Does Charlie Hebdo have any liability for inciting a terrorist attack?

[EE_]

They were fire bombed once before and knew terrorist would get upset with their cartoons again.
We have laws for inciting a riot in the US. Is what CH has done any different from encouraging an angry mob to commit a crime?

What do you think this little soiree of 80,000 law enforcement, emergency vehicles and equipment cost France?

What CB did, they did for profit, now it cost France a great deal, not to mention the lives lost and the families that were affected. What do you tell the families that lost loved ones? Oh Well, shit happens?

Freedom of the press and the dangers of provocation
By Tim Lister, CNN
Updated 3:36 PM ET, Wed January 7, 2015

(CNN)Wednesday's attack in Paris was not the first attack on the offices of Charlie Hebdo, nor the first terror attack planned against a European publication. But it was by far the most lethal act of terrorism to target the media in modern Europe.

It raises many troubling questions for the future of a free press, unhindered in its reporting by fear. And it will reopen the debate on where freedom of speech becomes incitement and where restraint equals self-censorship.

Charlie Hebdo has published many cartoons lampooning Islamist extremism and, more recently, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. One recent cartoon featured ISIS' leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Under editor Stephane Charbonnier, who was among those killed Wednesday, it has been one of several European publications to make a point of taking on extremism and religious intolerance -- knowing it risked deadly consequences. Even when these publications have come under attack, they have continued plowing a lonely and provocative furrow.

Charlie Hebdo's offices were destroyed by a gasoline bomb in 2011 after the magazine carried a caricature of the Prophet Mohammed on the cover, saying "100 lashes if you are not dying of laughter." A cartoon inside showed the prophet with a clown's nose. It also announced he would be editor-in-chief of the next edition. No one was hurt in that attack.

Depiction of the prophet is prohibited in Islam and, along with desecration of the Quran, enrages jihadists even more than images of prison abuse or airstrikes -- precisely because it is aimed directly at the prophet and the holy book.


Why are Mohammed images so offensive? 01:46
PLAY VIDEO

Charbonnier said at the time of the 2011 attack that it was the work of "idiot extremists" and insisted the magazine had the right to poke fun at anything. And then-French Prime Minister Francois Fillon said at the time: "Freedom of expression is an inalienable right in our democracy and all attacks on the freedom of the press must be condemned with the greatest firmness."

But Wednesday's attack shows that condemnation and round-the-clock protection of the media are two entirely different things. There was a regular police presence at the offices of Charlie Hebdo, but the officers appear to have been as much a target as the journalists -- an easy, static target for a well-organized attack.

And what organizations merit protection? In the aftermath of Wednesday's attack, French Prime Minister Manuel Valls announced that "media organizations, major stores, religious places and public transport (in the Paris area) will be provided with reinforced security." It is the obvious response, but some would argue that this is just what terrorists want: a climate of fear.

In February 2006, Charlie Hebdo reprinted cartoons of the prophet that had first appeared in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, itself the target of several plots by Islamist extremists. The magazine said it was reprinting the cartoons in support of press freedom, but then-French President Jacques Chirac criticized the decision as "overt provocation." The editor of another French newspaper was fired for reprinting the cartoons.

Charlie Hebdo was also taken to court by two Islamic groups in France but acquitted of incitement to racism. The court decided there had been no "deliberate intention of directly and gratuitously offending the Muslim community."

Charlie Hebdo: Satirical magazine is no stranger to controversy

That case encapsulated the dilemma for governments and the media in Europe. When does the exercise of free speech become incitement, provocation or an act of racism? And is self-censorship necessary in a multicultural society where restraint helps social peace and provocation can bring violence?

The original publication of the cartoons in Jyllands-Posten in September 2005 caused riots across the Muslim world in which an estimated 130 people were killed. The newspaper received more than 100 death threats.

Flemming Rose, the culture editor of the newspaper, later published an article in The Washington Post entitled "Why I Published Those Cartoons," which is worth quoting at length:

"I commissioned the cartoons in response to several incidents of self-censorship in Europe caused by widening fears and feelings of intimidation in dealing with issues related to Islam. ... The idea wasn't to provoke gratuitously -- and we certainly didn't intend to trigger violent demonstrations throughout the Muslim world. Our goal was simply to push back self-imposed limits on expression that seemed to be closing in tighter."

He gave an example, saying one Danish comedian had told Jyllands-Posten that he had no problem urinating on the Bible in front of a camera, but he dared not do the same thing with the Quran.

The Tate Gallery in London had confronted the same dilemma -- withdrawing a work called "God is Great" by John Latham which depicted torn images of the Bible, the Quran and the Talmud. The Tate said that in the wake of the July 2005 bombings, displaying the work would "not be appropriate."

Some have argued that restraint shows respect and is not cowing to extremism. As Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams argued in 2008 for stronger measures against incitement of religious hatred, saying that the "sound of a prosperous and socially secure voice claiming unlimited freedom both to define and to condemn the beliefs of a minority grates on the ear."

There are also some who see the publication of provocative images as a cheap way to publicity. The critic Michael Kimmelman wrote in The New York Times at the height of the cartoon controversy that "modern artists and their promoters forever pander to a like-minded audience by goading obvious targets, hoping to incite reactions that pass for political point-scoring."

If anything, the atmosphere in Europe is now more combustible than it was in 2006. Recession has brought unemployment -- in France it is rising fast -- and with it, less tolerance for immigration and minorities, even when they are well established. The anti-immigrant National Front in France topped the poll in last year's elections to the European Parliament.

In the UK, the anti-Europe and anti-immigration party UKIP has made spectacular gains in by-elections. And in Germany, a group calling itself Pegida -- Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West -- drew nearly 20,000 people to a recent rally in Dresden. Despite condemnation from Chancellor Angela Merkel as well as German business and labor unions, Pegida continues undaunted to challenge the establishment.

At the same time, the rise of Islamist militancy has seeped into many of the Muslim immigrant communities that have grown across Europe in the last generation. Younger Muslims, with few prospects and often alienated by what they perceive as victimization by police, are vulnerable to recruitment by extremists. Several thousand from across Europe have already gone to Syria and Iraq, many to fight for jihadist groups such as ISIS and al Nusra. The French Interior Ministry estimates that hundreds of French citizens have left or plan to leave to join the ranks of jihadist groups in Syria or Iraq.

A video released by ISIS in November showed three French jihadists calling on other French Muslims to join the fight or carry out attacks in France. One of the fighters said: "Terrorize them and do not allow them to sleep due to fear and horror. There are weapons and cars available and targets ready to be hit. Even poison is available, so poison the water and food of at least one of the enemies of Allah. Kill them and spit in their faces and run over them with your cars."

Others have already come back from Syria and Iraq. One was arrested and charged in the gun attack on a Jewish museum in Brussels last year; another was detained in the south of France after bomb-making equipment was found in his apartment.

France and Britain have introduced tougher anti-terrorism laws that allow for the confiscation of passports of those suspected of intending to travel to Syria and Iraq to join militant groups. But a free society doesn't have the resources, the laws or even perhaps the will to track all such individuals.

Ultimately, journalists who want to publish material that's clearly offensive or inflammatory to some will have to accept the inherent risks in this new environment. Some, like Flemming Rose at Jyllands-Posten, accept that.

"If a believer demands that I, as a nonbeliever, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect, but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy," he wrote.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/07/europe/paris-attack-and-press-freedom/

[crimethink]

EE_ sure has a hard-on for promoting "hate speech" prohibitions. Why is that?

"If you want to know who rules your society, determine who it is you cannot criticize." Apparently, the Mooslims have gotten a promotion.

[EE_]

EE_ sure has a hard-on for promoting "hate speech" prohibitions. Why is that?

"If you want to know who rules your society, determine who it is you cannot criticize." Apparently, the Mooslims have gotten a promotion.

I'm very pro-taking personal responsibility for your own actions and accepting the consequences.

If you were to express your free (hate) speech and it cost the life of one of my family members, I'm coming to get you! Justice doesn't have to come from more laws.

[crimethink]

I'm very pro-taking personal responsibility for your own actions and accepting the consequences.


There are no "consequences" for humor in a free society.




If you were to express your free (hate) speech and it cost the life of one of my family members, I'm coming to get you!

Good luck with that, Tough Guy. :rolleyes:

Anyone who uses the term "hate speech" as you just did, is Part of the Problem.

[crimethink]

"Do the Palestinians have any liability for inciting the Jews to kill them"?

Well, EE_, let's hear it! Be consistent now.

[EE_]

"Do the Palestinians have any liability for inciting the Jews to kill them"?

Well, EE_, let's hear it! Be consistent now.

This is where you out yourself as a Jew sympathizer. I had a feeling you were playing a game to conceal your Jewish roots...so that's why all the hate and interest you direct to the Muslims.

Palestinians retaliating against Isreal for stealing their land is hardly inciting their death, Rabbi crimthinkenstein.

You-->http://s28.postimg.org/7z2kdj3wt/Nacham_Helbrans.jpg

[EE_]

Your words

EE_ sure has a hard-on for promoting "hate speech" prohibitions. Why is that?

"If you want to know who rules your society, determine who it is you cannot criticize." Apparently, the Mooslims have gotten a promotion.

Your words

Anyone who uses the term "hate speech" as you just did, is Part of the Problem.

[singular_me]

charlie an hebdo is just another casualty of the multi layers of scams running the world, controlled opposition or not. 90 % of all deaths by aggression are the results of delusions caused by the system, staged or not .

[crimethink]

This is where you out yourself as a Jew sympathizer.


No, dipshit. Your crap won't work. I've made very damn clear I have no use for satanic anti-Christ "Israel."

NOT ONCE - EVER - have I seriously suggested "the Palestinians asked for it." What I said above was pure rhetoric.

However, you have said that victims of Mooslims have "asked for it." I'm merely asking you to man up, and be consistent: if the victims yesterday "asked for it," do you also say the Gazans "asked for it" by angering the Jews?




I had a feeling you were playing a game to conceal your Jewish roots

Why don't you go fuck yourself? I am 5/8 non-Jewish Ethnic German, 1/4 non-Jewish Ukrainian, and 1/8 non-Jewish Irish. I've said this before, here, and at GIM 1/2. I would have qualified as an SS Officer. Would you? (I suspect you yourself are some sort of shitskin mystery meat).




so that's why all the hate and interest you direct to the Muslims.


Islam was, is, and likely will always be a grave enemy of White, Christian civilization. Period.

Do you defend Mooslims becuase you are, like its "Prophet," a child molestor?




Palestinians retaliating against Isreal for stealing their land is hardly inciting their death, Rabbi crimthinkenstein.


Murder for drawing cartoons of a child molestor is OK with you, though.

[crimethink]

Your words

Notice the "quotes" around it - that's called a rhetorical device. You, on the other hand, used the term hate speech in the same manner as Abe Fuxmen of the ADL does. As in, seriously.

[EE_]

No, dipshit. Your crap won't work. I've made very damn clear I have no use for satanic anti-Christ "Israel."

NOT ONCE - EVER - have I seriously suggested "the Palestinians asked for it." What I said above was pure rhetoric.

However, you have said that victims of Mooslims have "asked for it." I'm merely asking you to man up, and be consistent: if the victims yesterday "asked for it," do you also say the Gazans "asked for it" by angering the Jews?


Why don't you go fuck yourself? I am 5/8 non-Jewish Ethnic German, 1/4 non-Jewish Ukrainian, and 1/8 non-Jewish Irish. I've said this before, here, and at GIM 1/2. I would have qualified as an SS Officer. Would you? (I suspect you yourself are some sort of shitskin mystery meat).

Islam was, is, and likely will always be a grave enemy of White, Christian civilization. Period.

Do you defend Mooslims becuase you are, like its "Prophet," a child molestor?

Murder for drawing cartoons of a child molestor is OK with you, though.

Look, I don't know you from Adam...for all I know you could be a Federal agent that has infiltrated this forum.
What you say you are, may not necessarily be who you are.

http://hopenothate.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/lenine2809cthe-best-way-to-control-the-opposition-is-to-lead-it-ourselves-e2809d.jpg

You are an angry person and obviously have a large chip on your shoulder. I can only guess that your particular style of freedom of speech has gotten you into trouble more then once. I'm not going to get into a pissing match of insults with you, because you mean nothing to me. Shit on my shoes.

So go on drawing your pictures and inciting Muslims with your free speech and when they gun you down, know I'll be the first to say "he deserved it!" I know your mouth writes checks your ass can't cash.

Controlled Opposition – The Hidden Hand of Misdirection
by Zen Gardner - Dec 1, 2014

This concept eludes public awareness to a scary degree. It’s similar to the reality of false flag operations, the epitome of carefully planned societal manipulation by unseen forces who have no regard for the human condition other than to control it at any cost.

This is so very similar to the slogan of the nefarious Mossad: “By way of deception, thou shalt do war.”

And the war is on us; for the subjugation, exploitation and control of….us. The human race.

Nothing is as it seems. Nothing. Not the least of which is anything and everything in our engineered society. It’s all misdirection, controlled opposition for the mind. This game of ruthless deception is endemic to the fabric of the entire matrix.

Useful Idiots and the Puppeteers

The obvious NATO/US backed ISIL creation, the insurgences in Syria, Ukraine, Venezuela, as well as most of the Middle East and now Africa, Hong Kong and other nations, past and present, are perfect examples of controlled opposition on the political stage. As awful as that is, the problem is way deeper than that.

We’ve all been useful idiots at one time or other. No one’s been fully conscious or completely independent of these influences all of their lives. We all have had to compromise in some manner just to survive in the matrix and unwittingly played into their hand.

This entire social landscape is an engineered one, and we help build and maintain it at varying degrees of conscious awareness until we disengage. Some aspects become more obvious than others to different people. The banking system for example has been getting hammered by the awakening. The full extent of its control is known by very few, but people are getting the idea. And it leads to more questions.

That’s how it works.

Many people come to the awakening via the health crisis we’re facing, with contaminated and mutated foods being forced into the market without the slightest compunction from our ever-so-caring slightly disguised crypto fascist central State. Just going to natural food or natural or alternative medicine sites is another way to go into the Wardrobe and land in a Narnia of Truth people had no idea existed.

For those looking to help others, this is a great way to approach someone still under the spell to get them started looking around. GMO awareness has jacked and is a great entry point. And just like the bankster revolving door with government, the Monsanto/Merck et al. infestation of so-called health agencies, this will make their heads spin if they’re willing to see it.

Geoengineering and Fukushima are other portals to the awakening. The surreal potential ELE nature of these assaults is seriously disrupting many entrained minds.

Finding out the extent of our own involvement is a trip in itself, and will lead to many wonderful, sometimes disturbing discoveries. Even more so is realizing the source of information we were trusting was tainted, twisted and distorted, or as in most cases, a complete fabricated lie, propped up by the energy of those that believed it. Matrix battery pods powering the collective.

What Really Matters

Religion, politics, education and the economic meme are of course the most predominant in the mainstream mind. But important things like where we came from, why we’re even here and where we’re going are barely addressed, and if they are it’s all gobbledygook designed to confuse and stifle the human spirit. Or freeze it into a debilitating religious paradigm where we wait for the cavalry to save us and are told “the powers that be are ordained by God”.

This is the true controlled opposition, although we’ll get to the modern oracles of this insidious ploy soon enough.

We have to see this for what it is. Anything short is not going to cut it. Just about every aspect of the opposing paradigms we’ve been handed as the absolute truth are designed. And even outside protesting elements who seem to know what’s going on are often generated by, or soon channeled by, these same overlords.

Here’s where and how the manipulation kicks in. Just like the controlled State media propaganda, there have to be enough apparent facts to cultivate credibility. Just enough. They won’t overdo it unless it’s some innocuous subject. Many of those “facts” will be wrapped in fear and violence as well, designed to cauterize your sensitivity while heightening your fear.

Religions have effectively done this for eons. Tapping into your inner knowledge of the spiritual and mixing in a few truths, they have no problem steering you straight into a numbed state of docile subservience to some weird-ass hierarchy of spiritual and physical abuse. In the name of God of course. Name dropping, anyone? Oh, and in the name of that guy they can send you and your kids off to fight their wars, build and support oppressive exploitative corporations, or be a professional gladiator and gain fame and fortune pounding other contestants into the ground to the roar of the frenzied, flag waving mob.

It’s Rarely Black and White – Deliberately

Layered in the imposed matrix are many overlapping memes and projected illusions, rendering fundamental empowering truths either hidden altogether, disguised or distorted. In a loving, uncontrolled conscious world there would be no need to hide anything. Instead, this mutant matrix system is built on deceit in order to spiritually disconnect and disempower those they wish to exploit.

Think of the mega volumes of information and technology being held from public knowledge under the guise of “national security”. How about “closed door meetings” or “need to know basis” or the massive labyrinth of secret ops operating in their vast network built on compartmentalization in the name of science or military confidentiality.

Now slide over to the Vatican sitting on brutally gained secret history accounts for centuries.

Does this make any sense to you?

Why do they keep all this as separate concepts? Connect them and they form a picture, a very clear one. Our entire society is completely staged, controlled and with vastly sinister intent.

(Fareed Zakaria is a confirmed CFR member)

Who’s Controlling Whom? Rethinking the Strategy of Protest

It’s well known that the various elite foundations and other power organs such as Soros’ empire finance various so-called opposition groups and protests. It’s a very sleazy bunch dressed in do-gooder garb who manipulate with money, not just compromising the causes, but misdirecting them into a validation of the very overarching structure they say they are against.

It’s time we learn to step out of that false, disempowering, matrix affirming paradigm and know exactly what we are up against and take consciously aware action and not feed into their little chess game.

“By providing the funding and the policy framework to many concerned and dedicated people working within the non-profit sector, the ruling class is able to co-opt leadership from grassroots communities, … and is able to make the funding, accounting, and evaluation components of the work so time consuming and onerous that social justice work is virtually impossible under these conditions” (Paul Kivel, You Call this Democracy, Who Benefits, Who Pays and Who Really Decides, 2004, p. 122 )

While the “Globalizers” may adopt a few progressive phrases to demonstrate they have good intentions, their fundamental goals are not challenged. And what this “civil society mingling” does is to reinforce the clutch of the corporate establishment while weakening and dividing the protest movement. An understanding of this process of co-optation is important, because tens of thousands of the most principled young people in Seattle, Prague and Quebec City [1999-2001] are involved in the anti-globalization protests because they reject the notion that money is everything, because they reject the impoverishment of millions and the destruction of fragile Earth so that a few may get richer.

This rank and file and some of their leaders as well, are to be applauded. But we need to go further. We need to challenge the right of the “Globalizers” to rule. This requires that we rethink the strategy of protest. Can we move to a higher plane, by launching mass movements in our respective countries, movements that bring the message of what globalization is doing, to ordinary people? For they are the force that must be mobilized to challenge those who plunder the Globe.” (Michel Chossudovsky, The Quebec Wall, April 2001)

There you have it. The information war to bring these Truths to a wider audience, sparking local action and alternative solutions in the face of this crumbling matrix of deceit. But it must be thoroughly identified for what it is before we know how to dismantle it while building real conscious community to supplant it.

Pushing up against it in these channeled, compromised and half awake antiquated methods only serves to reinforce it.

The Need for Discernment

I try to be very careful about what I read and certainly what I “take on board” in my mind and heart. I’ll look at just about anything, even mainstream drivel, to keep an eye on stuff and get the pulse of what’s going on, but not much.

But I’m very careful. I know I get fooled sometimes like anyone, but I’m not afraid to admit when I’m wrong. In fact it’s a joy every time that happens. Hey, I got another damn velcro hook and loop off my spiritual body!

And media outlets and information sources are something to look at very closely and carefully. And keep watching.

It’s never, or should I say rarely, totally clear cut as to who is who. Someone can be piping out a high percentage of true information, but then throw in some massive monkey wrench that few see coming. Sometimes it’s the tone and lower vibrational level. I’m skeptical of crass self-promoters who are more caught up in their image that the message. They’re usually humorless as well. If there’s that much ego there’s that much less conscious awareness, and the love starts running thin. If people can’t see past all the evil in this world to the wondrous beauty of the Universe and the amazing unlimited potential of the human spirit, I wonder about their information, or at least how it’s used.

But no one’s perfect, so we need to see and process the good and the Truth, and chuck the husks in the trash. It can take time and things morph, but that’s all part of the process.

Snowden, Color Revolutions, Wikileaks, Occupy, “Parties” and Other Corruptible Things
Keep a close eye out on these supposed whistleblowers. While we need real ones to come forward desperately and there are many wonderful, brave souls, those that attain public acclamation by way of major media attention are always suspect. This is because the corporate media is completely controlled. So I get suspicious. They may let out some truth, but it’s always to inoculate us against the full truth. There is no more responsible mainstream media today. It’s fully controlled.

These 6 big corporations running everything media are a fascist cabal.

I’ve written much about Snowden and my suspicions, as have many others. When the Wikileaks phenomenon appeared, I and many others were again very skeptical. It was playing right into the globalists’ plan, not the least of which is to muzzle the internet and smokescreen real events. Like most disinfo outlets, it conveniently sidestepped, minimized or dodged many of the really important issues. And sure enough, Assange was groomed in the Oligarchs’ machine for years. Then when he came out and said 9/11 was NOT an inside job…that cemented the deal.

It’s very similar to how these “partial” whistleblowers never mention Israel or the Zionist influence. Not even the Gaza genocide. Incredible, but telling.

The Occupy movement was clearly co-opted and engineered to be a controlled opposition release valve. Wonderful things still happened, but they managed to dilute and mis-steer the message enough to diffuse its greatest potential effects. The Orwellian stomp down by the Police State was off the charts, and of course the State run media made nothing of it. Instead they focus on seeming “rioting” often consisting of stock footage or if there was violence it was agent provocateurs, as caught in the recent Ferguson arson attacks in one particular block where a swat team was filmed lurking.

But that “movement” is gone. Not moving anywhere. But people got involved, that’s good. But it lacked the full on truth and was misguided.

The Tea Party? Again, born of a driven passion to stand up within that paradigm. Now? Zionist stooges Michelle Bachman, Glenn Beck and Hannity types are all over a wimped out “movement”, a form of expression that desperate middle class folks were joining in for the first times in their lives. Neutered and detoured once again. And now a ridiculed arm of the flag waving, warmongering republican party.

Who Are the Moles?

Who is this controlled opposition? Here is an example that came to light that would normally go unreported by the mainstream media. This is a good sign.

Did an undercover cop help organise a major riot? [Ha! – When didn’t they? – Z]
From the Stephen Lawrence inquiry we learned that the police were institutionally racist. Can it be long before we learn that they are also institutionally corrupt? Almost every month the undercover policing scandal becomes wider and deeper. Today I can reveal a new twist, which in some respects could be the gravest episode yet. It surely makes the case for an independent public inquiry – which is already overwhelming – unarguable.

Before I explain it, here’s a summary of what we know already. Thanks to the remarkable investigations pursued first by the victims of police spies and then by the Guardian journalists Rob Evans and Paul Lewis (whose book Undercover is as gripping as any thriller), we know that British police have been inserting undercover officers into protest movements since 1968. Their purpose was to counter what they called subversion or domestic extremism, which they define as seeking to “prevent something from happening or to change legislation or domestic policy … outside the normal democratic process”. Which is a good description of how almost all progressive change happens. Source

Their influence is vast. We have no idea how many inroads have been made and how much the military industrial government complex has infiltrated and controlled all we see and hear at this point, even within our alternative community.

It’s staggering, but it doesn’t frighten me. It’s expected.

Follow your heart. You’ll know.

The Wake Up – Is It In Time? What Will You Do?
Clearly we’re up against massively orchestrated activities, outlets and manufactured disinformation, and there’s much controversy on this subject. It’s a huge part of their agenda. Never mind…it’s just the matrix at work. Rise above it.

But will humanity “get it” in time?

It’s always in time…individually. Once you’ve popped into Now awareness and even begin to grasp the fact that all this is a sham and a fabricated facade, you’re virtually home free. Personally. Your participation in propping up this fake social landscape will fall off like over-sized pants.

It just happens.

However the next step is the big one – your participation. Once you know and have gained a true perspective it’s time to take action. While the spiritual is supreme, we are here in these bodies on this planet. Now. And it’s under a massive attack. Do you want your children and grandchildren to grow up in a world such as this one is rapidly becoming?

Enjoy the awakening, but be responsive. We’ve all got to make a difference. That’s where the revolution lies. Right there.

Respond. Consciously. And in love. But do it. An opportunity is knocking on your door. Open it – and step outside. If you don’t see it yet you soon will!

Meet you there!
http://www.zengardner.com/controlled-opposition-the-hidden-hand-of-misdirection/

Much love, Zen

[aeondaze]

I was thinking along similar lines to you EE, however I naturally found a position somewhere between the two of you.

What got me thinking was did the victims of this shooting think to themselves "I need to satirise Mohammed and protect free speech rights, regardless of the fact that I may be killed"

No way, not by a long shot.

If free speech was the issues at hand there are plenty of grievances against the state that could have been championed like mass surveillance and privacy violations, heck even Julian Assange does a better job of exercising his free speech rights.

The real answer is the Heebs in control encouraged and coerced the staff to publish these images from the very start. If even the coffee boy got a whiff that his life might be in danger from publishing said images I suspect they would have told their masters to go to hell. They should have told their masters go to hell, but that is typical of weak willed spineless liberal peaceniks.

This isn't about free speech as you both understand, this is about choosing not to put your neck on the chopping block for a stupid fucking useless prank, I might disagree with the conclusions extremist Muslims make about such imagery, but I'm not going to put my life on line trying to defend the point, thats just pure insanity and deserving of a Darwin award IMO.

Stupid is as stupid does.

I don't feel even a little bit of sympathy for these morons, nor do I support idolatry...I'm atheist. :rolleyes:

[EE_]

I was thinking along similar lines to you EE, however I naturally found a position somewhere between the two of you.

What got me thinking was did the victims of this shooting think to themselves "I need to satirise Mohammed and protect free speech rights, regardless of the fact that I may be killed"

No way, not by a long shot.

If free speech was the issues at hand there are plenty of grievances against the state that could have been championed like mass surveillance and privacy violations, heck even Julian Assange does a better job of exercising his free speech rights.

The real answer is the Heebs in control encouraged and coerced the staff to publish these images from the very start. If even the coffee boy got a whiff that his life might be in danger from publishing said images I suspect they would have told their masters to go to hell. They should have told their masters go to hell, but that is typical of weak willed spineless liberal peaceniks.

This isn't about free speech as you both understand, this is about choosing not to put your neck on the chopping block for a stupid fucking useless prank, I might disagree with the conclusions extremist Muslims make about such imagery, but I'm not going to put my life on line trying to defend the point, thats just pure insanity and deserving of a Darwin award IMO.

Stupid is as stupid does.

I don't feel even a little bit of sympathy for these morons, nor do I support idolatry...I'm atheist. :rolleyes:

Unlike some others here, I think you are living in the real world.
I don't think you would walk into a Hells Angels bar to exercise your free speech by telling them you think they are all pussies. :o

The only reason Charlie Hebdo satirized Mohammed is because shock value sells magazines.

[aeondaze]

The only reason Charlie Hebdo satirized Mohammed is because shock value sells magazines.

It may not be the only reason, another is to deliberately foment discord between the Muslim world and western Europeans.

It is interesting that the initial article featured a orthodox jew pushing Mohamed in a wheel chair, then after the initial massacre at the publications HQ, there is a second siege at a kosher supermarket.

It could have equally been some kind of payback from the heebs using the supermarket siege as a cover and to reinforce their claims of victimisation.

You gotta remember mossad/Israel has its finger in all sorts of pies with ties to plenty of muslim extremist groups.

[crimethink]

Look, I don't know you from Adam...for all I know you could be a Federal agent that has infiltrated this forum.


Likewise, buddy!

The Federal regime's position and your position on such things are identical. "Freedom has consequences." So-called "'hate speech' should be reined in." You might as well be a White House spokesliar.




What you say you are, may not necessarily be who you are.


I've said who I claim to be. On the other hand, you have not. :)




You are an angry person and obviously have a large chip on your shoulder.


LOL

You who first introduced the idea that violence is justified because someone is "offended" in our "discussions."




I can only guess that your particular style of freedom of speech has gotten you into trouble more then once.


Thugs who can't handle someone's opinion don't continue their "I'm gonna fuck you up!" once they realize I have the solution for a rabid dog. :) And yes, only a thug wants to physically hurt someone over an "offense."




So go on drawing your pictures and inciting Muslims with your free speech and when they gun you down, know I'll be the first to say "he deserved it!" I know your mouth writes checks your ass can't cash.


Offend the Mooslims and get murdered = OK. Offend the Jews and get murdered = not OK. Please be consistent.




Controlled Opposition – The Hidden Hand of Misdirection

You, the ADL and CAIR are all pushing for prohibition on "hate speech." But you call me the controlled opposition. LOL.

[crimethink]

I don't think you would walk into a Hells Angels bar to exercise your free speech by telling them you think they are all pussies.


Non-sequitur.

Paris or France are not the private domain of the Mooslims. If Charlie Hebdo were in Saudi Arabia, you might have a point. But a French magazine in the core of French territory is nothing like going into the domain of the Mooslims and trying to incite them.

Don't like "Western ways"? Then GTFO back to the desert sands!

[EE_]

Non-sequitur.

Paris or France are not the private domain of the Mooslims. If Charlie Hebdo were in Saudi Arabia, you might have a point. But a French magazine in the core of French territory is nothing like going into the domain of the Mooslims and trying to incite them.

Don't like "Western ways"? Then GTFO back to the desert sands!

I thought the HA was a good metaphor.
The HA brotherhood has a presence in most major cities around the world, just as the Muslim Brotherhood does.
I'm not so sure the HA likes western ways?...but they're not leaving either.
If you fuck with either, you can expect and might not like the consequences.
Non-sequitur how?

[midnight rambler]

I was thinking along similar lines to you EE, however I naturally found a position somewhere between the two of you.

What got me thinking was did the victims of this shooting think to themselves "I need to satirise Mohammed and protect free speech rights, regardless of the fact that I may be killed"

No way, not by a long shot.

If free speech was the issues at hand there are plenty of grievances against the state that could have been championed like mass surveillance and privacy violations, heck even Julian Assange does a better job of exercising his free speech rights.

The real answer is the Heebs in control encouraged and coerced the staff to publish these images from the very start. If even the coffee boy got a whiff that his life might be in danger from publishing said images I suspect they would have told their masters to go to hell. They should have told their masters go to hell, but that is typical of weak willed spineless liberal peaceniks.

This isn't about free speech as you both understand, this is about choosing not to put your neck on the chopping block for a stupid fucking useless prank, I might disagree with the conclusions extremist Muslims make about such imagery, but I'm not going to put my life on line trying to defend the point, thats just pure insanity and deserving of a Darwin award IMO.

Stupid is as stupid does.

I don't feel even a little bit of sympathy for these morons, nor do I support idolatry...I'm atheist. :rolleyes:

I'm still thinking that this was a Mossad operation - they had the intel that there was a meeting in the office and they were able to time their appearance just right to coerce a woman cartoonist/employee to get them through the locked door - how fortuitous. Then there's the 'magic ID' which showed up in the abandoned car...right. IMO this was a very carefully staged event.

[midnight rambler]

The only reason Charlie Hebdo satirized Mohammed is because shock value sells magazines.

Have to disagree...they only published 60,000 magazines per issue so their magazine was not exactly flying off the shelves.

[EE_]

Have to disagree...they only published 60,000 magazines per issue so their magazine was not exactly flying off the shelves.

The controversial issue was flying off the shelves. You know I can't rule out anything anymore.

WORLD FRANCE
The Provocative History of French Weekly Newspaper Charlie Hebdo
Megan Gibson @MeganJGibson Jan. 7, 2015

Charlie Hebdo was introduced in 1970 after another publication, Hara-Kiri, was banned for mocking the death of former French President Charles de Gaulle. Much of Hara-Kiri’s staff simply migrated to the new publication, which was named in reference to Charlie Brown comics. Hebdo is short for hebdomadaire which means weekly in French.

Though the publication has never found wide circulation, it quickly made a name for itself thanks to its incendiary cartoons, which took shots at high-profile figures, including the far right, politicians and celebrities, and religions of all kinds. Just last month, an edition featured a cartoon of the Virgin Mary, spread-eagled, giving birth to Jesus.

In 1981, Charlie Hebdo ceased publication because of a lack of funds, though it was resurrected in 1992. In 2006, the publication caused widespread controversy when it republished the controversial cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad that were first printed in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten and prompted protests from Muslims around the world. Charlie Hebdo’s reprint of the cartoons — not to mention the addition of their own work — gained it as much notoriety as the Danish newspaper. The issue saw unusually high sales, but drew criticism from many Muslim groups. France’s then President Jacques Chirac released a statement at the time saying, “Anything that can hurt the convictions of someone else, in particular religious convictions, should be avoided. Freedom of expression should be exercised in a spirit of responsibility.”

MORE: What to Know About the Paris Terror Attack

Charlie Hebdo responded by publishing a letter, signed by 12 writers and intellectuals including Salman Rushdie and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, which read, in part, “We, writers, journalists, intellectuals, call for resistance to religious totalitarianism and for the promotion of freedom, equal opportunity and secular values for all.”

The following year Charlie Hebdo was sued by two French Muslim associations, the Great Mosque of Paris and the Union of Islamic Organisations of France, for reprinting the Danish cartoons. A French court rejected the case, saying the publication’s decision to publish the images did not incite religious hatred.

Yet the backlash over the publication’s provocative critique of Islam continued — sometimes with violent consequences. On Nov. 2, 2011, Charlie Hebdo’s offices were firebombed and destroyed the day after the magazine announced the Prophet Muhammad as its “editor in chief” for its next issue. The cover also carried a caricature of the Prophet. As that attack took place in the early morning hours, no one was injured.

The publication’s editor Stéphane Charbonnier, who also published cartoons under the name Charb, told the BBC following the firebombing, “If we can poke fun at everything in France, if we can talk about anything in France apart from Islam or the consequences of Islamism, that is annoying.” Charb is believed to have been killed on Wednesday.

The following year, after the weekly published more provocative caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad, French officials announced they would temporarily close French embassies, consulates, cultural centers and schools in more than a dozen Muslim countries for safety. Despite the condemnation from multiple groups, Charlie Hebdo defended its editorial choices.

“The aim is to laugh,” Charlie Hebdo journalist Laurent Léger said at the time. “We want to laugh at the extremists — every extremist. They can be Muslim, Jewish, Catholic. Everyone can be religious, but extremist thoughts and acts we cannot accept.”
http://time.com/3657256/charlie-hebdo-paris-attack/

[crimethink]

I'm still thinking that this was a Mossad operation - they had the intel that there was a meeting in the office and they were able to time their appearance just right to coerce a woman cartoonist/employee to get them through the locked door - how fortuitous. Then there's the 'magic ID' which showed up in the abandoned car...right. IMO this was a very carefully staged event.

The evidence vs. horseshit ratio is about 1:100 right now, but the former is starting to add up.

[crimethink]

Non-sequitur how?

Publishing a cartoon magazine that "offends" foreigners in one's own land =/= going into the private domain of a rough motorcycle club to deliberately start shit.

So, indeed, a non sequitur.