Italian families rally for tradition
By Deepa Babington
REUTERS NEWS AGENCYMay 13, 2007

ROME -- Hundreds of thousands of Italians rallied in a church square yesterday to protest a proposed law that would give greater rights to unmarried couples, including homosexuals.

The draft legislation has divided Italy's ruling coalition, angered the powerful Roman Catholic Church and stirred passionate debate.

Waving banners and dancing to tambourines and trumpets, more than 500,000 people poured into the square outside Rome's St. John Lateran cathedral to support traditional family values based on marriage between a man and a woman.

A large cardboard wedding cake with a bride and groom on top stood next to the stage, while nuns, parents and children chanted "Long live the family."

A host of conservative politicians, including former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and some members of current Prime Minister Romano Prodi's government, showed up, after days of speculation and debate over who would and should attend.

"The family is in danger because the more freedom and options you allow in creating other unions outside the natural family made of a husband and a wife with children, the more society itself dissolves," said one participant, William Bergamini.

The rally's organizers -- a consortium of largely Catholic groups -- handed out millions of flyers and plastered lampposts and walls with posters in a publicity blitz before the event that ensured a strong turnout. Not far away at Piazza Navona, hundreds gathered at a counterdemonstration to support rights for homosexual couples, egged on by tourists.

Counterdemonstrators sang along to popular music, waved communist flags and held banners that read "Family Day -- No thanks, Family Gay" and "Benedict XVI ... Century," referring to Pope Benedict, who has exhorted Catholic lawmakers to oppose homosexual "marriage."

The large turnout at Family Day was expected to embarrass Mr. Prodi, whose government sponsored the bill to give more rights to unmarried couples in practical matters like welfare and inheritance.

The bill was immediately attacked by the church, which sees it as an assault on family values by the left and a "Trojan horse" that could ultimately usher in civil marriage ceremonies for homosexuals.

Members of Mr. Prodi's government, such as Justice Minister Clemente Mastella, also came out swinging against the bill, and the Family Day rally has become the latest issue to expose divisions within the Catholics-to-communists coalition.

Mr. Mastella and Education Minister Giuseppe Fiorini ignored a fellow minister's plea to avoid the rally as a matter of correctness, while European Affairs Minister Emma Bonino turned up at the "Secular Courage" counterdemonstration.

Mr. Prodi, a practicing Catholic, was in Stuttgart, Germany, yesterday and urged Italians to avoid fighting like the "Guelphs and Ghibellines" -- rival Italian factions that fought in the 12th and 13th centuries.

"We must not manipulate religion," Mr. Prodi told Italian radio. "In all modern countries, secularists and Catholics live together."

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20070513-121559-6781r.htm


\\ religion is something that is spreaded all over the world, and something most people uphold. as the article suggests, the issue of public protesting to give more rights to homosexuality angered the powerful Roman Catholic Church. from this, we cansee that european countries are still dominated by the Church.

the last statement, "We must not manipulate religion," Mr. Prodi told Italian radio. "In all modern countries, secularists and Catholics live together.", implied the government's attitude on the whole issue, that they still choose to respect and put the Church in high position on top of the people's protests.

i believe there is the existence of such thing as the 'family', comprising of father, mother (that is a man and woman) and child, and definitely not two people of the same sex playing the roles for two sexes. there should be control to prevent more 'deformation' in the organising of a family that is entirely possible in the future. who knows there will be three parents, or a web of complicated mother cum grandmother relationships? (although this is true for certain tribes) we have to exercise the rightful education on the public tolet them know the importance of forming a natural family and stop the expansion of 'abnormal' relationships.



May 10, 2007
Watchdog Organization Battles Bogus Online Defamation Case

Internet Forum Shielded by Federal Law Protecting Free Speech

Washington, D.C. - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of the National Capital Area has asked a Washington, D.C., court to dismiss claims against a nonprofit watchdog organization and its operators, arguing that federal law and the First Amendment protect them from liability in a defamation lawsuit.

DCWatch is a government watchdog organization run by Dorothy Brizill and Gary Imhoff to monitor Washington, D.C., city politics and public affairs. DCWatch's website, www.dcwatch.com, publishes articles and columns on local politics. Themail@dcwatch.com is an online newsletter and discussion forum devoted to reporting, analysis and commentary on local issues, past editions of which are archived on the DCWatch site.

In articles printed in themail@dcwatch.com, Washington journalist Jonetta Rose Barras reported that Roslyn Johnson, then Deputy Director of Programs for the D.C. Department of Parks and Recreation, had inflated her employment and salary history to secure her position. A subsequent formal investigation by the D.C. Inspector General concluded that Johnson did in fact submit an inflated resume and was improperly hired for her position. But in a lawsuit filed earlier this year, Johnson claims that these articles were defamatory, placed her in a false light, and resulted in the termination of her employment with the city. In addition to suing reporter Barras, she also sued DCWatch and its operators, claiming that their Internet publication of these articles made them responsible for their content.

EFF and the ACLU of the National Capital Area filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, pointing out that DCWatch and its operators are shielded by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which expressly protects providers or users of interactive computer services from liability in order to encourage robust debate in online discussions. The motion also urged the court to dismiss Johnson's claims, because the First Amendment protects statements about public officials that are substantially true.

"The Internet has played host to a renaissance of political speech, facilitating discussion on issues of local, national, and international importance," said EFF Staff Attorney Marcia Hofmann. "It's important that judges resist attempts by public officials to shut down online debate just because they don't like the speech."

Courts throughout the country have recognized the critical role Section 230 plays in enabling open discourse on the Internet and have shielded website operators from liability for comments made by others.

"The case against DCWatch must be dismissed. Congress has given online publications absolute immunity for claims based on third-party articles," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl. "An Internet intermediary should not be liable for what the speaker has said."

"This is a concept that should be expanded into all media: books, newspapers, radio and television," said Arthur Spitzer, Legal Director of the ACLU of the National Capital Area. "A speaker or writer should be responsible for his or her words. A bookstore or newsstand should not be responsible for the content of what it distributes."

http://www.eff.org/news/


\\ newspaper, internet, television- few of the most common and popular medium of communication and information exchange. any news or contents that appeared in them will be taken 'for real' and acts as an influence to the public. if adequate control is not exercised on these publications, inappropriate news may cause unrest among the public.

the definition of free speech is then questioned here in this article- to what extend is the law of 'free speech'? in countries like USA and Singapore, citizens are granted the freedom of free speech, and as the internet technologies progress, more and more people apply this privilege on blogging and website holding. however, this freedom is not always good as bloggers tend to forget who they are addressing or criticising, and often land themselves in deep soup, with the government suing them for some other violations found in some other parts of the law. So now the problem comes, what do we uphold, freedom or control?

this is not an easy task for the government as well. a win-win situation is even harder to achieve, and definitely not all needs can be fulfilled. to prevent bloggers or critics from offending any parts against the law, guidelines should be provided to the public, stating clearly what and what the public should followand what they should avoid.



Rainforest destruction in Africa
11 April 2007


Children sit on logs in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. An area of rainforest five times the size of Belgium has been allocated to the logging industry since 2002.






Left I on the News: CONVENTIONAL "WISDOM" ON IRAQ

A lot of people, politicians and pundits and "regular" people, take the attitude that "we" just can't leave Iraq, because we'll be abandoning the Iraqi people to chaos, and the occupation is the only thing preventing that from happening. This is something you hear from people who supported the war but now say they realize it was a bad idea (but they still don't think we can actually leave) as well as from people who were opposed to the war from the start. This line is said with absolute authority - the speaker knows this is what will happen if U.S. forces leave Iraq.

Even if this conventional wisdom were true, it wouldn't justify an illegal occupation. But there's one more little problem though - by a 2-1 margin, the Iraqi people, who are in a lot better position to know than American politicians and pundits, don't think it's true! This is what I think is the key result of a new poll (pdf link) that the media are writing and talking about. The question was, "do you believe that the security situation in Iraq will get better or worse in the immediate weeks following a withdrawal of Multi National Forces?" 29% said it would get "a great deal better," 24% said "a little better," and 6% said "stay the same." Only 26% thought it would get a little or a lot worse. So that's three out of five Iraqis, a clear majority, who think that the security situation in Iraq will not get worse, and only one in four who think it will get worse.
With all the coverage of this poll I've read and heard, though, (e.g., Washington Post, New York Times), not a single one has highlighted the result of this particular question, which relates directly to the major rationale offered why U.S. troops have to stay in Iraq. Funny, that.

http://www.iraqwarnews.net/


\\ we have all heard about the war happening between the US and Iraq. the question is, who has won, and who lost?

Claiming that Iraq has to have a proper leader and government, the US took the chance to fight their way through the Iraq grounds, accusing them of hiding warcraft and machinery. What? Is that all they can offer as an excuse to start this WAR?! How many young men have died, how many families ruined, how much tears and heartbreak? All these at the expense of the greed of the US government, who is, apparently, eyeing on the rich natural resources below the land of Iraq.

Funny that US abuse their authority and their stand in the world; so what if it is the most developed and influential country? Yes, the fact is, that actually counts. That gave them the green light to pick on other nations and take what they want for themselves. Was it fair? No. Was it justified? No. Was it beneficial? No. Then- why hasn't anyone stepped out to stop the US? Why hasn't anyone protested openly to the US government, and offered a better alternative? Because all are cowards, they have no courage to open their mouths in front of the lion, in this case, the US. All are too afraid to be implicated into this war of authority, all were keeping their thoughts to themselves in fear of being attacked, too.

Is this the political scene we want to see happening to the world? i believe everyone has a better answer to what's really happening now. Don't cover up anymore, the world, the politics all need a revolution- a global revolution. Not to one nation, not to one league, but every single one of us deserves a change now, for the batter future.



Kyoto Protocol comes into force

Industrial pollutants are blamed for global warming The Kyoto accord, which aims to curb the air pollution blamed for global warming, has come into force seven years after it was agreed.
The accord requires countries to cut emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.
Some 141 countries, accounting for 55% of greenhouse gas emissions, have ratified the treaty, which pledges to cut these emissions by 5.2% by 2012.

But the world's top polluter - the US - has not signed up to the treaty.
The US says the changes would be too costly to introduce and that the agreement is flawed.
Large developing countries including India, China and Brazil are not required to meet specific targets for now.

'Out of control'
The ancient Japanese capital of Kyoto, where the pact was negotiated, is hosting the main ceremony marking the treaty's coming into force.
Russia ratified the treaty in November 2004 - the crucial moment making the treaty legally binding.

HAVE YOUR SAY
If you really care about the environment, stop buying things that come in plastic packaging and stop using your car
Joe, London

Russia's entry was vital, because the protocol had to be ratified by nations accounting for at least 55% of greenhouse gas emissions to become valid.
This target was only met after Russia joined.
But the head of the UN Environment Programme, Klaus Toepfer, said Kyoto was only a first step and much hard work needed to be done to fight global warming.
"Climate change is the spectre at the feast, capable of undermining our attempts to deliver a healthier, fairer and more resilient world," he said.
Recent projections on planet warming made terrifying reading, he said, painting a vision of a planet that is "spinning out of control."
He said it would be Africa which bore the burden of the world's failure to act.
Individual targets
The protocol, which became legally binding at midnight New York time (0500 GMT) on 16 February, demands a 5.2% cut in greenhouse gas emissions from the industrialised world as a whole, by 2012.

Not just hot air - more than 140 countries have signed up
Each country has been set its own individual targets according to its pollution levels.
Growing developing countries China and India are outside the framework, a fact pointed out by US President George W Bush when he abandoned Kyoto as one of his first acts when taking office in 2001.

Japan's Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi issued a statement welcoming the treaty but also calling on non-signatories to rethink.
"From now, we have to build a system in which more nations will work together under the common framework to stop global warming," he said.
Environmentalists held protests around the world to mark the treaty coming into force - with many targeting the US.

Speakers at the official ceremony include Nobel Peace prize winner Wangari Maathai.
Ms Maathai, an ecologist and Kenya's deputy environment minister, said the Kyoto Protocol would require not just efforts from governments and businesses, but also a change in the way people lived.
Tough goals
But even for countries that have signed up to Kyoto, meeting the goals could be difficult.

Canada, one of the treaty's first signatories, has no clear plan for reaching its target emission cuts. Far from cutting back, its emissions have increased by 20% since 1990.
And Japan is also unsure it will be able to meet its legal requirement to slash emissions by 6% from 1990 levels by 2012.

"Japan will make all efforts to respect the rules of the Protocol," said Takashi Omura, of the Japanese environment ministry. "It will neither be easy nor insurmountable."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4267245.stm


\\ the Kyoto Protocol was the first attempt to saving the polluted environment aiming for countries who have signed the treaty to reduce their carbon dioxide emission by 5.2% by 2012. However, the world's most developed and industrialised countries with huge amount of carbon dioxide emissions, USA, China, India and Brazil have not complied to the treaty, accusing the treaty of being an obstruction to industrial developement and economic growth. These countries have neglected the well-being of the Earth for a selfish thought for their own prosperity at the cost of the environment. Other countries like Canada, have apparently failed to fulfill the treaty conditions, and might not meet the goal of 5.2% by 2012.

I hope that the natural disasters occuring in the recent years have set the first alarm ringing. Political leaders should have started thinking about the environment rather than cash now. Only by preserving the environment do we have the chance for prosperity and more advancements.
This will only happen in the realm of sustainable development, where all countries in the world, be it big or small, first world or not, do our part by releasing less pollutants through industrial means and giving more thoughts for our Earth. If the fishes die, the animals extinct, the forests disappear and is replaced by acid rain, tsunamis and earthquakes, will there still be a chance for industrail talk? NO. thus, it is a global effort we have to put in to save our world, and save ourselves.

COCO\.
going seventeen, 010591
temasekacademy ta'two
TWO A '06

the only reason i live for is to protect this world, this dangerous world at the edge of collapse, wher YOU are the cause for all the change & sufferings of the Earth. stop sleeping with aircon now. stop opening your fridge for cool air!

www.rocksandstone.blogspot.com

designer | kathleen
image | moonburst23
brushes | aethereality.net
font | violation
lyrics | five for fighting