User Tag List

First 7891011 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 104

  1. #81
    Gotta catch you all! Blackmail!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    2,934

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post

    But these groups are not alone, only today Pope Francis came out against free speech, again only from the highest motives.
    Yes, I've heard the news.

    Shame on him.

    Curiously, in Continental Europe, it's rather the Left who defended freedom of expression and the right to blaspheme. The situation here seems to be the opposite to what you describe in Australia.
    But I must admit I fail to understand why so-called Progressive men and Liberalism should be associated with the most backward and reactionary religious lobbies and defend the same unenlightened causes. Viewed from my French perspective, it looks like a political oxymoron.
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI
    Likes Rasofy liked this post

  2. #82
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,536

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackmail! View Post
    Yes, I've heard the news.

    Shame on him.

    Curiously, in Continental Europe, it's rather the Left who defended freedom of expression and the right to blaspheme. The situation here seems to be the opposite to what you describe in Australia.
    But I must admit I fail to understand why so-called Progressive men and Liberalism should be associated with the most backward and reactionary religious lobbies and defend the same unenlightened causes. Viewed from my French perspective, it looks like a political oxymoron.
    Yes, it is certainly very odd. But the Marxist Left, who are now confined to the Universities, have made an alliance with Islam. This is odd because the Marxist Left are atheist while the Islamists are theists. It is a bit of a mystery to me but I can only think their alliance is a reflection of their common enemy, liberal democracy.
    Likes grey_beard liked this post

  3. #83
    Gotta catch you all! Blackmail!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    2,934

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    Yes, it is certainly very odd. But the Marxist Left, who are now confined to the Universities, have made an alliance with Islam. This is odd because the Marxist Left are atheist while the Islamists are theists. It is a bit of a mystery to me but I can only think their alliance is a reflection of their common enemy, liberal democracy.
    I understand and many US articles I've read so far seems to confirm this odd theory.

    But what's even odder is that the former editor in chief of Charlie Hebdo, Charb, was a Marxist himself. His family required that the Internationale was played during his funeral.
    So in a way, many Anglo-Saxon Marxists are in fact defaming one of their peer, and accused him of being a bigot racist and a Far right activist. Nonsense!

    Truly, this killing seems to have revealed a huge dividing line between the Anglo-Saxon world and the other Western Democracies. In France, in Germany, in Italy, in Netherlands... we all knew Charlie Hebdo was a Leftist weekly. It was obvious. Their main target was the Front National, the true French Far right.

    For instance in Canada, the only State where local newspapers had the guts to publish Charlie Hebdo's cartoons was Québec. Everywhere else, they were banned, just like in the US.

    -----

    Let me show you an example of how far the Anglo-Saxon Left is spreading big lies about Charlie Hebdo.

    Unmournable Bodies - The New Yorker

    It's simply disgusting, because the author is perversely distorting facts and even dares to compare Charlie Hebdo's team with would-be nazis (he's purposefully using that word)!

    "But in recent years the magazine has gone specifically for racist and Islamophobic provocations, and its numerous anti-Islam images have been inventively perverse, featuring hook-nosed Arabs, bullet-ridden Korans, variations on the theme of sodomy, and mockery of the victims of a massacre. (...)

    Blacks have hardly had it easier in Charlie Hebdo: one of the magazine’s cartoons depicts the Minister of Justice Christiane Taubira, who is of Guianese origin, as a monkey "



    Either this man (Teju Cole) is unbelievably stupid, either he can't understand jokes past the second degree. Or either (more likely), he has a political agenda when he tries to defame the cartoonists who were brutally murdered. The same can be said with Joe Sacco, since he referred indirectly to this cartoon too, without having properly understood it.

    He is the cartoon of Christiane Taubira published by Charlie Hebdo a few years ago:



    But now, you have to put it into context and with the article and text it was illustrating.
    During the past weeks, our Far Right in France was deliberately insulting Christiane Taubira and compared her several times to a monkey. It was shocking.
    What Charlie Hebdo did was to ridicule this blatant expression of racism and that's why you see, in their cartoon, the logo of the FN and the mention "Rassemblement Bleu Raciste" ( in place of "Rassemblement Bleu Marine" which was the official slogan of the FN since Marine Le Pen was their leader). The purpose of this cartoon was to warn and remind everybody that the FN was not a normal party, but a truly, deeply racist one, and that you cannot vote for them while pretending otherwise.
    And it's even more obvious when you know that in real life, Taubira and Charb were friends !

    As a matter of fact, the only persons who accused Charlie Hebdo of racism were either Neo-Nazis like Alain Soral, Al-Qaeda sympathizers or obscure Stalinian groups of extremists.
    Thus, I can say I am deeply surprised to witness the Anglo-Saxon press using the same arguments against Charlie Hebdo... than French Stalinists and French Hitlerists.

    As you explained, the enemies of liberal democracy.

    It is a very odd alliance indeed.
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI

  4. #84
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,420

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackmail! View Post
    Freedom of speech cannot be complete without the simple right to blaspheme.
    Abso-friggin-lutely.

  5. #85
    Gotta catch you all! Blackmail!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    2,934

    Default

    Shame on the Anglo-Saxon medias for their cowardice and total hypocrisy, and the way they find excuses for terrorists to act the way they did, even if these medias have to LIE and blame France (Cf Shame on you New York Times and Fox News). Caroline Fourest is right to show that what they are doing is exactly what the terrorists want, that it is exactly the same cowardice when Hollywood refused to show and distribute a recent movie because of Northern Korea threats.

    The case for showing Charlie Hedbo cover - Video - Media

    What we see now is a great dividing cultural line in Western countries (and democracies). But believe me, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, Italy, Québec, Brasil, Japan ...etc... will not renounce to freedom of blasphemy that easily just because some American bigots and hypocrits ask them to do so. On this matter, the US are siding with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia: let them assume how far they are in fact betraying their own core values, and how they will nonetheless find justifications and excuses to act so, and worst, try to teach lessons of so-called "tolerance" to our countries.
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI

  6. #86
    Gotta catch you all! Blackmail!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    2,934

    Default

    About Anglo-Saxon medias and their cowardly and irresponsible censorship, here is a (brilliant) article of Caroline Fourest:

    Violence Against Charlie Hebdo: The Globalization of Moral and Intellectual Confusion | Caroline Fourest

    Violence Against Charlie Hebdo: The Globalization of Moral and Intellectual Confusion

    Excerpt:

    Terrorists not integrated in society?

    Talking about irresponsibility, we were left speechless by the flood of clichés about France in the USA during these terrible attacks.

    Ignore Fox News, which confused priority urban areas in France with lawless Muslim areas resembling Baghdad or Kabul, or the maps of "no go areas" highlighted in red, or their pseudo expert who at least made us laugh during this terrible time.

    But Fox News is not the only news channel which outrageously and indecently oversimplified. Even Obama, who couldn't find time to come to France, verged on the indecent when he explained that terrorism is linked to poor integration of Muslims... not like in the USA of course... As if there have never been any American terrorists. May we remind him that social discrimination rarely explains, and can never justify, terrorism?

    Did the son of a billionaire Osama Bin Laden really finance the 9/11 attacks and want to attack Charlie Hebdo because he was "poorly integrated"? Or was it because the Algerian GIA islamists were "poorly integrated" that they provoked a bloodbath in Algeria throughout the 1990s? Or that the Iraqi and Syrian jihadists created the Islamic State?

    How can one say in the same sentence that Muslims are the first victims of terrorism, which is true, while explaining terrorism by their "lack of integration"? According to this "logic" it is because they are not sufficiently integrated in their Muslim countries that Muslims kill each other. So Muslims are racist towards Muslims and this racism would explain how radical political Islam came to be in Egypt of Pakistan?

    Is it because they were born in France that the Kouachi brothers wanted to take up jihad against the Americans after Abu Ghraib and an American war against terrorism which was more destructive than effective?

    The truth is that islamist terrorism, just like war, provides a meaning and adrenalin to the frustrated who dream of firing a Kalashnikov and having sex slaves. The visceral and patriarchal explanation is more valid than the social explanation, which is not to say that better social policies are not called for in order to reduce hormonal temptations.

    The response to terrorism is not to apologize, but to stand firm on ideals and principles. And that is why the censorship of Charlie Hebdo by certain American and British newspapers is such a serious issue.

    Anglo-Saxon censorship

    The editorial staff debated, they supported Charlie, but the editors decided... Most of them censored the front page of Charlie Hebdo, just as they censored the Danish cartoons in 2006, claiming that they could offend Muslims.

    Today some say that it is for security reasons. It's a step forward. But would we be in danger if the world media had simply published the Danish cartoons or the "front page" of Charlie instead of making a taboo of them, instead of giving the impression that they justified extreme reactions?

    Their refusal to inform reveals a huge cultural gap concerning secularism and freedom of expression.

    America founded her democracy on freedom of religion, France was founded on freedom of conscience (freedom to believe or not to believe) and secularism. As for England, it is neither a republic nor secular, but a parliamentary monarchy with a State religion. This privileged religion makes her more careful when dealing with the sensitivities of others minority religions, in the name of a religious ban which does not even exist.

    The Quran does not ban the representation of Muhammad. It bans idolatry, i.e. exactly what the fanatics do by worshiping him and killing in his name in order to prevent his image being desacralized... in Charlie Hebdo.

    Even if the Quran were to ban the representation of Muhammad, the ban would not apply to non-Muslims and secular democracies. Or if we follow this logic to the extreme, we would have to ban for everyone, everywhere, all representations of the prophets of Islam. As Jesus is one of them we would have to ban Jesus on the Cross in churches and films about Jesus in cinemas. And why stop at religions? Logically, to avoid giving offense, we should also ban Hollywood films which upset the North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un and, to go completely global, we should import the laws of dictators and fanatics into our democracies to destroy them.
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI

  7. #87
    Gotta catch you all! Blackmail!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    2,934

    Default

    Article from the New Yorker (written by Adam Gopnik)

    Two Views on Speech - The New Yorker

    But the view that governs the opposite position, in Canada and Europe alike, is not irrational or truly hostile to liberty. The laws and rules vary, but all have a simple distinction at their core, which is that criticizing an ideology, including a religious ideology, however vociferously, is different from inducing hatred of a people or persons. In plain English, hate-speech laws are based on the simple truth that there is a huge difference between an insult and a threat, and that it isn’t actually that hard to tell one from the other.

    (...)

    Mill thought that real “harm” was the only reason to ever censor free speech. How to define that “harm” will always be a controversial subject—but real harm is surely something more than hurt feelings. Ideologues, of course, disagree, for they are people for whom selves and ideas have become so inseparable that any harm done to one is indistinguishable from an injury done to the other. But this is why we call them ideologues. The rest of us can recognize that mocking a faith is not the same as speaking in ways that threaten a new massacre, or condone an old one. This is the reason that so much of the free world sees questions of free speech other than Americans do. They may well yet move toward us. But we may well yet move toward them.
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI

  8. #88
    Theta Male Julius_Van_Der_Beak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    CROW
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    9,045

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackmail! View Post
    Shame on the Anglo-Saxon medias for their cowardice and total hypocrisy, and the way they find excuses for terrorists to act the way they did, even if these medias have to LIE and blame France (Cf Shame on you New York Times and Fox News). Caroline Fourest is right to show that what they are doing is exactly what the terrorists want, that it is exactly the same cowardice when Hollywood refused to show and distribute a recent movie because of Northern Korea threats.

    The case for showing Charlie Hedbo cover - Video - Media

    What we see now is a great dividing cultural line in Western countries (and democracies). But believe me, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, Italy, Québec, Brasil, Japan ...etc... will not renounce to freedom of blasphemy that easily just because some American bigots and hypocrits ask them to do so. On this matter, the US are siding with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia: let them assume how far they are in fact betraying their own core values, and how they will nonetheless find justifications and excuses to act so, and worst, try to teach lessons of so-called "tolerance" to our countries.
    I wondered what you had to say about this. Glad to see we're on the same page. Have you read any of Slavoj Zizek's thoughts on the subject?

    The idea that groups like ISIS and Al-Qaeda would leave people alone if people were more respectful of their religion is ridiculous. Whatever issues with prejudice and discrimination might exist in Europe in no way "complicates" what happened in Paris.

    The simple fact is that if a Christian massacred employees of an art museum for having a sculpture of Christ dripped in pee, the same people equivocating with Charlie Hebdo would be condemning it. They would be right to do so. However, the same standard ought to apply to Muslims.
    [Trump's] rhetoric is not an abuse of power. In the same way that it's also not against the law to do a backflip off of the roof of your house onto your concrete driveway. It's just mind-numbingly stupid and, to say the least, counterproductive. - Bush did 9-11


    This is not going to go the way you think....

    Visit my Johari:
    http://kevan.org/johari?name=Birddude78

  9. #89
    Gotta catch you all! Blackmail!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    2,934

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    According to muslim expert, Brigitte Gabriel, there are over 700 'no-go' zones in France. These are muslim controlled territories and if the French police or fire department tries to enter these zones, they get shot at. France, like Sweden, is too far gone. This multi-cultural experiment with flooding the country with millions of muslims has failed spectacularly. This is yet another manifestation of destructive, leftist ideology. I don't feel sorry for them one bit.
    You should be careful before you want to spread these kind of xenophobic lies. It's hate speech at its best.

    Paris moves to sue Fox News for false reporting on Muslim 'no-go zones' | World news | The Guardian
    "A man who only drinks water has a secret to hide from his fellow-men" -Baudelaire

    7w8 SCUxI

  10. #90
    Senior Member riva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    2,079

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackmail! View Post
    You should be careful before you want to spread these kind of xenophobic lies. It's hate speech at its best.

    Paris moves to sue Fox News for false reporting on Muslim 'no-go zones' | World news | The Guardian
    Not a single no go zone?

    I though didn't believe in the number 700 believed that there must be atleast a few no go zones because i have seen quite a few of those here in south asia.

    It is coming blackmail. Right now they 'just' want to kill the jews in europe, but once the devout islamic population grows upto around 10% you'd start noticing the fireworks, and although secularism is beautiful, no matter how secular, free and high the living standards of your countries are it wouldn't be enough.

    Why would it be enough? Because according to the koran muslims are much more priviledged than infidels because muslims are right, infidels are wrong, sharia is the law that all must follow.
    .

Similar Threads

  1. Norway Terrorist Attacks
    By MacGuffin in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 166
    Last Post: 08-07-2011, 02:48 PM
  2. Brutal Attack On Trans. Woman In McDonald's: Did bystanders do enough?
    By iwakar in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 115
    Last Post: 05-05-2011, 07:29 AM
  3. April Fools came early to Georgia with fake Russian attack on TV.
    By Sniffles in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-14-2010, 12:17 AM
  4. Teachers stage fake gun attack on kids
    By digesthisickness in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 12-29-2009, 04:35 PM
  5. Conservative attacks on health confirmed
    By rivercrow in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 09-11-2008, 03:36 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO