Boko Haram Strikes Again, Bodies Rotting in Streets

Al Qaeda/ISIS BELIEVE that they are translating the Koran correctly, that's why the murder in the name of it.

 

I understand the logic that underlies the disproportionate coverage and that's related to the issue of infotainment. Wall to wall saturation coverage on Sky and CNN of the atrocities in Australia and Paris are an advertisers dream. Sometimes its hard to differentiate news coverage from satire of the 'Mad City' variety. If you have ever seen that movie, you will know what I'm talking about. Anyway, as an aside, I think satire can work on various levels the most effective of which is humour. Mel Brooks satirizing the Nazi's is funny and Monty Python's satirizing Christianity is funny. Charlie Hebdo, however, is NOT funny anymore than cartoons depicting Jews as hook-nosed money lenders is funny. More than that, I fail to see anything remotely funny in being persistently and vociferously offensive. Clearly, the actions of those who produced and published the Charlie Hebdo cartoons are neither noble nor well-motivated. In fact I fail to see how their taunting of Muslims was anything other than deeply unpleasant.

 

They have the right to be obnoxious. The muslim don't have the right to kill them for it.

 

In all fairness - I do not think - majority Muslims agree with those extremists anymore than majority Jews agreed with Zionists extremists terrorist gangs LEHI?Irgun/Haganah or Kahanists .- what ? ..

Men will always be mad, and those who think they can cure them are the maddest of all. (Voltaire)

 

I don't disagree with you. However, it cannot be denied that the muslim terrorists are doing these acts in what THEY BELIEVE is the correct translation of the Koran.

 

Yes, that's true and I didn't suggest otherwise. But the law is an ass if it's regarded as being legitimate to vociferously and persistently insult Muslims while not applying the same standards to say, deeply offensive depictions of Jews.

 

That "right" is not universal across all religions in France.

 

Charlie Hebdo bash the Jews and Christian as much and often as they do the muslim, yet neither the jews or christian go on a killing spree for it.

 

The World turned their back on Rwanda too.

 

They don't actuaaly. France has strict anti-semetic laws. Another thread has pointed out the sacking of a staff member of Charlie in 2009 purely because he stated that Jews help each other in employment. A French comedian was arrested for similar "jokes" yesterday

 

They do. It just doesn't fit your agenda so you chose to disregard a big bunch of front pages cartoons targeting the jews and christians. The french comedian has legitimized terrorism and anti-semitism many time in the past. This one, was once too many.

 

Good. Those kinds of "jokes" are not funny. 6 million innocent Jews died in the holocaust, and hundreds of thousands since then. The illegal palestinians constantly terrorize the innocent Jews.

Jokes about them should be met with a severe penalty in France. In the US, we have free speech, so that would be legal.

 

You have a problem with my agenda that Freedom of speech should never be used just to incite or hurt others of any beliefs irrespective that those using it could not care less about the topic?

How about this guy?
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=384_1420849530

Israeli Media Revisits the case of "Anti-semitic" Cartoonist Maurice Sinet who was fired from Charlie Hebdo in 2009
Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=384_1420849530#OR78VYAL5yqsjoaZ.99

 

The French were rallying in support of the free speech they supposedly have!

 

There are nuanced differences in emphasis and, no, they don't bash them as often as they do the Muslims. Third, no amount of offensive material can justify the killings which were barbaric and senseless.

 

They are rallying about free speech against terrorists. It's fine to speak ill of a terrorist network such as the mohammed dwellers. See how evil they are? They don't differentiate between civilians and soldiers. They've stated that exact quote on numerous occasions.

 

Your comments are not true. Go find out what the law is and how it works before you make such statements. The example by the way you have contradicts your very point. If the laws were applied as you say, there could have never been any anti semitic cartoons.

Charlie Hebdo made and will continue to make anti semitic cartoons and anti Israel cartoons that fail to distinguish between criticizing Israeli state policies and Jews as a people. It will also continue to make anti Christian cartoons.

The nature of its criticism makes it severe and hard sometimes to understand what exactly it is criticizing all Jews,all Christians, certain Christian dogma, certain Israeli state policies. Its the nature of the beast. Cartoons must communicate through over-exaggerated symbols that can generate misunderstanding.

The legal issue you now try to misrepresent had to do with slander and libel laws-the issue was a false allegation, not an anti Jewish comment.

In Europe there are laws against denying the holocaust in many countries because and clearly you can't fathom it, Jews and non Jews died on the soil of these countries because of that holocaust and the vivid physical reminders are still there and if people deny that, it causes great emotional pain.

It would be no different than someone telling you there is a law in North America that prevents you from urinating on someone's headstone at a cemetery.

You don't get that because you don't live in a world where there are vivid physical reminders of death where you live. You take your peaceful world for granted. Europeans live on and with stark reminders of death.

The so called law you claim is not just for Jews and its not that different than in the US or Canada in that if you say something that incites violence against someone you identify as being part of a group you want attacked, its a crime.

In any country not just France that is a democracy. you can not incite people to attack Jews,Muslims, Christians. whatever. There is a limit.

Your ignorance of French law I can understand but go look up the law and the case. Please.

 

Yes they do. What they denounce in their cartoon are the abject stupidity of extremism, of which the muslims happens to be the top dogs these days. But they do bash jewish extremism and christianity extremism just as much. It's just that both jews and christians tends to do less extremism than your muslims friends do. But all things being equal, they bash them all equalyly.

 

No they don't. And Islamist fundamentalists are no friends of mine.

 

No they were not. They were rallying in support of all Free Speech.
Your statement is contradictory if you are going to use the common interpretation of Free Speech.

 

I'm going by the French's version of free speech. Not American.

 

The United States at this time has the widest scope of elasticity so to speak when it comes to allowing free speech.

It had a landmark US Supreme Court case with Larry Flynt and Hustler magazine which tested how far US society should go in allowing pornographic expression.

It added further clarification to another case with Al Goldstein and Screw Magazine.

The US also of course had a huge case regarding the right of neo Nazis to march through Skokie,Illinois, aJewish suburb full of holocaust survivors.

The US constitution has protected free speech in all these cases.

Now in France its hard to compare it sometimes to the US as its system of law is older and different. France has a history of codifying its laws and so when making legal reasons for its decisions tends to be much more formulated.

The American version of common law, takes similar fact situations and tries to come up with a consistent way to deal with them whereas French law is not so concerned with the different facts as it is a logical answer.

French law however has a very pronounced tradition for being tolerant to written and oral speech. Its standard of obscenity is actually much more lenient than even in America.

Its true the US law in the cases I mentioned go as far as any Western country in allowing free speech, but France has never needed to put it in law the way the US had to and allowed it to evolve there because of among many things the French revolution and the influence of Volitaires, Rousseau, Napoleon and so many other scholars, authors, painters.

France is as tolerant as it gets when it comes to certain standards of expression. Yet therein lies the irony because while it is, and is proud of being so tolerant, in other ways its very rigid.

For example, certain jobs, certain job sectors and positions are only accessible to old blood French. No one else can get those jobs. Thus a very strong labour movement came about to protect blue collar jobs as a reaction to the other jobs being closed and not capable of being accessed. In many ways France is still based on getting your job by blood lines or in the alternative trade unions for those with no blood lines who want jobs.

That fuels discontent among all MINORITIES but all French not just minorities and so sometimes just blaming minority anger on lack of jobs is too simple an analysis since that could apply to all non minority French as well.

Its not easy to define French society. Never has been.

It now faces a world where 5 million Muslims within its borders were allowed autonomy and a way to opt out of certain French laws in favour of Sharia law, and that option was created by Liberal elitists thinking it was tolerant and accommodating this minority.

There are also 10 million Jews, but the vast majority of Jews unlike the Muslims have moved past conservative and fundamentalist Judaism to an assimilated reformist type Jewish belief that puts French values and laws first. In the Islamic community putting your Islamic sharia law duty first, not France is prevalent.

This then leads to idiotic comparisons by those who do not understand France trying to suggest there is a different standard for Jews than Muslims.

There is not but if a Jew assimilates and a Muslim does not, it is that willingness to assimilate that causes the difference in treatment.

France in one sense treats all its citizens equally as rudely. Just ask them. Your regional accent, the choice of words you use, where you are born, what job you have, can all cause for not so subtle insults and it matters little whether you are Christian or not, the curled up nose and lips will be there.

The snitty affected Parisienne accent drives me nutz. I much prefer the Southern drawl of the people of Marseilles or Avignon or Nimes or
Nice. Hell I like the French on the Spanish border too,. Paris no thanks. Marseilles, well o.k. but man they can also be very tough people.

France is like many European countries paranoid of its continued existence as a French cultural bastion. It feels its language and heritage being eroded away. Is that racist? Too easy to call it that. Chauvenist of course. They invented the word. Fierce pride for their culture yes, sort of like Americans with their military history or the British or Germans with their own history lines.

Back to Nigeria, the Muslim extremism killing people in Nigeria is a direct offshoot of Muslim extremism that has always existed in Africa and was there long before the colonialists when Muslims engaged in the slave trade. For that matter if you look at how Muslim Africans are treated in wealthy Arab countries you will easily understand how other black Africans would bring that behaviour back home with them.

Black African Muslims are a complicated mix of a strain of Muslim extremism and a self hating racism they have picked up from fair skinned Muslims who still enforce the colour bar when defining Muslim standing.

In the Muslim world, dark skinned Africans, dark skinned Bangladeshis, dark skinned or even lighter skinned Fillipinos or Indonesians are looked down upon.

Some black Africans when they lash out at their perceive non Muslim enemy are trying to be just like the Muslims they want to imitate. They think if they are just as violent, they will transcend the colour bar and be equal

To understand the Muslim collective psyche you have to live in the Middle East. There is a complex racial code of superiority based on physical features not just type of Islam you subscribe to.

 

I have lived in the middle east my friend.

 

He was sacked by Charlie editor for writing "He'll go a long way in life, that little lad." and then not apologising. The one who was sacked is taking a journalist to court over a slander case

 

Your mentality is stunningly sick! That human beings have the capacity to kill innocent women and children in these numbers doesn't move you?