 |
| La publicación satírica española "El Jueves" de nuevo ha roto otra lanza a favor de la libertad de expresión, como nos tiene acostumbrados a sus fieles lectores. No se puede ceder a la barbarie que quieren imponer al resto del mundo los islamistas/terroristas, los líderes religiosos más fanáticos y rabiosos. Los mismos que condenan a las mujeres a una especie de esclavitud que pasa del padre al marido, que les niegan educación y cualquier derecho ciudadano. No se llamen a engaño: hablar de "grandes religiones" y sucumbier a honrarlas sin motivo es una trampa. Y si somos blasfemos pues también tenemos derecho, aunque claro sin jugarnos el pellejo. Un solidario besazo al "Jueves", que sale los miércoles, y que es una de las mejores publicaciones de Spain. Caña al mono. |
jueves, 27 de septiembre de 2012
Viva la blasfemia
martes, 25 de septiembre de 2012
La inocencia de los musulmanes: una teoría conspiratoria
“The Innocence of Muslims”: Blasphemy as a Political Tactic
By Thierry Meyssan
Thyerry Meyssan teje algo así como una teoría conspiratoria para explicar qué hay detrás de las revueltas y actos de violencia que han sacudido el mundo islámico por la película "La inocencia de los musulmanes". Uno puede estar o no de acuerdo pero ofrece elementos interesantes. Lean lo que he editado aquí y si les parece bien visiten la URL señalada.
Url of this article: http://www.globalresearch.ca/blasphemy-as-a-political-tactic/
The circulation on the Internet of the trailer for a film, The Innocence of Muslims, sparked demonstrations across the world and resulted in the killing in Benghazi of the U.S. Ambassador to Libya and members of his entourage.
At first glance, these events can be located in the long line leading from Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses to the burnings of the Koran by Pastor Terry Jones. Nevertheless, this new attack differs from other incidents in that the film was not directed at a Western audience but instead was uniquely conceived as an instrument of provocation directed at Muslims.
In political terms, the affair can be analyzed from two angles: from the tactical perspective as an anti-U.S. manipulation; or from a strategic one, as an anti-Muslim psychological attack.
The film was produced by a Zionist group composed of Jews of double Israeli-American nationality and by an Egyptian Copt. It was completed several months ago but was released at a calculated moment to provoke riots targeting the United States.
Israeli agents were deployed in several large cities with a mission to channel the rage of the crowd against American or Coptic targets (though not Israeli ones). Not surprisingly, their maximum effect was attained in Benghazi, the capital of Libya’s Cyrenaica region.
The population of Benghazi is known to harbor particularly reactionary and racist groups. It is useful to recall that at the time the cartoons of Mohammed appeared in September, 2005, Salafists attacked the Danish Consulate. In keeping with the Vienna Convention on diplomacy, the Libyan government of Muammar al-Gaddafi deployed troops to protect the diplomatic service then under attack. The repression of the riot resulted in numerous deaths. Subsequently, the West, seeking to overthrow the Libyan regime, financed Salafist publications which accused Gaddafi of protecting the Danish Consulate because he had allegedly been behind the cartoon operation.
On February 15, 2011, Salafists organized in Benghazi a demonstration commemorating the massacre during which shooting erupted, an incident that marked the beginning of the Benghazi insurrection that opened the way to the NATO intervention. The Libyan police arrested three members of the Italian Special Forces who confessed to having fired from the rooftops on both demonstrators and the police to sew chaos and confusion. Held prisoner throughout the war that followed, they were released when NATO seized the capital and smuggled them out of the country to Malta in a small fishing boat on which I was also a passenger.
This time, the manipulation of the Benghazi crowd by Israeli agents had as its goal the assassination of the U.S. Ambassador, an act of war not seen since the Israeli bombardment of the USS Liberty by the Israeli Air Force and Navy in 1967. This constitutes the first assassination of an ambassador in the line of duty since 1979. The act is all the more grievous considering that in a country where the current central government is a purely legal fiction, the U.S. Ambassador was not merely a diplomat but was functioning as Governor, as the de facto head of state. (Para leer el resto ir a la URL señalada)
By Thierry Meyssan
Thyerry Meyssan teje algo así como una teoría conspiratoria para explicar qué hay detrás de las revueltas y actos de violencia que han sacudido el mundo islámico por la película "La inocencia de los musulmanes". Uno puede estar o no de acuerdo pero ofrece elementos interesantes. Lean lo que he editado aquí y si les parece bien visiten la URL señalada.
Url of this article: http://www.globalresearch.ca/blasphemy-as-a-political-tactic/
At first glance, these events can be located in the long line leading from Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses to the burnings of the Koran by Pastor Terry Jones. Nevertheless, this new attack differs from other incidents in that the film was not directed at a Western audience but instead was uniquely conceived as an instrument of provocation directed at Muslims.
In political terms, the affair can be analyzed from two angles: from the tactical perspective as an anti-U.S. manipulation; or from a strategic one, as an anti-Muslim psychological attack.
The film was produced by a Zionist group composed of Jews of double Israeli-American nationality and by an Egyptian Copt. It was completed several months ago but was released at a calculated moment to provoke riots targeting the United States.
Israeli agents were deployed in several large cities with a mission to channel the rage of the crowd against American or Coptic targets (though not Israeli ones). Not surprisingly, their maximum effect was attained in Benghazi, the capital of Libya’s Cyrenaica region.
The population of Benghazi is known to harbor particularly reactionary and racist groups. It is useful to recall that at the time the cartoons of Mohammed appeared in September, 2005, Salafists attacked the Danish Consulate. In keeping with the Vienna Convention on diplomacy, the Libyan government of Muammar al-Gaddafi deployed troops to protect the diplomatic service then under attack. The repression of the riot resulted in numerous deaths. Subsequently, the West, seeking to overthrow the Libyan regime, financed Salafist publications which accused Gaddafi of protecting the Danish Consulate because he had allegedly been behind the cartoon operation.
On February 15, 2011, Salafists organized in Benghazi a demonstration commemorating the massacre during which shooting erupted, an incident that marked the beginning of the Benghazi insurrection that opened the way to the NATO intervention. The Libyan police arrested three members of the Italian Special Forces who confessed to having fired from the rooftops on both demonstrators and the police to sew chaos and confusion. Held prisoner throughout the war that followed, they were released when NATO seized the capital and smuggled them out of the country to Malta in a small fishing boat on which I was also a passenger.
This time, the manipulation of the Benghazi crowd by Israeli agents had as its goal the assassination of the U.S. Ambassador, an act of war not seen since the Israeli bombardment of the USS Liberty by the Israeli Air Force and Navy in 1967. This constitutes the first assassination of an ambassador in the line of duty since 1979. The act is all the more grievous considering that in a country where the current central government is a purely legal fiction, the U.S. Ambassador was not merely a diplomat but was functioning as Governor, as the de facto head of state. (Para leer el resto ir a la URL señalada)
lunes, 24 de septiembre de 2012
Spain según el NYT
Así es la imagen que ofrece el NYT hoy en una colección de 16 fotos, todas, como la que he escogido en b/n. Se trata de sustentar que en Spain hay hambre y condiciones paupérrimas. El artículo tiene su fondo real, pero ha sido cocinado con mucha mala baba. Juzguen ustedes si lo que se muestra aquí es un reflejo fiel de Benidorm. En fin Pilarín, que mientras el rey Juan Carlos visitaba NY le sacaban las fotitos que nos ponen a caer de un burro, no te digo. Para ver el resto newyorktimes.com.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)