Garden Party Invitation For Twins

against Yoani blogger? Cuba is not

www.rebelion.org Site Taken

Funny how the anti-Castro blog Yoani Sánchez and the hype that continues to give the newspaper El Pais . So funny, it is serving to let the world see that in a country where they say there is no freedom of expression a woman published every day what he wants without successor nothing. Did not have access to mass media on the island? Nor do we have other access to mass media in Spain. In addition, Yoani published using a blog on the Internet in which she hangs his articles, in which he denounced, among other things, that the Cubans have no Internet access.

On 25 March, Google accounted for in 40 / 2 "news media that complained that the Cuban authorities had blocked famous blog. The news was based only on the author's assertion that the Cubans could not access your blog because he had blocked the Cuban government. Did not we agree that the Cubans could not access the Internet? What will block you? The news was baseless, I called half a dozen friends in Havana and everyone could access your page, however a few weeks ago an entire ministry was two days without being able to use the Internet by a technical problem. Do they also blocked the Cuban government itself?

As Yoani criticizes what he wants in a country where they say you can not make criticisms and hangs his word every day in a blog in a country where they say they are prohibited from having Internet El Pais says now in his home June 21 that Fidel Castro of his last fights a battle against freedom of expression on the Internet "because he criticized an article in the famous blog. It took into the inside pages of the newspaper , read her husband's response to Fidel Castro, known for the umpteenth time that day the prize, remember Yoani texts that alienated the Cuban president, and finally, the fourth paragraph of the story we read inside Castro's attack on freedom of expression. It was in the prologue of a book on Bolivia and responded to the statement, "blogger" who claimed that there is opposition or have "political color" and that for his generation, the left and rights are "increasingly obsolete concepts." Castro replied: "We are serious allegations of this kind, immediately reported the mass of imperialism, but the generalization as their slogan, worse still, it has young Cubans who think this way, special envoys to conduct sabotage and press work neocolonial of ancient English metropolis that reward. " That is the modus operandi with the "dictator" and "repressive" freedoms attacks freedom of expression. Write that in the preface to a book, an eloquent example of the relentless fury with which the "Castro dictatorship" crushes raising his voice.

Of course, at such ferocity Yoani could only act in response to this example of feminism and maturity: "The feeling attacked by someone with power infinitely superior to mine, with more than twice my age and also, as my neighbors say the children-by a 'macho-male-male' I decided to be my husband who will respond. "

Names Of Parts Of A Pirate Ship

Connect me.

optical fiber ensures a broadband connection very secure, efficient and high capacity. Currently you can not conceive that the connectivity of a country is structured on the basis of satellite connections. Cuba does not have an efficient connectivity, much money is paid annually by a satellite connection that only provides the bandwidth equivalent to any American institution. That is a country of 12 million has a transfer rate comparable to that of a foreign school. Supposedly
Cuba citizens are deprived of full access to the Internet (which most evil government) all boast to say that ordinary citizens are deprived of this precious right, but what is being correctly accusing responsible? I think not, on many occasions we have tried to agree on access to the extensive network of fiber optic cables that we circulate, and always negative justification of illegal economic blockade against the island echoes to orders.
Who is responsible for the lack of access to the network of networks, Cuba, or the American blockade. Draw your own conclusions. Here I post images
cables around us, so close and we can not connect.

The owner of the information sent.

services

Other Names For Turquoise

justify human rights? Policy and Speed \u200b\u200b


Metapolítica

articles

By Eduardo Hernando Nieto

Recently I was cordially invited by a young (and not so) of the NGO "Transparency" to intervene in a discussion: with Professor Alessandro Caviglia, concerning the validity of human rights.
Since I had nothing to substantiate or prove - as to why there are those who worship them - Alessandro Caviglia started her argument [1] ruling out two options for foundation level that have accompanied particularly the legal discourse of human rights, namely, the argument of nature (read Locke for example) or the positivist argument (Bobbio, or Ferrajoli). Obviously, as Berlin would appeal to nature would allow the imposition of a totalitarian regime justified precisely on the weight of the nature of things (sic). Certainly, as a good liberal Kantian Caviglia then flatly rejected the "nature" as the foundation of human rights and then also leaves questions about the viability of the positivist argument would also lead behind a authoritarian tendencies (just recall the thesis of Hobbes or Bentham)
Then the options before the teacher Caviglia in this case were reduced to two, the intuitive argument and historical argument. In the first case, saying any reasonable person would have to recognize the advantages and correction of human rights, that is, considering that a society is just if it defends human rights than one who does not. The historical argument on their part would say that since the religious wars, until the French Revolution, the establishment of representative democracy, granting women's suffrage, etc., Etc., The world has evolved and human rights have consolidation, ie, that human history leads inevitably to that destination.
Obviously, it was difficult to find reasons that could challenge such claims, first I remembered that Robert Nozick in 'Anarchy, State and Utopia "(1974) also appealed to the same intuitive argument here is not to justify or Liberal Welfare State but rather a Libertarian state, ie that only minimal state as sacred property rights and market but flatly ruled out any social or economic right (probably the most desired by my friends and Caviglia Gamio)
On the other hand, the historical argument always turns into a double-edged sword because although you could say that there is a tendency that leads to the consolidation of human rights to the story is nothing to prevent further take other paths, ultimately, appeal to history is to fall as Strauss would mark the second wave of modern, romantic as that represented by Rousseau and Hegel those trying to overcome positivism and its affirmation of a truth only gave us more of a myriad of truths that could lead us to relativism [2] .
At this point it would be feasible to define and some preliminary conclusions:
1. None of the arguments seem solid enough to justify the reason the doctrine of human rights
2. If this is so then we could say that these are not rational
3. If they are not rational then they are:
4. I argue that they are basically an emotional and sentimental
product precisely, we can see an exaggerated passion in their supporters and some say maybe this is the new religion that corresponds to the "'last man', ie a man twilight dying civilization to the spiritual emptiness that has been submitted. Even as a liberal academic Michael Ignatieff speaks of human rights as idolatry to this attitude exhibited by activists and their high priests (the scholars who defend them) to take them as ends in themselves [3] .
The identification of human rights with the advent of "last man", is associated specifically with the demonstrated inability to not endure the pain and suffering [4] . Contemporary men defend human rights because they do not tolerate human suffering [5] , and is not that bad to show compassion, but the devil is in the abuse of it and intend to bring this attitude to all areas of human life, then considering the punishment makes no sense and should always reign comfort. I think finally after this cult of decadence is hidden the old problem of the denial of good and evil, fans Human rights do not believe in the merits of Evil (or Good), although they say they fight (for example, when embodied in a "human rights violators), if they believed in it then they could truly be tolerant for pain and suffering and could accept punishments for terrorists for example.

Since then an explosion of emotion we are confident that at some point could be diluted to the extent that human passions are also extremely volatile, of course, would have to appear before a new cult to replace him, maybe things are whatever comes could be even worse.
[1] This is Incidentally, there is then said she really would not have to sustain it were self-evident truths. (Sic)
[2] Indeed, cultural critics and communitarians to human rights is based on the historicist assumptions.
[3] Cf Michael Ignatieff, Human rights as politics and idolatry. Cambridge, Polity Press, 2003. Ignatieff is a Liberal close to the thought of Isaiah Berlin and think that human rights activists have the problem than as the freedoms and more positive when they point out that should only be taken as negative liberties.
[4] Recommended reading for my fellow liberals: Ernst Jünger, On Pain.
[5] Although this is also relative because I imagine if you enjoy the suffering of a "human rights violator"