France: Charlie Hebdo Office shootings [and further terrorist attacks] - Page 33

marton · #**641** 10.01.2015, 22:45

	Quote:	Slaphead
	Ah well. You can keep the thanks, marton.

French, not one of my finest accomplishments

Although I have drunk enough good French wine in my life that it should be in the blood.
Quote "Charlie Hebdo: Notre édition spéciale" .......

Thanks also....

Tom1234 · #**642** 10.01.2015, 22:50

	Quote:	porsch1909
	I'm not sure what you're trying to get at or what point you're trying to make. Spell it out for me. .

Actually it was your post where I did not understand what you were trying to get at:

	Quote:	porsch1909
	Respect someone elses faith and sacntities and in return they should respect your freedom of speech. No need to insult someone's religion, just as there is no need to condemn someone's ability to excersize free speech. Both sides require responsibility, which a minority on each side seem to lack unfortunately.

What the hell do you mean by it? It reads like a veiled threat against free speech.

Do you not understand the concept of free speech? Why on earth should religion be exempt from that?

porsch1909 · #**643** 10.01.2015, 22:52

	Quote:	Tom1234
	Actually it was your post where I did not understand what you were trying to get at: What the hell do you mean by it? It reads like a veiled threat against free speech. Do you not understand the concept of free speech? Why on earth should religion be exempt from that?

It's not a veiled threat against anything. I'm just saying everyone should be nice to each other. You're the one reading between the lines.

In fact my post says not to condemn someone's right to free speech.

We've had this problem with you reading what you want to read rather what is actually written before haven't we Tom?

Tom1234 · #**644** 10.01.2015, 22:56

	Quote:	porsch1909
	It's not a veiled threat against anything. I'm just saying everyone should be nice to each other. You're the one reading between the lines.

Well I won't write "That would be lovely" like I did last time as you replied with the nonsensical:

	Quote:
	I'm not sure what you're trying to get at or what point you're trying to make. Spell it out for me.

porsch1909 · #**645** 10.01.2015, 22:57

	Quote:	Tom1234
	Well I won't write "That would be lovely" like I did last time as you replied with the nonsensical:

OK then?

#**646** 10.01.2015, 23:01

[QUOTE=porsch1909;2315895Sorry I can't interact with you because you go crying to the mods and then they ban me. I'd appreciate it if you don't try and bait me into a discussion with you. Thanks.[/QUOTE]

So, out of interest, how many have been told, via red rep, that we are not allowed to 'interact' with you on EF? There I was thinking I was all alone

porsch1909 · #**647** 10.01.2015, 23:10

	Quote:
	So, out of interest, how many have been told, via red rep, that we are not allowed to 'interact' with you on EF? There I was thinking I was all alone

I was told by the mods not to interact with him because he kept crying to them when I said something he didn't like. I don't mind him otherwise but I'd rather not get banned over it

You on the other hand don't leave me alone for whatever reason. I actually feel a bit sorry for you so have given up trying

#**648** 10.01.2015, 23:54

	Quote:	porsch1909
	You on the other hand don't leave me alone for whatever reason. I actually feel a bit sorry for you so have given up trying

Some of my very best friends are coloured! They like curry, you know...

greenmount · #**649** 11.01.2015, 00:54

	Quote:	Medea Fleecestealer
	Really? I found at least 4 Charlie Hebdo cartoons on Judaism and they also had a regular column lambasting the religion for a while so Google tells me.

They should have done it more! They weren't convincing enough... I'm outraged I didn't find anything about the Chinese and situation in Tibet.

msmaddymax · #**650** 11.01.2015, 01:37

Amazing, isn't, how somehow Jews are always dragged into the conversation even when they have sweet eff all to do with anything. Your stream of thinking perhaps reflects why these psychos targetted innocent French Jews just days after the Charlie attack. Apparently you're not all that familiar with Charlie Hebdo because they certainly did poke fun at Jews like they did everyone and everything else. So please take your Jewish conspiracy elsewhere.

	Quote:
	How do you apply this to, say, Christians- whose interpretation of the Bible comes in 1000s and more guises? Including of course the 'cultural kind- those who are no longer believers that state vehemently, day in, day out, that we 'have to fight for our Christian values'. I feel so lost today, and perhaps also very British- surrounded here by French and Swiss who seem to come in 2 versions. Those who say we should execute all Muslims at birth, and send the rest 'back where they come from' (doh!) unless they become more French than the French, Swiss than the Swiss- and the other group who categorically state that Free Speech has to prevail, come what may - as long as it does not include a) discussing 'free speech and its possible limits' and b) discussing why Charlie Hebdo never lampooned zionism and sacked one of their founder members in the 90s for mocking Zarkozy's pseudo conversion to Judaism to marry a tycoon's daughter, and for wanting to mock and criticize zionism and the treatment of Palestinians.

porsch1909 · #**651** 11.01.2015, 01:53

	Quote:	msmaddymax
	Amazing, isn't, how somehow Jews are always dragged into the conversation even when they have sweet eff all to do with anything. Your stream of thinking perhaps reflects why these psychos targetted innocent French Jews just days after the Charlie attack. Apparently you're not all that familiar with Charlie Hebdo because they certainly did poke fun at Jews like they did everyone and everything else. So please take your Jewish conspiracy elsewhere.

Except they fired a cartoonist for an anti Semitic cartoon

MrVertigo · #**652** 11.01.2015, 01:57

	Quote:	msmaddymax
	Amazing, isn't, how somehow Jews are always dragged into the conversation even when they have sweet eff all to do with anything. Your stream of thinking perhaps reflects why these psychos targetted innocent French Jews just days after the Charlie attack. Apparently you're not all that familiar with Charlie Hebdo because they certainly did poke fun at Jews like they did everyone and everything else. So please take your Jewish conspiracy elsewhere.

i think you are on the wrong track.....Siné who was working at Charlie Hebdo did a cartoon on Sarkozy's son converting to judaism to marry Jessica Sebouan-Darty (very rich jewish family in France). Siné was accused of antisemitism by Philippe Val (director of Charlie Hebdo) and close friend to Sarkozy. Siné was fired. There was a prosecution and the judges judged in favor of Siné. That was the big question on "freedom of speech" at Charlie when in touches powerful jewish people in France.

msmaddymax · #**653** 11.01.2015, 02:15

So because there was once a case where a powerful person exerted his power to control something at a company, that translates into Jews being the only group that Charlie Hebdo didn't lampoon? Sorry, the leap in logic is too far.

(As an aside, but speaking to another point in this thread, I don't believe Holocaust denial should be illegal. Much better IMO to know who one's enemies are than to force them underground.)

MrVertigo · #**654** 11.01.2015, 02:19

	Quote:	msmaddymax
	So because there was once a case where a powerful person exerted his power to control something at a company, that translates into Jews being the only group that Charlie Hebdo didn't lampoon? Sorry, the leap in logic is too far. (As an aside, but speaking to another point in this thread, I don't believe Holocaust denial should be illegal. Much better IMO to know who one's enemies are than to force them underground.)

No. My point was that for Charlie Hebdo the notion of "absolute freedom of speech" was actually more relative. Another example: the did not write a single article about the Clearstream political scandal in France involving Sarkozy. The lawyer of Clearstream company is also the lawyer of Charlie Hebdo. This was especially true under the direction of Philippe Val who left in 2009.

msmaddymax · #**655** 11.01.2015, 03:18

	Quote:	MrVertigo
	No. My point was that for Charlie Hebdo the notion of "absolute freedom of speech" was actually more relative. Another example: the did not write a single article about the Clearstream political scandal in France involving Sarkozy. The lawyer of Clearstream company is also the lawyer of Charlie Hebdo. This was especially true under the direction of Philippe Val who left in 2009.

Gotcha. And that's a fair point.

farmadoc · #**656** 11.01.2015, 03:29

	Quote:	MrVertigo
	No. My point was that for Charlie Hebdo the notion of "absolute freedom of speech" was actually more relative. Another example: the did not write a single article about the Clearstream political scandal in France involving Sarkozy. The lawyer of Clearstream company is also the lawyer of Charlie Hebdo. This was especially true under the direction of Philippe Val who left in 2009.

Charlie Hebdo wasn't a person, it was a publication and the publication had freedom of speech - it wasn't relative. The journalists who worked for the publication also had the same amount of free speech, except when they wanted their speech to appear in a publication they worked for but didn't own. In this case they were subject to the editor in the same was as every newspaper and magazine in the world. The case of the false accusation of anti-semitism was exactly that. The anti-semitism accusation was an excuse to protect his friend Mr Sarkozy. We know this because Hebdot produced prolific and virulent anti-semitic content a selection of which are found here

http://alyaexpress-news.com/2015/01/...-charly-hebdo/

greenmount · #**657** 11.01.2015, 07:46

	Quote:	msmaddymax
	Amazing, isn't, how somehow Jews are always dragged into the conversation even when they have sweet eff all to do with anything. Your stream of thinking perhaps reflects why these psychos targetted innocent French Jews just days after the Charlie attack. Apparently you're not all that familiar with Charlie Hebdo because they certainly did poke fun at Jews like they did everyone and everything else. So please take your Jewish conspiracy elsewhere.

If it wasn't about such a tragic massacre, it would have actually been entertaining to read all this discussion. There's something deeply rooted and visceral against the Jews in many people's minds here. They would use any opportunity to turn the discussion against them or at least to mention them as the negative element somehow.
12 people were executed for a stupid reason. You'd have thought the discussion focused on the this fact, on freedom of speech/press, etc. On how the Kouachi brothers born and raised in France acted like that, how was that possible...

MidfieldGeneral · #**658** 11.01.2015, 09:26

	Quote:	greenmount
	There's something deeply rooted and visceral against the Jews in many people's minds here.

On EF? If so, then please name names!

#**659** 11.01.2015, 09:34

I just read an interesting article on the relativity of "freedom of speech". What constitutes freedom of speech in one culture or perhaps even in one publication is relative. No absolutes because freedom of speech is linked to cultural representations of hate speech, libel, etc. And of course, subject to editorial approval. The point that the author made was that some of what Charlie Hebdo published would be way beyond other cultures' notion of freedom of speech. Nevertheless, never a reason for a masacre.

The point was more, that people defending freedom of speech might be surprised at what they are defending. And again, i'm not saying that is wrong, but in determining the meaning of free speech, someone's preferences are prioritized. Still, the response should never be violence.

Personally, i don't get Holocaust denial. The impact of history is subjective, but i don't quite understand how one explains/denies the physical evidence. But that's for another discussion.

Chuff · #**660** 11.01.2015, 09:43

	Quote:	porsch1909
	Respect someone elses faith and sacntities and in return they should respect your freedom of speech. No need to insult someone's religion, just as there is no need to condemn someone's ability to excersize free speech. Both sides require responsibility, which a minority on each side seem to lack unfortunately.

Why should we have any respect for extreme fundamentalists and the hatred they preach against Western values and civilization?

	Quote:
	I just read an interesting article on the relativity of "freedom of speech". What constitutes freedom of speech in one culture or perhaps even in one publication is relative. No absolutes because freedom of speech is linked to cultural representations of hate speech, libel, etc. And of course, subject to editorial approval. The point that the author made was that some of what Charlie Hebdo published would be way beyond other cultures' notion of freedom of speech. Nevertheless, never a reason for a masacre. The point was more, that people defending freedom of speech might be surprised at what they are defending. And again, i'm not saying that is wrong, but in determining the meaning of free speech, someone's preferences are prioritized. Still, the response should never be violence.

Free speech is obviously defined by the laws of the country the person is exercising the right to speak freely in. In France as well as the vast majority of Western Europe, it is legal to exercise that right. Legally, and morally, they are doing nothing wrong by expressing their personal thoughts and criticism of modern religion via the medium they do it in.