1) Ok. Since you're the French specialist and I know nothing surely you know Voltaire : “Je ne suis pas d’accord avec ce que vous dites, mais je me battrai jusqu’à la mort pour que vous ayez le droit de le dire”

2) The average french might be very racist, doesn't change the fact they have very strict anti hate-speech laws and more associations to sue you for it than any other country.

I get it. Keep bending over to avoid a beating. like a prison bitch. that's the solution :disgust

Bien, nous pouvons continuer cette discussion en français.

1) Quant à Voltaire, il ne faisait que se moquer et condamner ses contemporains. Il était également connu pour être un snob et un hypocrite.

Bref Je ne défendrais pas Voltaire et franchement si je le faisais... Voltaire aurait été le premier à se moquer.

2) Depuis Sarkozy plus personne n'applique les lois antiracistes

1) I did not say Willits is an opinion. I said your claim that Willits had "more to do with the legalization of the distribution of porn than the ACLU" is an opinion. Those are two diiferent things.

2) Your "certainty" about me is irrelalvant to your claim about the ACLU. You claimed the ACLU has done nothing. I provided you with a court case that contradicts your claim. (By the way, the cite I provided you was not from wikipedia.)

Fine whatever

Exactly. You claimed that Willits had "more to do with the legalization of the distribution of porn than the ACLU". That claim of yours is your opinion.

I also live in Thailand doesn't mean I read Thai :2 cents: I do know the culture enough though.

It is the ONLY thing worth fighting for. If Minnie Mouse's dress is too short for some should we make it longer? We live by the rule of law, if you can't bear those laws and want Sharia law today you move to a country that has them today. If you don't want to move and want to change things from the inside you obey the rule of law and do what we all do make babies and vote. In the meantime if Minnie's dress hurts
your feelings. tough.

kinda amazing how few people writing in this thread understand what free speech even means. its a right that is written into demcratic constitutions to prevent governments from restricting it.

there is no free speech. Speech has a cost. When i put pictures of myself drunk & stupid on facebook, & i cant get a job, my speech had a cost.

Yes. anyone can insult muslims, jews, christians. but you need to use your brain. insult a jew in texas, nothing will happen. insult a jew in the west bank, you might get shot. insult a black person on a college campus, nothing will happen. Insult one in compton, you might get shot.

the editors of charlie hebdo played with fire. They burned. none of that has anything to do with freedom to insult people, because there is no such freedom at all. insult someone, you might get your ass beat, you might get shot. thats the law of the jungle. Sorry that all the trappings of the first world cloud that fact.

none of this is to justify murder. people should not be killed over insults. But that is an idealistic thought & not a realistic one. in the real world, people die because they cut their sons allowance by $200. insanity will never be purged from our world, sorry. Intelligent people use discretion who, where & when they insult. Duh.

:2 cents:

i don't get how anyone can blame the people that got shot - in the middle of western Europe - this is surreal.

^^This^^

If you live in a democracy like the UK, France, Germany, you are governed by the rule of law. You have every right to use your freedom as you see fit within those boundaries. no if's and but's.

in fact you underestimate the numbers of leftists in france.
Usually if you use this sentence in france, you are suspected to be racist and antisemit.
Leftists are mostly against an unrestricted freedom of speech and their political correctness is easy to trigger.

I'm not able to find a translation for this:
Terrorisme intellectuel — Wikipédia

intellectual terrorism ?

She was wearing a short skirt she kinda deserved to be raped.... no, fuck you :2 cents:

Judeo Christianity,
get loving.

this is a nice gesture :) :thumbsup lets see what they can do :)

do you speak french too ?

ps: i'm getting fucking tired of this "requiem for a dream" music

Really we are all be swamped to the point of being minorities ?

Nothing like exaggeration to inflame a situation and make rational debate more difficult.

It would mean more than 30 million muslims have come to the UK. That's strange as the 2nd language in the UK is Polish.

yes but poles are ok, since they can be used to dance

White Britons are now a minority in 4 towns and cities | UK | News | Daily Express
Ethnic minorities 'will make up one third of the population by 2050' | Daily Mail Online
'Ethnic majority' areas growing, says report - Telegraph

why not. if a circus act draws an audience & makes money poking an angry bear, would you call the circus act blameless when the bear kills the ringmaster?

do you suggest, had they never printed insulting cartoons, they woulda been shot anyway? I believe the nutjobs woulda killed others instead, given their targets were not random.

why do we act like nutjobs will respect rights? they wouldnt be nutjobs if they did that.

:helpme

“Marine Le Pen, can stop immigration, but can not stop the Islamization, which is a spiritual process..."

google: "Fatima Allaoui"
(sorry there is only results in french, but since you all speak french it's not a problem :winkwink:)

Towns = very small places

Lies, damn lies and then right wing populist rags

btw:
Aniconism in Islam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and that is the other factor, too...but trying to justify it that way would mean that France is already a country under the Sharia Law- which is not, right ?:winkwink:

nobody forced them too look at these cartoons...it's not like with noisy neighbour that you are forced to listen to his music - here you can just walk away and dont watch it, simple.

You get the point, they did this attack to enforce their law

if you don't understand it now, it won't make much difference whether i try to explain or not

just pray that not someday publishing pornography makes you a target as well because in that case you obviously asked to be shot

seriously - you don't see a connection here?

i wouldnt necessarily conflate the two. my work does not target a group with an intention of insulting it. theres a nuance there that, IMO, makes it different. I forbid religious symbols in my work, have asked models to take off religious necklaces.

some girl last year, melissa midwest or something, took naked pics in front of a church, posted them on this forum, got arrested. If she got shot, i would say she has some responsibility for antagonizing church nutters.

charlies business was to seek attention with deliberately controversial symbols. he was successful enough to get put on a hitlist made by wackos. You would agree they would be alive today had they not done that, yes?

unless we have some way to exterminate all the wackos on earth, speech will never be free in the ideal that most everyone is espousing. there really is no such thing as free speech as far as im concerned. there is only action, & consequences. perhaps i am somewhat nihilist or amoral on this matter.

i do want to be clear that i am not defending the actions of nutters. i am instead saying we live in a world without boundries like law. Only the lawful follow laws, & as far as i can tell we will never jail all the people who decide to become unhinged & avenge the desecration of their deity. the nutters are real & they dont care what you think your rights are.

I would suggest an intelligent person be careful in their use of satire. I dont see any US comedians poking fun at muslims. Why was charlie doing it? free speech? he only learned there really is a price & its not free at all. unless your rich & can afford the security, if you insult people & do it well & often & consistent, there will be blowback, & in rare cases, catastrophe. I believe i am being realistic. Its a law of human behavior & it should be respected.

just because you are free to insult, does that mean that you should? & if you do, should you consider your target & whether they may respond? is it wrong to say dont provoke nutters, or else?

Strange how the editor had two armed "secret service" agents with him 24/7 and the magazine allowed a pregnant/mother to answer the door...unescorted.

Says a lot about the people running the magazine.

These were contract killings not the lunacy of extremists. Al Qaeda after all was created by US as a para-military force/hit squad unit. This is blowback.

I've lived in Paris in the 12th arrondisemont. If you are not white and speak perfect French it is not always a fun place to be.

I know what you are trying to say but Charlie Hebdo didn't insult Islam or moderate Muslims.

How far do you retreat to accommodate a few people who, as you rightly pointed out, would have taken their anger out on society one way or another.

i believe that discretion can be found by listening to the feedback they get from other people, & from the lessons of prior events. Like in 2011 when their offices were burned, at that point they knew they were playing with fire. They kept it up.

somewhere someone posted the last cartoon by charb, alluding to no terror attacks so far in france. Thats so karma. i dont understand it, its very weird, those odd coincidences. very ironic & tragic.

i do hope the animals that did this get shot. I know the blowback from US intelligence is going to kill a lot more than 12 people, & they wont be in france. Fresh hellfires are being loaded in yemen & the CIA is acquiring new targets tonight. Innocents as well as the guilty are going to die soon, & their families will be agrieved, become jihadis, & the war goes on forever.

:2 cents:

http://i.imgur.com/SWum2NT.jpg

Charlie was one step too far, tomorrow the BBC? Who draws the line? Critical remarks on Islam can't be systematically banned from mainstream media.

I agree about Yemen but the guy who plowed his car into a crowd didn't shout free "Yemen", this hit squad didn't shout "Free Iraq". The gunmen were avenging the prophet.

8 year old pic. I would hope they tagged and deported the ones holding signs for beheadings and massacre, and if they were citizens, should have had their citizenship revoked. :disgust

No on both counts, I think they got their own sitcom on the BBC instead.

You obviously can't read french and you've obviously never read anything written by Voltaire. I also suspect that you've probably never even visited France. Just the same you've taken an interest in french culture and society so I might as well try and provide you with some information to reflect upon.

Let's try and start with this ;
Article 4 in the the French "Declaration of the rights of man and the citizen" - August 26th 1789

(The rights of the one individual ends where the rights of another begins)

With this in mind ask yourself how does one person's "Freedom of speech" take priority over article 2 that being another person's "right to life, liberty and security of person" ?

The truth of the matter is that it does NOT.
The magazine Charlie Hebdo is within its rights to express any point of view they wish. On the condition that any repercussions are purely and solely incumbent upon them.

When innocent lives that had NOTHING to do with those opinions expressed are killed because of opinions expressed by someone else their "Right To Life, Liberty and Security of Person" has been taken away... Taken away by those that express their opinion without regard to the safety of others.

nobody deserves to die for drawing comics...but the french guys were not in to the buggs bunny and daffy duck kind of comics...

to call them "artists" or "cartoonists" is not really true is it?...

maybe "professional trolls"...or "desperate for money" would fit better...

do they deserve to die? in my opinion: of course not!

am I surprised? well this is another story completely...not surprised in the least...

I do not think they deserved to die or even get beaten or what not...but the only thing comical about these "cartoonists" is that they called what they did "art" and "Freedom of speech" when it was in fact pure trolling for $$

Damn straight that they did not deserve to die....... but why bother making such an obvious insult to a religion whose membership they fully well know is intolerant of insults? It's totally provocative especially in the context of other behaviors in France which look anti-Islamic.

When you sit down and analyse it, it's not really freedom of speech, it's freedom of stupidity. :2 cents:

My guess is that this just helps to draw a dividing line and pit one side against the other which is exactly what both sides want..... ie both sides want the argument to be fierce so it can escalate.

That's not true. Your stupidity is LIMITLESS, timeless, borderless and incurable. :2 cents:

You forgot that article 4 ends with "These limits can only be determined by law". even with France's strict anti-racist laws the court of appeal confirmed the cartoons targeted only terrorists or fundamentalists??not the whole Muslim community

Also please explain how Charlie Hebdo impeded the rights of Muslims or any other religious group?



Lifes were lost because some dumbfuck losers who couldn't make anything of themselves wanted to be part of something and found a cause.

the only thing these nutjobs accomplished was the Fame. They are the same as newtown child shooter adam lanza - mad people with a grudge, & they chose their target to evoke revulsion from the public. mission accomplished.

the idealogy of terror that fed their rage is an ongoing phenom. its hard to say how there is ever final victory over the idealogy, other than the middle east needs an age of enlightenment & prosperity that makes jihadism obsolete like the KKK. The US gave it their best shot recent in afghanistan, but theres limits to what a country half a world away can do.

The local people themselves must evolve away from tribalism & sectarianism. good luck with that. maybe the US should drop iphones on syria along with bombs.

:pimp

I've explained to you

• (1)french culture
• (2) the difficulties of modern french society
• (3) the french laws
• (4) and the situation.

Obviously you're intentionally being daft because all you want to do is argue for the sake of "feeling tough.". You have neither an interest in trying to understand the events that occurred in France nor do you even care about the events. Your stake in the conversation is for purely selfish reasons of stroking your own ego. (ie: Feeling tough)

Furthermore I'm not interested in an infantile tirade of censorious language. Such behavior adds nothing to the correctness of any point of view someone may try to express. All it does is demonstrate someone's lack of maturity and education.


So...
If you want to be respected then act respectable.
And if you want to be treated like an adult then act like one.

shame but not man, just can listen a bit, but cannot speak. i wish i had more time in chamonix, i mean i wish i have been drinking less and learning more :) :thumbsup maybe next time :)