Saturday, 5 January 2013

Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, the Moroccan-born minister for Women's Rights in the French government, a "non-practising Muslim" who once said she felt "wounded like all the Muslims of France" when her political opponent Fillon made remarks about the spread of halal food, has called for Twitter to suppress tweets that don't respect human rights and for the tweeters responsible to be prosecuted.
Other countries in which the Twitter network is also present have a different conception of the manner of exercising freedom of expression and the protection of the dignity of the human person. We think that each of the legal traditions must be respected, as long as it is in line with the protection of human rights.
Source: Le Monde

She presents this demand for censorship innocently enough, prefacing it with examples of anti-homosexual, anti-Semitic and anti-negro Twitter hashtags. She doesn't say a word specifically about Islam, Muslims or even religion in the abstract. In fact, when citing the French law that criminalises incitement to hatred, she curiously omits religion from the list of "protected characteristics" even though the text of the law does clearly mention it:
It is to France's credit that it has progressively inscribed in the Criminal Code the repression of incitement to hatred or violence towards a person or group of persons because of their origins, their membership or non-membership of an ethnicity, a nation, or their sexual identity or orientation.

Of course, the elephant in the room is that France is being colonised by North-African Muslims like her and the French people are increasingly vocal about the distress this is causing them. Given that she so curiously fails to mention this in amidst all the other carefully listed prejudices that, in her view, require repressive government action, it is reasonable for us to suspect that her real agenda relates to what she has not said rather than what she has.

Unsurprisingly, the Guardian has published an article in praise of her, written by an appropriately-named American called Jason Farago who thinks that "the first amendment of the US constitution is looking a lot like the second amendment: an American exception so broad and so holy that it prevents us even from thinking about how to prevent harm."

If only this were still the 18th century! We can't delude ourselves any longer that free speech is the privilege of pure citizens in some perfect Enlightenment salon, where all sides of an argument are heard and the most noble view will naturally rise to the top. Speech now takes place in a digital mixing chamber, in which the most outrageous messages are instantly amplified, with sometimes violent effects.

Digital speech is new territory, and it calls for fresh thinking, not the mindless reapplication of centuries-out-of-date principles that equate a smartphone to a Gutenberg press.
Source: Guardian

It is yet further proof, as if any was needed, that the ideology of human rights is a ready-made weapon for elites to use to suppress any murmurings of dissident thought. Why do Counterjihad activists still delude themselves into believing that this framework of ideas is our ally rather than our enemy?


Anonymous said...

Absolutely human rights has to go! Our survival depends upon it.

The totalitarian jakobinism of the elites has almost already destroyed us and the nonsense "rights of humanity" is their weapon of choice.

Anonymous said...


Its the truth.

sheik yer'mami said...

"The Universal Declaration of Human Rights" is a smorgasbord and a self-service restaurant for the soldiers of allah and is past its use by date.

"The Cairo Declaration of Human Rights" is what they really mean, because it declares that all rights fall under the sharia; which means only muslims are human and unbelievers, the 'sons of apes & pigs', 'vermin', the 'vilest of creatures', have no rights at all and should be disposed off once they have outlived their usefulness.

Mullah Lodabullah said...

She may censor Twitter and prosecute those who tweet, but there are warnings against consuming meats sacrificed to strange gods and idols such as the islamic allah.

Anonymous said...

all muslim should be voted out of europe america canada australia great britain and russia and wherever they be found they are the scum of the earth!! piss be upon allah and his homosexual prophet mohammed

BC said...

Anonymous wrote:

"Absolutely human rights has to go! Our survival depends upon it.

The totalitarian jakobinism of the elites has almost already destroyed us and the nonsense "rights of humanity" is their weapon of choice."

My Answer:

Wake up. If you can't make the simple argument about why Islam violates basic Western human rights - and thus believe "...human rights has to go..." - you're both lost in space and begging to paint the entire counter-jihad movement as actual and real Nazis. It's already bad enough as it is being tagged as "right-wing extremists" the entire time when, in fact, we're trying to preserve Western freedoms, democracy, and actual human rights.

For your information, the vast and enormous difference between those within the counter-jihad movement and those who are actually NAZIS is that we in the counter-jihad movement believe in taking on Islam's disregard for and incompatibility with Western human rights via democratic processes, values, and institutions. Yes, that means we must do a lot of arguing, writing, and convincing. But, if you have any idea of what exactly happened during and after World War II, you should be quite certain that the opposite is NOT an option.

If you want to see a Muslim Europe go ahead and become or act like a Nazi. Go ahead and let the world actually be correct in painting the counter-jihad movement as a Nazi movement. This post-World War II reaction to Hitler and Nazism that continues on even today is a large part of why Western guilt and political correctness have created the immigration policies that have reigned for many decades now.

How to do it then? Stick fully to human rights all around - but - inform minds as to why Islam is dangerous and different and then change laws and procedures as apply to Muslims and descendants of Muslim immigrants. If they don't assimilate; if they commit crimes; if they have more than two kids; if they have more than one wife; if they demand special privileges; if they exclude themselves by their clothing, action, habits, etc - then revoke their (and their family's) legal status and return them to the place they or their parents or grandparents came from. Period.

In doing so, all other human rights will be complied with for them - and for everyone else. Human rights is the only answer. Without sticking to human rights, you become a Nazi and I and many others WILL NOT tolerate a Nazi or a person who does not abide by the human rights enshrined in our Western freedoms. That means, if we follow your suggested path, the counter-jihad movement will be dead, Europe will be split, people like you who believe "...human rights must go..." will be defeated by all means necessary from within and without Europe, and Islam will then without doubt be fully ensured to become the indisputable ideology and religion for the future of Europe. I don't want that. You don't want that.

Learn to make the human rights argument - QUICKLY!!!! If you don't, we are all FINISHED.... Like I said, anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool. Nazis will die. Those who believe "...human rights must go..." will become and be seen as Nazis. You and I both know the results of that.

To begin to understand HOW to make the all-important human rights argument in defense of Western freedoms, start with Peter Carl's great articles at The Brussels Journal entitled "Surviving Islamism ... And Right/Left Politics: Churchill's Principle" at:

Anonymous said...

I dont think being against human rights makes me a nazi!

And I think we are FINISHED if we continue down the rights track.

Surely I believe in the principles of life and liberty, but human rights has made international law out of what should be incarnated only in national constitutions.

This means that everybody on the globe has the same rights under the same global law, this is NOT freedom, but imperialism! Because who is going to protect the law? Ohh yes the human rights empire, meaning an overnational power ready to invade any regime who is breaking the "law".

Do you want global power in the hands of an empire of rights?? EU wants to be that empire! Do you want the EU running the globe?? I dont!

Human rights also means the abolition of nations, because with human rights you only need the empire, beacuse there is only ONE law and everybody is subject, beacuse we are all humans right???

This means that people from China, Africa or the Middleeast owns your country as much as you do!

Do you want that?

I dont!

Diana trosper said...

Our electric skateboard are not the oversized, heavy, low quality, hard to carve models that have come before. And, yes, they are lithium powered. The bamboo and carbon street series are under 20 lbs. with a range of up to 20 miles.

Blog Archive

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Total Pageviews