ARTE G.E.I.E. Pressestatement zur Dokumentation “Auserwählt und ausgegrenzt – Der Hass auf Juden in Europa”


ARTE G.E.I.E.
Pressestatement zur Dokumentation “Auserwählt und ausgegrenzt – Der Hass auf Juden in Europa”
13.06.2017 – 11:26

Strasbourg (ots) – ARTE hat zur Kenntnis genommen, dass Bild.de die Dokumentation “Auserwählt und Ausgegrenzt. Der Hass auf Juden in Europa” in eigener Verantwortung online gestellt hat. Auch wenn diese Vorgehensweise befremdlich ist, hat ARTE keinen Einwand, dass die Öffentlichkeit sich ein eigenes Urteil über den Film bilden kann.
ARTE kann und will den Film jedoch nicht durch eine eigene Ausstrahlung nachträglich legitimieren, da er, ohne dass ARTE darüber informiert wurde, gravierend von dem verabredeten Sendungskonzept abweicht. Eine solche Vorgehensweise kann ARTE in diesem wie in jedem anderen Fall nicht akzeptieren.
Die Unterstellung, der Film passe aus politischen Gründen nicht ins Programm ist schlichtweg absurd: Der ursprünglich von der Programmkonferenz genehmigte Programmvorschlag sah ausdrücklich das Thema des unter dem Deckmantel der Israelkritik versteckten Antisemitismus vor – entsprechend der editorialen Linie von ARTE als europäischer Sender aber nicht im Nahen Osten, sondern in Europa.
Pressekontakt:
CLAUDE-ANNE SAVIN
claude.savin@arte.tv
Tel. +33 3 88 14 21 45

A Florida Sheriff’s Video, which urges Civilians to arm themselves and prepare for war, is quickly making the rounds on social media.


iveysheriff

 

 

 

 

Florida Sheriff Declares “THIS IS WAR!” Tells Americans To Arm Up
Mac Slavo
June 11th, 2017
SHTFplan.com

A Florida Sheriff’s video, which urges civilians to arm themselves and prepare for war, is quickly making the rounds on social media.  But he has a point when one listens logically.  He warns that when a mass murderer strikes, the government won’t immediately be there to save you; it’ll be your job to save yourself.
Brevard County Sheriff Wayne Ivey posted the controversial video message on Facebook Wednesday, two days after a deadly workplace shooting in nearby Orlando claimed the lives of five people.  The Florida sheriff urged citizens to arm themselves in self-defense saying “this is war.”
He doesn’t mean war in the sense that nukes will be flying, but the war against mass homicides and sociopaths who only seek the destruction of human life.   “What’s next is to fully understand that this is war, and you better be prepared to wage war to protect you, your family, and those around you if attacked,” he said. Ivey stressed that attackers rely on people running, hiding, and waiting for help, rather than fighting back.  And they will use guns, knives, bombs, and even trucks to kill innocents. “What they don’t count on is being attacked themselves, having to become defensive to save their own lives,” Ivey argued.
Become the first line of defense to prevent the loss of life, and protect yourselves and others.  That was the underlying message the sheriff sought to convey.

Ivey’s video is irritating anti-gun lobbyists and politicians who seem content with letting people die with a minimal chance of survival.  Ivey encouraged people to take self-defense classes and urged those with concealed weapons permits to carry their guns with them at all times. “No matter who you are or what your position is on guns, there’s no denying the fact that the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun or a knife is an armed and well-prepared citizen or law enforcement officer,” Ivey said.  Ivey is simply stating the obvious.  Yet, he’s being called “controversial.”
Ivey’s being accused of “fear mongering” and riling up vigilantes for refusing to tow the line. As those in government, police included, continue to lean toward more gun control, (for everyone but themselves, of course) it’s becoming obvious that those in charge want us to suffer at the whims of the sociopathic mass murderers. Leonard Papania, the police chief in Gulfport, Mississippi, spoke out against weakening gun regulations to the New York Times, saying, “Do you want every incident on your street to escalate to acts of gun violence?”
Gun control is a sensitive issue for most, as the logical in society understand that gun ownership doesn’t make one a mass murdering homicidal maniac or terrorist.  But the emotional side of people inhibits their brain from understanding that a gun can be used in self-defense, and may even prevent the loss of innocent life. When guns become outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.  An old saying, but one the hoplophobes seem to continue to forget.

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/florida-sheriff-declares-this-is-war-tells-americans-to-arm-up_06112017

Scharia, Juden und Oliven


Brights - Die Natur des Zweifels

Foto: pixabay.com/RDF

Das Todesurteil für die „jüdischen“ Olivenbäume der Türkei und die angebliche Vereinbarkeit der Scharia mit den Menschenrechten

Von Giordano Brunello | Richard-Dawkins-Foundation

Nachdem die AKP-Islamofaschisten die Gewaltenteilung in der Türkei mit der Verfassungsänderung vom vergangenen April durch einseitige Berichterstattung in den von ihnen gesteuerten Medien sowie Medienzensur, massivste Einschüchterungen der Bevölkerung und systematischen Wahlbetrug beseitigen konnten, hat nun auch die letzte Stunde der türkischen Olivenbäume geschlagen. Die AKP-Bande hatte zuvor während Jahren versucht, insbesondere die Olivenhaine der Ägäis abzuholzen, was bis anhin durch Gerichtsentscheide teilweise verhindert werden konnte. Da in der heutigen Türkei Gerichte keine eigenständige Rolle mehr spielen und in faktischer Hinsicht genauso wie das türkische Parlament nur noch Akklamationsinstanzen des Diktators darstellen, gibt es leider nichts mehr, was die Islamofaschisten von diesem Vorhaben noch abhalten könnte.

Die insbesondere an der türkischen Ägäis-Küste seit Jahrhunderten wachsenden Olivenbäume sind der geldgierigen AKP-Clique und dem noch geldgierigeren Diktator, der…

View original post 489 more words

Muslimische Familie tötet christlichen Schwiegersohn


Brights - Die Natur des Zweifels

Pakistan: Die eigene Tochter wurde lebensgefährlich verletzt, da die frühere Muslimin Christin geworden war

kath.net

In Pakistan hat eine muslimische Familie ihren Schwiegersohn getötet und ihre Tochter lebensgefährlich verletzt, weil diese Christin geworden war. Die Familie beging die Taten, weil sie glaubte, ihre Tochter habe ihr durch den Religionswechsel Schande gebracht. Wie der Informationsdienst Morning Star News berichtet, lauerten Familienmitglieder Ende Juli in der Ortschaft Narang Mandi, 60 Kilometer von Lahore entfernt, dem 28-jährigen Christen Aleem Masih und seiner 23-jährigen Frau Nadia auf. Sie entführten und folterten sie, bevor Nadias Bruder den Mann mit drei Schüssen tötete. Er schoss auch auf seine Schwester, die zwar überlebte, aber mit lebensgefährlichen Verletzungen ins Krankenhaus eingeliefert werden musste. Die Angreifer kehrten danach in ihr Dorf zurück und verkündeten, dass sie die Ehre der Muslime durch den Mord wiederhergestellt hätten.

weiterlesen

View original post

Göttlich: Christ stirbt, nachdem sich drei Ärzte weigern, ihn zu berühren


Brights - Die Natur des Zweifels

Pakistan: Ärzte hatten Angst, während des Ramadan ihr Fasten zu brechen

kath.net

Im pakistanischen Umerkot ist ein christlicher Kanalarbeiter gestorben, nachdem sich drei Ärzte weigerten, ihn zu berühren. Die Ärzte hätten gesagt, sie könnten den bewusstlosen Irfan Masih nicht anfassen, da sie damit ihr Fasten während des Ramadan brechen würden, berichtet Parvaiz Masih, der Bruder des Toten.

„Unrein“ in den Augen der Ärzte

Der 35-jährige Irfan Masih war am 1. Juni gemeinsam mit zwei anderen christlichen Kollegen dazu abgestellt worden, Abwasserleitungen zu reinigen. Wie Irfans Bruder berichtet, wurde den Arbeitern keine Schutzausrüstung zur Verfügung gestellt.

weiterlesen

View original post

What’s hidden behind the walls of America’s prisons


 

What’s hidden behind the walls of America’s prisons
June 5, 2017 2.45am BST
Inmates at the California Institution for Men state prison in Chino, California in 2011. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson
Author
Heather Ann Thompson
Professor of History and Afroamerican and African Studies, University of Michigan
Disclosure statement
Heather Ann Thompson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond the academic appointment above.
Partners

University of Michigan provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation US.
The Conversation UK receives funding from Hefce, Hefcw, SAGE, SFC, RCUK, The Nuffield Foundation, The Ogden Trust, The Royal Society, The Wellcome Trust, Esmée Fairbairn Foundation and The Alliance for Useful Evidence, as well as sixty five university members.
View the full list
Few Americans fully appreciate just how many of their fellow citizens are ensnared in the criminal justice system.
Some may have heard that there are about 2.3 million people behind bars, but that figure tells only part of the story. Yes, in a stunning array of 1,719 state prisons, 102 federal prisons, 901 juvenile correctional facilities, 3,163 local jails and 76 Indian Country jails, as well as in military prisons, immigration detention facilities, civil commitment centers and prisons in the U.S. territories, we physically contain more human beings than any other country in the world. In addition to those actually locked up, there are another 840,000 Americans being supervised on parole and an additional 3.7 million people being monitored on probation.
Consider this: The world’s most populous city, Tokyo, and the U.S.‘s most populous state, California, have fewer residents combined than the up to 100 million U.S. citizens who now have a criminal record.
As important, these historically unprecedented rates of containment, and the deep stigma of a criminal record, aren’t experienced equally in this country. America’s incarceration crisis is suffered staggeringly and dis-proportionally by communities of color.
That so many are blissfully unaware of just how many people are, or have been, subject to containment or control is, perhaps, unsurprising. Prisons are built to be out of sight and are, thus, out of mind. Somehow, even though these institutions contain human beings, including children, and even though we are the ones who cough up the billion of dollars that it costs to run them, we are expected simply to trust that they are operated humanely and that they in fact make our society safer.
As a historian of crime and punishment who has been inside of America’s prisons and has documented severe abuses that have taken place within them, I know this trust is not warranted. It is past time that the public has unfettered access to these public institutions so that we can know exactly what happens behind prison walls.
The fight to see inside
There is, in fact, a long history of the public being kept away from prisons so that corrections officials could run them as they wished. For much of the 19th and into the 20th century, state politicians’ deeply ingrained fear of federal encroachment on their power more generally translated into the so-called “hands-off doctrine” when it came to how they ran their prisons. Prison authorities, it was understood, had the right to do what they wanted to those in their charge.
Of course prisoners routinely tried to bring attention to the abuses that happened to them. But time and again, and most notably in the infamous 1871 case Ruffin v. Commonwealth, their bid to be treated as human beings was formally denied. In fact, according to the court in this case, prisoners were “slaves of the state.”

 

Chain gang street sweepers in Washington, D.C., circa 1909.
In the 1960s and 1970s, though, in response to escalating protests in penal facilities and in cities across the country, prisoners finally gained some rights. In turn, the public began to learn a bit more about what was happening to them behind bars.
It was, for example, deeply significant when the Warren Court opined in a 1974 case, Wolff v. McDonnell, that
“a prisoner is not wholly stripped of constitutional protections when he is imprisoned for crime. There is no iron curtain drawn between the Constitution and the prisons of this country.”
However, at the moment that more light was being shone on prison conditions because of specific judicial rulings, it was also clear that serious limitations on the public’s access to these institutions would remain and, overtime, actually increase.
In 1974, the court ruled in Pell v. Procunier that prisoners’ First Amendment rights were in fact limited. In this case the court held that journalists, the people who might hear prisoner accounts of abuse and share them with the public, “have no constitutional right of access to prisons or their inmates beyond that afforded to the general public.” As Ted Kennedy noted passionately before his colleagues in the Senate, this decision was alarming since, as he pointed out, “the public cannot regularly tour the prisons and interview inmates.”
Another significant blow to the public’s access came in 1987 when a decision was rendered in the case Turner v. Safley. The court ruled that prisoners’ rights to speak to the media existed only to the extent that prison authorities didn’t have a reasonable justification for restricting those rights. And the lid on access lowered even farther in the 2003 case Overton v. Bazzetta. The court ruled, in short, that if prison administrators wished to bar visitors to prison, their desires trumped other constitutional considerations such as the First Amendment rights of prisoners.
The court even found that prison officials could prevent visits between prisoners and their kids if the restrictions on visitation were related to “valid interests in maintaining internal security.”
Access abroad
Notably, other prison systems, most famously those in countries such as Sweden and Norway, are much more transparent. The primary goal of prison, officials in these countries maintain, is to return people to the society improved. And, thus, they insist, prisons must have oversight to ensure that they are run humanely.
Not only are Scandinavian prisoners assigned a special officer “who monitors and helps advance progress toward return to the world outside,” but Norwegian prisons boast an “explicit focus on rehabilitating prisoners through education, job training and therapy … [and the] priority of reintegration.”
Even in countries not known for their human rights, such as Singapore, prison officials explicitly connect the humane treatment of the incarcerated to the broader public good. As their corrections officials put it, “by rehabilitating our inmates, society can continue to be safe even when these offenders leave prison.”
The principle that the public has a responsibility to run prisons humanely was in fact adopted by the United Nations back in 1955.
When the U.N. revised and again adopted its “Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners” in 2013, thereafter dubbed the “Nelson Mandela Rules,” not only was it endorsing the idea that penal practices must be humane and prisoners treated like people, but it also made clear that humane treatment depended upon outsider access to prisons. According to the U.N., “services and agencies, governmental or otherwise” interested in prisoners’ well being “shall have all necessary access to the institution and to prisoners.”
Why access matters
Even a cursory glance at our nation’s history indicates that such access is not only desirable, but necessary.
The abuses that went on in this country’s 19th-century penal institutions, both in the North and in the South, are well-documented, and it is now obvious that the 20th century did not bring much improvement.
One need only read of the pain and suffering the men locked up at the Angola Penitentiary in Louisiana endured in the 1950s. Here, men willingly cut their own Achilles tendons so that they might avoid the abuses of the guards driving them in the prison’s cotton fields. Or we can look at the horrific torture endured by the men at Attica in the wake of their 1971 protest….

http://theconversation.com/whats-hidden-behind-the-walls-of-americas-prisons-77282?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=twitterbutton

Kriegsverbrechen in Syrien: Bundesanwaltschaft ermittelt in 30 Fällen


Brights - Die Natur des Zweifels

Kreuzigung in Syrien. Themenbild. Bild: RMC

Mutmaßliche Kriegsverbrechen in Syrien beschäftigen zunehmend die Bundesanwaltschaft. Seit 2011 habe der Generalbundesanwalt wegen Völkerrechtsverbrechen in Syrien bereits 29 Ermittlungsverfahren eingeleitet, berichtete die “Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung” (Donnerstag). Die Verfahren richteten sich gegen insgesamt 38 Täter, die entweder Mitglied der Terrormiliz IS sind oder die zum syrischen Regime von Machthaber Baschar al-Assad gehören. Die Zahlen stammen aus einer Antwort der Bundesregierung auf eine Anfrage der Grünen.

evangelisch.de

Die Zahlen steigen den Angaben zufolge kontinuierlich. 2016 hätten zwölf Verfahren gegen IS-Mitglieder begonnen. Der Generalbundesanwalt rechne noch in diesem Jahr mit der Eröffnung von mindestens zwei völkerstrafrechtlichen Hauptverfahren zu Syrien. Die Opfer seien meistens vom IS oder in Gefängnissen des syrischen Machthabers Assad gefoltert worden. Da es sich um Kriegsverbrechen und Verbrechen gegen die Menschlichkeit handelt, könne gegen die mutmaßlichen Täter auch hierzulande ermittelt werden.

weiterlesen

View original post