#eu-standards
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
Text
Barrierefreiheit: Websites müssen neue EU-Standards erfüllen
THOKA Network Webdesign unterstützt Unternehmen dabei, die neuen EU-Standards für Barrierefreiheit bis 2025 zu erfüllen. Das Behindertengleichstellungsgesetz und die EU-Richtlinie 2019/882 verlangen, dass digitale Inhalte für alle Nutzerinnen und Nutzer zugänglich sind. Unser Service führt technische Anpassungen durch, um die vollständige Einhaltung der Vorschriften zu gewährleisten, den universellen Zugang sicherzustellen und den Ruf des Kunden zu schützen. Wir kümmern uns um die technischen Anforderungen, während sich unsere Kunden auf ihr Kerngeschäft konzentrieren können.
Das BFSG-Gesetz erklärt
Das Barrierefreiheitsstärkungsgesetz (BFSG) markiert einen entscheidenden Wandel in der digitalen Landschaft Deutschlands und schreibt vor, dass Websites und elektronische Dienste bis zum 28. Juni 2025 umfassende Standards zur Barrierefreiheit erfüllen müssen. Organisationen müssen ihre digitalen Plattformen anpassen, um sicherzustellen, dass Menschen mit Behinderungen die Dienste selbstständig verstehen und nutzen können, wie es die EU-Richtlinie 2019/882 vorschreibt. Danach müssen Unternehmen, die deutsche Verbraucher bedienen, unabhängig von ihrem physischen Standort klare Anforderungen erfüllen. E-Commerce-Plattformen, Bankdienstleistungen, Versicherungsanbieter und Telekommunikationsunternehmen müssen barrierefreie Designs umsetzen, die für alle funktionieren. Das Ziel geht über die bloße Einhaltung von Vorschriften hinaus - es geht darum, digitale Räume zu schaffen, an denen alle Nutzer ohne Barrieren uneingeschränkt teilhaben können. Das Barrierefreiheitsstärkungsgesetz (BFSG) steht für das Engagement Deutschlands für digitale Inklusion und verändert die Art und Weise, wie Unternehmen an Webdesign und die Bereitstellung von Dienstleistungen herangehen. Die Weiterentwicklung der Barrierefreiheitsstandards bedeutet, digitale Schnittstellen von Grund auf neu zu überdenken und sicherzustellen, dass sie für Nutzerinnen und Nutzer aller Fähigkeiten nahtlos funktionieren.
Erfüllung der Zugänglichkeitsstandards bis 2025
Die Barrierefreiheitsanforderungen der BFSG für 2025 zeigen einen klaren Weg zu einem inklusiven Webdesign auf, wobei spezifische technische Benchmarks bis zum 28. Juni erforderlich sind. Um barrierefreie digitale Räume zu schaffen, müssen wichtige Funktionen implementiert werden, die es allen Nutzern, insbesondere denjenigen, die auf assistive Technologien angewiesen sind, ermöglichen, effektiv zu verstehen und zu interagieren. Zu den wichtigsten technischen Implementierungen gehören: - Tastaturnavigationssysteme mit sichtbaren Fokusindikatoren und Sprunglinks - Displays mit hohem Kontrast und skalierbarer Typographie, die auch bei 200% Zoom noch funktionsfähig sind - beschreibende Alternativtexte für Bilder und umfassende Multimedia-Untertitel Organisationen haben nur ein begrenztes Zeitfenster, um ihre digitale Infrastruktur auf den neuesten Stand zu bringen, bevor empfindliche Strafen von bis zu 100.000 Euro drohen. Erfolg erfordert strategische Planung, technische Kompetenz und das Engagement, digitale Räume zu schaffen, die wirklich jeden Nutzer willkommen heißen. Web-Teams können damit beginnen, bestehende Websites zu überprüfen, kritische Aktualisierungen zu priorisieren und Änderungen systematisch umzusetzen, um Fristen einzuhalten und gleichzeitig die allgemeine Nutzererfahrung zu verbessern.
Grundprinzipien der Barrierefreiheit
Schauen wir uns die Grundprinzipien an, die digitale Inhalte für alle zugänglich machen. Wenn wir bei der Gestaltung von Websites auf Wahrnehmbarkeit, Bedienbarkeit, Verständlichkeit und Robustheit achten, schaffen wir Räume, in denen alle Nutzerinnen und Nutzer sinnvoll mit digitalen Inhalten interagieren können. GrundsatzKernanforderungenUmsetzungWahrnehmbarDeutliche Kontraste, AlternativtexteScreenreader, BildunterschriftenBedienbarTastaturnavigationSprungmarken, FokusanzeigenVerständlichKlare Sprache, BeschriftungenEinheitliche Navigation, Fehlermeldungen Jede Designentscheidung beeinflusst das Nutzererlebnis. Barrierefreie Websites benötigen mehrere Zugangswege zu den Inhalten, eine robuste Unterstützung für assistive Technologien und eine intuitive Navigation, die für Nutzer aller Fähigkeiten geeignet ist. Bei der barrierefreien Gestaltung digitaler Räume geht es nicht nur um die Einhaltung von Richtlinien, sondern darum, allen Menschen einen gleichberechtigten Zugang zu Informationen und Dienstleistungen zu ermöglichen. Anmerkung: Inklusives Design führt zu Produkten, die für Menschen mit unterschiedlichen Fähigkeiten und Hintergründen gut funktionieren.
Grundlegende Anforderungen an die Website-Navigation
Stellen wir sicher, dass die Webnavigation für alle funktioniert - es geht nicht nur darum, bis 2025 die BFSG-Konformität zu erreichen, sondern digitale Räume zu schaffen, in denen sich alle Nutzer willkommen und befähigt fühlen. Stellen Sie sich barrierefreie Navigation als die Schaffung universeller Pfade vor, die Benutzer mit den Inhalten verbinden, die sie benötigen, unabhängig davon, wie sie mit Websites interagieren. Ein gutes Navigationsdesign berücksichtigt das gesamte Spektrum der Benutzerbedürfnisse. Der Schwerpunkt liegt nach wie vor auf drei wesentlichen Anforderungen: - Die Tastatursteuerung muss sich auf alle interaktiven Elemente erstrecken und dem Benutzer die Möglichkeit geben, mit den Tabulatortasten, der Eingabetaste und den Pfeiltasten zu navigieren. - Sprunglinks müssen direkte Pfade zum Hauptinhalt bieten, um die Frustration wiederholter Menünavigation zu vermeiden. - Fokusindikatoren dienen als klare visuelle Orientierungshilfen und heben anklickbare Elemente hervor, während sich die Nutzer durch die Website bewegen. Wenn Websites diese Navigationsstandards anwenden, werden sie zu Orten, die jeder Besucher mit Selbstvertrauen erkunden kann. Das Design wird unsichtbar, so dass sich die Benutzer auf den Inhalt konzentrieren können, anstatt sich mit Zugangsbarrieren herumzuschlagen. Ein gut durchdachtes Navigationssystem ermöglicht es den Nutzern, ihren eigenen Weg durch die digitalen Inhalte zu finden und ihre Unabhängigkeit zu bewahren, unabhängig von ihren Fähigkeiten oder bevorzugten Interaktionsmethoden.
Inhalte für alle verständlich machen
Die Erstellung barrierefreier Inhalte beruht auf drei Grundpfeilern: lesbares Design, logische Struktur und barrierefreie Botschaften. Digitale Zugänglichkeitsstandards, einschließlich der BFSG-Anforderungen in Deutschland, legen spezifische Richtlinien für Kontrastverhältnisse, die Organisation von Inhalten und die Klarheit der Sprache fest, die allen Nutzern zugute kommen. Die Umsetzung eines inklusiven Designs beginnt mit einem angemessenen Kontrast zwischen Text und Hintergrund - mindestens 4,5:1 für Standardtext. Semantische HTML-Elemente schaffen eine natürliche Hierarchie der Inhalte, während beschreibende Links, klare Formularbeschriftungen und verständliche Fehlermeldungen den Benutzer sicher durch die Anwendung führen. Die Unterstützung von Sprachausgabegeräten und die Bereitstellung von Alternativtexten für Bilder verwandeln grundlegende Konformität in sinnvolle Barrierefreiheit. Dieser umfassende Ansatz beseitigt digitale Barrieren und stellt sicher, dass jeder Besucher unabhängig von seinen Fähigkeiten oder Bedürfnissen mit Online-Inhalten interagieren und diese verstehen kann.
Richtlinien für die technische Umsetzung
Machen wir die Umsetzung der Barrierefreiheit klar und einfach. Der Weg zur Erstellung barrierefreier Websites folgt den BFSG-Regeln und den WCAG 2.1 Level AA-Richtlinien, um sicherzustellen, dass jeder unabhängig von seinen Bedürfnissen oder der bevorzugten Technologie auf digitale Inhalte zugreifen kann. Beginnen Sie mit diesen technischen Kernelementen: - Sauberes semantisches HTML, erweitert um ARIA-Attribute für die Verständlichkeit in Screenreader-Programmen - tastaturfreundliche JavaScript-Komponenten, die nahtlos mit Touchscreen-Geräten funktionieren - Responsive CSS, das die Lesbarkeit bei starker Vergrößerung beibehält und gleichzeitig die Kontrastverhältnisse erhält. Die Erstellung barrierefreier Websites erfordert in jeder Phase der Entwicklung viel Aufmerksamkeit für Details. Beginnen Sie mit einer korrekten HTML-Struktur, fügen Sie robuste interaktive Funktionen hinzu und validieren Sie diese durch ausgiebige Tests. Eine Kombination aus automatisierten Zugänglichkeitswerkzeugen und praktischen Tests hilft sicherzustellen, dass jeder Benutzer die Inhalte effektiv verstehen und mit ihnen interagieren kann. Hinweis: ARIA-Attribute (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) bieten grundlegende Informationen zur Zugänglichkeit für assistive Technologien.
Rechtliche Konsequenzen bei Nichtbeachtung
Die Einhaltung der Barrierefreiheitsanforderungen des BFG bis zum 28. Juni 2025 ist unerlässlich, um erhebliche rechtliche und finanzielle Risiken zu vermeiden. Organisationen müssen sich darüber im Klaren sein, dass die Nichteinhaltung der Vorschriften zu Bußgeldern von bis zu 100.000 Euro führen kann, wobei wiederholte Verstöße die Aussetzung von Dienstleistungen zur Folge haben können. Das Durchsetzungssystem ermöglicht es sowohl Verbraucherverbänden als auch Einzelpersonen, rechtliche Schritte einzuleiten, was den Weg für komplexe Schlichtungsverfahren ebnet. Art des VerstoßesUnmittelbare FolgenLangfristige FolgenGeringfügige VerstößeSchriftliche VerwarnungBeobachtungszeitraumWiederholte VerstößeBußgelderVerpflichtende AuditsSchwere VerstößeSuspendierung von DienstenGerichtsverfahren Die Folgen gehen weit über die direkten Sanktionen hinaus. Organisationen riskieren Reputationsschäden und setzen sich zivilrechtlichen Klagen nach dem Gesetz gegen den unlauteren Wettbewerb aus. Ein solider Rechtsrahmen gewährleistet eine konsequente Durchsetzung, so dass die Einhaltung der Barrierefreiheitsregeln für jede digitale Präsenz auf dem deutschen Markt von entscheidender Bedeutung ist. Das Verständnis dieser Konsequenzen hilft den Teams, Ressourcen effizient zuzuweisen und konforme Webdienste bereitzustellen, die allen Nutzern gerecht werden.
Unterstützung von Werkzeugen
Die effektive Integration von Hilfsmitteln entscheidet darüber, ob eine Website wirklich den BFSG-Standards entspricht. Eine gut strukturierte Website funktioniert reibungslos mit Bildschirmleseprogrammen, Sprachsteuerungssystemen und adaptiven Technologien und schafft so eine Umgebung, in der Benutzer mit unterschiedlichen Bedürfnissen Inhalte unabhängig voneinander verstehen können. Zu den grundlegenden Anforderungen an unterstützende Technologien gehören: - Strategische ARIA-Attribute und semantische HTML-Implementierung zur Verbesserung der Leistung von Bildschirmleseprogrammen - Vollständige Tastatur- und Touchscreen-Kompatibilität mit 200% Zoomfunktion - Präzise Sprachdefinitionen in Kombination mit logischen Überschriftenstrukturen Die Schaffung barrierefreier digitaler Räume erfordert eine gründliche Integration unterstützender Technologien, wobei der Schwerpunkt auf der Befähigung der Nutzer und nicht auf der grundsätzlichen Einhaltung von Vorschriften liegt. Tests mit verschiedenen Hilfsmitteln werden die Zugänglichkeit validieren und das Engagement für digitale Inklusion stärken. Anmerkung: ARIA-Attribute (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) sind HTML-Elemente, die zusätzliche Informationen für assistive Technologien bereitstellen. Read the full article
0 notes
Text
love seeing "not for EU sale" on uk food packaging now and getting to wonder what poison im eating that's banned on the continent but fine for us plebs who've Taken Back ControlTM
128 notes
·
View notes
Text
me when i’m an illegal venezuelan alien in a springfield, ohio prison and communist kamala forces me to have a transgender operation performed by newly aborted 10 year olds on steroids who don’t know they’re alive.
#🏳️⚧️💉🚫⚖️👽🏢#murica#why do i live here like i have other citizenships that i identify more strongly with so i could go somewhere else#i could go back to the fucking eu#which as much as it fails by my commie standards it is at least slightly more coherent#presidential debate#kamala harris#donald trump
29 notes
·
View notes
Text
Here is an antique flag celebrating British hypocrisy.
Sevastopol and Inkerman...
Bottom center: The Balkans War ended with Ukraine being granted independence but controlled by Britain and France after the Crimean War, which was fought to prevent Russian economic access to Europe and the Middle East, and to defend Nathan Rothschild’s banking and political interests.
The USA was given power over companies and infrastructure as an incentive to protect the UK’s control of Ukraine from Russia and to prevent Russian influence.
The hypocrisy of it all – here is 100% proof of how England took Ukraine more than 100 years ago as part of their empire.
Today, they wage war against Russia, which has a sovereign right over Ukraine...
#usa#wef#genocide#rockefeller#eu#Rockerfeller#democrats#murder#un#ucraine#hypocrisy#double standards#vote blue vs
14 notes
·
View notes
Text
i need to like. make a list of what characters i know and can write about. especially for doctor who. because i love you guys but i do not know blorbo #684 from obscure eu audio released a decade ago-
#things to do for next time alsjfkfjks#if i could write for your obscure eu blorbo i would but i dont know them!!!! i barely know all the standard blorbos!!!!
9 notes
·
View notes
Text
European Jewish leaders have sharply criticized a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights (EHCR), which upheld a ban on kosher slaughter in Belgium, slamming it as a significant setback for religious freedom across Europe.
Dismissing legal and humanitarian appeals by Belgium’s Jewish community and Jewish leaders worldwide, the seven-judge panel in the Strasbourg court—the EU’s highest judicial body– invoked “the protection of animal welfare” as “an ethical value” that supersedes the Jewish and Muslim religious mandates.
The judges confirmed the ban already in place in Belgium that insists that animals be “stunned” prior to slaughter, regardless of Jewish law and Islamic practice that forbid it.
Rabbi Pinchas Goldschmidt, President of the Conference of European Rabbis and Russia’s chief rabbi, called the ruling “a black day for Europe, when fundamental religious rights are no longer respected.”
“The court’s decision to enforce the ban on ritual slaughter in the Flanders and Wallonia regions of Belgium will be felt by Jewish communities across the continent,” Rabbi Goldschmidt said. “The bans have already had a devastating impact on the Belgian Jewish community, causing supply shortages. And we are all very aware of the precedent this sets in challenging our rights to practice our religion.”
Belgium is home to some 500,000 Muslims and 30,000 Jews. Those who want to observe shechitah and Muslim ‘halal’ must now obtain meat from abroad.
“This distorted verdict implies that the rights of citizens to freedom of religion and worship are of lower importance than the “rights” of animals,” said Rabbi Menachem Margolin, chairman of the Brussels-based European Jewish Association. He warned that the restrictions on Jews practicing their faith will lead to “serious damage to the fabric of life throughout the continent.”
Fearing A Domino Effect
By upholding the Belgian ban, the EU Court of Human Rights has effectively signaled other states within the European Union that they can implement their own laws prohibiting kosher slaughter for Jews and halal slaughter for Muslims, without fear of religious discrimination lawsuits.
The threat of legal consequences has until now acted as a brake on the anti-shechitah movement. But the EUHR ruling has removed that barrier, setting the stage in an expected domino effect for a wave of copycat restrictions on ritual slaughter by European governments.
“We are already seeing attempts across Europe to follow this Belgian ban, now sadly legitimized by the ECHR,” Dr. Ariel Muzicant, president of the European Jewish Congress, said in a statement.
The bans, imposed in the two regions several years ago, were the result of a long-running campaign by animal welfare activists. But they also raised fears among Muslim and Jewish community groups that they were “a cover for nationalist politicians to foster anti-immigrant sentiment,” reported Politico.
Ben Weyts, the Flemish minister responsible for animal welfare, was the first to propose the idea of a ban and expressed satisfaction with the verdict. “Now the door is open for a ban on ritual slaughter not only in Brussels but in the whole of Europe,” Weyts, of the far-right New Flemish Alliance, gloated in a television interview.
Yohan Benizri, president of the Belgian Federation of Jewish Organizations that opposed the slaughter ban, said he was “appalled” by the ruling. “This is the first time that the ECHR decides that protection of animal welfare is a matter of public morals that can trump the rights of minorities,” Benizri told Politico.
Hostility To Shechitah Deeply Rooted in European History
The hostility to shechitah endorsed by the Strasbourg court hardly comes as a shock; that animus has underpinned Belgian society for generations, deeply rooted in a legacy of Jew-hatred that has flourished throughout European history.
Blood libels across the ages have been fueled by malicious portrayals of shechitah as barbaric and cruel. Grotesque carvings on countless medieval church facades depicting Jews in obscene acts with pigs, on display to this very day, continue the tradition of mocking Jewish dietary restrictions.
Several European countries in the 19th and 20th Centuries oppressed their Jewish populations with bans against shechitah. Switzerland did so in 1893 to stop Jews fleeing pogroms from entering their country. Poland enacted a similar ban in 1936, Sweden in 1937.
Germany passed anti-shechitah laws three months after the Nazis came to power in 1933, citing cruelty to animals, and maligning kosher slaughter as a Jewish celebration of animal suffering. One of the first acts of the Nazi regime, the laws banning shechitah were aimed at making Germany unlivable for Jews, forcing them to emigrate.
Legislation prohibiting shechitah often follows the Nazi model, masquerading under the banner of animal welfare, and fueled by the canard that kosher slaughter inflicts undue suffering on animals. This misconception has persisted through generations and continues to resonate in various parts of the world.
In 2009, bowing to pressure from liberals and parties hostile to Jews and Muslims, the EU Council implemented the pre-slaughter stunning law. Following outcries from religious groups, the law made allowances for member States to provide exemptions to accommodate ritual slaughter by Jews and Muslims.
A number of countries including France, Germany, Luxembourg, Cyprus and Spain make use of that exemption. Other European countries refuse to grant any exemptions from the stunning law. These include Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Denmark, Cyprus, Spain, Slovenia, and now Belgium.
Five Years of Court Battles
The Strasbourg court’s ruling marked the culmination of legal battles waged by Jewish and Muslim groups, together with seven advocacy groups, against bans enacted in 2017 and 2018 in Flanders and Wallonia against shechitah and Islamic ritual slaughter.
The bans were pushed through the Belgium parliament by an alliance of anti-shechitah forces, animal rights groups and anti-Muslim politicians.
The litigants first brought a religious discrimination lawsuit in a Belgium court, then at the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg in 2020, and finally the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
Their appeals argued that the laws violate guarantees of religious freedom enshrined in EU law; in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; the European Convention on Human Rights; and the Belgian Constitution itself.
The Strasbourg court dismissed their arguments, stating that animal welfare was a component of “public morals” and carried significant weight in modern-day democracies.
Critics have drawn attention to Articles 9 and 14 under the European Convention of Human Rights, formulated in 1953, which protects the political and civil rights of Europeans. Its provisions guarantee freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
Muzicant said the Strasbourg court, in upholding the anti-shechitah law, “had violated the very charter” from which it draws its authority.
“We call on the European Commission and European Parliament to enact legislation which truly protects these fundamental rights and to give real meaning to their long-stated claims that they foster Jewish life in Europe,” Muzicant affirmed on the EJC website. “Jewish communities in Europe, now more than ever, need the protection of national governments and pan-European organizations to ensure that thousands of years of Jewish life on this continent do not come to an abrupt end.”
“Restrictions on fundamental aspects of Jewish religious freedom of expression, coupled with a background of massive increases in anti-Semitic attacks on Jewish communities, lead us to seriously consider whether Jews have a future in Europe,” the EJC representative said.
The EU Lowers Its Mask
Commenting on the Strasbourg court ruling upholding Belgium’s anti-shechitah ban, noted British political commentator Melanie Philips mocked the EU for its hypocrisy.
“The European Union likes to pose as the embodiment of tolerance, freedom and all civilized values. Now it has ripped off its own disguise to reveal something rather more ugly,” she wrote in the Jewish Star.
“The idea that stunning is humane is laughable,” Philips elaborated. “It’s often ineffective, causing the animal to be subjected to this assault more than once before it eventually loses consciousness. And even with prior stunning, meat processing plants in Europe are often inhumane places where livestock are factory farmed, pumped full of chemicals and industrially killed.”
So if the requirement for stunning actually has little to do with animal welfare, what’s the real driving force behind it?
At its core, writes Phillips, the law reflects a switch in priorities; animals being given priority over basic human rights, with a corresponding rise in ignorance and hypocrisy over what actually constitutes animal welfare.
“That moral confusion is one of the outcomes of the dogma of secularism, as well as the hostility to religion upon which the EU itself is based,” writes the author. Another key factor contributing to Western decay is its “moral and cultural relativism,” which preaches there are no absolute values.
“All of these [dark forces] have propelled the rise of paganism and the veneration of the animal at the expense of humanity.”
Pitfalls of Stunning an Animal
The practice of “stunning” refers to the methods of rendering an animal or bird unconscious prior to slaughter.
It was originally developed to facilitate the killing of large numbers of animals at once, in factory-like conditions. The main stunning method used for slaughtering cattle and sheep is by captive bolt gun, in which a steel bolt is shot into the skull at the front of the animal’s brain, details the National Institute Health.
Another method is by electric shock, whereby electrodes are clamped to the animal’s head and heart, electrocuting it.
These methods are contrary to Jewish law which stipulates that an animal intended for food must be healthy and uninjured at the time of shechitah. Stunning injures and sometimes kills the animal, in either case rendering it forbidden for Jews to eat.
Apart from the halachic prohibition, there are other objections to stunning. Despite the rhetoric from animal rights activists, there is no conclusive evidence that stunning an animal renders it insensible to pain, experts say.
Some scientists claim that the animal is often only paralyzed—not fully sedated—and thus prevented only from displaying its pain.
In addition, when the captive bolt method fails, as happens not infrequently, it inflicts considerable suffering and distress on the animal. The conscious animal is left in acute pain as the captive bolt gun is reloaded and reapplied, or the electrical tongs reapplied to re-stun it.
According to Britain’s Royal Society for the Protection of Animals (RSPCA), stunning is done differently for poultry. “Birds are hung upside down by their legs on metal shackles along a moving conveyor belt,” the RSPCA details.
“They move along the production line to a stunning water bath; when the bird’s head makes contact with the water, an electrical circuit between the water bath and shackle is completed, which stuns the bird. The conveyor belt then moves the birds to a mechanical neck cutter, which cuts the major blood vessels in the neck.”
Shechitah avoids all the technical risks and humanitarian pitfalls of stunning. Yet, in one of the supreme ironies of this world, despite the gruesome, torturous nature of non-kosher slaughter, it is shechitah with its meticulous laws aimed at minimizing animal suffering that is being painted as barbaric and cruel.
*****
Why Isn’t Stunning Required for Animals Killed in Belgian Sporting Events?
One of the EJC’s earliest legal appeals drew attention to the discriminatory nature of the Belgian anti-shechitah legislation, noting that hunting and killing animals in sporting events are not subject to any of the “humane” regulations that have been imposed on ritual slaughter.
On the contrary, the laws governing the popular activity of game-hunting in Belgium, whether for recreation of food consumption, make no reference whatever to the welfare of animals. The law’s concern instead is over environmental protections.
As a feature article in Flanders Today makes clear, the government’s aims in regulating hunting are purely environmental; to ensure that the region’s wildlife supply is not significantly reduced and that no damage is done to the land.
The article goes on to enthuse about the opportunities for hunting wild game in Belgian resort areas. “Hunting wild game in the winter is a hit among hunters, butchers and consumers,” the article begins, going on to list “deer, wild boar, partridge, ducks and pheasant” as “huntable animals.”
The Jewish community’s appeal challenged the double standard inherent in these hunting laws. It argued that since the law in Belgium permits the hunting and killing of animals at “cultural or sporting events” without prior stunning, how can the same government impose “stunning” requirements on ritual slaughter?
The court’s response exposed its show of caring about animal welfare as empty posturing.
“Cultural and sporting events result at most in a marginal production of meat which is not economically significant,” the court said. “Consequently, such events cannot reasonably be understood as a food production activity, which justifies their being treated differently from slaughtering.”
What does that gibberish mean? What does food production have to do with the obligation to spare an animal from undue suffering?
What the court seemed to be saying was that imposing humanitarian restrictions on game-hunting will make no economic dent on Jewish or Muslim meat-production industries (and by association, on Jewish or Muslim immigration), so why make a fuss over whether hunting game is done humanely?
In other words, hunt and kill for sport however you please, gentlemen, no stunning necessary, because we don’t really care about animals. That was never the point.
*****
Shocking Scenarios of Animals ‘Rights’ Superseding Human Life
“The protection of nature is gradually taking ideological precedence not only over the right to exercise one’s religion but also over the well-being of humans,” Prof. Eric Mechoulan who teaches in Paris, attested in Mosaic Magazine.
The writer describes a trip he took to Denmark a number of years ago, when he was confronted with a real-life scenario in which obsession over animal welfare trumped concern for the health and well-being of thousands of people.
The writer recalls during his trip being “trapped for six hours in a humongous traffic jam on the highway between Copenhagen and the island of Funen.”
“A truck carrying pigs had overturned and the animals had wandered into a field adjacent to a bridge pier,” he recalled “Not only did a crane have to be brought in to get the animals back into their truck, but “a veterinarian had to be called in to catch and kill the injured pigs in the middle of the countryside, as Danish law prohibits the transport of suffering animals.”
“It took [the veterinarian] a long time,” the author writes. “For this reason, a quarter of the country was blocked and tens of thousands of humans, women and children, old and sick, lacking water and washroom facilities, stayed for hours under the scorching sun.”
“The nature-worshippers in Europe wear the mask of progressive ecology and behind it lurks anti-speciesism,” the author scoffs. Anti-speciesism is an atheistic movement, rooted in the 70’s that claims that no species, including the human species, is more important than any other.
Animal Rights Activists Fight Municipal Orders to Kill Marauding Bears
In some parts of the world where sanity still rules, multiple sightings of a bear in populated areas where fatal bear attacks have taken place would naturally spur efforts to kill the animal as a safety precaution.
However, in regions were animal and environmentalists equate animal rights with those of human beings, threats to public safety are not considered valid grounds to end the life of suspected killer bear.
An incident unfolded early this month in Torentino, a northern province in Italy, that highlighted this unhinged mentality. A bear, identified by its collar and ear markings as M90, was sighted on 12 occasions “in residential areas or in the immediate vicinity of permanent dwellings.”
After Bear M90 reportedly stalked people on numerous occasions, terrifying them, he was deemed a danger to public security, tracked to its lair in the forest and killed, the Guardian reported.
Animal and environmental activists were incensed, slamming the action as “shortsighted and hostile to animals” and accusing the municipality of not “protecting biodiversity,” according to the article. The animal-loving activists went on to rally for the welfare of the brown bears in the provincial capital, Trento.
In other headlines from Italy, even after a hiker was fatally mauled by a bear last year in the Italian village of Caldes, and the same bear had previously attacked a father and a son, the order to kill the deadly animal was cancelled by an administrative court after intense lobbying by animal activists, reported the Guardian.
Only after intense counter pressure was brought to bear by influential parties was the order renewed and carried out.
Isolated incidents in Denmark and Italy? Or episodes reflecting something deeper and sicker in the fabric of European society, and in the moral rot lurking behind the EU judiciary’s shameful anti-shechitah ruling.
5 notes
·
View notes
Text
hate that the most easily accessible american food in this country is like. pop tarts and twinkies. and not the shit i DO crave regularly like. i don't know. kix. swiss miss. jello goddammit. in n out burger
#i can get kraft mac and cheese but it's not the same as the one shitty box kind they sell in 1 specific restaurant#in my family's hometown. like. sigh#watched pulp fiction the other day and the main reaction it brought out in me was Wow i want to go. to the diner#Yeah a whole bunch of blueberry pancakes sounds great actually#curse eu food regulation and standards laws. i miss american rood#had good baked beans like 2 weeks ago and ive been thinking abt them ever since. bacon (not pathetically thin) also. argh#it's so frustrating. save me ghirardelli brownie mix i guess
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
Where’s the ‘Ireland is the white leftist’s Mecca’ post? That was a good post.
#ra speaks#personal#I’m sure ppl more knowledgeable and articulate than me have said it before#but it truly is a little sickening to see the country held up as some gold standard and it’s people utterly infallible#all because they’re the de facto example of (white) people gaining sovereignty from their (white) colonizers through violence#(including terrorism) so you have these (usually usamerican) white ppl who love to identify w the Irish struggle for independence#but to the point of fetishizing it. stripping it from its (white European) context. and outright ignoring it’s still lingering effects#like I get it there are a lot of Irish who do get the colonization struggle because they lived it! but they also lived it#in a very different way than most other colonized peoples (who are not white)#also I just think Ireland (as a government) has not done as much as it could be doing for Palestine in the EU/UN spheres so. ¯\ _(ツ)_/¯#idk what my point was. putting a culture or people on a pedestal as an ideal never ends well.
3 notes
·
View notes
Text
Looking at the current phone market here in the States. I really wish it was easier for international markets to break in here, but you pretty much HAVE to be able to get into a carrier or retail store to be viable by the masses.
I like Motorola because a) they're cheap, and b) they aren't half bad for the price in my experience. But... nothing they make is remotely on the smaller end. Everything is at least 6.5" diagonal, really closer to 6.7". The newer Edge model (base Edge since they never dropped the '24 Edge+ here apparently?) is maybe a TINY bit smaller than the Edge+ 2022 that I have today. And that's cause of bezels, not really the screen size.
And I personally really like the clean, straightforward Android UI/UX Motorola has... and the only comparable one that doesn't involve a custom ROM is Google's, as far as the States are concerned.
I ain't the biggest fan of Xiaomi's UI/UX, but the Xiaomi 14 looks nice and is almost exactly what I'd be after. Clean look, solid camera setup, small build with a nice screen... and a nicer construction too. Yeah, I could import it, but it's missing a few of the crucial 4G LTE and 5G bands that are used in the US. Ones that are important for... rural coverage, outside of urban areas. Which is important for me since my region now has a lot of rural stretches.
Yes I know the Galaxy S23 and S24 exist, but I really really hate Samsung's UI/UX. I tried the S23 last year and I hated the UI so much I returned it. I liked the size, though if anything it felt a bit too small - but I'd been using larger phones for years now.
The UI was just miserable for me, as someone used to & desiring cleaner UI/UX. I used custom ROMs on my Xiaomi Mi 9 to get that, because MIUI was trying to be an iOS clone (as many Chinese OEMs did, at least back then) and if I wanted iOS I'd get an iPhone.
sigh
#phone market here fucking sucks#I wish we had something like the EU phone market#but the EU also has a lot more standardized phone bands compared to the US#but STILL it's so frustrating! i just wanna have the phone that fits MY wants and needs and nobody fucking makes that here
4 notes
·
View notes
Text
What's the point of this 1 sided farce? To pretend to be doing something? Hamas has to completely fold and Israel doesn't have to change a single thing...and still Netanyahu rejected the very notion of it. That should tell you everything.
#this was never about hamas#israel is committing genocide#israel is an apartheid state#apartheid#ethnic cleansing#illegal occupation#collective punishment#collateral damage#israeli war crimes#save palestine#free palestine 🇵🇸#stand with palestine#stand up for humanity#double standard#seek the truth#spread awareness#protest for palestine#gaza under attack#the EU is a joke#ceasefire#stolen lives#stolen land#stolen futures#stolen voices#mass murder#netanyahu is a war criminal#genocide
5 notes
·
View notes
Text
It’s probably an inevitability of a franchise being this far reaching and this popular and this long lasting but it is so baffling how much of the wider star wars fanbase tries to “fix” star wars
#this is about the anti jedi movement and the satine criticism and the grey jedi fantasy and and and and and#star wars#I think the root of the issue here is that many people find George Lucas’s morality lesson at the heart of the story boring. and lash out#they see jedi who are supposed to be good and it bores them and they go ‘I will poke holes in that and hold them to unrealistic standards’#because their biggest crime is boring the audience who thinks they’re smarter than the fiction they intake#who cannot extend to the boring good guys the benefit of the doubt because they don’t match the sith or the empire’s rule of cool#which leads to justifying the sith order and the empire as Not As Bad As We’re Told Actually#which leads to misinterpretation and misrepresentation of the jedi#which leads to demonization and flattening of perfectly typical flawed characters and literary devices that promote nuance#I really think that’s what this is#I will never forget arguing with a friend a long time ago about the eu versus Lucas’ definition of the force. we argued for weeks#when in the end the argument boiled down to him saying ‘yeah but I think Lucas’s force is boring as shit’#and I was like ‘see. okay. why couldn’t we have acknowledged this way in the beginning instead of#you wasting precious time trying to convince me how to fix the jedi and why the empire is better than the republic#I think thinking of it all in this way helps me emotionally distance myself from all the discourse#nowadays when people watch star wars what they’re looking for is game of thrones#and they’re not seeing it#which means they have to try to make it that - both in their heads and loudly on the internet
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
Playing Hunt path resonance and Welt is just never let the enemy take a turn in SU. Absolutely love it.
#> tired shitpost#he was my first 5s from standard banner lol#i played on eu servers but decided why not to try and pull on asia and qmericas#and o got him!!!#since then my account was blessed
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
communism is when transgender operations on illegal aliens that are in prison
#🏳️⚧️💉🚫⚖️👽🏢#someone take me back to the eu#it may not live up to my commie standards but it’s better than this#or at least it’s slightly more coherent#murica#presidential debate#kamala harris#donald trump
11 notes
·
View notes
Photo
14 notes
·
View notes
Text
Was wondering if there is a standard way of pronouncing eu in english, so I looked it up. I'm not opening that can of worms, good bye.
#there is a standard way in german and french but i'm not sure if there are even non-loanwords with eu in english#from a quick glance it seems like no#-franz
3 notes
·
View notes
Text
.
#meu deus ta cada vez mais insalubre comprar cd nesse país#fui olhar quanto ta o harry's house cd standard por aqui#esperei uns bons meses pra comprar mais barato............#e o bagulho ta no minímo 100 reais#mais fácil comprar importado#o fine line eu comprei por 30 reais#100 eu pago só se tiver algo a mais#um autografo#um cd mais elaborado#ou mais exclusivo#mas o simples????
5 notes
·
View notes