ONU CONDENA «DIFAMAÇÃO DE RELIGIÃO» - MAIS UM GOLPE CONTRA A LIBERDADE DE EXPRESSÃO
O Conselho dos Direitos Humanos da ONU aprovou, esta quinta-feira, uma resolução que condena a difamação da religião.
A partir de agora, a difamação da religião é considerado uma violação dos direitos humanos.
O texto foi proposto pelo Paquistão em nome dos Estados islâmicos e recebeu 23 votos a favor e 11 contra, contando ainda com 13 abstenções.
Falando em nome da Organização da Conferência Islâmica, que tem 56 membros, o Paquistão afirmou que é preciso obter um "delicado equilíbrio" entre a liberdade de expressão e o respeito às religiões.
A resolução descreve que as minorias islâmicas enfrentam a intolerância, a discriminação e a violência, desde os atentados de 11 de Setembro de 2001 contra os EUA, e que isso inclui leis e medidas administrativas que "estigmatizam pessoas religiosas".
Como seria de esperar, a hoste islâmica, apoiada no mundo africano em massa, levou avante a sua intenção de conferir ao seu credo um direito que só a pessoas se aplica, ou seja, destruiu o pressuposto essencial para haver debate livre, porque quando não se pode criticar uma ideia começa a acabar a vivência democrática. Que o Ocidente não pareça ser capaz de travar esta monumental agressão à Democracia e à Liberdade de expressão mostra bem até onde chega já o poder islâmico a nível mundial.
Deve ser a isto que a saloiada anti-sionista primária continua a chamar «controlo judaico do mundo»...
A Índia absteve-se em protesto contra o facto de o Islão ser a única religião especificamente referida no documento aprovado como merecendo protecção.
O embaixador indiano Gopinathan Achamkulangare disse entretanto que a resolução associa «desapropriadamente» a crítica à religião com o racismo.
E porquê? Porque a hoste musla já sabe, tal como muitos negros, que, para vergar o mundo e fazê-lo sentir vergonha, basta fazer-se vítima de «racismo», que é um autêntico abre-te Sésamo...
A partir de agora, a difamação da religião é considerado uma violação dos direitos humanos.
O texto foi proposto pelo Paquistão em nome dos Estados islâmicos e recebeu 23 votos a favor e 11 contra, contando ainda com 13 abstenções.
Falando em nome da Organização da Conferência Islâmica, que tem 56 membros, o Paquistão afirmou que é preciso obter um "delicado equilíbrio" entre a liberdade de expressão e o respeito às religiões.
A resolução descreve que as minorias islâmicas enfrentam a intolerância, a discriminação e a violência, desde os atentados de 11 de Setembro de 2001 contra os EUA, e que isso inclui leis e medidas administrativas que "estigmatizam pessoas religiosas".
Como seria de esperar, a hoste islâmica, apoiada no mundo africano em massa, levou avante a sua intenção de conferir ao seu credo um direito que só a pessoas se aplica, ou seja, destruiu o pressuposto essencial para haver debate livre, porque quando não se pode criticar uma ideia começa a acabar a vivência democrática. Que o Ocidente não pareça ser capaz de travar esta monumental agressão à Democracia e à Liberdade de expressão mostra bem até onde chega já o poder islâmico a nível mundial.
Deve ser a isto que a saloiada anti-sionista primária continua a chamar «controlo judaico do mundo»...
A Índia absteve-se em protesto contra o facto de o Islão ser a única religião especificamente referida no documento aprovado como merecendo protecção.
O embaixador indiano Gopinathan Achamkulangare disse entretanto que a resolução associa «desapropriadamente» a crítica à religião com o racismo.
E porquê? Porque a hoste musla já sabe, tal como muitos negros, que, para vergar o mundo e fazê-lo sentir vergonha, basta fazer-se vítima de «racismo», que é um autêntico abre-te Sésamo...
27 Comments:
Oh, hoje em dia também já ninguém liga à ONU...
Anónimo disse...
Oh, hoje em dia também já ninguém liga à ONU...
Sábado, Março 28, 2009 12:19:00 AM
pois é bom que não, é bom que não!
25 DE ABRIL!!
vou votar no PNR.
a onu que vá levar no cu
o povo unido jamais será vencido
a onu que vá levar no cu
o povo unido jamais será vencido
a onu que vá levar no cu
o povo unido jamais será vencido
a onu que vá levar no cu
o povo unido jamais será vencido
a onu que vá levar no cu
o povo unido jamais será vencido
a onu que vá levar no cu
o povo unido jamais será vencido
a onu que vá levar no cu
o povo unido jamais será vencido
a onu que vá levar no cu
o povo unido jamais será vencido
a onu que vá levar no cu
o povo unido jamais será vencido
a onu que vá levar no cu
o povo unido jamais será vencido
a onu que vá levar no cu
o povo unido jamais será vencido
a onu que vá levar no cu
o povo unido jamais será vencido
a onu que vá levar no cu
o povo unido jamais será vencido
a onu que vá levar no cu
o povo unido jamais será vencido
ABAIXO OS TIRANOS!
VOLTA INQUISIÇÃO, ESTÁS PERDOADA!
It's Gays v Muslims as the Rainbow Alliance falls apart
It's Gays v Muslims as the Rainbow Alliance falls apart
Stonewall, the gay rights charity, is strongly backing Clause 58, the legislation that would outlaw "homophobic hate speech". It denies that the measure is aimed at comedy poking fun at homosexuals - and I agree. I reckon Clause 58 is a thinly veiled attack on gay-bashing by Muslims and sections of the black community.
As Stonewall say: "The new offence will tackle serious acts of hatred directed towards lesbian and gay people. These include homophobic song lyrics, available to buy in Britain, which encourage the torture and murder of gay people and violently homophobic publications and websites, available to the general public."
In other words, acts of hatred by certain black reggae artists and Muslim radical clerics.
Clause 58 illustrates how much the "Rainbow Alliance" is in trouble. The coalition of gay rights groups, feminists, socialists, black and Muslim groups was always reminiscent of the Onion's fake World War II headline: "Japan Forms Alliance With White Supremacists in Well-Thought-Out Scheme". Now it's falling apart.
The gay rights movement was formed with three aims - to repeal laws against homosexual behaviour, to fight discrimination in the workplace, and make the population accept homosexuality. They've achieved all three - in Britain 71 per cent of people find homosexuality "acceptable", and among the young that figure is far higher, even among Christians and Conservatives.
I've noticed more gay men in the Conservative party, and in my constituency they've just selected a gay man for the next election. Admittedly I live in North London and they're hardly going to send in a whisky-soaked old colonel to fight the seat, but even in small towns attitudes are softening. My dad has come to accept homosexuality, and he has barely come around to accepting the Great Reform Act.
Almost all the gay-bashing, in London at least, comes from ethnic minorities, inspired by an increasingly intolerant Islam and a violence-obsessed black musical subculture.
The equality industry are shy about publishing figures, but the East London Advertiser is filled with horrific stories. There were 47 anti-gay attacks in Tower Hamlets last year; Muslims in swinging London are among the most anti-gay in Europe.
Gay-bashing by black men is, naturally, a taboo subject among liberals. Middle-class black Britons are almost indistinguishable from their white compatriots in social attitudes. But it's a very different story among London's black underclass: virulent homophobia is pretty much the only old West Indian Christian value they've inherited.
Stonewall was set up to repeal Section 28, rightly in my opinion - that law, designed to stop schools and councils "promoting" homosexuality, was intrusive, petty, authoritarian and pointless - and now it has achieved that aims. Unfortunately very few people in the equality industry take the attitude of Cincinnatus and go back to their farms once their aims are achieved. Instead, they roam about looking for new prejudice. Well, I can tell them where to find it.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/edwest/blog/2009/03/26/its_gays_v_muslims_as_the_rainbow_alliance_falls_apart_
Gay fears rise after street gang’s murderous attack
THE East End’s gay community has declared ‘enough is enough’ after a young man was left fighting for his life following a brutal homophobic stabbing by a gang of youths.
A 20-year-old, known as Olly, was stabbed seven times in the back and chest, outside a gay-friendly pub this week.
He remains in a critical condition in hospital and police have launched an attempted murder investigation.
Both Bethnal Green and Bow MP George Galloway and Abjol Miah, the leader of the Respect group at Tower Hamlets council, have called for all communities to condemn last week’s attack in Boundary Street.
With 47 homophobic attacks in Tower Hamlets over the last 12 months, one man called the Advertiser to say: “It’s time we stood up for ourselves. I’m fed up with people almost excusing this kind of violence.”
Police have branded last Thursday’s assault as “evil” and are treating it as homophobic. Cops believe the 20-year-old had been walking to the gay-friendly George and Dragon pub in Hackney Road with a woman when he was attacked at the junction of Boundary Street and Austin Street in Shoreditch onThursday.
He was hounded by a group of around five teenage boys, hit over the head with a glass bottle then stabbed seven times in the back and chest. He underwent life-saving surgery at Whitechapel’s Royal London Hospital on Friday morning.
The stabbing is also being linked to an assault in the same area 24 hours before in which a man and woman were both attacked and were kicked and punched by a group of youths.
Det Insp Howard Way, of Tower Hamlets police, condemned the attack as “evil”, but although it was being treated as a homophobic crime, he was keeping an open mind about motive.
Three men have been arrested, but police refused to give any details about their backgrounds.
MP George Galloway said: “This is a sickening and vile assault that I am sure will unite the diverse community of Tower Hamlets in condemnation. “A near fatal knife attack by a group of people on a defenceless man is horrific enough. The fact that this also appears to be a homophobic hate crime compounds the evil.
“There is a rich and tolerant mix in Tower Hamlets. It’s one of the good things about our borough, and I am determined to keep it that way. Everyone needs to accept that people are different.”
His Respect colleague Cllr Miah added: “There is no justification, in any language or any belief, for savagely setting upon a young man like this.” The gay community has grown in Bethnal Green and Shoreditch over recent years and Alan Booth, 45, who lives in Columbia Road, said it was time to fight back against homophobic violence.
He said: “It has just got worse and worse around here—it’s left people frightened to go out. The problem is with a minority of Bengali youth: but that minority is significant.
“Just because we’re gay doesn’t mean we aren’t men. It’s time we stood up for ourselves. I’m fed up with people excusing this kind of violence and the gay community are as guilty as anyone else in that.
“It’s time we got some intelligent, sensible people together to discuss what we can do to make it safer for the gay community and for everyone in Shoreditch.”
The three men arrested in connection with the attack have since been released on police bail.
http://www.eastlondonadvertiser.co.uk/content/towerhamlets/advertiser/news/story.aspx?brand=ELAOnline&category=news&tBrand=northlondon24&tCategory=newsela&itemid=WeED03%20Sep%202008%2020%3A44%3A41%3A983
«...desde os atentados de 11 de Setembro de 2001 contra os EUA,»
Desde 11 de Setembro de 2001, os atentados islamistas já vão em 12954!! 12954!
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
ONU = PIDE
ONU = PIDE, VAI LEVAR NA PEVIDE
ONU = PIDE, VAI LEVAR NA PEVIDE
ONU = PIDE, VAI LEVAR NA PEVIDE
ONU = PIDE, VAI LEVAR NA PEVIDE
ONU = PIDE, VAI LEVAR NA PEVIDE
ONU = PIDE, VAI LEVAR NA PEVIDE
ONU = PIDE, VAI LEVAR NA PEVIDE
ONU = PIDE, VAI LEVAR NA PEVIDE
ONU = PIDE, VAI LEVAR NA PEVIDE
ONU = PIDE, VAI LEVAR NA PEVIDE
ONU = PIDE, VAI LEVAR NA PEVIDE
Gen. Richard Myers: U.S. Enemies Seek WMDs to End 'Our Way of Life'
Former top military commander Gen. Richard Myers tells Newsmax that America s enemies in the war on terror are ruthless and relentless and will not hesitate to use nuclear or biological weapons if they obtain them.
They want to do away with our way of life, Myers tells Newsmax TV s Ashley Martella. They could bring great harm to this country and our friends and allies.
Myers, who served as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from October 2001 until September 2005, tells Newsmax that the U.S. focused too narrowly on tactical battles and failed to develop a long-rang strategy to battle terrorism.
After 9/11 we had some things we had to do right away, said Myers, author of the new book, Eyes on the Horizon: Serving on the Front Lines of National Security.
Afghanistan was one of them. Then we went into Iraq. But the development of a strategy to deal with the whole issue of violent extremism we didn t take the time to do that because we were so busy with the day to day.
Myers said the further America gets from the events of 9/11, the more complacent it gets, and the more danger the country is in.
I m not an alarmist but I did spend four years right after 9/11 looking at all this intelligence from violent extremists, he says. They could [attack America] through biological weapons. God forbid if they get their hands on nuclear materials, they could do it that way as well. And they re ruthless so we know they d use them.
Martella asked Myers about a new official British government report warning that the threat of a terrorist attack using a weapon of mass destruction, such as a nuclear or biological weapon, on a major city is higher than ever.
I don t see the intelligence on a daily basis anymore, but I do think the threat is very high, Myers responded.
It wasn t that long ago, just a little more than a year ago, when that plot to bring airliners down over the North Atlantic [was thwarted]. I think there were 10 or 20 airliners involved in that plot. If that hadn t been thwarted we d be talking about 2,000 dead potentially from that.
So like I said, they re relentless, they re ruthless. If they can get their hands on dangerous material, nuclear material, biological weapons, they wouldn t hesitate to use them. They want to bring down the United States in particular and the West in general.
Martella asked Myers for his assessment of the current situation in Iraq.
I think things in Iraq are going extremely well right now, said Myers. But I think, as all the leaders in Iraq and General Petraeus himself say, it s reversible
I think there is real reason for optimism. I think we have to be very careful, though. There are people who would like it not to be a success. The al-Qaida are part of that. They are pretty much decimated in Iraq, but they never give up.
And there are other factions inside Iraq, and of course Iran. You never know exactly how they re going to want to influence events inside Iraq.
On the Iranian threat, Myers declared: Any country that sponsors terrorism, which Iran does, that doesn t believe in the existence of the state of Israel, that is aggressively pursuing nuclear weapons this is not a good thing.
Martella asked if it would be a mistake for the Barack Obama administration to abandon plans for a U.S. missile defense system in Eastern Europe.
One thing is for certain: The only country in the world that can build an effective missile defense system is the United States of America, said Myers, a former fighter pilot who also served as Commander in Chief of the North American Aerospace Defense Command.
Implicit in that is the obligation to at least offer our allies and our friends our ability to protect them from the rogue nations that can develop missiles now and could possibly threaten them.
Martella asked: With the every-escalating drug violence along the Mexican border, how do you feel about sending U.S. troops there?
Myers responded: Active-duty U.S. troops? I think it would have to get a heck of a lot worse before you d want to send U.S. troops under congressional or presidential decree to go down there. U.S. troops are not trained for law enforcement action. That would be an extreme action.
The other option is that you could send the National Guard. I know the Texas and Arizona governors have talked about that potential. They can go and act in a law enforcement capacity If they need more manpower on the border the National Guard is an option. but active duty troops I think would be a big mistake.
http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/richard_myers_wmds/2009/03/25/196103.html
Vatican: "The land that was the cradle of Christianity risks ending up without Christians"
Many forget that the Middle East was indeed, particularly Egypt and Syria, the "cradle of Christianity" and played a major role in the articulation of Christian theology and the concept of monasticism. So what happened? Basically, what has been happening since day one when Islam burst onto the stage is still happening today: Christians are being persecuted to the point that they either emigrate, convert, or live in oppression. Hence why the Middle East "risks ending up without Christians."
Vatican City, 25 March (AKI) - The Vatican on Wednesday expressed "profound concern" about the position of Christians in the Middle East after the recent conflict in the Gaza Strip. In a statement, the Vatican said two of its senior officials, Cardinal Leonardo Sandri and Archbishop Antonio Maria Veglio sent a letter to bishops around the world, asking them to contribute to a collection for the Holy Land, which includes Israel and the Palestinian territories.
In the letter, the two officials expressed the church's "profound concern" for the position of Christians, particularly following the conflict in Gaza.
They also stressed how Pope Benedict XVI "constantly comforts Christians, and all the inhabitants of the Holy Land, with special words and gestures, coupled with his desire to make a pilgrimage in the historical footsteps of Jesus".
"The wounds opened by violence make the problem of emigration more acute, inexorably depriving the Christian minority of its best resources for the future," the letter said.
"The land that was the cradle of Christianity risks ending up without Christians"...
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/025391.php
"VOLTA INQUISIÇÃO, ESTÁS PERDOADA!"
Mais asneiras não, já basta uma.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/LinktoTROP.htm
http://jn.sapo.pt/PaginaInicial/Sociedade/Interior.aspx?content_id=1183918
...E os casais heterossexuais que não tem € para sustentar filhos ou sequer viver sozinhos que se amanhem! Mas que é isto? Pensava que estavamos em crise..pelos vistos os homossexuais são a prioridade. Lá vão arranjar negócio para meia dúzia de amigos paneleiros lá da AR.
Quem permanentemente difama o maldito islão são os próprios enganados por maomé, o monstro(que allah o esteja a satanizar mal satanizado).
Tudo no islão são insultos ao islão.
Todas as letras do corão malvado são insultos a maomé, a allah e ao islão.
Se proibirem as difamações, isso significa proibir e extinguir o islão.
Oxalá isso seja feito.
há que se consultar a deliberação da ONU para ver o que é considerado "difamação de religião". dependendo do caso, essa determinação agirá contra as religiões majoritárias: Cristianismo, Judaismo e Islamismo. deve ser visto também qual a contrapartida em deveres por parte dos grupos ou representantes religiosos que são, especialmente os Monoteístas, os que mais difamam outras opiniões (seja esta religiosa ou científica).
e falta saber o que se entende por difamação... e se quem levou isso à ONU (países islâmicos) não confundem difamação com crítica.
"dependendo do caso, essa determinação agirá contra as religiões majoritárias"
Bem se sabe que as determinações agem sempre contra aqueles que têm menos persistência em se defender. Ou seja neste caso não é difícil deduzir quem poderá melhor defender os seus interesses, religiões instituídas com grande financiamento, ou religiões que vivem apenas de contributos voluntários das comunidades que as seguem. Contra isto penso que se justifica inteiramente uma aliança entre os ateus e as religiões étnicas contra as religiões globalizantes.
Beto disse...
há que se consultar a deliberação da ONU para ver o que é considerado "difamação de religião". dependendo do caso, essa determinação agirá contra as religiões majoritárias: Cristianismo, Judaismo e Islamismo. deve ser visto também qual a contrapartida em deveres por parte dos grupos ou representantes religiosos que são, especialmente os Monoteístas, os que mais difamam outras opiniões (seja esta religiosa ou científica).
Sábado, Março 28, 2009 3:18:00 PM
aquilo é para beneficio do islão...
estupores!!!
Journalist Who Exposes U.N. Corruption Disappears From Google
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,331106,00.html
The Corruption of the United Nations
http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?q=1853.782.0.0
ORGANIZAÇÃO DAS AMEBAS UNIDAS!!
Beto disse...
há que se consultar a deliberação da ONU para ver o que é considerado "difamação de religião". dependendo do caso, essa determinação agirá contra as religiões majoritárias: Cristianismo, Judaismo e Islamismo. deve ser visto também qual a contrapartida em deveres por parte dos grupos ou representantes religiosos que são, especialmente os Monoteístas, os que mais difamam outras opiniões (seja esta religiosa ou científica).
Sábado, Março 28, 2009 3:18:00 PM
EXACTO; ELES PROIBEM QUE ATAQUEMOS AS RELIGIÕES MONOTEISTAS, MAS ELAS CONTINUAM A ATACAR AS OUTRAS RELIGIÕES!!
QUEREM BATER SEM LEVAR DE VOLTA
ISSO SIM É COVARDIA!!!
VEJO ISLAMICOS, CRISTÃOS E JUDEUS METENDO O PAU NAS TRADIÇÕES DOS POVOS DA AFRICA, AMERICA, ASIA E AFINS, MAS POR QUE ENTÃO NÃO PODEM LEVAR DE VOLTA??
SE BATERAM AGORA VÃO TER DE LEVAR TAMBEM!!
ATÉ MESMO OS ATEUS SÃO PERSEGUIDOS POR ESTA ESCORIA TEÍSTA!!
POR MIM OS CRISTÃOS, MUSLOS E JUDEUS SE AUTO-ANIQUILAVAM E A HUMANIDADE SERIA MUITO MELHOR SEM ELES!!
Muitas baboseiras em um sú lugar.
Não queres usar teu blog para ajudar os haitianos?
Enviar um comentário
<< Home