Home · Maps · About
Home > OTChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

First : << [21 22 23 24 25]

< Previous Page  

Page 21 of 25

Next Page >  

(1084582)

view threaded

EUEUEUEUEU vs S-ccer: slaps down FIFA and UEFA over broadcast rights

Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Jul 18 17:13:16 2013, in response to EUEUEUEUEU Olog, posted by RockParkMan on Sat Nov 12 14:58:17 2011.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Associated Press
Jul 18, 2013 9:37 AM EDT

EU goes against FIFA, UEFA over broadcast rights

By Raf Casert
Associated Press
BRUSSELS (AP) — The European Union's highest court has dismissed a challenge from football governing bodies FIFA and UEFA and sided with any EU member state that wants to keep all of the World Cup and the European Championship on free TV.

Thursday's decision will be welcomed by fans across the continent who follow the tournaments with uncanny zeal.

The Court of Justice rejected the appeals of the two federations "in their entirety," in a move that represents a major legal slapdown for FIFA, the governing body that oversees the World Cup, and UEFA, which runs the European Championship. The two events are held every four years and are major income-providers for the federations.

As a result, the two will continue to face a restricted pool of broadcasters when they come to sell the rights to the prime-time matches in key markets across the 28-country EU. The member states have the right to select a series of top sports events to be shown on free TV.

"This decision not only distorts competition in a free market, but also reduces the possibility to generate income that can then be distributed to the amateur game," UEFA said in a statement.

FIFA objected to the broad interpretation of the rules to include all 64 matches of the World Cup. It said in a reaction that it already makes "at least 22 matches available on that basis" including all home team matches, the opening match, semi-finals and the final.

"Crucially," the world federation said, "such market distortion could also impact on FIFA's ability to generate funds from the FIFA World Cup."

At the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, FIFA earned $1.289 billion in European TV rights fees from a global total of $2.408 billion. FIFA says around 85 to 90 percent of overall income comes from World Cup revenue streams.

The court said that the initial 2011 ruling of the EU's General Court already stated that "all the matches in the final stages of those two tournaments actually attracted sufficient attention from the public to form part of an event of major importance."

"Those tournaments, in their entirety, have always been very popular among the general public and not only viewers who generally follow football matches on television," the court statement said.

Post a New Response

(1084623)

view threaded

Re: EUEUEUEUEU vs S-ccer: slaps down FIFA and UEFA over broadcast rights

Posted by Dan Lawrence on Thu Jul 18 17:58:04 2013, in response to EUEUEUEUEU vs S-ccer: slaps down FIFA and UEFA over broadcast rights, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Jul 18 17:13:16 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
I hate to say it, but RockParkMan was totally right. Plus this is a US place and most of don't give crap about what goes on across the Atlantic.

Post a New Response

(1084844)

view threaded

EUEUEUEUEU believes it owns the Suez Canal

Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Jul 19 15:55:57 2013, in response to EUEUEUEUEU Olog, posted by RockParkMan on Sat Nov 12 14:58:17 2011.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Yes, it's true. Just look at page 30 of this document.

Scenario 5: Threats to critical infrastructure overseas

Risk/threat: Having come to power a few years previously in a nearby country long wracked by instability and turmoil, Islamist jihadis set up artillery and rocket batteries along the Suez Canal. They demand what they describe as ‘taxes’ and ‘tolls’ from passing commercial vessels, cruise liners and oil/gas tankers for use of the canal. Threatening to open fire on any vessel failing to stop and pay the ransom, the jihadis announce a deadline for when ships have to start to pay. Insurance premiums go through the roof, with some companies sending their ships around the Cape of Good Hope — with the resulting growth in cost, time and carbon emissions. European shipping corporations, energy companies and businesses demand action.

Response: Europeans would have to conduct air and naval strikes against the jihadis to rapidly disable their relatively primitive anti-ship systems in an extended defense operation to protect one of their most precious pieces of overseas infrastructure along which almost all of their trade to and from the Middle East and Asia passes.

Post a New Response

(1084848)

view threaded

Re: EUEUEUEUEU redraws Israel's borders back to 1949 ''green lines'' (AP acknowledges)

Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Jul 19 16:05:54 2013, in response to EUEUEUEUEU redraws Israel's borders back to 1949 "green lines", posted by Olog-hai on Tue Jul 16 17:19:53 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
AP article
Jul 19, 2013 2:18 PM EDT

New EU guidelines limit Israel funding

PARIS (AP) — The European Union has published new guidelines explicitly banning any EU funding of Israeli institutions operating in territories occupied since the 1967 Mideast war, despite vigorous Israeli objections.

The EU holds that Jewish settlements in territories such as the West Bank and east Jerusalem are illegal. The Palestinians want some of those territories for their hoped-for state.

After EU officials announced plans this week for the new guidelines, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke with several European leaders to express his opposition.

EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said the document released Friday "is meant to clarify the EU's position," not to harm efforts toward Mideast peace. The new rules come into force Jan. 1.

The EU said the ban applies to "grants, prizes and financial instruments and that the new funding guidelines go into effect in 2014. The EU issues dozens of grants, totaling millions of euros, to Israeli universities, companies and researchers every year, but little of that goes to Israeli bodies in the occupied territories.

Israel's foreign ministry called the move an "attempt by the European Commission to coerce positions on issues which belong at the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations table." In a statement, the ministry also said it "doubts the political wisdom" of Europe's ban and said it "would have been preferable" for Europe to put its efforts into promoting peace measures instead.

Some 500,000 Israelis live in Jewish settlements scattered through the West Bank and around east Jerusalem. In addition, the West Bank is dotted with smaller settlements and outposts not formally sanctioned by the government. The Palestinians and the international community view all of Israel's West Bank settlements as illegal.

Post a New Response

(1085449)

view threaded

EUEUEUEUEU, Judea, Samaria and the "peace process" (historic antisemitism)

Posted by Olog-hai on Sun Jul 21 00:43:11 2013, in response to EUEUEUEUEU Olog, posted by RockParkMan on Sat Nov 12 14:58:17 2011.

fiogf49gjkf0d
INN

The European Obsession with Judea and Samaria

By Tom Wilson
Published: Friday, July 19, 2013 12:29 AM

An analysis of the reasons for the constant preoccupation with the only democracy in the Middle East.

Most international observers will find unremarkable the latest round of European Union boycotts against the Settlements, that is to say any Jewish community that happens to find itself located over the briefly maintained 1949 armistice lines. This move sits neatly within an ongoing pattern of European hostility towards Jews living in a vast array of places, ranging from much of Israel’s capital Jerusalem to Judaism’s next most holy and arguably most ancient city, Hevron.

At times this ongoing fixation has appeared almost farcical. On the same day in May of last year that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas once again stated his refusal to return to the negotiating table, the European Union was seemingly too busy announcing the publication of yet another report on Settlements to even notice. While Palestinian intransigence remains unshakable European foreign policy analysts obsessively count and recount the number of Jews living in Israel’s disputed territories and meanwhile the rest of the region precariously hurtles from one crisis to the next.

Although this time around the latest directive may also pertain to the Golan, there is something quite remarkable about the relative lack of attention that is usually given to this, Israel’s other supposed ‘occupation’. Europeans rarely seem to ever reference either the Jewish communities there or the lot of the sizable Arab population living in the Israeli controlled Golan. Nor has there ever been any outrage expressed at Israel’s initial presence beyond the original 1947 UN partition plan. Who ever heard of the occupation of Ramle or Akko? So what is it about Jerusalem and the "West Bank" that has so excited the Europeans?

True, the Zionist national revival in general sits squarely counter to the post-nationalist universalism of the European project and the progressive march towards the no doubt thrilling dream of world government that so many eurocrats already speak fondly of. Palestinian Arab nationalism, as aggressive and fiercely intolerant as it may well be, is of course dressed up as an anti-colonial civil rights movement, one to which Europeans enthusiastically lend their support, perhaps in the hope of redeeming themselves of their own history.

Europeans, it seems were less troubled by Israel in its early incarnation; secular, socialist and for the most part territorially confined to the Mediterranean coastal plain. They refused, however, to recognize any Israeli claim to a capital in even the most outlying western suburbs of Jerusalem. This city was, apparently, a problem for many Europeans. Could religiously charged Jerusalem lend biblical connotations to the new Jewish State they might have wondered.

Then in 1967, everything changed. In fending off its attackers, not only did Israel establish its military preeminence in the region but now all of Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount, and the biblical heartlands of Judea and Samaria had fallen to Jewish Sovereignty. This was too much. No Palestinian Arab State had been extinguished; Jordanian occupiers had simply been replaced by Israeli forces. Yet, the international community, seemingly previously untroubled by the Jordanian seizure of these areas, was clearly outraged by the Jewish presence there and from the UN the call immediately began for Israeli withdrawal.

The religious and historical significance of Jerusalem and the adjacent regions of Judea and Samaria have not been lost on the many Israelis who have made their homes there, yet this significance has also not been lost on other observers too. At any anti-Israel rally or meeting in Europe one can hear shrill speeches decrying the ‘Judaization of Jerusalem’. A phrase uttered in genuine angst rather than with any sense of irony. For Europeans have thrown off the now much resented influences of their own Churches and they lack the kind of Evangelical Christian Right that can be found in America. The notion then that anyone might take the Bible seriously enough to let it influence how they live their lives or, cue ‘the dreaded settlers’, determine where they live, is a serious affront to the modern European mind.

Yet it gets worse. The return of Jews and Jewish sovereignty to such religiously sensitive areas as Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria all begins to look horrifically like happenings envisaged by the Bible. For post-Judeoa-Christian Europe it is difficult to overstate just how catastrophic it would be for anything to appear to give any kind of validation to biblical claims. Europeans have spent a century or more trying to free themselves of the frustrating limits that biblical morality placed on their appetites.

Whether they proclaim it openly or not, they are now akin to the more starkly honest American philosopher Thomas Nagel who once declared ‘It isn’t just that I don’t believe in God... It’s that I hope there is no God! I don’t want there to be a God; I don’t want a universe like that’. And while it may be for slightly different reasons, perhaps it is also no coincidence that the ‘progressive’ and anti-Orthodox strands of Judaism have taken so aggressively against the Jewish presence in biblically sensitive areas; these are denominations who have similarly staked everything on the hope that the Bible is a fairytale.

Islam, on the other hand, does not concern most Europeans, for as Douglas Murray observes in his latest ebook Islamophilia, liberal Westerners are happy to swoon over Islam. This is primarily because they don’t for a moment entertain the thought that it could be true. They do not historically have the same cultural hang-ups about Quaranic prohibitions and so feel no sense of guilt when say drinking alcohol for instance. Christianity and its taboos still loom in the European psyche, however, and so Europeans often reveal themselves to be far more hostile to the Church leaders than to many extremist Islamic clerics; compare Yusuf Qawadawi’s visit to London to that of Pope Benedict’s.

In his strikingly insightful essay The Myth of the Supra-Human Jew, Irving Kristol wrote at length about the long European struggle with what the Jews meant for their own religion. Since Church doctrine taught that the survival of the Jews until the end of time was testament to the truth of the Bible and its claims so, argues Kristol, was the challenge set to any European wishing to rid himself of the shame and guilt associated with Judeo-Christian morality. Annihilate the people of the book and in doing so disprove their book and free yourself of its restrictions.

Six decades on from the German-led attempt to extinguish the Jewish people, one that found collaborators in every European country, and it is striking how in some German cities it can seem as if there is a sex-shop on every street corner. Across Europe grand Cathedrals, like the once thriving Jewish quarters, are almost entirely deserted. Yet, anti-Semites always encounter the same conundrum; the more they persecute the Jews, the more they reaffirm the very Jewish exceptionalism they seek to deny. Success becomes a failure that must spur on new attempts.

In the long run, severing Israel from Judea, Samaria and the most religiously significant parts of Jerusalem not only serves to destroy Israel’s identity and rob the nation of much biblical significance, but it also creates indefensible borders for what many of Israel’s enemies already refer to as a ‘one bomb country’. As has been suggested by Charles Krauthammer, it is doubtful whether this time the Jewish people could survive such a blow as another destruction of their homeland and their most determined opponents must surely have calculated similarly.

The European Union’s latest directive against the "settlements" has no shortage of unfortunate historical connotations. Not only are Europeans once more telling Jews where they can and can’t live but it smacks of a futile colonialism whereby Europeans are again recklessly attempting to draw other people’s borders for them. Similarly, boycotts are a longstanding tactic in the war against Jews, advocated in early Medieval England just as they were also the first anti-Jewish policy enforced in Nazi Germany.

Noticeably, most Europeans seem to have been just as untroubled by the myriad daily atrocities and injustices taking place around the globe as the rest of the world that also routinely looks on with apparent disinterest. Even when genocide returned to Europe itself in the 1990s, it was for the Americans to lead an intervention in the Balkans to put a stop to it. Yet, when it comes to Jews living in biblically sensitive places, then we can surely always count on the Europeans to spring into decisive action.

Post a New Response

(1085464)

view threaded

Re: EUEUEUEUEU, Judea, Samaria and the ''peace process'' (historic antisemitism)

Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Jul 21 01:33:59 2013, in response to EUEUEUEUEU, Judea, Samaria and the "peace process" (historic antisemitism), posted by Olog-hai on Sun Jul 21 00:43:11 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Half truth and half bullshit. More sex shops and fewer churches make for a better society.

Post a New Response

(1087213)

view threaded

EUEUEUEUEU distrusted by average of 60% of citizens: poll

Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Jul 25 16:20:34 2013, in response to EUEUEUEUEU Olog, posted by RockParkMan on Sat Nov 12 14:58:17 2011.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Reuters

Faith in European Union at low ebb, EU poll says

By Robin Emmott
Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:11pm BST
BRUSSELS (Reuters) — The number of Europeans who distrust the European Union has doubled over the past six years to a record high, with bailed-out Greeks and Cypriots having the least faith in the bloc, according to a new EU poll.

An economic crisis, record unemployment and five eurozone bailouts have taken their toll on the standing of the European Union that last year was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize but is increasingly viewed as an overbearing, cumbersome bureaucracy.

Sixty percent of Europeans "tended not to trust the EU", according to Eurobarometer, a public opinion service of the European Commission, the EU executive, which released its spring findings this week.

That compares to the 32-percent level of distrust reported in early 2007 before the onset of the 2008/2009 global financial crisis and the ensuing eurozone debt crisis.

Cyprus, which was bailed out earlier this year in a controversial rescue that forced losses on wealthy depositors, showed the most distrust of the European Union at 83 percent.

In Greece, which is suffering from an economic depression and where painful job and spending cuts have been ordered by the EU, the International Monetary Fund and the European Central Bank, the level of distrust was 80 percent.

Britons also showed steadily growing disillusionment, with 68 percent of citizens saying they had little confidence in the bloc of 500 million citizens that London joined four decades ago. Prime Minister David Cameron has proposed Britain hold a vote by 2017 on whether to leave.

Britain's support for the euro, the single currency shared by 17 EU nations and of which Britain is not a member, was also the lowest in the bloc at 15 percent.

Almost half of all Europeans said that they were pessimistic about the future of what is now a 28-nation bloc, the poll found, up from a quarter in late 2007.

That marks a worrying trend for a bloc designed around an ideal of "ever greater union" to deepen the benefits of cooperation in areas ranging from trade to health and the rule of law, and as European influence wanes in the world.

Elections to the European Parliament next May could see a surge in anti-EU parties and Britain's Eurosceptic party, UKIP, believes it can win the largest share of British votes.

In April, European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso warned of "political extremes and populism tearing apart the political support and the social fabric" of Europe and called for unity, but many citizens see EU institutions as pernicious and overbearing in national public life.

The Eurobarometer poll was carried out between May 10 and May 26 and interviewed 32,694 people across the European Union.

(Editing by Robin Pomeroy)

Post a New Response

(1087644)

view threaded

Israel defense minister Ya'alon slaps EUEUEUEUEU over settlements directive

Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 27 02:14:34 2013, in response to EUEUEUEUEU Olog, posted by RockParkMan on Sat Nov 12 14:58:17 2011.

fiogf49gjkf0d
INN

EU 'Concerned' About Israeli Cold Shoulder in Yesha

European Union expresses concern over Israeli directive to suspend contact with Europe on matters related to Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

By Elad Benari, Canada
First Publish: 7/26/2013, 10:08 PM
The European Union expressed concern on Friday over a directive by Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon to suspend contact with Europe on matters related to Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

Maja Kocijancic, a spokeswoman for EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, responded to the decision by saying, "The EU is concerned by reports in the Israeli media that the Israeli Minister of Defense has announced a number of restrictions affecting EU activities supporting the Palestinian people."

Kocijancic stressed, however, "We have not received any official communication from the Israeli authorities. Our delegations on the spot are seeking urgent clarifications.”

Israeli media outlets reported on Thursday that Yaalon has ordered the Coordinator of Government Activities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, Maj. Gen. Eitan Dangot, to turn down any request by the European Union which relates to these regions.

Yaalon’s directive is a direct response to the EU’s new guidelines which forbid any contact with Israeli companies operating beyond the 1949 Armistice Lines, said the report. Last week the EU published these guidelines despite Israeli efforts to dissuade it from doing so.

The Defense Minister reportedly instructed Dangot to make it difficult for the Europeans to operate in Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

In the past week, Israel has denied several European requests to fund projects in the Palestinian Authority. In addition, eight requests by EU officials to cross from Israel into PA-assigned areas were denied and meetings between EU and Israelis officials were canceled.

A Western diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Reuters on Friday that several European humanitarian aid staff had had difficulty obtaining permits to enter Gaza and some requests had gone unanswered.

Israel met European envoys last Friday, warning them of a serious crisis between the European Union and Israel over the move.

Hundreds of legal experts from Israel and around the world have appealed to European Union Foreign Affairs Commissioner Catherine Ashton to annul the EU's plan.

The experts are noting that the decision does not have a legal basis, because, they argue, Judea and Samaria is not occupied territory in the legal sense of the term.

Post a New Response

(1087653)

view threaded

Re: Israel defense minister Ya'alon slaps EUEUEUEUEU over settlements directive

Posted by RockParkMan on Sat Jul 27 08:13:38 2013, in response to Israel defense minister Ya'alon slaps EUEUEUEUEU over settlements directive, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 27 02:14:34 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
If the EU is going to stand with the Islamist religious fundamentalists instad of the democratic progressive Israelis, they deserve the cold shoulder.

Post a New Response

(1087655)

view threaded

Re: Israel defense minister Ya'alon slaps EUEUEUEUEU over settlements directive

Posted by mtk52983 on Sat Jul 27 08:15:52 2013, in response to Re: Israel defense minister Ya'alon slaps EUEUEUEUEU over settlements directive, posted by RockParkMan on Sat Jul 27 08:13:38 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
RockParkMan agrees with Olog?!? The apocalypse is here!

Post a New Response

(1087661)

view threaded

Re: Israel defense minister Ya'alon slaps EUEUEUEUEU over settlements directive

Posted by ChicagoMotorman on Sat Jul 27 08:52:40 2013, in response to Re: Israel defense minister Ya'alon slaps EUEUEUEUEU over settlements directive, posted by mtk52983 on Sat Jul 27 08:15:52 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Not until rockman comes out against a so-called 2 state solution.

Post a New Response

(1087667)

view threaded

Re: Israel defense minister Ya'alon slaps EUEUEUEUEU over settlements directive

Posted by rockparkman on Sat Jul 27 09:33:03 2013, in response to Re: Israel defense minister Ya'alon slaps EUEUEUEUEU over settlements directive, posted by ChicagoMotorman on Sat Jul 27 08:52:40 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
The alternative is SHOAH!!!

Post a New Response

(1087687)

view threaded

Re: Israel defense minister Ya'alon slaps EUEUEUEUEU over settlements directive

Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jul 27 12:59:45 2013, in response to Re: Israel defense minister Ya'alon slaps EUEUEUEUEU over settlements directive, posted by rockparkman on Sat Jul 27 09:33:03 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
The Palestinians are not ready for a two-state solution (really a three state solution).

Post a New Response

(1087693)

view threaded

Re: Israel defense minister Ya'alon slaps EUEUEUEUEU over settlements directive

Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 27 13:22:29 2013, in response to Re: Israel defense minister Ya'alon slaps EUEUEUEUEU over settlements directive, posted by rockparkman on Sat Jul 27 09:33:03 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Eh?? The "Palestinians" want that anyway! The "two-state solution" to them is a stepping stone to the Third Intifada/Second Shoah.

Post a New Response

(1088426)

view threaded

(EUEUEUEUEU) German mag "Der Landsder" revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center

Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jul 29 16:38:39 2013, in response to EUEUEUEUEU Olog, posted by RockParkMan on Sat Nov 12 14:58:17 2011.

fiogf49gjkf0d
NY Times

German Magazine Accused Over Historical Views

By Jack Ewing
Published: July 29, 2013
FRANKFURT — The Waffen-SS is widely seen as one of the main perpetrators of the Holocaust, but not in the pages of Der Landser, a weekly German pulp magazine.

In one recent issue, members of the feared World War II military unit were portrayed as just a bunch of good-natured soldiers doing their jobs and, between battles, sharing rounds of local plonk with Greek villagers grateful to have been invaded. “We conquered them, and they’re still a friendly folk,” remarked one member of the squad, which belonged to Hitler’s personal bodyguard.

That jarring view of history, in a magazine published by one of Germany’s largest news media companies and available for download on Amazon and Apple iTunes, has come under fire from a prominent American Jewish group. Acting on what it said were several recent complaints, the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles invoked German laws against Nazi propaganda and Holocaust denials in asking Berlin last week to shut down Der Landser.

German Interior Ministry officials said they took the Wiesenthal Center complaint “very seriously” and would investigate. But in the meantime, companies that publish and distribute Der Landser said they would continue doing so, noting that previous legal challenges had failed to find fault with the editorial stance of the magazine, whose relatively small circulation belies its lightning-rod role in Germany.

The new focus on Der Landser is the latest incarnation of a debate — one that has lasted decades — over the balance between free speech and efforts in Germany to eradicate the neo-Nazi movement and tamp down anti-Semitism. And in an era when any publication, no matter how obscure, can be disseminated far and wide via the Internet, the controversy sharpens the focus on the question of whether companies like Amazon and Apple are responsible for scrutinizing what is being sold through their digital channels.

The magazine, which advertises that it is based on true events but also clearly includes fictional elements, studiously avoids mentioning the word “Nazi” and does not overtly propagate anti-Semitism. But critics say Der Landser, with its failure to acknowledge atrocities and displaying little sense of regret for the deaths of tens of millions of people, is stuck in a World War II time warp that ignores efforts by broader German society to come to terms with Nazi crimes.

Even if Der Landser technically stays within legal bounds, critics contend, it nourishes a violence-prone, far-right subculture that is particularly strong in eastern Germany, where a rightist party has seats in the state Parliament of Saxony. The law enforcement authorities in Dresden, the capital of Saxony, said they often found copies of Der Landser when they raided homes of those suspected of being neo-Nazis.

“The way they interpret it, everyone in the Wehrmacht was just like in the American Army or the Canadian Army or the British Army,” said Rabbi Marvin Hier, founder of the Wiesenthal Center, using the term for the German armed forces at that time. “They forget the most important point. People in this army were thugs and murderers who almost brought down Western civilization.”

He called Amazon’s refusal to stop selling the magazine “preposterous.”

Der Landser, named for a term describing common soldiers in World War II and founded by a German Luftwaffe veteran in 1957, has already survived numerous frontal assaults by critics over the years. It has been the subject of several critical academic studies and reports in the German news media, and individual issues of the magazine have been sanctioned by a government office that vets news media content that could harm young people.

But even some experts skeptical of its pseudo-historical tales of military heroics and camaraderie among German forces question whether the magazine violates the prohibition against glorifying Nazism or denying the Holocaust.

“Legally, there is not much to grab on to,” said Peter Conrady, a retired professor of literature at the University of Dortmund who has studied Der Landser. Mr. Conrady said the magazine subtly promotes nationalism by portraying German soldiers, even from the S.S., as sympathetic everymen who were morally superior to their enemies.

Mr. Conrady said a ban of the magazine would simply drive such material underground. It would be more useful to promote public knowledge of the issues raised by the magazine’s portrayal of history, he said.

“It’s important for the public to be aware of this phenomenon,” he said.

The magazine is now produced by an editor young enough to be a grandchild of the war veterans, who waves off assertions that Der Landser plays to contemporary extreme rightist sentiments. In a brief telephone interview, Guntram Schulze-Wegener, the editor in chief of Der Landser, as well as several other magazines about military history, said the content was nonpolitical. Mr. Schulze-Wegener, who is in his late 40s, declined to comment further, saying he had to first consult with his superiors.

Der Landser’s publisher, Bauer Media Group, cited previous rulings by German officials that the magazine did not violate any laws. Its own review of the magazine has concluded that the magazine “neither glorifies National Socialism nor downplays Nazi crimes,” Bauer saidin a statement. Bauer would not disclose the circulation of the magazine, widely distributed on newsstands and online, but about a decade ago it was estimated at 60,000, not counting special issues.

Amazon said Friday that it would continue to sell the magazine after determining it had previously passed muster with German officials who scrutinize the news media available to children.

Apple, which offers Der Landser on iTunes, did not respond to e-mails and telephone messages last week asking whether it was aware of the content of the magazine. The Wiesenthal Center said it planned to complain to Apple but had not done so as of Friday.

If anything, the recent criticism from the Wiesenthal Center seems likely to bring new, unflattering attention to Bauer, which is based in Hamburg. The center was named for Simon Wiesenthal, the famed Nazi hunter who helped the authorities locate war criminals like Adolf Eichmann. Bauer is a privately owned publishing giant with extensive business in the United States and other markets outside Europe.

Bauer’s U.S. titles include In Touch, the celebrity magazine, and also several soap opera fan magazines, including ABC Soaps in Depth. It also publishes the German edition of Cosmopolitan and Australian editions of Rolling Stone and a girl’s magazine called Disney Princess, according to the company’s Web site.

Rabbi Hier said the Wiesenthal Center decided to complain to Bauer, Amazon and the German authorities after receiving several complaints and reviewing a study conducted for the center by Stefan Klemp, a German journalist and historian. Mr. Klemp compiled evidence that numerous officers profiled reverentially in Der Landser belonged to units that had committed atrocities, even if they were never themselves convicted of war crimes.

One recent issue, for example, described the exploits of August Zingel, a member of a so-called SS-Totenkopf, or “Death’s Head,” unit. Members of the Totenkopf units were notorious for their role running concentration camps, including Auschwitz, though that fact was not mentioned by Der Landser. According to the magazine, Mr. Zingel survived the war and died in 2000 at the age of 79.

Far from being a mark of guilt, the silver skull insignia of the Totenkopf unit is portrayed in the story as a badge of honor.

“On the day that he was accepted into the SS-Totenkopf unit,” the text says of one soldier, “he stepped out of the shadow of his older brother. He had made it.” The story tells how the soldier was then able to marry his dream wife, Edeltraud, who bore him two healthy children.

Critics say the magazine provides fodder for the far right’s fascination with World War II military awards and medals. The magazine features profiles of officers who were awarded the Knight’s Cross, a version of the Iron Cross, which predated the rise of the Nazis but was appropriated by them.

Der Landser is seen as part of a far-right subculture that evades bans on swastikas and blatant Nazi propaganda with an elaborate system of codes and cultural markers they use to identify themselves. A tattoo of the numbers “88” stands for “HH” or “Heil Hitler.” (H is the eighth letter in the alphabet.) Clothing with the Thor Steinar brand has become so closely associated with neo-Nazism that some soccer clubs refuse to allow people wearing the label into stadiums. The Iron Cross belongs to the catalog of favored neo-Nazi symbols. Der Landser also provides this subculture a body of literature they can call their own, critics say.

Even outside far-right circles, though, there remains a debate in Germany about how much blame the regular German Army of World War II bears for war crimes.

In April, a huge television audience tuned in for a three-part fictional mini-series, “Unser Mütter, unsere Väter” (“Our Mothers, Our Fathers”), which dealt with how World War II distorted the moral outlook of five young German friends. The film depicted Wehrmacht soldiers murdering civilians, including children. Though the series generally won praise, a few critics argued that it ignored the large number of soldiers who were neither war criminals nor resisters, but were just trying to survive.

Many Germans still regard the regular army as largely guilt-free. Joachim Wolf, who operates several anti-Nazi Web sites, said that Der Landser perpetuated the myth that atrocities were the work of a few fanatics and that most German soldiers remained “pure.”

“The crimes are completely ignored,” Mr. Wolf said. “That plays into the hands of the right-wingers.”

Post a New Response

(1088446)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landsder'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center

Posted by RockParkMan on Mon Jul 29 18:20:21 2013, in response to (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag "Der Landsder" revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jul 29 16:38:39 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Reagan did the same thing.
Reagan honors SS

But that's ok, isn't it.

Post a New Response

(1088449)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landsder'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Jul 29 18:47:23 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landsder'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center, posted by RockParkMan on Mon Jul 29 18:20:21 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/west-of-eden/if-obama-treated-israel-like-reagan-did-he-d-be-impeached-1.400542

Post a New Response

(1088467)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Olog-hai revises history, What about der Fuhrer Ronald Reagan???

Posted by rockparkman on Mon Jul 29 20:22:30 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landsder'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Jul 29 18:47:23 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Remember when the mealy mouthed scumbag said "Mr. Gorbachev, Tear Down this wall"???

Post a New Response

(1088468)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landsder'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center

Posted by Fred G on Mon Jul 29 20:46:51 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landsder'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Jul 29 18:47:23 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/west-of-eden/if-obama-treated-israel-like-reagan-did-he-d-be-impeached-1.400542

If Obama treated Israel like Reagan did, he’d be impeached
Former President Ronald Reagan’s confrontations with Israel were harsh and personal, yet Republican conservatives revere him and the Jews remember him as a great friend.
By Chemi Shalev | Dec. 9, 2011 | 12:37 PM | 46

Imagine if Israel would launch a successful preemptive strike against a country that is building a nuclear bomb that threatens its very existence, and the American president would describe it as “a tragedy”.

And then, not only would the U.S. administration fail to “stand by its ally”, as Republicans pledged this week, but it would actually lend its hand to a UN Security Council decision that condemns Israel, calls on it to place its nuclear facilities under international supervision and demands that it pay reparations (!) for the damage it had wrought.

And then, to add insult to injury, the U.S. president would impose an embargo on further sales of F-16 aircraft because Israel had “violated its commitment to use the planes only in self-defense”.

Can you imagine the uproar? Can you contemplate the brouhaha? I mean, if Mitt Romney believes that President Obama “threw Israel under the bus” just for suggesting that a peace settlement with Israel be based on the 1967 borders - what would he say about a president who actually turns his back on Israel in its greatest time of need? That he hurled Israel over the cliff with a live grenade in its pocket and into a burning volcano?

And what if that very same president, only a few months later, would decide to sell truly game-changing sophisticated weaponry to Saudi Arabia, an Arab country that is a sworn enemy of Israel? And not only would this president dismiss Israeli objections that these weapons endanger its security, but he would actually warn, in a manner that sent shivers down the spines of American Jews, that “it is not the business of other nations to make American foreign policy”. And his Secretary of State would mince no words, just in case Walt or Mearsheimer hadn’t heard the first time, saying ominously that if the deal would be blocked by Israeli influence, there would be “serious implications on all American policies in the Middle East... I’ll just leave it there.” And then the two of them would extend the abovementioned arms embargo, just to twist Israel’s arm a little bit more.

I mean, what words would be left to describe such behavior, after the entire thesaurus’ arsenal of synonyms for “insult” “perfidy” and “knife in the back” have been exhausted to describe the official White House photo of President Obama talking to Prime Minister Netanyahu with his shoes on the table?

And what if this same president - you know who I’m talking about by now, but let’s keep up the charade - what if this same president, time after time after time, not only failed to exercise the U.S. veto in the UN Security Council to block anti-Israeli resolutions, but actually joined Muslim and Communist and other heathen countries in supporting Security Council decisions that condemned Israel for assassinating well-known terrorists; for annexing territories that Michele Bachman has clearly stated belong only to Israel; for killing violent jihadist students at Bir Zeit University; for waging war against the enemies of Western civilization in Lebanon; and even for “Israel’s policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians.” Denying the human rights of Palestinians? Who wrote that? Judge Goldstone? Khaled Meshal?

But because Newt Gingrich is already on record as saying of the Obama Administration that “this one-sided, continuing pressure that says it’s always the Israelis’ fault no matter how bad the other side is has got to stop,” we have no doubt that he would say much worse things about this president we’re talking about, don’t we?

Especially when that president called for a settlement freeze that “more than any other action, could create the confidence needed for wider participation in these talks”; when he threatened a reluctant Israeli prime minister in an official letter that “the relationship between our two countries is at stake”; when the same Israeli prime minister - that this president couldn’t stand, by the way - is forced to ask why the US is treating Israel as if it was a “banana republic”; when this Administration’s secretary of defense doesn’t veil his criticism of Israel before a pro-Israeli crowd at the Saban Forum, like Leon Panetta did this week, but actually tells Congress in open session that the Israeli leader “is not a moderate”; or when the White House spokesman - Marlin Fitzwater, for God’s sake - says that the Israeli “occupation” actually “damages the self-respect and world opinion of the Israeli people.”

I mean, if Ambassador Gutman should be tarred, feathered and sacked for saying that the Middle East conflict fuels Muslim anti-Semitism, what should one do with a White House that is openly providing ammunition to the boycotters and the delegitimizers? And what would all the piqued pundits and bristling bloggers who scribed this week that the words of Panetta and Gutman along with Hillary Clinton’s off-the-record concern for Israel’s democracy prove the Obama Administration’s animosity towards Israel - what would they have to say about an Administration that often spoke to Israel with all the subtlety of Tony Soprano holding a sledgehammer in his hand?

And finally - and this is where we really enter the Twilight Zone, I admit - imagine if this president not only never once visited Israel, despite being eight years in office, but he even balked at visiting a concentration camp, as Obama did after his speech in Cairo. You want to know why? Because - take a deep breath - because the Germans “feel that they have a guilt feeling that's been imposed upon them." Poor things.

But wait, I’m not finished yet. So where does this president insist on going, despite overwhelming Jewish objections and an emotional last-minute appeal by Elie Wiesel in the name of Holocaust survivors? To lay a wreath at a ceremony commemorating the memory of the soldiers of the Waffen SS, a Nazi unit designated as a criminal organization at the Nuremberg trials, whose soldiers committed countless war crimes, including the razing of the Warsaw Ghetto, and murdered hundreds of thousands of Jews. And what does this president, this American idol of Republican conservatives, this righteous gentile of right-wing Jews, what does he have to say about these Nazi war criminals? That “they were victims just as surely as the victims in the concentration camps."

NOW, SERIOUSLY, can you even begin to imagine what mayhem would break out if Obama would say such an insensitive, obtuse and borderline Holocaust-denying sentence? Can you picture the earthquake of rage and the tsunami of venom that would spontaneously and simultaneously erupt and sweep forth all the way from Fox News through Newt Gingrich to Pamela Geller? Is it far-fetched to imagine that America would actually grind to a halt as Republicans frantically sought a constitutional offence with which to impeach Obama and angry multitudes gathered before the White House lawn?

Ah, but Ronald Reagan, obviously, was not Obama, notwithstanding what some of Obama’s advisers once wanted you to believe. Reagan was the Gipper, the Great Communicator, the father of Reaganomics, the scourge of the Evil Empire, the great conservative revivalist who, in retrospect at least, can do no wrong. And he was a mensch, the Jews will add, because no matter what he did to Israel and how often he did it, his heart was always in the right place.

And Obama? I mean, perhaps he’s failed in other matters, but by all accounts he’s been a great help to Israel in many security -related areas, he’s supported Israel in countless international forums, and even if he has made some bad mistakes, in comparison to Reagan’s often roughshod treatment of Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir, he’s a Zionist-loving pussycat, no?

That’s when your interlocutor will look you in the eye and sigh with a mix of scorn and pity. Yes, well, he’s a kalter Fisch, you know, a cold fish, he doesn’t “feel” for Israel like Reagan did, he didn’t want a photo-op with Bibi, he bowed his head before the Saudi king, his middle name is Hussein and, well, you know. We don’t have to spell it out.

Post a New Response

(1088470)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Olog-hai revises history, What about der Fuhrer Ronald Reagan???

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Jul 29 20:57:39 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Olog-hai revises history, What about der Fuhrer Ronald Reagan???, posted by rockparkman on Mon Jul 29 20:22:30 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Sure do ... it got played for weeks afterward when it happened, and for years ever since. I'll give him credit for scaring the shit out of the Russians and accelerating their bankruptcy, but that was already in progress before he took office. He DID speed it up a bit though.

Post a New Response

(1088471)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landsder'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Jul 29 20:59:46 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landsder'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center, posted by Fred G on Mon Jul 29 20:46:51 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Yeah, I still don't think any of our righties will read it. I've gotten to the point where I just link it and walk away. :)

Post a New Response

(1088473)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center

Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jul 29 21:26:48 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Olog-hai revises history, What about der Fuhrer Ronald Reagan???, posted by rockparkman on Mon Jul 29 20:22:30 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Knew you couldn't stand a subthread talking in defense of Jews, rocKKKparKKKnazi.

Post a New Response

(1088475)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Olog-hai revises history, What about der Fuhrer Ronald Reagan???

Posted by rockparkman on Mon Jul 29 21:27:38 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Olog-hai revises history, What about der Fuhrer Ronald Reagan???, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Jul 29 20:57:39 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Bankrupting the USSR was a good thing but the US is ALSO rapidly going under thanks ot der Furher's economic policies which should have been abandoned LONG AGO. Furthermore, German reunification IS a threat to the Jewish People.

Post a New Response

(1088476)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center

Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jul 29 21:29:49 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landsder'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center, posted by RockParkMan on Mon Jul 29 18:20:21 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Who said it was OK? You still stuck on stupid mode acting like Reagan is unassailable or unimpeachable?

If you're going to use this as a defense of Der Landser, you sure are stretching things really thin, rocKKKparKKKnazi. Reagan was not chancellor of Germany; this is happening today in Germany.

Post a New Response

(1088477)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center

Posted by rockparkman on Mon Jul 29 21:29:52 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jul 29 21:26:48 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Reagan enabled the Fourth Reich and established al Qaeda. The Right is NO FRIEND to the Jewish People.

Post a New Response

(1088478)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center

Posted by rockparkman on Mon Jul 29 21:31:41 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jul 29 21:29:49 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
The USS Ronald Reagan. Its name defiles its sailors. Scrap it.

Post a New Response

(1088479)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center

Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jul 29 21:31:53 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Olog-hai revises history, What about der Fuhrer Ronald Reagan???, posted by rockparkman on Mon Jul 29 21:27:38 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
LOL! You really saying that Obama's pushing Reagan's economic policies?

Never mind you being such a scumbag and putting words in my mouth that I didn't say, rocKKKparKKKNAZI.

Post a New Response

(1088480)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center

Posted by rockparkman on Mon Jul 29 21:33:02 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jul 29 21:31:53 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
I hope this place gives you a massive Coronary, ASSHOLE.

Post a New Response

(1088481)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center

Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jul 29 21:33:08 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center, posted by rockparkman on Mon Jul 29 21:31:41 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
I don't like DCA being named after Reagan either.

But this story is about Der Landser. In der Vaterland. Focus your brain.

Post a New Response

(1088482)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center

Posted by rockparkman on Mon Jul 29 21:35:47 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jul 29 21:33:08 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
You love Reagan. so STFU about Germany.

Post a New Response

(1088485)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Jul 29 21:39:28 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jul 29 21:31:53 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
And you're really saying that Obama made Gorby tear down that wall so Merkel could lead BOTH Germanys? How's that working out for you?

Post a New Response

(1088486)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Jul 29 21:41:46 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landser'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Jul 29 21:29:49 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Only because THIS happened when Reagan ruled:



Merkel was on the other side. She escaped.

Post a New Response

(1088522)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Olog-hai revises history, What about der Fuhrer Ronald Reagan???

Posted by SMAZ on Tue Jul 30 04:45:19 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Olog-hai revises history, What about der Fuhrer Ronald Reagan???, posted by SelkirkTMO on Mon Jul 29 20:57:39 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Too bad he bankrupted the US in the process.

Post a New Response

(1088523)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landsder'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center

Posted by SMAZ on Tue Jul 30 04:48:07 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) German mag ''Der Landsder'' revises history, provokes Wiesenthal Center, posted by Fred G on Mon Jul 29 20:46:51 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Reagan was just trying to put off The Rapture for a little longer.

Post a New Response

(1088630)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Olog-hai revises history, What about der Fuhrer Ronald Reagan???

Posted by SelkirkTMO on Tue Jul 30 14:55:08 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Olog-hai revises history, What about der Fuhrer Ronald Reagan???, posted by SMAZ on Tue Jul 30 04:45:19 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Details ... details ... patron saint nonetheless. :)

Post a New Response

(1091730)

view threaded

Netanyahu slaps EUEUEUEUEU over settlements directive: no Judea/Samaria, no contracts

Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Aug 8 23:56:07 2013, in response to Israel defense minister Ya'alon slaps EUEUEUEUEU over settlements directive, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Jul 27 02:14:34 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
INN

Netanyahu: No Judea and Samaria? No Contracts with Europe

Netanyahu clarifies that Israel will not sign contracts with Europe so long as it continues to boycott areas beyond the 1949 Armistice Line.

By Elad Benari
8/9/2013, 5:12 AM
In response to the European Union’s guidelines which forbid any contact with Israeli companies operating beyond the 1949 Armistice Line, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has clarified that Israel will not sign any contracts with Europe so long as the boycott of these regions continues.

Netanyahu met on Thursday to discuss the issue with Justice Minister Tzipi Livni, Economy Minister Naftali Bennett, Finance Minister Yair Lapid, Agriculture Minister Yair Shamir and Science and Technology Minister Yaakov Perry. Following the meeting, Netanyahu said, "Israel will not sign agreements with the EU, so long as the directive on the [pre-]1967 borders remains in effect."

During the discussion it was agreed that Israel will turn to the EU and seek to better understand the implications of the boycott. Jerusalem hopes the Europeans will become a bit more flexible on the wording of the statement that it plans to force Israeli companies to sign as part of future agreements with Europe.

Deputy Foreign Minister Zeev Elkin (Likud) explained to Army Radio the reasoning behind the government’s decision, saying, "We are very much interested in continuing this cooperation with Europe, but we cannot sign some of the new things that the Europeans are trying to add these agreements."

"Once they insist on the pre-1967 borders, we’re talking about very large part of Jerusalem, including Jerusalem-based high-tech enterprises, including very large companies. Under Europe’s proposed new operating method, many Israeli bodies that were not rejected before - will be disqualified."

Hundreds of legal experts from Israel and around the world have appealed to European Union Foreign Affairs Commissioner Catherine Ashton to annul the EU's plan.

The experts are noting that the decision does not have a legal basis, because, they argue, Judea and Samaria is not occupied territory in the legal sense of the term.

Israel has already taken some action in response to the boycott. Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon ordered the Coordinator of Government Activities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza to turn down any request by the European Union which relates to these regions.

Post a New Response

(1098409)

view threaded

(EUEUEUEUEU) AFP issues "mandatory kill" of "unflattering" photo of French president Hollande

Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 5 16:39:03 2013, in response to EUEUEUEUEU Olog, posted by RockParkMan on Sat Nov 12 14:58:17 2011.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Yahoo News — The Signal

AFP issues 'mandatory kill' order on 'unflattering' photo of French president

By Dylan Stableford
September 5, 2013 1:30 PM
Agence France-Presse has come under fire for issuing a "mandatory kill" order on a photograph of French President François Hollande it deemed "unflattering."

The photo, of Hollande marking "back to school" day in France, was taken by AFP photographer Denis Charlet and transmitted to the global news agency's clients on Tuesday. It quickly issued a request to its clients to delete the photo, leading to speculation that AFP was pressured by the French government to pull the image.

The agency, however, says it was an editorial decision, and not censorship.

"AFP has a rule not to transmit images that gratuitously ridicule people," AFP global news director Philippe Massonnet explained in a blog post. "The decision to publish each picture is based on its news or informational value. We never publish something purely for its shock value or to mock someone. Our photographers often catch public figures — at international conferences or waiting to give a speech, for instance — in unflattering but entirely human poses, such as with a finger in a nostril."

But Massonnet conceded that issuing a "mandatory kill order" was a bad decision — and drew more attention to the photo:
The editorial decision to retract the photo — while it seemed sound at the time — created more problems than it solved. In trying to “kill” the photo after it had already been transmitted, we actually drew more attention to it and fueled the suspicion that AFP had bowed to political pressure, thus causing some people to call into question the agency’s credibility.

The order to kill the photo ironically breathed new life into this saga, and led to the image being massively shared across social networks in France, often accompanied by unkind comments about AFP.

The picture is quite banal and far from being scandalous in itself. AFP publishes an average of 2,500 photos daily, and this one would probably have gone largely unnoticed if we hadn’t asked our clients to retract it.
Instead, it went viral.

Post a New Response

(1098412)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) AFP issues ''mandatory kill'' of ''unflattering'' photo of French president Hollande

Posted by AlM on Thu Sep 5 16:58:00 2013, in response to (EUEUEUEUEU) AFP issues "mandatory kill" of "unflattering" photo of French president Hollande, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 5 16:39:03 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
"AFP has a rule not to transmit images that gratuitously ridicule people,"

If true, that photo sure comes under the rule.

Post a New Response

(1098413)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) AFP issues ''mandatory kill'' of ''unflattering'' photo of French president Hollande

Posted by daNd124 on Thu Sep 5 17:08:02 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) AFP issues ''mandatory kill'' of ''unflattering'' photo of French president Hollande, posted by AlM on Thu Sep 5 16:58:00 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
you mean it's not evidence of Nazism in Germany or abortion causing hurricanes?

Post a New Response

(1104148)

view threaded

(EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for "psychological" reasons

Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 26 02:48:28 2013, in response to (EUEUEUEUEU) German court declares religious circumcision to be *criminal*, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Jun 28 21:05:34 2012.

fiogf49gjkf0d
The Local

Court bans circumcision over 'psychological' fears

Published: 26 Sep 2013 09:00 CET
A German court has forbidden a woman from having her six-year old son circumcised because of a risk of psychological damage. The decision comes a year after a similar ruling sparked an international outcry.

In July 2012, a court in Cologne said religious circumcision of male infants was tantamount to grievous bodily harm, a criminal act subject to prosecution — prompting furor around the world. In response, German lawmakers were forced to clarify that circumcision was legal.

But now a court in Hamm in North Rhine-Westphalia has said a woman was unfit to decide whether doctors performed the religious rite on her six-year-old child because she had not taken into account the psychological harm it would cause him, newspaper the Westdeutsche Allgemeine newspaper reported.

The unnamed woman from Dortmund, who is German-born but of Kenyan descent, wanted to have her son circumcised before visiting Kenya, where it is normal practice for baby boys at birth.

More than 80 percent of the Kenyan adult male population is circumcised. The woman had worried her son would not be accepted as a real man by his relatives there unless he had the operation.

The court said the 31-year-old mother was not fit to make the decision about the operation because neither child nor mother was aware of the risks involved in the procedure — including psychological harm, the newspaper reported.

"In this case there are substantial grounds to suggest that a circumcision sought by the child's mother would damage the psychological well-being of the six-year-old," wrote the higher regional court in Hamm in a ruling at the end of August published on Wednesday.

Potential harm could result from the mother's intention not to be present at the operation, said the court and the fact that the child had already been christened.

Such "damage" was not necessary and should not be allowed, particularly as both mother and child lived in Germany and only traveled to Kenya very rarely, the court said.

The decision upholds an earlier ruling by the family court in Dortmund suggesting the local youth welfare office should have the final say on the matter.

Last December, German lawmakers passed a law stating circumcision was legal as long as the child's health was not put at risk, and that the practitioner carried out the rite in accordance with medical standards.

Post a New Response

(1104229)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons

Posted by Dan Lawrence on Thu Sep 26 11:02:56 2013, in response to (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for "psychological" reasons, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 26 02:48:28 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Thank you for posting new crap.

Post a New Response

(1104231)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons

Posted by daNd124 on Thu Sep 26 11:04:32 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons, posted by Dan Lawrence on Thu Sep 26 11:02:56 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
hypocrite

Post a New Response

(1104242)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons

Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 26 11:17:59 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons, posted by Dan Lawrence on Thu Sep 26 11:02:56 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Thanks for more proof that you are an antisemite.

Post a New Response

(1104280)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons

Posted by Dan Lawrence on Thu Sep 26 12:04:41 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 26 11:17:59 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Go away stupid!!!

Post a New Response

(1104282)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons

Posted by streetcarman1 on Thu Sep 26 12:10:07 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons, posted by Dan Lawrence on Thu Sep 26 12:04:41 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
He can't.....1st he has to take his meds to realize that he's wrong in life.


photo cymbalta.jpg

Post a New Response

(1104398)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons

Posted by dand124 on Thu Sep 26 17:33:06 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons, posted by Dan Lawrence on Thu Sep 26 12:04:41 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
you first

Post a New Response

(1104413)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons

Posted by orange blossom special on Thu Sep 26 18:08:48 2013, in response to (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for "psychological" reasons, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Sep 26 02:48:28 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
I'm so bewildered by this whole tale, that i'm afraid it will cause a blog clot.

Post a New Response

(1104415)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons

Posted by Gamera on Thu Sep 26 18:21:20 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons, posted by Dan Lawrence on Thu Sep 26 11:02:56 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d

W A D L





Post a New Response

(1104440)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons

Posted by Dan Lawrence on Thu Sep 26 19:06:10 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons, posted by dand124 on Thu Sep 26 17:33:06 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Keep it up and Larry will find out!!@!

Post a New Response

(1104441)

view threaded

Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons

Posted by Dan Lawrence on Thu Sep 26 19:07:19 2013, in response to Re: (EUEUEUEUEU) Different German court puts ban on circumcision—now for ''psychological'' reasons, posted by Gamera on Thu Sep 26 18:21:20 2013.

fiogf49gjkf0d
Don't you start with the "WADL" stuff,

Post a New Response

First : << [21 22 23 24 25]

< Previous Page  

Page 21 of 25

Next Page >  


[ Return to the Message Index ]