Monday, September 13, 2010

Examples Of A Church Welcome

Vivisection: the list of signatories


Vivisection September 13, 2010
voted the new directive on animal testing.

Gabriele Albertini (PDL) 2-Robert
Alfredo Antoniozzi (PDL)
4 -
Raffaele Baldassarre (PDL)
5-Paolo Bartolozzi (PDL) 6-Sergio
( PDL)
7-Vito Bonsignore (PDL)
8-Antonio CANCIAN (PDL) 9-John

Lara 10-COMI (PDL) 11-Carlo
girlfriend (PDL)
12 - Elisabetta Gardini
( PDL)
13-Salvatore Iacolino (PDL) 14-John

15-Barbara Matera (PDL)
16-Mario MAURO (PDL) 17-

Erminia Mazzoni (PDL)
Alfredo 18-BALL (PDL)
19-Aldo Patriciello (PDL)
20 -
Licia RONZULLI (PDL) 21-
Salatto Potito (PDL)
22-Amalia SARTORI (PDL) 23-Mark Scurr
24-Francesco Paolo Sergio Silvestris (PDL )
25 - Salvatore
26-This Mortal Coil (PDL)?
(Lega Nord)
28-Mario Borghezio (Lega Nord)
29-FONTANA Lorenzo (Lega Nord
30-Claudio Morganti (Lega Nord)
31-Fiorello PROVERA (Lega Nord
32 Orestes-RED (Lega Nord)
33-Matteo Salvini (Lega Nord)
34 -
Giancarlo Scotti (Lega Nord)
35-Francesco Enrico Speroni (Northern League) 36-Sergio Gaetano
37-Luigi Berlinguer (PD) 38-Paul

39-Roberto Gualtieri (PD) 40-
Pier Antonio Panzeri (PD)
41-Mario Pirillo (PD)
42-Gianni PITTELLA (PD ) 43-
Vittorio Prodi (PD) 44-David-Maria
Carlo Casini (UDC)
Antinori (UDC)
47-Luigi Ciriaco De Mita (UDC)
48-Vincent IOVINE
50-DORFMANN Herbert (SVP) 51-

Clemente Mastella (EDU) 52-
Magdi Cristiano Allam (I Love Italy) "

THE JOURNAL September 13, 2010

Animal Testing, the infamous

Caro dottor Granzotto, rispondendo alla lettrice Isabella
D’Onofrio lei si impegnò a «spulciare» il sito Internet del Parlamento
europeo per stanare i «disonorevoli» che hanno votato la direttiva
sulla sperimentazione sugli animali, cani e gatti randagi in
particolare. Nel caso avesse avuto successo, fornirebbe a noi lettrici
e lettori amanti degli animali i risultati della sua ricerca?
Sì, certo, gentile lettrice, anche se non sono molto soddisfatto dei
risultati. Resta confermato in base all’articolo 11 paragrafo 1 secondo
comma della risoluzione, che su rane, topi, porcellini d’India,
criceti, gerbilli della Mongolia, primates (obviously non-human),
dogs and cats are allowed to experiment and "basic research and for
treatment of disease, the effectiveness of the drugs, the higher education
and forensic investigations." Then we read that "because
antecedents of animals in the stray and feral
of domestic species are not known and their capture and detention in
establishments increases the anxiety, they should not be used
procedures." The use of the hypocrite, mascalzonesco conditional
place of this target obviously leaves a free hand and therefore I see
bad for dogs and cats. And speaking of conditional
Listen to this: "The methods chosen should, where possible, avoid

death as end point due to the severe suffering caused."
thus giving for granted the suffering, death
should be avoided "as far as possible." But can you? The seal in a directive
carelessly, all smoke and no roast that good intentions into practice
leave the field open to experimentation, "hard" animal
is the final recommendation: "To enable the competent authorities to monitor compliance with this
Directive, if possible
each establishment should maintain accurate records on the number of animals, their origin and their
fate. " If possible. It should. But at this point could not
, MEPs, summarize the law in a simple
simple: "Do whatever you want"?
However, it went how it went,
kind friend, to the satisfaction of European ladies and gentlemen, the resolution is passed
great. Impossible, despite his continual references to transparency
, get it from the European Union
the details of the vote. To tell the truth, not even the final result
, how many "yes", how many "no" and those who "abstained" (let alone the
number of people in attendance, probably because, as usual,
deserted). So we must be content with explanations of vote
of our five MEPs. By voting "yes" Mr Giancarlo
Scott, the league added that the text of the resolution "
find a balance that allows you to use methods that cause the least pain possible
. Others who voted "yes" is Paolo De Castro,
the Democratic Party, which also barred the way for parliamentary
as requiring further review of the text.
Elisabetta Gardini, pidiellina out, he voted "yes" because "unfortunately, the rice

rca animal remains paramount." A "no" came from
dipietrina Sonia Alfano who had asked for, unheard, the postponement of
text ("the experiment that allows for teaching and re-use of animals
sometimes using methods that cause pain) in
Parliamentary Commission. Finally Christian Muscardini pidiellina too, has expressed
Classroom hope that the resolution be revised soon to
"stop unnecessary testing and repetitive exercise."
would seem a 'no', but it could be a "yes" with reservations.


13 September 2010

Directive vivisection. The near-mea culpa 's
MEP Pino Arlacchi.

GEAPRESS - Swamped
thousands of email messages, MEPs who voted in favor of vivisection
Directive on 8 September to the European Parliament,
try to defend themselves. Who to blame relies unlikely
parliamentary process, as the case of Mr Pittella, those who defended the goodness
points to the animal rights lobby, unfortunately that is the true
, as did Paolo De Castro, who instead called into play the '
ignorance on the subject and the favorable vote on the same Verdi
final text (we think that the Hon. Arlacchi relates to what the
exempted by the Commission). We propose in the response text
Hon. Arlacchi the (PD ). A further confirmation
of what happened in Parliament as reported in 'shock interview
GeaPress issued by the Hon. the Sonia Alfano.
Rome, 10 set.2010
Pino Arlacchi
I received some hate mail on my vote in the European Parliament about the motion
regulating vivisection. And I say now that I have a
po'sottovalutato the issue, relying on the assessment
of my group (ALDE, Democrats and liberals in Europe), without further
's argument with a personal investigation. But before
communicate to my readers and voters
which would be my position if I had been alerted of an impending vote
so "sensitive" and, more importantly, what will my
future direction on the same subject, since the matter is just
all 'beginning of a journey, let me tell you how things went in court
Wednesday scorso.Quando case has come to
vivisection question, a couple of Members have requested the floor to ask
, an imprint of regulation, not a vote for or against
vivisection, but the simple reference text
the Commission that he had fired for the final opinion.

clarify this point is crucial, because if it were to express an opinion Dry
I would definitely vote against vivisection, because I think una
pratica inaccettabile, crudele, e non più indispensabile per l’
avanzamento della medicina.
Davanti a me avevo la lista di voto del mio
gruppo, che indicava un voto favorevole al provvedimento. Sono
contrario ai colpi di mano in seduta plenaria, perché sono una tecnica
che sfrutta gli aspetti più deteriori del sistema parlamentare, ed è
adottata in prevalenza dai demagoghi e dai furbetti che tentano di
rovesciare l’esito prevedibile di un provvedimento approfittando di
circostanze fortuite quali la distrazione o la disinformazione dei
deputati, le assenze momentanee dall’ aula, la confusione che si crea
in particolari momenti e che induce alcuni parlamentari even
wrong button (do not be surprised, I checked out the person who
what has happened to fellow players in key votes).
L '
intervention of the chairman of the committee, De Castro,
has also reduced my uncertainty of the issue had been discussed for over a year in
Commission, and the final text was approved
also by the Greens, now they inexplicably took
distances. It would not be serious by the Parliament
disregard of a sudden the work done by its members. The text is

was finally approved, but the possibility of returning to the theme with a
position clearer, di abolizione delle pratiche più degradanti e
dolorose di sperimentazione scientifica sugli animali, è aperta, anzi
apertissima. E il sottoscritto sarà in questo caso in prima fila n ella
battaglia per i diritti delle specie animali”.


Post a Comment