News What lessons can we learn from the Charlie Hebdo shooting?

[256bits]

Apparently, from outward appearances, the Kouachi brothers appeared normal, average persons. However the authorities had records on them. How did they get the weapons?

http://www.haaretz.com/news/world/1.637034
Arms dealer turns himself into police.
There also was a report that he considered himself safer with the police than out in the street due to a possible retaliation against him by "terrorists".

 

[256bits]

I don't know the particulars of the situation, but I have heard she was a rookie.

Police are trained to deal with drivers who speed, people who drink too much, thieves, and miscreants who wreak havoc with violent crime. Dealing with hell-bent terrorists shouldn't be their job.

In any case, it's sad and horrific.

I would agree whole heartedly. She most likely accessed the situation, saw that she was outgunned and attempted a retreat thinking of the safety of others around and her own. I don't think that police training entails a section on "How to be a Hero." Unfortunately it did not work out for her very well, but by not confronting the individuals, she may have saved the lives innocent bystanders. In my book she is a HERO.

 

[lisab]

One thing that you can't miss in all this: the French have got their stuff together when it comes to dealing with crap like this!

Vive la France!

 

[Astronuc]

http://www.haaretz.com/news/world/1.637034
Arms dealer turns himself into police.
There also was a report that he considered himself safer with the police than out in the street due to a possible retaliation against him by "terrorists".

The Belgian/Brussels underworld!

 

[256bits]

ps. I'll probably get an infraction for this, but, what the hell.

I hope not, since it deals with the sensibilities of people, and that should be somewhat applicable, as people reasonably do weigh provocation against retaliation, and attempt a rationalization of whether or not there is some sort of balance. One can become conflicted by the rationalization.

There was the previous post about tormenting the dog, which is along the same lines as the Pope and his mother (violence again ) - ( don't poke a stick in a bear's face or pull the cats tail ) - and not expect some sort of reaction. OK. Seems reasonable enough perhaps. Perhaps not.

Is the Pope saying that religion is infallible? If so, agree with him, or disagree.

But at least, have the choice.
And have the allowable discussion expressing viewpoints and the agreement of being able to disagree.
It's a long way to perfect world.

 

[naima]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law

The pope said that they had to be beaten

 

[OmCheeto]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law

The pope said that they had to be beaten

?

Who did he say had to be beaten? I'm not finding the key words in your statement within your link. Are you referring to my quote, where he said, if someone insulted his mother, he would punch them in the nose? If so, it seems a bit of a stretch.

 

[HossamCFD]

Let's think for a while how everything look like from perspective of a decadent European.
...
Do you think that people who after one minor terrorist attack start to toy with some deportation idea are overreacting?

Yes I do. I'm aware that some people think this way, especially after an attack like this, but I think it's a very disturbing notion.

Many western muslims are abhorred and terrified by such terrorist attacks the same way you are. The difference is that they have to deal with it twice: first, just like any citizen they are terrified that it could've happened to them, feel unsafe and targeted by terrorists, and saddened by the loss of life of their fellow citizens. Second, they have to deal with people in their community who hold them responsible for such attacks, and entertain thoughts as extreme as their mass deportation.

Lumping the wider muslim community with Jihadists in the same discussion is very counter-productive. It alienates a population that's already, as you mentioned, struggling in integration. It also helps the narrative of the Jihadists by validating their claim as the representatives of the faith.

Yes, it's very serious overreacting.

Glad we agree.

But also a few people discovered that they really don't want to make their countries look like Muslim countries.

That's not a real threat. There is no imminent muslim take over of Europe.

If not, that which of those rules (sometimes kept as semi-sacred) require curbing to prevent further atrocities?

Absolutely None!
The idea that Europe has to either change its tradition regarding freedom of speech etc. to accommodate muslims or expel them altogether is an ill posed question. They both are very very bad ideas.

 

[Garth]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law

The Pope said that they had to be beaten

As OmCheeto commented above, the Pope didn't say they should be beaten up, but rather that someone could expect a punch if he ''cursed his mother'', in other words it would be a natural unthoughtful reaction.

I think the Pope was unwise to say this because it does give the (wrong) impression that he suggests violence is the correct response to insults to religion.

A response closer to the Christian gospel would be to 'turn the other cheek'. (Matthew 5:38-40).

Reaction to criticism is a normal and a healthy part of debate in a free society, however repression of criticism through terrorist acts, or indeed law in a repressive regime, is a threat to such a healthy free society, instead criticism should be countered with alternative ideas and arguments.

I think some of the cartoons in Charlie Hebdo are extremely offensive. My own response if I were French would be to not buy it. Actually before the attacks others (I think) thought the same as their sales were falling and the future of the magazine was in danger: Charlie Hebdo First Issue: Magazine Was In Financial 'Danger' Before Paris Massacre. The terrorists guaranteed the future of the satirical magazine.

Garth

 

[Bystander]

The difference is that they have to deal with it twice:

Only "Twice?" Isn't there a third threat/coercion from the terrorists to be quiet? Not rock the boat? Not object to their activities?
I don't think we in the "West" fully appreciate what "peer pressure" really is.

 

[HossamCFD]

Only "Twice?" Isn't there a third threat/coercion from the terrorists to be quiet? Not rock the boat? Not object to their activities?
I don't think we in the "West" fully appreciate what "peer pressure" really is.

I'm not sure about that. I would've thought that terrorist cells would prefer to operate under complete secrecy rather than intimidate their community to remain quiet. I don't know really.

 

[Bystander]

I'm not sure about that.

It's just a question I had in reaction/response to some of the calls for a more active/pro-active position by members of the Islamic community/world toward identifying and "ratting out" the "Wild Bunch." If it's not part of the situation, it's not.

 

[mheslep]

That's not a real threat. There is no imminent muslim take over of Europe.

Why is that not possible? What about the next decade, or the decade after? Could not voting thresholds for minority parties be met soon?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_the_European_Union_by_Muslim_population

 

[nikkkom]

Yes I do. I'm aware that some people think this way, especially after an attack like this, but I think it's a very disturbing notion.

I think you misrepresent typical proposals of those "pesky Islamophobes". Most people who propose to get serious about Islamist terrorism do not propose that laws be changed to allow deportation of Muslims. They propose that immigration to Europe should be seriously reduced.

It seems that _a lot_ of people who has no recognizable useful trait (such as University degree, or work contract) are still being allowed to come. Any time someone says "let's not allow thousands of African boat people land in Italy every year", there is an outcry "don't you have a heart, you right-wing racist fascist pig you?"

There are no treaties which demand that immigration laws must be non-discriminatory. In fact, these laws can be as discriminatory as country wants. And common sense says that it's prudent to select prospective immigrants so that your country gets people who are likely to be a productive member of the society, not a freeloader. Such as people who are educated. Who aren't religious fanatics. *That* is what "Islamophobes" want to be done in Europe. Not mass deportations.

Don't play "these are poor people in need, don't you have a heart?" game. There are BILLIONS of them. The solution to Middle East or Africa's problems is not to export all of its hungry stomachs to Europe. The solution is to make African countries less corrupt.

 

[HossamCFD]

I think you misrepresent typical proposals of those "pesky Islamophobes". Most people who propose to get serious about Islamist terrorism do not propose that laws be changed to allow deportation of Muslims. They propose that immigration to Europe should be seriously reduced.

No, I didn't misrepresent anything. I was asked an explicit question about deportation, to which I replied. I almost never use the word 'islamophobes'. Your entire comment is just a massive straw-man argument, your're replying to things you think I would say not things I actually said.

And common sense says that it's prudent to select prospective immigrants so that your country gets people who are likely to be a productive member of the society, not a freeloader. Such as people who are educated. Who aren't religious fanatics.

By all means! I have absolutely no problem with that.

*That* is what "Islamophobes" want to be done in Europe. Not mass deportations.

Not quite. Not all of them at least. I saw an interview of Geert Wilders the other day where he calls for banning immigration from all muslim majority countries, regardless of wether the individual is religious, freeloader, or even a muslim at all.

Don't play "these are poor people in need, don't you have a heart?" game.

I'm not playing any games. I'm not sure how is that relevant to anything I said before. I haven't even expressed any views on immigration.

There are BILLIONS of them. The solution to Middle East or Africa's problems is not to export all of its hungry stomachs to Europe. The solution is to make African countries less corrupt.

Again no disagreement. Although I would say that most refugees from the middle east are escaping civil war, not hunger.

 

[HossamCFD]

Why is that not possible? What about the next decade, or the decade after? Could not voting thresholds for minority parties be met soon?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_the_European_Union_by_Muslim_population

from The wikipedia link:

If the current rate of migration of Muslims to Europe and the Muslim fertility rate remains constant, by 2030, people of Muslim faith or origin are predicted to form about 10% of the French population[6] and 8% of the European population.[6]

I wouldn't call that a muslim take over. It certainly wouldn't transform Europe to "look like muslim countries".

 

[Vanadium 50]

Geert Wilders the other day where he calls for banning immigration from all muslim majority countries, regardless of wether the individual is religious, freeloader, or even a muslim at all.

There is a difference between mass deportations (what you said) and banning future immigration (what Wilders said). (I don't necessarily agree with either position - just pointing out they are different)

 

[nikkkom]

> *That* is what "Islamophobes" want to be done in Europe. Not mass deportations.

Not quite. Not all of them at least.

Do you really think I said "not a single European proposes mass deportations"? LOL...

I saw an interview of Geert Wilders the other day where he calls for banning immigration from all muslim majority countries, regardless of wether the individual is religious, freeloader, or even a muslim at all.

And yet, even his extreme position is not a mass deportation proposal, but a proposal to stop immigration. Even a complete stop of immigration is not undemocratic.

 

[nikkkom]

from The wikipedia link:

> If the current rate of migration of Muslims to Europe and the Muslim fertility rate remains constant, by 2030, people of Muslim faith or origin are predicted to form about 10% of the French population[6] and 8% of the European population.[6]

I wouldn't call that a muslim take over. It certainly wouldn't transform Europe to "look like muslim countries".

I would call that "lies, damn lies, and statistics".

France *already* has 8.6% immigrants, another 5.9% are "foreigners". I take it means "people who did not get the citizenship... yet". That's 14.5% together.

"Eurobarometer" data says that only 2% are Muslims, but with a closer look it has this curious category "don't know" (huh? How can one not know its religious affiliation?) and it's 7% (!). I have a suspicion that much of that 7% are also Muslims. It just did not look good to have so much of them in the stats, so Eurobarometer fudged the numbers. Googling "france muslim percent". It says 7.5% - and this number is from Guardian, the leftist outlet not at all interested in inflating this number.

We are 15 years away from 2030 and I am not convinced that France doesn't have 10% Muslim population already.

 

[lisab]

Perhaps the root of the issue is not immigration, but poor integration.

Here in the States it's widely understood that by the third generation, immigrants will be completely "Americanized" (which I'm not going to define since that's complicated and off-topic). That's something European countries should strive for, IMO. As long as a group of citizens is fully integrated into society, who cares where their grandparents came from?

Also, if the issue is viewed this way, it's much simpler to fix.

 

[Dotini]

I spend a lot of time on a worldwide but Euro-centered forum devoted to motorsports, having a vibrant opinion and current event subforum. The moderation is largely progressive liberal, and makes a statistically impressive case that anti-multiculturalism poses a greater threat to Europe than does any other, current events notwithstanding. I don't know because I'm not there.

 

[Borg]

Perhaps the root of the issue is not immigration, but poor integration.

Here in the States it's widely understood that by the third generation, immigrants will be completely "Americanized" (which I'm not going to define since that's complicated and off-topic). That's something European countries should strive for, IMO. As long as a group of citizens is fully integrated into society, who cares where their grandparents came from?

Also, if the issue is viewed this way, it's much simpler to fix.

I would even say that most first and second generation immigrants become Americanized pretty quickly.

 

[Astronuc]

Apparently Geert Wilders has in the past, and perhaps recently, advocated deportation of Muslims, but apparently with conditions, e.g., crime.

From 2009, in an interview with Radio Netherlands, "Wilders calls for mass deportation of Muslims". Perhaps he's modified his stance since then?

Mr Wilders stressed that he believed that Muslims who abide by the law and conform to what he described as “our values” should be welcome to stay. However, he said he had a “clear message” to people who did not choose to return to their countries of origin on a “voluntary basis”:“If you commit a crime, if you start thinking about jihad or sharia, then it’s very clear, we will send you away, we will send you packing, we will strip you of the Dutch or Danish nationality. Abide by the rules, you are welcome to stay, and if you don’t we will send you away the same day.”

and apparently there are others more recently

A top French TV presenter [Eric Zemmour] has been sacked for saying that Muslims should be deported to avoid “chaos and civil war.” His comments have sparked a heated debate, with some on the right defending him and leftists denouncing him as a racist.

http://rt.com/news/216703-television-muslims-deported-france/

Obviously, it's a sensitive matter.There is some discussion about the matter of immigration, lack of integration/assimilation, and the jihadist movement in this article from 2005, two years after the US invaded Iraq.
http://www.cfr.org/religion/europes-angry-muslims/p8218

 

[nikkkom]

I spend a lot of time on a worldwide but Euro-centered forum devoted to motorsports, having a vibrant opinion and current event subforum. The moderation is largely progressive liberal, and makes a statistically impressive case that anti-multiculturalism poses a greater threat to Europe than does any other, current events notwithstanding.

Those evil anti-multiculturalism rioters! Oh, wait...

The photos are from 2014

 

[Borg]

I spend a lot of time on a worldwide but Euro-centered forum devoted to motorsports, having a vibrant opinion and current event subforum. The moderation is largely progressive liberal, and makes a statistically impressive case that anti-multiculturalism poses a greater threat to Europe than does any other, current events notwithstanding. I don't know because I'm not there.

From what I've been seeing in the news, I would have to agree that anti-multiculturalism is a significant issue (for both sides).

France has been doing a pretty bad job of integrating non-anglo saxon French such that French Jews are leaving out of fear because the police turn a blind eye and Muslim and North African immigrants have rioted because of high unemployment and police harassment.

On the Muslim side, they are going to have to accept that freedom of speech and acceptance of other views is part of being in a democratic society. You may not like it when someone insults your prophet but, if you're going to live in a democratic society, you have to accept the fact not everyone has to share your views. Nobody is forcing you to give up your religion when you immigrate so you shouldn't expect everyone to convert to yours.

 

[OmCheeto]

As OmCheeto commented above, the Pope didn't say they should be beaten up, but rather that someone could expect a punch if he ''cursed his mother'', in other words it would be a natural unthoughtful reaction.

I think the Pope was unwise to say this because it does give the (wrong) impression that he suggests violence is the correct response to insults to religion.

I suppose if the only thing you read was his "punch in the nose" comment, you might get that impression, but he went on to say:

One cannot offend, make war, kill in the name of one’s own religion, that is, in the name of God. To kill in the name of God is an aberration.

Which I think every sane person accepts.

A response closer to the Christian gospel would be to 'turn the other cheek'. (Matthew 5:38-40).

Reaction to criticism is a normal and a healthy part of debate in a free society, however repression of criticism through terrorist acts, or indeed law in a repressive regime, is a threat to such a healthy free society, instead criticism should be countered with alternative ideas and arguments.

This reminds me of the question the young man asked Lizzy Mae in the "Ask a Slave" episode I recommended; "If you have a problem, you can just go to human resources. Or is that not an option for you at all?"
I don't know where you live, nor what type environment you live in, but every time I browse the news at Al Jazeera, I see very little evidence of healthy free societies.
Even in Norway, the #4 best country in the world to live in, you still have the Breiviks. Those are the ones you have to worry about. As I said before, it only takes 1 or 2 lunatics to spoil it for the rest of us.

I think some of the cartoons in Charlie Hebdo are extremely offensive. My own response if I were French would be to not buy it. Actually before the attacks others (I think) thought the same as their sales were falling and the future of the magazine was in danger: Charlie Hebdo First Issue: Magazine Was In Financial 'Danger' Before Paris Massacre. The terrorists guaranteed the future of the satirical magazine.

Garth

I saw that also.
After just now looking at "French Demographics" in wiki, and my previous research on the history of terrorism in France, I'd say that the worst thing about France, is Charlie Hebdo. And what better way, to keep hate alive, than to keep bigotry alive.

Charlie Hebdo founder says slain editor 'dragged' team to their deaths
Henri Roussel, 80, who contributed to the first issue of the satirical weekly in 1970, wrote to the murdered editor, saying: “I really hold it against you.”

My apologies, if I sound a bit flip-floppish on the subject. But every day, I learn something new.
And I'm not implying that geriatrics like Henri are any wiser than the rest of us, as I know many geriatric fools.
I just happen to agree with him.

 

[naima]

The problem here in France is that the parents who were coming from Algeria have a "a la francaise" muslim practice. They only asked that at school their children could find menus with no pork (beef, fish or vegetables). Now their children want that they could have "Hallal" (Kosher like)
menus. They want that their parents obey the ramadan laws. And their parents are very destabilized.
There was more than one million people in the march but the great majority was white.
This is not a criticisim but what was seen.

 

[Garth]

This reminds me of the question the young man asked Lizzy Mae in the "Ask a Slave" episode I recommended; "If you have a problem, you can just go to human resources. Or is that not an option for you at all?"
I don't know where you live, nor what type environment you live in, but every time I browse the news at Al Jazeera, I see very little evidence of healthy free societies.

I live in the UK in Kent, I used to live in the East End of London 30 years ago, which has changed a bit since then. Recently Muslim fanatics have tried to stop white women from walking through their own streets because they were 'incorrectly dressed' (perhaps you could see their faces?!?) and gays have been attacked. The bit about a 'healthy free society' was an aspiration not a reality! (It reminds me of a cartoon in which a aircraft hijacker demands to be taken to a 'free society'. The pilot responds, "This is an aeroplane not a ******* spaceship!")

My apologies, if I sound a bit flip-floppish on the subject. But every day, I learn something new.
And I'm not implying that geriatrics like Henri are any wiser than the rest of us, as I know many geriatric fools. I just happen to agree with him.

You know another GF now!

Regards,
Garth

 

[OmCheeto]

I would even say that most first and second generation immigrants become Americanized pretty quickly.

I would put it more at half and half, for the first generation. I've had much observational experience.

Some people are happy that they've arrived in a nation that is much better than their own, and scream; "YES! This is what I was looking for!"

While others, are hung up on the fact, that someone screwed up their homeland: my mother...

------------------------
Christmas dinner, the year before she passed away; "You! You destroyed my country!"
Our thoughts; "Mom has lost her mind. We weren't even born."

My brother and I joked about this, the day after her death.
He said to me; "You know, we've lost one of the funniest people in our lives."
To which, I could only agree.

 

[Czcibor]

Perhaps the root of the issue is not immigration, but poor integration.

Here in the States it's widely understood that by the third generation, immigrants will be completely "Americanized" (which I'm not going to define since that's complicated and off-topic). That's something European countries should strive for, IMO. As long as a group of citizens is fully integrated into society, who cares where their grandparents came from?

Also, if the issue is viewed this way, it's much simpler to fix.

It almost work in Europe.
-For example when I was in Germany I joked that there are no true Germans, but actually when you talked to some local people and ask them deep enough you'd discover that they are all just from Slavic countries in second generation. (my subjective impression, but there were really plenty of them)
-In case of France there is a funny story that in National Front there are quite plenty of people with Polish sounding surnames. It even is exaggeration that grand kids of immigrants become nationalists. You may also read about Sarkozy origin:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_history_of_Nicolas_Sarkozy

Just it don't work well with Muslim immigrants, there was impression that second generation is not integrated and less cooperative than their parents who as immigrants were careful in their behaviour.

Hossam:

If you are not worried enough yet, then I'd add one more thing. There is an impression that Western democracies are too politically correct to address the whole problem. You know, decisions made by affluent people who if hear complains from poor people about misbehaving Muslims (no terrorism just no school and minor crime including rioting) would just call those who complain as racist and have the case closed. Such inertia and lack of ability to do moderate decision (like let's say a few deportations of radicals and criminals), made the whole elites look unresponsive and is feeding with votes politicians with more radical ideas.

 

[mheslep]

from The wikipedia link:I wouldn't call that a muslim take over. It certainly wouldn't transform Europe to "look like muslim countries".

Ok, if not all of France / Europe, how about numerous European cities, starting with, e.g., Marseilles already as high as 35%, which then set up legal systems accordingly?

 

[mheslep]

I would even say that most first and second generation immigrants become Americanized pretty quickly.

Agreed that this was the case in the past. Increasing evidence to the contrary now. In the current time when schools and government refuse to declare even a national language, its apparent the country has moved away from the American melting pot model.

 

[OmCheeto]

I live in the UK in Kent, I used to live in the East End of London 30 years ago, which has changed a bit since then. Recently Muslim fanatics have tried to stop white women from walking through their own streets because they were 'incorrectly dressed' (perhaps you could see their faces?!?) and gays have been attacked.

Well, if that happened where I lived, that would tend to taint my opinion. Fortunately, to my knowledge anyways, it hasn't.
But I can see the backlash from such a thing. Why on Earth would someone move to another country, and try and impose their moral values on the local citizenry?
Your comments now makes a bit more sense. Thank you.

But the Mentors have been harping on us, to keep this on topic, as well they should, so I'll try and figure out what the "Charlie Hebdo" incident means.
...
I've got nothing, beyond that which I've previously stated.

All further comments, would be anecdotal.

The bit about a 'healthy free society' was an aspiration not a reality! (It reminds me of a cartoon in which a aircraft hijacker demands to be taken to a 'free society'. The pilot responds, "This is an aeroplane not a ******* spaceship!")

You know another GF now!

Regards,
Garth

I like you, Garth of Kent. You are no fool. :)

 

[HossamCFD]

There is a difference between mass deportations (what you said) and banning future immigration (what Wilders said). (I don't necessarily agree with either position - just pointing out they are different)

And yet, even his extreme position is not a mass deportation proposal, but a proposal to stop immigration. Even a complete stop of immigration is not undemocratic.

Let's try one more time. I did NOT bring up the deportation topic, nor did I assign it to any political figure. Czcibor ASKED if I see this notion as an overreaction and I REPLIED by saying yes it's a disturbing overreaction. I do not even consider mass deportation as something within the realm of right wing politics.

I hope this is cleared up now.

The point about Geert Wilders wasn't to conflate his policies with deportation. At no point did I claim that. nikkkom was presenting what seemed to me as an overly benign version of right wing immigration politics, and I brought up an example to challenge this presentation.

 

[HossamCFD]

Ok, if not all of France / Europe, how about numerous European cities, starting with, e.g., Marseilles already as high as 35%, which then set up legal systems accordingly?

Yes this seems like a possibility and people need to be worried about it. I'd be interested though to know how many of those muslims take their faith seriously enough to try and adopt parts of it in the legal system.

 

[HossamCFD]

Hossam:

If you are not worried enough yet, then I'd add one more thing. There is an impression that Western democracies are too politically correct to address the whole problem. You know, decisions made by affluent people who if hear complains from poor people about misbehaving Muslims (no terrorism just no school and minor crime including rioting) would just call those who complain as racist and have the case closed. Such inertia and lack of ability to do moderate decision (like let's say a few deportations of radicals and criminals), made the whole elites look unresponsive and is feeding with votes politicians with more radical ideas.

Of course there are many cases where political correctness has harmed societies. My impression is that democracies fix themselves; when systems mess up because of political correctness they'll get sacked and their successors will learn the lesson.

 

[Monique]

Apparently Geert Wilders has in the past, and perhaps recently, advocated deportation of Muslims, but apparently with conditions, e.g., crime.

From 2009, in an interview with Radio Netherlands, "Wilders calls for mass deportation of Muslims". Perhaps he's modified his stance since then?

Wilders... he likes to kick the box. In response to his statements the Dutch Moroccans twittered with the hashtag #bornhere, showing their Dutch passport.

 

[Borg]

Agreed that this was the case in the past. Increasing evidence to the contrary now.

Are you saying that a single twisted individual (who would have probably attacked people in whatever country he resided in) is evidence of how most people are not successfully integrating into American society? A simple yes or no would be nice since this is way off topic.

 

[Czcibor]

Of course there are many cases where political correctness has harmed societies. My impression is that democracies fix themselves; when systems mess up because of political correctness they'll get sacked and their successors will learn the lesson.

They fix themselves, however it takes time and on the fringes of society as usual would be discussed conceptually simple solutions, in this case like: "deport all Muslims".

 

[Vanadium 50]

Is there any major political figure in the West calling for the deportation of all Muslims? Anyone? If not, we should stop with this straw man.

There is plenty to criticize even if we limit ourselves to what people actually said and did, without resorting to making stuff up.

 

[naima]

7 000 000 copies of last Charlie Hebdo are going to be printed.
This is a surprizing success for this magazine. Could it be possible in your country?

 

[nikkkom]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tml?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

"Schoolbook authors have been told not to write about sausages or pigs for fear of causing offence.
Guidance from leading educational publisher the Oxford University Press prohibits authors from including anything that could be perceived as pork-related in their books."

Some people may get offended by seeing a picture of a sausage, or just reading that word? Wow, don't do that then!

Anyone still still not seeing that this PC nonsense went way too far?

 

[Blackberg]

Forbidding pigs and sausages in writing sounds like a bad joke about aristocrates. Some people need to get of their ivory towers. I'm offended that some look down on me because I enjoy ham in my omelette. People should go about ther business and let others be.

 

[naima]

Everybody will understand that as a vegetarian you may be offended by pork and sausages.
St Paul (corinthians) told us: let your women keep silent in the assemblies.
if you are shocked by all these women in political demonstrations, use photoshop to hide them!
Or read Kol Hamevaser:
www.courrierinternational.com/article/2015/01/13/un-journal-israelien-efface-angela-merkel-de-la-photo-a-paris
No more Angela Merkel, no more women
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/routine-emergencies/.premium-1.636823

 

[jim hardy]

Everybody will understand that as a vegetarian you may be offended by pork and sausages.

While i can understand their aversion ,
I'm equally offended by narcissists who think themselves so important that i should bow down to their silly neurotic superstitions .

A man said to the universe:
“Sir, I exist!”
“However,” replied the universe,
“The fact has not created in me
A sense of obligation.”

I'll remain polite until they get pushy.

 

[Czcibor]

Everybody will understand that as a vegetarian you may be offended by pork and sausages.
St Paul (corinthians) told us: let your women keep silent in the assemblies.
if you are shocked by all these women in political demonstrations, use photoshop to hide them!
Or read Kol Hamevaser:
www.courrierinternational.com/article/2015/01/13/un-journal-israelien-efface-angela-merkel-de-la-photo-a-paris
No more Angela Merkel, no more women
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/routine-emergencies/.premium-1.636823

In Polish newspaper it was also noticed that Donald Tusk was also removed from that photo. Maybe also his liberal (for American: libertarian leaning) views may lead someone into temptation? :D

 

[Vanadium 50]

US Presidential advisor Valerie Jarrett calls the march in Paris a "parade".

Meanwhile, in Niger, Muslims are burning churches and killing Christians.

 

[Dotini]

US Presidential advisor Valerie Jarrett calls the march in Paris a "parade".

A parade that set off angry protests and demonstrations across the Muslim world.

The US would like to think it's far more astute than Europe in integrating and assimilating Muslims, and it doesn't go about it by shoving trashy free speech in their face. For example, we arrest pastors who attempt to burn the Koran.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...pastor-terry-jones-arrested-article-1.1453195

 

[mheslep]

A parade that set off angry protests and demonstrations across the Muslim world.

You're confusing the march with publication of post massacre Charlie Hebdo issues depicting the Mohammed. It was the latter that set off more demonstrations.

 

[mheslep]

US Presidential advisor Valerie Jarrett calls the march in Paris a "parade".

Meanwhile, in Niger, Muslims are burning churches and killing Christians.

She won't mind then if the President is introduced tonight at the SOTU as the Entertainer in Chief, the Ringmaster, etc.