Monday, 7 January 2013

UN ARTICLE 19: HUMAN RIGHTS AND HISTORY REVISIONISM


 This is important information to have access to.

Gilad Atzmon
January 2, 2013
.
An Introduction by Gabi Weber and Gilad Atzmon
.
UN Human Rights Committee, July 2011:
 General Comment on Article 19
~ Freedoms of Opinion and Expression

Just a few days ago we came across the following from the UN Human Rights Committee ~ an independent body tasked with supervising compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

The document, from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OCHR), dates from July 2011 and concerns freedom of opinion and expression. It states that
"anti-blasphemy laws and restrictions on criticism of governments are incompatible with existing norms and that free expression is essential for the protection of human rights."
This report, entitled General Comment, is an interpretation of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) ~ a covenant with 167 state signatories, signed and ratified also by Germany, France, Switzerland and other European countries.
 Crucial to the committee´s comments are the so-called “memory laws,” which it defined as "laws that penalize the expression of opinions about historical facts” and sees these laws as “incompatible with the obligations that the covenant imposes on States parties in relation to the respect for freedom of opinion and expression.” and goes on to say that,

“Freedom of expression is a necessary condition for the realization of the principles of transparency and accountability that are, in turn, essential for the promotion and protection of human rights”.
In spite of the significance of this document, it was not reported by any media outlet. 
Reading it makes it abundantly clear that governments and political organizations that prohibit the elementary right to present alternative historical accounts are in clear violation of the United Nations’ position on freedom of opinion and expression.

This obviously applies to Germany, France and Austria but it also applies to many 'progressive' organizations (Jewish and Non-Jewish) and individuals that are engaged in relentless harassment campaigns against dissent voices within the (Jewish and Non-Jewish) communities and beyond.   
 The document states clearly that
It is incompatible with paragraph 1 to criminalize the holding of an opinion. The harassment, intimidation or stigmatization of a person, including arrest, detention, trial or imprisonment for reasons of the opinions they may hold, constitutes a violation of article 19, paragraph 1.", and in the footnotes are references to many relevant cases.

Think about it.


Article 19
1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.

2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.

3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:
(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others;
(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.
Article 20
1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.

2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

GE.11-45331
Human Rights Committee
102nd session
Geneva, 11-29 July 2011
General comment No. 34

Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression

GENERAL REMARKS

1. This general comment replaces general comment No. 10 (nineteenth session).

2. Freedom of opinion and freedom of expression are indispensable conditions for the full development of the person. They are essential for any society. (1)

They constitute the foundation stone for every free and democratic society. The two freedoms are closely related, with freedom of expression providing the vehicle for the exchange and development of opinions.

3. Freedom of expression is a necessary condition for the realization of the principles of transparency and accountability that are, in turn, essential for the promotion and protection of human rights.

4. Among the other articles that contain guarantees for freedom of opinion and/or expression, are articles 18, 17, 25 and 27. The freedoms of opinion and expression form a basis for the full enjoyment of a wide range of other human rights. For instance, freedom of expression is integral to the enjoyment of the rights to freedom of assembly and association, and the exercise of the right to vote.

5. Taking account of the specific terms of article 19, paragraph 1, as well as the relationship of opinion and thought (article 18), a reservation to paragraph 1 would be incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant.(2)

Furthermore, although freedom of opinion is not listed among those rights that may not be derogated from pursuant to the provisions of article 4 of the Covenant, it is recalled that, “in those provisions of the Covenant that are not listed in article 4, paragraph 2, there are elements that in the Committee’s opinion cannot be made subject to lawful derogation under article 4”. (3)

Freedom of opinion is one such element, since it can never become necessary to derogate from it during a state of emergency. (4)

6. Taking account of the relationship of freedom of expression to the other rights in the Covenant, while reservations to particular elements of article 19, paragraph 2, may be acceptable, a general reservation to the rights set out in paragraph 2 would be incompatible with the object and purpose of the Covenant.(5)

7. The obligation to respect freedoms of opinion and expression is binding on every State party as a whole. All branches of the State (executive, legislative and judicial) and other public or governmental authorities, at whatever level ~ national, regional or local ~ are in a position to engage the responsibility of the State party. (6)

Such responsibility may also be incurred by a State party under some circumstances in respect of acts of semi-State entities. (7)

The obligation also requires States parties to ensure that persons are protected from any acts by private persons or entities that would impair the enjoyment of the freedoms of opinion and expression to the extent that these Covenant rights are amenable to application between private persons or entities.(8)

8. States parties are required to ensure that the rights contained in article 19 of the Covenant are given effect to in the domestic law of the State, in a manner consistent with the guidance provided by the Committee in its general comment No. 31 on the nature of the general legal obligation imposed on States parties to the Covenant.

It is recalled that States parties should provide the Committee, in accordance with reports submitted pursuant to article 40, with the relevant domestic legal rules, administrative practices and judicial decisions, as well as relevant policy level and other sectorial practices relating to the rights protected by article 19, taking into account the issues discussed in the present general comment. They should also include information on remedies available if those rights are violated.

Freedom of opinion
9. Paragraph 1 of article 19 requires protection of the right to hold opinions without interference. This is a right to which the Covenant permits no exception or restriction. Freedom of opinion extends to the right to change an opinion whenever and for whatever reason a person so freely chooses. No person may be subject to the impairment of any rights under the Covenant on the basis of his or her actual, perceived or supposed opinions. All forms of opinion are protected, including opinions of a political, scientific, historic, moral or religious nature. It is incompatible with paragraph 1 to criminalize the holding of an opinion. (9)

The harassment, intimidation or stigmatization of a person, including arrest, detention, trial or imprisonment for reasons of the opinions they may hold, constitutes a
violation of article 19, paragraph 1. (10)

10. Any form of effort to coerce the holding or not holding of any opinion is prohibited. (11)

Freedom to express one’s opinion necessarily includes freedom not to express one’s opinion.

Freedom of expression
11. Paragraph 2 requires States parties to guarantee the right to freedom of expression, including the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds regardless of frontiers.

This right includes the expression and receipt of communications of every form of idea and opinion capable of transmission to others, subject to the provisions in article 19, paragraph 3, and article 20. (12)

It includes political discourse, (13) commentary on one’s own (14) and on public affairs, (15) canvassing, (16) discussion of human rights, (17) journalism, (18) cultural and artistic expression, (19) teaching, (20) and religious discourse. (21)

It may also include commercial advertising. The scope of paragraph 2 embraces even expression that may be regarded as deeply offensive, (22) although such expression may be restricted in accordance with the provisions of article 19, paragraph 3 and article 20.

12. Paragraph 2 protects all forms of expression and the means of their dissemination. Such forms include spoken, written and sign language and such non-verbal expression as images and objects of art. (23)

Means of expression include books, newspapers, (24) pamphlets, (25) posters, banners, (26) dress and legal submissions. (27)

They include all forms of audio-visual as well as electronic and internet-based modes of expression.

Freedom of expression and the media
13. A free, uncensored and unhindered press or other media is essential in any society to ensure freedom of opinion and expression and the enjoyment of other Covenant rights. It constitutes one of the cornerstones of a democratic society. (28)

The Covenant embraces a right whereby the media may receive information on the basis of which it can carry out its function. (29)

The free communication of information and ideas about public and political issues between citizens, candidates and elected representatives is essential. This implies a free press and other media able to comment on public issues without censorship or restraint  and to inform public opinion. (30)

The public also has a corresponding right to receive media output. (31)

14. As a means to protect the rights of media users, including members of ethnic and linguistic minorities, to receive a wide range of information and ideas, States parties should take particular care to encourage an independent and diverse media.

15. States parties should take account of the extent to which developments in information and communication technologies, such as internet and mobile based electronic information dissemination systems, have substantially changed communication practices around the world. There is now a global network for exchanging ideas and opinions that does not necessarily rely on the traditional mass media intermediaries. States parties should take all necessary steps to foster the independence of these new media and to ensure access of individuals thereto.

16. States parties should ensure that public broadcasting services operate in an independent manner. (32)

In this regard, States parties should guarantee their independence and editorial freedom. They should provide funding in a manner that does not undermine their independence.

17. Issues concerning the media are discussed further in the section of this general comment that addresses restrictions on freedom of expression.

Right of access to information
18. Article 19, paragraph 2 embraces a right of access to information held by public bodies. Such information includes records held by a public body, regardless of the form in which the information is stored, its source and the date of production. Public bodies are as indicated in paragraph 7 of this general comment. The designation of such bodies may also include other entities when such entities are carrying out public functions. As has already been noted, taken together with article 25 of the Covenant, the right of access to information includes a right whereby the media has access to information on public affairs (33) and the right of the general public to receive media output. (34)

Elements of the right of access to information are also addressed elsewhere in the Covenant. As the Committee observed in its general comment No. 16, regarding article 17 of the Covenant, every individual should have the right to ascertain in an intelligible form, whether, and if so, what personal data is stored in automatic data files, and for what purposes. Every individual should also be able to ascertain which public authorities or private individuals or bodies control or may control his or her files. If such files contain incorrect personal data or have been collected or processed contrary to the provisions of the law, every individual should have the right to have his or her records rectified. Pursuant to article 10 of the Covenant, a prisoner does not lose the entitlement to access to his medical records. (35)

The Committee, in general comment No. 32 on article 14, set out the various entitlements to information that are held by those accused of a criminal offence. (36)

Pursuant to the provisions of article 2, persons should be in receipt of information regarding their Covenant rights in general. (37) Under article 27, a State party’s decision-making that may substantively compromise the way of life and culture of a minority group should be undertaken in a process of information-sharing and consultation with affected communities. (38)
.
19. To give effect to the right of access to information, States parties should proactively put in the public domain Government information of public interest. States parties should make every effort to ensure easy, prompt, effective and practical access to such information. States parties should also enact the necessary procedures, whereby one may gain access to information, such as by means of freedom of information legislation. (39)
 
The procedures should provide for the timely processing of requests for information according to clear rules that are compatible with the Covenant. Fees for requests for information should not be such as to constitute an unreasonable impediment to access to information. Authorities should provide reasons for any refusal to provide access to information. Arrangements should be put in place for appeals from refusals to provide access to information as well as in cases of failure to respond to requests.

Freedom of expression and political rights
20. The Committee, in general comment No. 25 on participation in public affairs and the right to vote, elaborated on the importance of freedom of expression for the conduct of public affairs and the effective exercise of the right to vote. The free communication of information and ideas about public and political issues between citizens, candidates and elected representatives is essential. This implies a free press and other media able to comment on public issues and to inform public opinion without censorship or restraint. (40)

The attention of States parties is drawn to the guidance that general comment No. 25
provides with regard to the promotion and the protection of freedom of expression in that context.
.
The application of article 19 (3)
21. Paragraph 3 expressly states that the exercise of the right to freedom of expression carries with it special duties and responsibilities. For this reason two limitative areas of restrictions on the right are permitted, which may relate either to respect of the rights or reputations of others or to the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public) or of public health or morals. However, when a State party imposes restrictions on the exercise of freedom of expression, these may not put in jeopardy the right itself. The Committee recalls that the relation between right and restriction and between norm and exception must not be reversed. (41)
 
The Committee also recalls the provisions of article 5, paragraph 1, of the Covenant according to which “nothing in the present Covenant may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms recognized herein or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the present Covenant”.

22. Paragraph 3 lays down specific conditions and it is only subject to these conditions that restrictions may be imposed: the restrictions must be “provided by law”; they may only be imposed for one of the grounds set out in sub-paragraphs (a) and (b) of paragraph 3; and they must conform to the strict tests of necessity and proportionality. (42)

Restrictions are not allowed on grounds not specified in paragraph 3, even if such grounds would justify restrictions to other rights protected in the Covenant. Restrictions must be applied only for those purposes for which they were prescribed and must be directly related to the specific need on which they are predicated. (43)

23. States parties should put in place effective measures to protect against attacks aimed at silencing those exercising their right to freedom of expression. Paragraph 3 may never be invoked as a justification for the muzzling of any advocacy of multi-party democracy, democratic tenets and human rights (44).

Nor, under any circumstance, can an attack on a person, because of the exercise of his or her freedom of opinion or expression, including such forms of attack as arbitrary arrest, torture, threats to life and killing, be compatible with article 19. (45)

Journalists are frequently subjected to such threats, intimidation and attacks because of their activities. (46)

So too are persons who engage in the gathering and analysis of information on the human rights situation and who publish human rights-related reports, including judges and lawyers. (47)

All such attacks should be vigorously investigated in a timely fashion, and the perpetrators prosecuted, (48) and the victims, or, in the case of killings, their representatives, be in receipt of appropriate forms of redress. (49)

24. Restrictions must be provided by law. Law may include laws of parliamentary privilege (50) and laws of contempt of court. (51)

Since any restriction on freedom of expression constitutes a serious curtailment of human rights, it is not compatible with the Covenant for a restriction to be enshrined in traditional, religious or other such customary law. (52)

25. For the purposes of paragraph 3, a norm, to be characterized as a “law”, must be formulated with sufficient precision to enable an individual to regulate his or her conduct accordingly (53) and it must be made accessible to the public. A law may not confer unfettered discretion for the restriction of freedom of expression on those charged with its execution. (54)

Laws must provide sufficient guidance to those charged with their execution to enable them to ascertain what sorts of expression are properly restricted and what sorts are not.

26. Laws restricting the rights enumerated in article 19, paragraph 2, including the laws referred to in paragraph 24, must not only comply with the strict requirements of article 19, paragraph 3 of the Covenant but must also themselves be compatible with the provisions, aims and objectives of the Covenant. (55)

Laws must not violate the non-discrimination provisions of the Covenant. Laws must not provide for penalties that are incompatible with the Covenant, such as corporal punishment. (56)

27. It is for the State party to demonstrate the legal basis for any restrictions imposed on freedom of expression. (57)

If, with regard to a particular State party, the Committee has to consider whether a particular restriction is imposed by law, the State party should provide details of the law and of actions that fall within the scope of the law. (58)

28. The first of the legitimate grounds for restriction listed in paragraph 3 is that of respect for the rights or reputations of others. The term “rights” includes human rights as recognized in the Covenant and more generally in international human rights law. For example, it may be legitimate to restrict freedom of expression in order to protect the right to vote under article 25, as well as rights article under 17 (see para. 37).(59) Such restrictions must be constructed with care: while it may be permissible to protect voters from forms of expression that constitute intimidation or coercion, such restrictions must not impede political debate, including, for example, calls for the boycotting of a non-compulsory vote. (60)

The term “others” relates to other persons individually or as members of a community. (61)

Thus, it may, for instance, refer to individual members of a community defined by its religious faith (62) or ethnicity. (63)

29. The second legitimate ground is that of protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.

30. Extreme care must be taken by States parties to ensure that treason laws (64) and similar provisions relating to national security, whether described as official secrets or sedition laws or otherwise, are crafted and applied in a manner that conforms to the strict requirements of paragraph 3. It is not compatible with paragraph 3, for instance, to invoke such laws to suppress or withhold from the public information of legitimate public interest that does not harm national security or to prosecute journalists, researchers, environmental activists, human rights defenders, or others, for having disseminated such information. (65)

Nor is it generally appropriate to include in the remit of such laws such categories of information as those relating to the commercial sector, banking and scientific progress. (66)

The Committee has found in one case that a restriction on the issuing of a statement in support of a labour dispute, including for the convening of a national strike, was not permissible on the grounds of national security. (67)

31. On the basis of maintenance of public order (ordre public) it may, for instance, be permissible in certain circumstances to regulate speech-making in a particular public place. (68)

Contempt of court proceedings relating to forms of expression may be tested against the public order (ordre public) ground. In order to comply with paragraph 3, such proceedings and the penalty imposed must be shown to be warranted in the exercise of a court’s power to maintain orderly proceedings. (69)

Such proceedings should not in any way be used to restrict the legitimate exercise of defence rights.

32. The Committee observed in general comment No. 22, that “the concept of morals derives from many social, philosophical and religious traditions; consequently, limitations… for the purpose of protecting morals must be based on principles not deriving exclusively from a single tradition”. Any such limitations must be understood in the light of universality of human rights and the principle of non-discrimination

33. Restrictions must be “necessary” for a legitimate purpose. Thus, for instance, a prohibition on commercial advertising in one language, with a view to protecting the language of a particular community, violates the test of necessity if the protection could be achieved in other ways that do not restrict freedom of expression. (70)

On the other hand, the Committee has considered that a State party complied with the test of necessity when it transferred a teacher who had published materials that expressed hostility toward a religious community to a non-teaching position in order to protect the right and freedom of children of that faith in a school district. (71)

34. Restrictions must not be overbroad. The Committee observed in general comment No. 27 that “restrictive measures must conform to the principle of proportionality; they must be appropriate to achieve their protective function; they must be the least intrusive instrument amongst those which might achieve their protective function; they must be proportionate to the interest to be protected…The principle of proportionality has to be respected not only in the law that frames the restrictions but also by the administrative and judicial authorities in applying the law”. (72)

The principle of proportionality must also take account of the form of expression at issue as well as the means of its dissemination. For instance, the value placed by the Covenant upon uninhibited expression is particularly high in the circumstances of public debate in a democratic society concerning figures in the public and political domain. (73)

35. When a State party invokes a legitimate ground for restriction of freedom of expression, it must demonstrate in specific and individualized fashion the precise nature of the threat, and the necessity and proportionality of the specific action taken, in particular by establishing a direct and immediate connection between the expression and the threat. (74)

36. The Committee reserves to itself an assessment of whether, in a given situation, there may have been circumstances which made a restriction of freedom of expression necessary. (75)

In this regard, the Committee recalls that the scope of this freedom is not to be assessed by reference to a “margin of appreciation” (76) and in order for the Committee to carry out this function, a State party, in any given case, must demonstrate in specific fashion the precise nature of the threat to any of the enumerated grounds listed in paragraph 3 that has caused it to restrict freedom of expression. (77)

Limitative scope of restrictions on freedom of expression in certain specific areas

37. Among restrictions on political discourse that have given the Committee cause for concern are the prohibition of door-to-door canvassing, (78) restrictions on the number and type of written materials that may be distributed during election campaigns, (79) blocking access during election periods to sources, including local and international media, of political commentary, (80) and limiting access of opposition parties and politicians to media outlets. (81)

Every restriction should be compatible with paragraph 3. However, it may be legitimate for a State party to restrict political polling imminently preceding an election in order to maintain the integrity of the electoral process. (82)

38. As noted earlier in paragraphs 13 and 20, concerning the content of political discourse, the Committee has observed that in circumstances of public debate concerning public figures in the political domain and public institutions, the value placed by the Covenant upon uninhibited expression is particularly high. (83)

Thus, the mere fact that forms of expression are considered to be insulting to a public figure is not sufficient to justify the imposition of penalties, albeit public figures may also benefit from the provisions of the Covenant. (84)

Moreover, all public figures, including those exercising the highest political authority such as heads of state and government, are legitimately subject to criticism and political opposition. (85)

Accordingly, the Committee expresses concern regarding laws on such matters as, lese majesty, (86) desacato, (87) disrespect for authority, (88) disrespect for flags and symbols, defamation of the head of state (89) and the protection of the honour of public officials, (90) and laws should not provide for more severe penalties solely on the basis of the identity of the person that may have been impugned. States parties should not prohibit criticism of institutions, such as the army or the administration. (91)

39. States parties should ensure that legislative and administrative frameworks for the regulation of the mass media are consistent with the provisions of paragraph 3. (92)

Regulatory systems should take into account the differences between the print and broadcast sectors and the internet, while also noting the manner in which various media converge. It is incompatible with article 19 to refuse to permit the publication of newspapers and other print media other than in the specific circumstances of the application of paragraph 3. Such circumstances may never include a ban on a particular publication unless specific content, that is not severable, can be legitimately prohibited under paragraph 3. States parties must avoid imposing onerous licensing conditions and fees on the broadcast media, including on community and commercial stations. (93)

The criteria for the application of such conditions and licence fees should be reasonable and objective, (94) clear, (95) transparent, (96) nondiscriminatory and otherwise in compliance with the Covenant. (97)

Licensing regimes for broadcasting via media with limited capacity, such as audiovisual terrestrial and satellite services should provide for an equitable allocation of access and frequencies between public, commercial and community broadcasters. It is recommended that States parties that have not already done so should establish an independent and public broadcasting licensing authority, with the power to examine broadcasting applications and to grant licenses. (98)

40. The Committee reiterates its observation in general comment No. 10 that “because of the development of modern mass media, effective measures are necessary to prevent such control of the media as would interfere with the right of everyone to freedom of expression”. The State should not have monopoly control over the media and should promote plurality of the media. (99)

Consequently, States parties should take appropriate action, consistent with the Covenant, to prevent undue media dominance or concentration by privately controlled media groups in monopolistic situations that may be harmful to a diversity of sources and views.

41. Care must be taken to ensure that systems of government subsidy to media outlets and the placing of government advertisements (100) are not employed to the effect of impeding freedom of expression. (101)

Furthermore, private media must not be put at a disadvantage compared to public media in such matters as access to means of dissemination/distribution and access to news. (102)

42. The penalization of a media outlet, publishers or journalist solely for being critical of the government or the political social system espoused by the government (103) can never be considered to be a necessary restriction of freedom of expression.

43. Any restrictions on the operation of websites, blogs or any other internet-based, electronic or other such information dissemination system, including systems to support such communication, such as internet service providers or search engines, are only permissible to the extent that they are compatible with paragraph 3. Permissible restrictions generally should be content-specific; generic bans on the operation of certain sites and systems are not compatible with paragraph 3. It is also inconsistent with paragraph 3 to prohibit a site or an information dissemination system from publishing material solely on the basis that it may be critical of the government or the political social system espoused by the government. (104)

44. Journalism is a function shared by a wide range of actors, including professional full-time reporters and analysts, as well as bloggers and others who engage in forms of self publication in print, on the internet or elsewhere, and general State systems of registration or licensing of journalists are incompatible with paragraph 3. Limited accreditation schemes are permissible only where necessary to provide journalists with privileged access to certain places and/or events. Such schemes should be applied in a manner that is nondiscriminatory and compatible with article 19 and other provisions of the Covenant, based on objective criteria and taking into account that journalism is a function shared by a wide range of actors.

45. It is normally incompatible with paragraph 3 to restrict the freedom of journalists and others who seek to exercise their freedom of expression (such as persons who wish to travel to human rights-related meetings) (105) to travel outside the State party, to restrict the entry into the State party of foreign journalists to those from specified countries (106) or to restrict freedom of movement of journalists and human rights investigators within the State party (including to conflict-affected locations, the sites of natural disasters and locations where there are allegations of human rights abuses). States parties should recognize and respect that element of the right of freedom of expression that embraces the limited journalistic privilege not to disclose information sources. (107)

46. States parties should ensure that counter-terrorism measures are compatible with paragraph 3. Such offences as “encouragement of terrorism” (108) and “extremist activity” (109) as well as offences of “praising”, “glorifying”, or “justifying” terrorism, should be clearly defined to ensure that they do not lead to unnecessary or disproportionate interference with freedom of expression. Excessive restrictions on access to information must also be avoided. The media plays a crucial role in informing the public about acts of terrorism and its capacity to operate should not be unduly restricted. In this regard, journalists should not be penalized for carrying out their legitimate activities.

47. Defamation laws must be crafted with care to ensure that they comply with paragraph 3, and that they do not serve, in practice, to stifle freedom of expression. (110)

All such laws, in particular penal defamation laws, should include such defences as the defence of truth and they should not be applied with regard to those forms of expression that are not, of their nature, subject to verification. At least with regard to comments about public figures, consideration should be given to avoiding penalizing or otherwise rendering unlawful untrue statements that have been published in error but without malice. (111)

In any event, a public interest in the subject matter of the criticism should be recognized as a defence. Care should be taken by States parties to avoid excessively punitive measures and penalties. Where relevant, States parties should place reasonable limits on the requirement for a defendant to reimburse the expenses of the successful party. (112)

States parties should consider the decriminalization of defamation (113) and, in any case, the application of the criminal law should only be countenanced in the most serious of cases and imprisonment is never an appropriate penalty. It is impermissible for a State party to indict a person for criminal defamation but then not to proceed to trial expeditiously ~ such a practice has a chilling effect that may unduly restrict the exercise of freedom of expression of the person concerned and others. (114)

48. Prohibitions of displays of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system, including blasphemy laws, are incompatible with the Covenant, except in the specific circumstances envisaged in article 20, paragraph 2, of the Covenant. Such prohibitions must also comply with the strict requirements of article 19, paragraph 3, as well as such articles as 2, 5, 17, 18 and 26. Thus, for instance, it would be impermissible for any such laws to discriminate in favour of or against one or certain religions or belief systems, or their adherents over another or religious believers over non-believers. Nor would it be permissible for such prohibitions to be used to prevent or punish criticism of religious leaders or commentary on religious doctrine and tenets of faith. (115)

49. Laws that penalize the expression of opinions about historical facts are incompatible with the obligations that the Covenant imposes on States parties in relation to the respect for freedom of opinion and expression. (116)

The Covenant does not permit general prohibition of expressions of an erroneous opinion or an incorrect interpretation of past events. 

Restrictions on the right of freedom of opinion should never be imposed and, with regard to freedom of expression, they should not go beyond what is permitted in paragraph 3 or required under article 20.

The relationship between articles 19 and 20
50. Articles 19 and 20 are compatible with and complement each other. The acts that are addressed in article 20 are all subject to restriction pursuant to article 19, paragraph 3. As such, a limitation that is justified on the basis of article 20 must also comply with article 19, paragraph 3. (117)

51. What distinguishes the acts addressed in article 20 from other acts that may be subject to restriction under article 19, paragraph 3, is that for the acts addressed in article 20, the Covenant indicates the specific response required from the State: their prohibition by law. It is only to this extent that article 20 may be considered as lex specialis with regard to article 19.

52. It is only with regard to the specific forms of expression indicated in article 20 that States parties are obliged to have legal prohibitions. In every case in which the State restricts freedom of expression it is necessary to justify the prohibitions and their provisions in strict conformity with article 19.


NOTES: 
(1) See communication No. 1173/2003, Benhadj v. Algeria, Views adopted on 20 July 2007; No. 628/1995, Park v. Republic of Korea, Views adopted on 5 July 1996.

(2) See the Committee’s general comment No. 24 (1994) on issues relating to reservations made upon ratification or accession to the Covenant or the Optional Protocols thereto, or in relation to the declarations under article 41 of the Covenant, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fiftieth Session, Supplement No. 40, vol. I (A/50/40 (Vol. I)), annex V.

(3) See the Committee’s general comment No. 29 (2001) on derogation during a state of emergency, para. 13, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 40, vol. I (A/56/40 (Vol. I)), annex VI.

(4) General comment No. 29, para. 11.

(5) General comment No. 24.

(6) See the Committee’s general comment No. 31 (2004) on the nature of the general legal obligation imposed on States parties to the Covenant, para. 4, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifty ninth Session, Supplement No. 40, vol. I (A/59/40 (Vol. I)), annex III

(7) See communication No. 61/1979, Hertzberg et al. v. Finland, Views adopted on 2 April 1982.

(8) General comment No. 31, para. 8; See communication No. 633/1995, Gauthier v. Canada, Views adopted on 7 April 1999.

(9) See communication No. 550/93, Faurisson v. France, Views adopted on 8 November 1996.
CCPR/C/GC/34

(10) See communication No. 157/1983, Mpaka-Nsusu v. Zaire, Views adopted on 26 March 1986; No. 414/1990, Mika Miha v. Equatorial Guinea, Views adopted on 8 July 1994.

(11) See communication No. 878/1999, Kang v. Republic of Korea, Views adopted on 15 July 2003.

(12) See communications Nos. 359/1989 and 385/1989, Ballantyne, Davidson and McIntyre v. Canada, Views adopted on 18 October 1990.

(13) See communication No. 414/1990, Mika Miha v. Equatorial Guinea.

(14) See communication No. 1189/2003, Fernando v. Sri Lanka, Views adopted on 31 March 2005.

(15) See communication No. 1157/2003, Coleman v. Australia, Views adopted on 17 July 2006.

(16) Concluding observations on Japan (CCPR/C/JPN/CO/5).

(17) See communication No. 1022/2001, Velichkin v. Belarus, Views adopted on 20 October 2005.

(18) See communication No. 1334/2004, Mavlonov and Sa’di v. Uzbekistan, Views adopted on 19 March 2009.

(19) See communication No. 926/2000, Shin v. Republic of Korea, Views adopted on 16 March 2004.

(20) See communication No. 736/97, Ross v. Canada, Views adopted on 18 October 2000.

(21) Ibid.

(22) Ibid.

(23) See communication No. 926/2000, Shin v. Republic of Korea.

(24) See communication No. 1341/2005, Zundel v. Canada, Views adopted on 20 March 2007.

(25) See communication No. 1009/2001, Shchetoko et al. v. Belarus, Views adopted on 11 July 2006.

(26) See communication No. 412/1990, Kivenmaa v. Finland, Views adopted on 31 March 1994.

(27) See communication No. 1189/2003, Fernando v. Sri Lanka.

(28) See communication No. 1128/2002, Marques v. Angola, Views adopted on 29 March 2005.
(29) See communication No. 633/95, Gauthier v. Canada.

(30) See the Committee’s general comment No. 25 (1996) on article 25 (Participation in public affairs and the right to vote), para. 25, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifty-first Session, Supplement No. 40, vol. I (A/51/40 (Vol. I)), annex V.

(31) See communication No. 1334/2004, Mavlonov and Sa’di v. Uzbekistan.

(32) Concluding observations on Republic of Moldova (CCPR/CO/75/MDA).

(33) See communication No. 633/95, Gauthier v. Canada.

(34) See communication No. 1334/2004, Mavlonov and Sa’di v. Uzbekistan.

(35) See communication No. 726/1996, Zheludkov v. Ukraine, Views adopted on 29 October 2002.

(36) See the Committee’s general comment No. 32 (2007) on the right to equality before courts and tribunals and to a fair trial, para. 33, Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-second Session, Supplement No. 40, vol. I (A/62/40 (Vol. I)), annex VI

(37) General comment No. 31.

(38) See communication No. 1457/2006, Poma v. Peru, Views adopted on 27 March 2009.

(39) Concluding observations on Azerbaijan (CCPR/C/79/Add.38 (1994)).

(40) See General comment No. 25 on article 25 of the Covenant, para. 25.

(41) See the Committee’s general comment No. 27 on article 12, Official Records of the General
Assembly, Fifty-fifth Session, Supplement No. 40, vol. I (A/55/40 (Vol. I)), annex VI, sect. A

(42) See communication No. 1022/2001, Velichkin v. Belarus, Views adopted on 20 October 2005.

(43) See the Committee’s general comment No. 22, Official Records of the General Assembly, Forty eighth Session, Supplement No. 40 (A/48/40), annex VI

(44) See communication No. 458/91, Mukong v. Cameroon, Views adopted on 21 July 1994.

(45) See communication No. 1353/2005, Njaru v. Cameroon, Views adopted on 19 March 2007.

(46) See, for instance, concluding observations on Algeria (CCPR/C/DZA/CO/3); concluding observations on Costa Rica (CCPR/C/CRI/CO/5); concluding observations on Sudan (CCPR/C/SDN/CO/3).

(47) See communication No. 1353/2005, Njaru v. Cameroon ; concluding observations on Nicaragua (CCPR/C/NIC/CO/3); concluding observations on Tunisia (CCPR/C/TUN/CO/5); concluding observations on the Syrian Arab Republic (CCPR/CO/84/SYR); concluding observations on Colombia (CCPR/CO/80/COL).

(48) Ibid. and concluding observations on Georgia (CCPR/C/GEO/CO/3).

(49) Concluding observations on Guyana (CCPR/C/79/Add.121).

(50) See communication No. 633/95, Gauthier v. Canada.

(51) See communication No. 1373/2005, Dissanayake v. Sri Lanka, Views adopted on 22 July 2008.

(52) See general comment No. 32.

(53) See communication No. 578/1994, de Groot v. The Netherlands, Views adopted on 14 July 1995.

(54) See general comment No. 27.

(55) See communication No. 488/1992, Toonen v. Australia, Views adopted on 30 March 1994.

(56) General comment No. 20, Official Records of the General Assembly, Forty-seventh Session, Supplement No. 40 (A/47/40), annex VI, sect. A.

(57) See communication No. 1553/2007, Korneenko et al. v. Belarus, Views adopted on 31 October 2006.

(58) See communication No. 132/1982, Jaona v. Madagascar, Views adopted on 1 April 1985.

(59) See communication No. 927/2000, Svetik v. Belarus, Views adopted on 8 July 2004.

(60) Ibid.

(61) See communication No. 736/97, Ross v. Canada, Views adopted on 18 October 2000.

(62) See communication No. 550/93, Faurisson v. France; concluding observations on Austria (CCPR/C/AUT/CO/4).

(63) Concluding observations on Slovakia (CCPR/CO/78/SVK); concluding observations on Israel (CCPR/CO/78/ISR).

(64) Concluding observations on Hong Kong (CCPR/C/HKG/CO/2).

(65) Concluding observations on the Russian Federation (CCPR/CO/79/RUS).

(66) Concluding observations on Uzbekistan (CCPR/CO/71/UZB).

(67) See communication No. 518/1992, Sohn v. Republic of Korea, Views adopted on 18 March 1994.

(68) See communication No. 1157/2003, Coleman v. Australia.

(69) See communication No. 1373/2005, Dissanayake v. Sri Lanka.

(70) See communication No. 359, 385/89, Ballantyne , Davidson and McIntyre v. Canada.

(71) See communication No. 736/97, Ross v. Canada, Views adopted on 17 July 2006.

(72) General comment No. 27, para. 14. See also Communications No. 1128/2002, Marques v. Angola; No. 1157/2003, Coleman v. Australia.

(73) See communication No. 1180/2003, Bodrozic v. Serbia and Montenegro, Views adopted on 31 October 2005.

(74) See communication No. 926/2000, Shin v. Republic of Korea.

(75) See communication No. 518/1992, Sohn v. Republic of Korea.

(76) See communication No. 511/1992, Ilmari Länsman, et al. v. Finland, Views adopted on 14 October 1993.

(77) See communications Nos. 518/92, Sohn v. Republic of Korea; No. 926/2000, Shin v. Republic of Korea.

(78) Concluding observations on Japan (CCPR/C/JPN/CO/5).

(79) Ibid.

(80) Concluding observations on Tunisia (CCPR/C/TUN/CO/5).

(81) Concluding observations on Togo (CCPR/CO/76/TGO); concluding observations on Moldova (CCPR/CO/75/MDA).

(82) See communication No. 968/2001, Kim v. Republic of Korea, Views adopted on 14 March 1996.

(83) See communication No. 1180/2003, Bodrozic v. Serbia and Montenegro, Views adopted on 31 October 2005.

(84) Ibid.

(85) See communication No. 1128/2002, Marques v. Angola.

(86) See communications Nos. 422-424/1990, Aduayom et al. v. Togo, Views adopted on 30 June 1994.

(87) Concluding observations on the Dominican Republic (CCPR/CO/71/DOM).

(88) Concluding observations on Honduras (CCPR/C/HND/CO/1).

(89) See concluding observations on Zambia (CCPR/ZMB/CO/3), para.25.

(90) See concluding observations on Costa Rica (CCPR/C/CRI/CO/5), para. 11.

(91) Ibid., and see concluding observations on Tunisia (CCPR/C/TUN/CO/5), para. 91.

(92) See concluding observations on Viet Nam (CCPR/CO/75/VNM), para. 18 and including observations on Lesotho (CCPR/CO/79/Add.106), para. 23.

(93) Concluding observations on Gambia (CCPR/CO/75/GMB).

(94) See concluding observations on Lebanon (CCPR/CO/79/Add.78), para. 25.

(95) Concluding observations on Kuwait (CCPR/CO/69/KWT); concluding observations on Ukraine (CCPR/CO/73/UKR).

(96) Concluding observations on Kyrgyzstan (CCPR/CO/69/KGZ).

(97) Concluding observations on Ukraine (CCPR/CO/73/UKR).

(98) Concluding observations on Lebanon (CCPR/CO/79/Add.78).

(99) See concluding observations on Guyana (CCPR/CO/79/Add.121), para. 19; concluding observations on the Russian Federation (CCPR/CO/79/RUS); concluding observations on Viet Nam (CCPR/CO/75/VNM); concluding observations on Italy (CCPR/C/79/Add. 37).

(100) See concluding observations on Lesotho (CCPR/CO/79/Add.106), para. 22.

(101) Concluding observations on Ukraine (CCPR/CO/73/UKR).

(102) Concluding observations on Sri Lanka (CCPR/CO/79/LKA); and see concluding observations on Togo (CCPR/CO/76/TGO), para. 17.

(103) Concluding observations on Peru (CCPR/CO/70/PER).

(104) Concluding observations on the Syrian Arab Republic (CCPR/CO/84/SYR).

(105) Concluding observations on Uzbekistan (CCPR/CO/83/UZB); concluding observations on Morocco (CCPR/CO/82/MAR).

(106) Concluding observations on Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (CCPR/CO/72/PRK).

(107) Concluding observations on Kuwait (CCPR/CO/69/KWT).

(108) Concluding observations on the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
(CCPR/C/GBR/CO/6).

(109) Concluding observations on the Russian Federation (CCPR/CO/79/RUS).

(110) Concluding observations on the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
(CCPR/C/GBR/CO/6).

(111) Ibid.

(112) Ibid.

(113) Concluding observations on Italy (CCPR/C/ITA/CO/5); concluding observations on the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (CCPR/C/MKD/CO/2).

(114) See communication No. 909/2000, Kankanamge v. Sri Lanka, Views adopted on 27 July 2004.

(115) Concluding observations on the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland-the Crown Dependencies of Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man (CCPR/C/79/Add.119). See also concluding observations on Kuwait (CCPR/CO/69/KWT).

(116) So called “memory-laws”, see communication No. , No. 550/93, Faurisson v. France. See also concluding observations on Hungary (CCPR/C/HUN/CO/5) paragraph 19.

(117) See communication No. 736/1997, Ross v. Canada, Views adopted on 18 October 2000. 

1 comment:

  1. Fuck the U.N and fuck the kenite rothschilds too.

    ReplyDelete

Please. No spam. No hate spewing. Religious quotations not so much. If your comment is not posted, it was deemed offensive.

QUOTES BY JEWS

“The Talmud is to this day the circulating heart’s blood of the Jewish religion. Whatever laws, customs or ceremonies we observe – whether we are Orthodox, Conservative, Reform or merely spasmodic sentimentalists – we follow the Talmud. It is our common law.” ~ Herman Wouk

WISE WORDS AND WARNINGS OF WICKEDNESS


"If [Jews] are as wise as they claim to be, they will labour to make Jews American, instead of labouring to make America Jewish. The genius of the United States of America is Christian in the broadest sense, and its destiny is to remain Christian. This carries no sectarian meaning with it, but relates to a basic principle which differs from other principles in that it provides for liberty with morality, and pledges society to a code of relations based on fundamental Christian conceptions of human rights and duties." ~ Henry Ford

“It doesn’t even enter their heads to build up a Jewish state in Palestine for the purpose of living there; all they want is a central organization for their international world swindle, endowed with its own sovereign rights and removed from the intervention of other states: a haven for convicted scoundrels and a university for budding crooks.” ~ Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Chapter 11

**********

The real God of the Universe does not have “Chosen” in the first place because he is perfect as we understand and predilection is a human weakness. The Jews invented the OT to fool humanity as always. The real God of the Universe does not send any body to kill, destroy his own creation, to rape, to maim, to create misery and havoc on other people. Don’t you get it? the God in the OT is a monster, is another one of the many Gods in the dessert, those sacrifices offered to God are Satanic as their name and the Jews keep offering sacrifices to their God. Last year they immolated thousands of human beings in Gaza to their God Baal, Moloch, Azazel, Satan, Lucifer. ~Isaas, TUT

**********

"I had been asked to sign a pledge for Israel when I first became a candidate for Congress and after refusing to do so my congressional career became trench warfare, hand to hand combat just to remain in the congress.


Ever since my refusal to sign that pledge for Israel the pro-Israel lobby let me know that my political net was in the hangman's noose it was the pro-Israel lobby they decided to tighten that noose." ~ Cynthia McKinney

**********

"Himself a Jew, Marx has around him, in London and France, but especially in Germany, a multitude of more or less clever, scheming, agile, speculating Jews ~ such as Jews are everywhere: commercial or banking agents, writers, politicians, reporters for newspapers of all shades, with one foot in the bank and the other in the socialist movement, and with their arses sitted upon the German daily press ~ they have taken possession of all the newspapers ~ and you can imagine what kind of sickening literature they produce. Now, this entire Jewish world, which glut a single profiteering sect, a nation of blooksuckers, a single gluttonous parasite closely and intimately interlinked not only across national borders, but across all differences of political opinion ~ this Jewish world today stands for the most part at the disposal of Marx and, at the same time, at the disposal of Rothschild.

**********

This may seem strange. What can there be in common between Communism and the largest banks? Ho-ho! The Communism of Marx seeks an enormous centralization of the state, and where such exists, there must inevitably be a central state bank, and where such a bank exists, the parasitic Jewish nation, which profiteers from the labour of others, will always find a way to prevail. In reality, for the proletariat, this would be a barrack regime, under which the working men and the working women, converted into a uniform mass, would rise, fall asleep, work, and live at the beat of the drum." ~ Bakunin (1814-1876)

**********

“We entered the synagogue, which was packed with the greatest stinking bunch of humanity I have ever seen. When we got about halfway up, the head rabbi, who was dressed in a fur hat similar to that worn by Henry VIII of England and in a surplice heavily embroidered and very filthy, came down and met the General (Eisenhower)...The smell was so terrible that I almost fainted and actually about three hours later lost my lunch as the result remembering it." ~ General Patton in Germany, diary entry Sept 17, 1945
**********

The U.S. Congress officially recognized the Noahide Laws in legislation that was passed by both houses. Congress and the President of the U. S., George Bush, indicated in Public Law 102-14, 102nd Congress, that the United States of America was founded upon the Seven Universal Laws of Noah, and that these Laws have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization. They also acknowledged that the Seven Laws of Noah are the foundation upon which civilization stands and that recent weakening of these principles threaten the fabric of civilized society, and that justified preoccupation in educating the Citizens of the U.S. of America and future generations is needed. For this purpose, this Public Law designated March 26, 1991 as Education Day.”
**********

Marxism, to which all branches of Socialism necessarily adhere, was originated by Jew Karl Marx, himself of rabbinical descent and has been dominated by them from the beginning. Marx did not actually originate anything; he merely “streamlined” Talmudism for Gentile consumption.” ~ Elizabeth Dilling

**********
Every time anyone says that Israel is our only friend in the Middle East, I can’t help but think that before Israel, we had no enemies in the Middle East.” ~ Fr. John Sheehan, S.J.

**********

The cruel canard ‘anti-Semitic’ does not apply for many reasons, not the least of which is the simple fact that the slanderous word itself is derived from language games for purposes of propaganda and in real world context has no validity. ~ Tom Valentine

**********

Follow the path of the unsafe, independent thinker.

Expose your ideas to the dangers of controversy.

Speak your mind and fear less the label of 'crackpot'

than the stigma of conformity.

And on issues that seem important to you,

Stand up and be counted at any cost.

~ Thomas J Watson (1874-1956)

**********

'There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. The business of the Journalist is to destroy truth; to lie outright; to pervert; to vilify; to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals for rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.' ~ John Swinton, former Chief of Staff, The New York Times, 1953

**********

WHAT TALMUDICS THINK

Historically, Jews had always thrived in nations and empires with multicultural, pluralistic and tolerant environments, while they fared badly in strong ethnic or nationalistic societies. European Jews have always been the emblematic stranger or ‘other’. Therefore, by definition, a society where the stranger is welcome is good for the Jews, although they have not always appreciated this link. The future of European Jewry is dependent on our ability to shape a multicultural, pluralistic and diverse society. ~ Göran Rosenberg, Jewish author and journalist

**********

American Jews are committed to cultural tolerance because of their belief ~ one firmly rooted in history ~ that Jews are safe only in a society acceptant of a wide range of attitudes and behaviors, as well as a diversity of religious and ethnic groups. It is this belief, for example, not approval of homosexuality, that leads an overwhelming majority of U.S. Jews to endorse ‘gay rights’ and to take a liberal stance on most other so-called ‘social’ issues. ~ Charles Silberman, Jewish writer and journalist

**********

The Jew … Judaizes … he provokes religious indifference, but he also imposes on those whose faith he destroys, his own concept of the world, of morality, and of human life. The Jews detests the spirit of the nation in the midst of which they live. ~ Bernard Lazare

**********

We will legally define the Talmud as the basis of the Israeli legal system. ~ Benjamin Netanyahu

**********

"Anti-Communism is Antisemitism." ~ Jewish Voice, July ~ August 1941.

**********

We Jews, we, the destroyers, will remain the destroyers forever. Nothing that you will do will meet our needs and demands. We will forever destroy because we need a world of our own. ~ Maurice Samuels, You Gentiles. 1942.

**********

According to the Talmud...."...When the serpent came unto Eve, he infused filthy lust in her (but) when Israel stood on Sinai, that lust was eliminated" ~ Talmud, Abodah Zarah 22b

**********

As monstrous as it may seem, we are engaged in close combat between Israel and the Nations ~ and it can only be genocidal and total because it is about our and their identities. ~ Yitzhak Attia, Israel Magazine, April 2003

**********

"Some may call it Communism, but I call it what it is: Judaism." ~ Rabbi Stephen Weiss.

**********

It was hard for Satan alone to mislead the whole world, so he appointed prominent rabbis in different localities. ~ A Chasidic saying attributed to Nahman of Bratzlav, early 19th century

**********

It is our duty to force all mankind to accept the seven Noahide laws, and if not ~ they will be killed." ~ Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg

**********

"The Jews are called human beings, but the non-Jews are not humans. They are beasts." ~ Talmud: Baba mezia, 114b
**********

"The Akum (non-Jew) is like a dog. Yes, the scripture teaches to honor the the dog more than the non-Jew." ~ Ereget Raschi Erod. 22 30
**********

"Even though God created the non-Jew they are still animals in human form. It is not becoming for a Jew to be served by an animal. Therefore he will be served by animals in human form." ~ Midrasch Talpioth, p. 255, Warsaw 1855
**********

Dear World, "I understand that you are upset by us here in Israel. Indeed, it appears you are very upset, even angry. So…it is because we became so upset over upsetting you, dear world, that we decided to leave you ~ and establish a Jewish State.” ~ Rabbi Meir Kahane, 1988

**********

"A pregnant non-Jew is no better than a pregnant animal." ~ Coschen hamischpat 405
**********

"The souls of non-Jews come from impure sprits and are called pigs." ~ Jalkut Rubeni gadol 12b
**********

"Although the non-Jew has the same body structure as the Jew, they compare with the Jew like a monkey to a human." ~ Schene luchoth haberith, p. 250 b
**********

"If you eat with a Gentile, it is the same as eating with a dog." ~ Tosapoth, Jebamoth 94b
**********

"If a Jew has a non-Jewish servant or maid who dies, one should not express sympathy to the Jew. You should tell the Jew: "God will replace 'your loss', just as if one of his oxen or asses had died." ~ Jore dea 377, 1

**********

"Sexual intercourse between Gentiles is like intercourse between animals." ~ Talmud Sanhedrin 74b

**********

"It is permitted to take the body and the life of a Gentile." ~ Sepher ikkarim III c 25
**********

"It is the law to kill anyone who denies the Torah. The Christians belong to the denying ones of the Torah." ~ Coschen hamischpat 425 Hagah 425. 5
**********

"A heretic Gentile you may kill outright with your own hands." ~ Talmud, Abodah Zara, 4b
**********

"Every Jew, who spills the blood of the godless (non-Jews), is doing the same as making a sacrifice to God." ~ Talmud: Bammidber raba c 21 & Jalkut 772

**********

Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity. The goal of abolishing the white race is on its face so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed white supremacists. ~ Noel Ignatiev, Harvard Magazine, Sep-Oct 2002

**********

We intend to keep bashing the dead white males, and the live ones, and the females too, until the social construct known as ‘the white race’ is destroyed, not ‘deconstructed’ but destroyed.

Even if reason tells us, even shouts with all its force the very absurdity of this confrontation between the small and insignificant people of Israel [i.e., all Jewry worldwide, not just “the State of Israel”] and the rest of humanity… as absurd, as incoherent and as monstrous as it may seem, we are engaged in close combat between Israel and the Nations ~ and it can only be genocidal and total because it is about our and their identities. ~ Yitzhak Attia, Israel Magazine, April 2003

**********

Any trial based on the assumption that Jews and goyim are equal is a total travesty of justice. ~ Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg, June 6, 1989:

**********

REVENGE OF THE JEWISH RABBIS OF SPAIN
In 1492 CE, Chemor, chief Rabbi of Spain, wrote to the Grand Sanhedrin, which had its seat in Constantinople, for advice, when a Spanish law threatened expulsion (after the fall of Muslim rule in spain).

This was the reply:

” Beloved brethren in Moses, we have received your letter in which you tell us of the anxieties and misfortunes which you are enduring. We are pierced by as great pain to hear it as yourselves. The advice of the Grand Satraps and Rabbis is the following:

1. As for what you say that the King of Spain obliges you to become Christians: do it, since you cannot do otherwise.
2. As for what you say about the command to despoil you of your property: make your sons merchants that they may despoil, little by little, the Christians of theirs.
3. As for what you say about making attempts on your lives: make your sons doctors and apothecaries, that they may take away Christians’ lives.
4. As for what you say of their destroying your synagogues: make your sons canons and clerics in order that they may destroy their churches. [Emphasis mine]
5. As for the many other vexations you complain of: arrange that your sons become advocates and lawyers, and see that they always mix in affairs of State, that by putting Christians under your yoke you may dominate the world and be avenged on them.
6. Do not swerve from this order that we give you, because you will find by experience that, humiliated as you are, you will reach the actuality of power.

(Signed) PRINCE OF THE JEWS OF CONSTANTINOPLE.”
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----
The reply is found in the sixteenth century Spanish book, La Silva Curiosa, by Julio-Iniguez de Medrano (Paris, Orry, 1608), on pages 156 and 157, with the following explanation: “This letter following was found in the archives of Toledo by the Hermit of Salamanca, (while) searching the ancient records of the kingdoms of Spain; and, as it is expressive and remarkable, I wish to write it here.” ~ vide, photostat facing page 80. ~ The above was quoted from Waters Flowing Eastward by Paquita de Shishmareff, pp. 73-74

**********

“[1] When the Lord your God brings you into the land that you are about to enter and occupy, and he clears away many nations before you ~ the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations mightier and more numerous than you – [2] and when the Lord your God gives them over to you and you defeat them, then you must utterly destroy them. Make no covenant with them and show them no mercy” (Deut 7:1-2).

**********

"Compassion towards the wicked is really wickedness. It is along these lines that Rabbi Levi opened his speech in honor of Purim: (Talmud, Megillah, 11a): "If you do not uproot the inhabitants of the Land, and allow them to remain - they will become thorns in your sides, and will cause trouble for you in the Land in which you dwell." (Bamidbar 33:55) The mitzvah, then of wiping out Amalek [Palestinians], actually stems from the value of compassion and kindness - compassion on all those whom Amalek threatens to exterminate. This mitzvah is an ongoing one, and valid even today. Today, too, there are those - driven by a deep-seeded anti-Semitism - who desperately wish to kill us. These are the people whom the Torah commanded us to obliterate, to leave no memory of them." ~ Rabbi Zalman Baruch Melamed

**********

Nachman Abramovic demonized Palestinian children stating: “They may look young to you, but these people are terrorists at heart. Don’t look at their deceptively innocent faces, try to think of the demons inside each of them. I am absolutely certain these people would grow to be evil terrorists if we allowed them to grow. Would you allow them to grow to kill your children or finish them off right now? Honest and moral people ought to differentiate between true humans and human animals. We do kill human animals and we do so unapologetically. Besides, who in the West is in a position to lecture us on killing human animals. After all, whose hands are clean?”

**********

"Wars are the Jews’ harvest, for with them we wipe out the Christians and get control of their gold. We have already killed 100 million of them, and the end is not yet." ~ Chief Rabbi in France, in 1859, Rabbi Reichorn

**********

"The Communist soul is the soul of Judaism. Hence it follows that, just as in the Russian revolution the triumph of Communism was the triumph of Judaism, so also in the triumph of fascism will triumph Judaism." ~ Rabbi Harry Waton, A Program for the Jews and Humanity, p. 143-144

**********

If a Jew is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there. ~ Moed Kattan 17a

**********

The Jewish people as a whole will become its own Messiah. It will attain world domination by the dissolution of other races, by the abolition of frontiers, the annihilation of monarchy and by the establishment of a world republic in which the Jews will everywhere exercise the privilege of citizenship. In this New World Order, the “children of Israel” will furnish all the leaders without encountering opposition. The governments of the different peoples forming the world republic will fall without difficulty into the hands of the Jews. It will then be possible for the Jewish rulers to abolish private property and everywhere to make use of the resources of the state. Thus will the promise of the Talmud be fulfilled in which it is said that when the Messianic time is come, the Jews will have all the property of the whole world in their hands. ~ Baruch Levy in a letter to Karl Marx.

**********

"My opinion of Christian Zionists? They're scum, but don't tell them that. We need all the useful idiots we can get right now." ~ Bibi Netanyahu

**********

It was hard for Satan alone to mislead the whole world, so he appointed prominent rabbis in different localities. ~ A Chasidic saying attributed to Nahman of Bratzlav, early 19th century

**********

Gentiles exist only to serve Jews as slaves. Goyim were only born to serve us. Without that they have no place in the world. Only to serve the people of Israel. Why are gentiles needed? They are only here to work. They will work, they will plow. They will reap. We will sit like effendi and eat. That is why gentiles were created,” Rabbi Yosef, Sha Party, Jerusalem Post, 2011

**********

"An example of the use of the Jewish code words Esau and Jacob is found in a sermon preached by Rabbi Leon Spitz during the Purim observances in 1946 (quoted here from the American Hebrew of March 1, 1946) : "Let Esau whine and wail and protest to the civilized world, and let Jacob raise his hand to fight the good fight. The anti-Semite . . . understands but one language, and he must be dealt with on his own level. The Purim Jews stood up for their lives. American Jews, too. must come to grips with our contemporary anti-Semites. We must fill our jails with anti-Semitic gangsters. We must fill our insane asylums with anti-Semitic lunatics. We must combat every alien. Jew-hater. We must Harass and prosecute our Jew-baiters to the extreme limits of the laws. We must humble and shame our anti-Semitic hoodlums to such an extent that none will wish or dare to become (their) 'fellow-travelers'.

**********

This is what Trotsky, a Jew, was preparing for the Russians for the implementation of Communism, which Marx based on the Babylonian Talmud for Gentiles:

"We should turn Her (Russia) into a desert populated with white Niggers. We will impose upon them such a tyranny that was never dreamt by the most hideous despots of the East. The peculiar trait of that tyranny is that it will be enacted from the left rather than the right and it will be red rather than white in color.

Its color will be red literally because we would spill such torrents of blood that they will pale all human losses of the capitalist wars and make the survivors shudder.

**********

Remember my children, that all the earth must belong to us Jews, and that the gentiles, being mere excrements of animals, must possess nothing. ~ Mayer Amschel Rothschild on his deathbed, 1812

**********

The largest overseas banks will cooperate with us most closely. If we win the Revolution and squash Russia, on the funeral pyres of its remains we will strengthen the power of Zionism and become a power the whole world would drop in the face of on its knees. We will show the world what real power means.

By way of terror and blood baths we will bring the Russian intelligentsia into a state of total stupor, to idiocy, to the animal state of being. So far our young men dressed in leather ~ the sons of watch repair men from Odessa and Orsha, Gomel and Vinnitza ~ oh, how beautifully, how brilliantly do they master hatred of everything Russian! With what a great delight do they physically destroy the Russian intelligentsia ~ officers, engineers, teachers, priests, generals, agronomists, academicians, writers!" ~ Secret Forces in History of Russia. U.K. Begunov 1995, p 148

**********

One of the finest things ever done by the mob was the Crucifixion of Christ. Intellectually it was a splendid gesture. But trust the mob to bungle the job. If I’d had charge of executing Christ, I’d have handled it differently. You see, what I’d have done was had him shipped to Rome and fed him to the lions. They could never have made a saviour out of mincemeat!”~ Rabbi Ben Hecht

**********

The only reason that Jews are in pornography is that we think that Christ sucks. Catholicism sucks.”~ Al Goldstein (publisher of Screw Magazine).

**********

"The difference between a Jewish soul and souls of non-Jews ~ all of them in all different levels ~ is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle." ~ Rabbi Kook, the Elder, father of the messianic tendency of Jewish fundamentalism, said

**********

"You have not begun to appreciate the depth of our guilt. We are intruders. We are subverters. We have taken your natural world, your ideals, your destiny, and played havoc with them. We have been at the bottom of not merely the latest Great War, but of every other major revolution in your history.

We have brought discord and confusion and frustration into your personal and public life. We are still doing it. No one can tell how long we shall go on doing it. Who knows what great and glorious destiny might have been yours if we had left you alone." ~ Marclis Eli Ravage, Century Magazine February, 1926.

**********

"The United Nations is nothing but a trap-door to the Red World's immense concentration camp. We pretty much control the U.N." ~ Harold Wallace Rosenthal, Zionist, The Hidden Tyranny

**********

Very soon, every American will be required to register their biological property (that’s you and your children) in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a charge back for our fiat paper currency.

Every American will be forced to register or suffer being able to work and earn a living. They will be our chattels (property) and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading (Birth Certificate) to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, secured by their pledges.

They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two should figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability.

After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debts to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges. This will inevitably reap us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud, which we will call “Social Insurance.”

Without realizing it, every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and we will employ the high office (presidency) of our dummy corporation (USA) to foment this plot against America.” ~ American traitor, the Jew Edward Mandell House giving a very detailed outline of the New World Order plans that were to be implemented gradually over time to enslave the American people ... A PLAN THAT HAS BEEN REPEATED IN CANADA, AUSTRALIA, BRITAIN AND ELSEWHERE.

*******

"You throw a little Jewish on top of that, you got trouble. You got a bunch of wild, crazy energy.

"Sorry that doesn't sound hippie. Sorry that doesn't sound like communal jubilant fun. Sorry I'm not a Pepper. Sorry I didn't pop out of a soda-pop ad, and life is just one big fucking cabaret, because a lot of what propelled Van Halen, what compels me and propels me is precisely this element. It's fury. If you approach me with anti-Semetic preconceptions, I'm not here to re-educate. I come from a whole different school of thought. If you don't get it on the first try, fuck you.

"I once heard somebody say to the Van Halens, "You guys play the music; the Jew sells it." Well, you're fucking right. And now that I'm gone, Van Halen stinks. Okay?

"Want to know why some of my contributions to Van Halen sound like they do? Didn't come from a smiling place in my soul. Not at all.

"Nobody ever said to Mick Jagger, "So, Mick, you're Episcopalian, aren't you?" Nobody ever took Jimi Hendrix aside and said, "So, Jimi, you're a Baptist, aren't you?" Much less start off the interview that way.

"Every step I took on that stage was smashing some Jew-hating, lousy punk ever deeper into the deck. Every step. I jumped higher 'cause I knew there was going to be more impact when I hit those boards. And if you were even vaguely anti-Semetic, you were under my wheels, motherfucker. That's where the lyrics came from, that's where the body language came from, that's where the humor came from, and where the fuck you came from. All equally as important. You want to know the ingredients? Don't ask if you don't want to know.

"What you get from repression and what you get from hatred is fury, and fury was one of the main trigger points for the great Van Halen. What you see now is a bunch of buffoons waddling around at the family barbecue, and their wives admonishing the children saying, "Don't worry, Daddy's just had a few too many Coors Lights and he's imitating what he used to do for a living when he played music, honey."

"What's missing is the testosterone. What's missing is the fury. What's missing is the passionate convicted commitment. And I got a lot of mine from my religious background. So y'all best stop imagining the way Dr. Zorba looked, or some defenseless Hasidic Jew with a little yarmulke on his head, 'cause that ain't here for you." ~ David Lee Roth

**********

Rabbi Isaac Wise, in The Israelite of America writes, “Masonry is a Jewish institution whose history, degrees, charges, passwords, and explanations are Jewish from beginning to end

**********

“We infiltrated the Roman Catholic Church right from the very beginning. Why do you think the Pope, the Cardinals and all the Bishops wear yarlmulkahs? (skullcaps) The white race never figures this out. A thousand years later the white race began to wake up ... we had to come up with a plan B ... so we formed the Jesuits. There was a nice boy, Ignatius Loyola. He started the Jesuits.” (Loyola was Jewish. Research/read the Jesuit Extreme Oath) Regarding the Jesuits, quoting Rabbi Finkelstein

**********

Does worship of the Talmud pervade Judaism globally? Herman Wouk, Orthodox Jew and famed author of The Cain Mutiny, affirms, “The Talmud is to this day the circulating heart’s blood of the Jewish religion. Whatever laws, customs, ceremonies we observe ~ whether we are Orthodox, Reform,Conservative, or merely spasmodic sentimentalists ~ we follow the Talmud. It is our common law.”

**********
From Jews Must Liveby Samuel Roth, pg. 22. “The organ is diseased. This disease is a sort of moral gonorrhea known as Judaism, which, alas, seems to be incurable. If you have any doubts, look at any Jew ridden country in Europe. If you need to be further convinced, take a look at what is happening in the United States.”

*******

“Every synagogue we Jews build in a Christian country is a finger of scorn we point at our hosts; a sore finger we stick into their eyes, like the leering of a senile old woman who does all sorts of foul mischief before you, and feels safe in the knowledge that you will not lay hands on her for fear of contamination.” ibid., pg.

*******

Sen. Al Franken: One of the widely disseminated stories was that no Jews died in the collapse of the Trade Towers because they had received calls telling them not to go to work that day.

To tell you the truth, I got the Jew call. I had an office in the Trade Center where I used to do most of my writing. The call came from former New York mayor Ed Koch. “Al,” he told me, “don’t go to work on the twenty-third day of Elul [September 11, 2001.].”


*******

Tell me, do the evil men of this world have a bad time? They hunt and catch whatever they feel like eating. They don’t suffer from indigestion and are not punished by Heaven. I want Israel to join that club. Maybe the world will then at last begin to fear us…Maybe they will start to tremble, to fear our madness instead of admiring our nobility. Let them tremble, let them call us a mad state. Let them understand that we are a wild country, dangerous to our surroundings, not normal, that we might go crazy, that we might go wild and burn all the oil fields in the Middle East, or that we might start World War Three just like that. ~ Ariel Sharon