss when he started to go down a race related line.

    What happens in the blogosphere right now is that dissenting opinion is shouted down, blocked or smothered, criticism is seen as a personal attack, and the biggest blog BFP indulges known party hacks who use information that I know to be wrong. That’s right, they use OUTRIGHT LIES to further their own political ends and BFP is complicit in that.

    Further, the lack of checking of information means that innocent people have their reputation smeared on a stage that carries a global audience. People who have done nothing wrong, in many cases who have done years of service get tarred and feathered because BFP wants to increase it’s number of visitors. I’m not saying that everyone accused on BFP is innocent, some need to be accused, but that is what makes the smears of the innocent worse.

    I support freedom of speech and expression however I believe that this freedom comes with a responsibility to
    use it correctly.

    I consider linking to the new blogs to be an effort to foster diversity of opinion. There are a number of denizens of the blogosphere that have openly demonstrated that they do not want that diversity to happen.


    Comment by notesfromthemargin — February 6, 2008 @ 8:54 am | Reply

  9. BLP supporters to CONSTRUCTIVELY engage the blogosphere.


    ….and this is after they were CONSTRUCTIVELY engage in closing them down? The BLP and it’s supporters seems to have a believability problem, ….and i think it is deserved. Is this change in position the result of their defeat at the polls?

    …..The overwhelming perception amongst Barbadians is that the BLP is the party that censors, issues libel threats, engages in bringing fear and victimization to it’s opposers. They will have to deal with these behaviours before reasonable independent persons can justify their call for “engaging” the blogosphere as genuine.

    Comment by Adrian Hinds — February 6, 2008 @ 3:01 pm | Reply

  10. So Adrian,

    The blogosphere is something you must be “worthy” of engaging in?

    I’m sorry I don’t consider that to be a valid option.

    I think it would be particularly convenient for the governing party for the opposition to be denied access to the same blogosphere that they so effectively used. I’m sorry I’m not buying your argument.

    “Reasonable independent persons” will make their own judgments about EVERYTHING they see on the blogs. I don’t think it is fair or constructive to try to bar one side of the discussion. In fact I think the blogosphere is poorer for not having that side of the discussion. Let the reader decide, isn’t that what blogs are supposed to be about? You may want to dress it up in several different ways but in the end it boils down to trying to silence a dissenting opinon.


    Comment by notesfromthemargin — February 6, 2008 @ 8:48 pm | Reply

  11. Well, here’s your first test – Catpee or Standpipe is going at Thompson and comparing him with Bruce Golding of Jamaica and Barak Obama in the US as rise of red men, notwithstanding their black communities, so what does race have to do with being voted? The racemongering has begun!

    Comment by Brian Duffy — February 7, 2008 @ 7:26 am | Reply

  12. Brian,

    Calm down, I would hardly call the article you refer to as “race mongering” nor would I call the Barbados Underground article “David Thompson Suffering From Barack Obama Sickness” as race mongering. Both articles discussed Mr. Thompson’s skin colour.

    In fact the CP&P article isn’t even remotely critical of Thompson. They will need to do worse than this to get removed. I would suggest if you take objection to something in the CP&P article, go post it on their site.


    BTW I’d suggest you also read the BU article as well.

    Comment by notesfromthemargin — February 7, 2008 @ 9:02 am | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: