http://hosted2.ap.org/AKJUN/2e515285...9b02d64d1a32c6
Uh oh, we know who's next on the list
http://fr.novopress.info/wp-content/...r-quenelle.jpg
Printable View
http://hosted2.ap.org/AKJUN/2e515285...9b02d64d1a32c6
Uh oh, we know who's next on the list
http://fr.novopress.info/wp-content/...r-quenelle.jpg
The double standard in France..So they have a law against hate speech and anti-semitism but are rallying for the freedom to hate on Moslems..
France with fake freedom of speech..
:lmao
Good. It gives Pop an easy out to make the change at pg. Although, I guess if fucks up his trade value.Quote:
Originally Posted by testies
France has been a fascist state for a while, why is this news?
same goes for Australia tbh.
US has been for while as well
the scary thing is the German nationalism brewing tbh
you know when them Germans go radical, all hell breaks lose :lol
I for one would support Tony if they arrest him...tbh.
Nah it's not, German people are still traumatized about the holocaust and will be for years to come, they have extra rules saying that you can't do the nazi salute and stuff like that... Besides they're basically ruling the European Union so nationalism is much weaker than in other European countries where the EU is seen as the enemy.Quote:
Originally Posted by hater
disagree. haven't been this many german nationalists congregated since the fall of the wall tbhQuote:
Originally Posted by Baam
http://rt.com/files/news/36/30/30/00/4537457856.jpg
Agree, we're all screwed if far right nationalist movements gain traction there.Quote:
Originally Posted by hater
So, uh... posting random shots of Germans? Did their celebrations after the World Cup give you the vapors?Quote:
Originally Posted by hater
Right - they basically were afraid to show any national pride until the '06 World Cup and their soccer fans - while fervent supporters - are actually pretty tame compared to the English, Russians, etc. And unlike many other European countries, they actually have a country to be proud of (economy + world cup win).Quote:
Originally Posted by Baam
A lot of the strife in France and elsewhere is caused by the fact that unemployment is still very high - especially for younger people, and population growth is stagnant in non-immigrant communities. Also, muslims in Germany = mostly Turkish, while many more from the Arab world in France. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to know where more extremism is bred, which is why it's surprising that these marches are taking place in Germany combined with the fact that the economy there doesn't suck.
that's not a random shot. It's a anti-immigration rally in Dresden performed last week.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Body
http://i.imgur.com/qY67BP6.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Body
http://i.imgur.com/4C7uB2A.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by hater
So Pablo Escobar is your hero, but Nationalism scares you? That's an interesting take on the world. Are you an Anarchist?Quote:
Originally Posted by hater
sup harlem...Quote:
Originally Posted by apalisoc_9
quite a moronic take but it's all good brah... difficult to follow what's going on in a country you never visited especially when you live in Canada tbh...
:lol
That photo is obviously old.
wowQuote:
Originally Posted by PingPong
Do you know when this picture was made? Do you know that back then, Dieudonné was not considered antisemite (anti-sionnist and anti establishment at best)? And did you know that he was (rightfully) seen as the funniest French comic?Quote:
Originally Posted by testies
Living myself in Berlin for years now, people are, for the vast majority, tolerant, open minded and well aware/ashame of their Grand parents fucked-up mistakes. Unless the economy collapses completely, German society will do just fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by in2deep
do you remember this French comic who ended up in trouble for also speaking his mind? hmmmmmm.....Quote:
Originally Posted by romain.star
http://www.famousbirthdays.com/faces...akov-image.jpg
Frances' hypocrisy is disgusting.Quote:
Originally Posted by apalisoc_9
Those rallies are only popular in Dresden, a city where hardly any Muslims live. So, it´s mostly about misinformation and fear of the unknown and not about nationalism/racism/facism! In multiple other cities there are ten times as many people demonstrating against this movement and for tolerance, soldarity etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by hater
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._2015-2215.jpg
Please explain why it's moronic. Bashing Muslims = OK. Bashing Jews = Illegal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brazil
And as if it matters, I've been to France more times than I can count.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splits
the only questionable part regarding freedom of speech is the law forbidding negationism.
For the rest if you think this law is against bashing Jews you did not pay attention.
The problem with a law against antisemitism is that it is a completely subjective term. It gets thrown around so frequently that as to render it meaningless. To a religious zionist, calling "settlements" "illegal" is antisemitism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brazil
Speech is officially unfree in much of Europe. Not sure why people are surprised. In France you can go to jail for being a holocaust denier.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gayssot_Act
Quote:
Originally Posted by apalisoc_9
I would support Tony's arrest as well. :lol
LOL, well said!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Body
then you have not learned much when you were there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splits
Great explanation. Tell me what you disagree with in this piece: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2...book-comments/Quote:
Originally Posted by Nero5
BRAZIL
WHAT DID I TELL YOU?
DOUBLE STANDARDS
:lmao France
"And a 22-year-old in the Paris suburb of Nanterre was sentenced to a year in jail for posting a video mocking one of the policemen shot dead last week."
http://news.yahoo.com/french-comedia...150125064.html
The French authorities also cancelled Dieudonne's tour a while ago because it was deemed antisemitic
:lol after this I'm done with this topicQuote:
Originally Posted by lefty
there is no double standard, there would be double standard if law was different for Jewish and Muslim or whatever... Incitive genocide of Muslims in France and u go to jail simple as that.
charlie never incitivated somebody to kill Muslims not sure where u see a double standard.... When dat faggot Dieudonne say I'm Coulibaly who killed 4 Jews (I guess like for Charlie these dudes deserved it too) considering his antisemitisim he will be accused to incentive hate and violence.
furthermore this kind of law is not specific to france but exists in most western countries
Finally U.S. citizens giving lessons about individual liberty or freedom of speech after patriot act and other funny laws is quite :lmao
let us proceed
So you can publish a picture in a newspaper bashing Muslims but you can't post something on FB regarding jews? That's somehow not a double standard?
As far as inciting violence i'm pretty sure the attack proved that CH's comics incite violence. I think they have every right to do what they did don't get me wrong, but to then arrest people for making a statement or comment that 'could incite violence' is damn hypocritical from where I sit.
again for the 100th timeQuote:
Originally Posted by Brazil
Its not about killing or not
It's about the reaction to the tragedy, people talking about free speech and saying it was just satire
But when Dieudonne opens his mouth it's neither :lmao
Bashing Muslims or Jews is Legal in France. Crime apology is not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splits
That´s not all he did. He has a history most posters here don´t know or ignore:Quote:
Originally Posted by unleashbaynes
Court actions
On 14 June 2006, Dieudonné was sentenced to a penalty of €4,500 for defamation after having called a prominent Jewish television presenter a "secret donor of the child-murdering Israeli army".[102]
On 15 November 2007, an appellate court sentenced him to a €5,000 fine because he had characterized "the Jews" as "slave traders" after being attacked in le Théâtre de la Main d'Or.[103]
On 26 June 2008, he was sentenced in the highest judicial instance to a €7,000 fine for his characterization of Holocaust commemorations as "memorial pornography".[42]
On 27 February 2009, he was ordered to pay 75,000 Canadian dollars in Montreal to singer and actor Patrick Bruel for defamatory statements. He had called Bruel a "liar" and an "Israeli soldier".[104]
On 26 March 2009, Dieudonné was fined €1,000 and ordered to pay €2,000 in damages for having defamed Elisabeth Schemla, a Jewish journalist who ran the now-defunct Proche-Orient.info website. He declared on 31 May 2005 that the website wanted to "eradicate Dieudonné from the audiovisual landscape" and had said of him that "he's an anti-Semite, he's the son of Hitler, he will exterminate everyone".[105]
On 27 October 2009, he was sentenced to a fine of €10,000 for "public insult of people of Jewish faith or origin" related to his show with Robert Faurisson.[106]
On 8 June 2010, he was sentenced to a fine of €10,000 for defamation towards the International League against Racism and Anti-Semitism, which he had called "a mafia-like association that organizes censorship".[107]
On 10 October 2012, he was fined €887,135 for tax evasion. According to the French revenue service, Dieudonné failed to pay part of his taxes from 1997 to 2009.[citation needed].
On 12 February 2014, he was ordered by a court to withdraw two clips from a video posted on YouTube on 31 December 2013 on the grounds of incitement to ethnic or racial hatred, and crimes against humanity denial.[108]
More here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieudon...7bala_M%27bala
Denying Holocaust is a little more than posting something regarding jews...
you have reading comprehension issue.... one is basically calling for killing jews, charlie never made crime apology, they don't incentivate anybody to kill jews, muslims or christians... not sure what you don't understand tbhQuote:
Originally Posted by lefty
You have understanding issues tbh
This is because France doesn't understand "freedom of speech" as 'Murica traditionally has. And I know exactly what lefty is saying. You're attributing an arbitrary 'intent' to the speech, but at the end of the day, it's just speech.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brazil
That's why in 'Murica, save very, very specific exceptions (like yelling 'fire' inside a theater, or 'bomb' inside an airport) it's not a crime for KKK agents or even Nazis to speak their minds.
Then again, they're different countries, with different constitutional values and laws. So it's perfectly fine for France to have their own set of rules.
^ well in America they can detain citizens indefinitely without any charge. Dozens of citizens are currently in custody this way.
that's even worse tbh. Sure this is happening all over Europe and Australia now, but the whole thing started in the US. So I have to agree. an american critizicing the French law is fucking stupid :lol
I fail to see how saying "I feel like Coulibaly" on Facebook can be determined as a call for killing Jews. He also killed a Muslim police officer - why not "anti-Muslim" or "anti-police"?
He was charged for "apologizing for terrorism" anyways, so nothing to do with the Jewish stuff people are claiming.
The ironic part is this is clearly an issue about free speech...since it's the actual state intervening, as opposed to crazy radicals. Let's not even talk about being charged and sentenced to a year in prison for mocking one of the officers...the hypocrisy is hilarious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by resistanze
Actually Coubaily murdered the black female police officer...so I guess the comedian was calling for racial violence against blacks :lol
Yeah, that's why I wrote 'traditionally'. The whole Patriot Act, extraordinary rendition, etc are a travesty to all that.Quote:
Originally Posted by hater
I guess you answered your own question. Lefty and I are arguing double standard... This law is not specific for protection of the jews but everybody, you don't make apologize for terrorism period. Now YOU think saying I feel like Coulibaly is not a call to kill jews, a French court will decide if it is or not. Dieudo has not been put in jail yet. That's justice work to decide.Quote:
Originally Posted by resistanze
I, for one, fail to see the double standard between charlie hebdo and dieudo... two situations totally different and not comparable as charlie never called to kill muslims or anybody else or never said holocaust did not exist.
Now obviously we can argue about is this french law an obstruction of freedom of speech and why it is ok to mock the pope but not ok to say jews are rats and deserve to die...Quote:
Originally Posted by resistanze
First of all, it is not a French specificity as most european countries have similar laws starting by germany, sweden and even Canada... I personnally think some elements of this law do not make sense, Dieudonne has to pay a fine for saying a league against racism is a mafia ? non sense imo. Now fighting against negotionism when you know a bit European history is ok in my book, fighting against opinion leaders incitivating crime is also ok in my book.
Some part of the anti semite law is over the top imo it creates martyr and the consequences are worst than if there was no law.
On a side note, patriot act law in US is 10 times worst for individual liberty than European laws fighting discrimination.
I understand the stance that these laws can be interpreted as an obstacle of freedom of speech but double standard would be an application different from a community to another which is not the case. Law defines exactly what we cannot do, Charlie hebdo never crossed the lines legally speaking in France.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElNono
Reading dudes deserved it because they were looking for trouble is sad because you are saying terrorists can dictate what you can do or not in your own country... You live in France, France has a set of rules if you don't like it get the fuck out this country...
First of all, don't assume just because an American is criticizing French anti-free-speech laws means that all Americans think we are the beacon of free speech. We have our own set of problems, which are quite similar to those of the French problems, when it comes to "free speech". That similarity is that speech is "free" when it is impugning minority or unpopular opinions, but unacceptable when criticizing the positions our governments take, especially when it comes to state-sanctioned violence.
Second of all, since nobody bothered to click on the Greenwald link, I'm going to paste the entire article here and ask where there is disagreement.
Quote:
Forty-eight hours after hosting a massive march under the banner of free expression, France opened a criminal investigation of a controversial French comedian for a Facebook post he wrote about the Charlie Hebdo attack, and then this morning, arrested him for that post on charges of “defending terrorism.” The comedian, Dieudonné (above), previously sought elective office in France on what he called an “anti-Zionist” platform, has had his show banned by numerous government officials in cities throughout France, and has been criminally prosecuted several times before for expressing ideas banned in that country.The apparently criminal viewpoint he posted on Facebook declared: “Tonight, as far as I’m concerned, I feel like Charlie Coulibaly.” Investigators concluded that this was intended to mock the “Je Suis Charlie” slogan and express support for the perpetrator of the Paris supermarket killings (whose last name was “Coulibaly”). Expressing that opinion is evidently a crime in the Republic of Liberté, which prides itself on a line of 20th Century intellectuals – from Sartre and Genet to Foucault and Derrida – whose hallmark was leaving no orthodoxy or convention unmolested, no matter how sacred.
Since that glorious “free speech” march, France has reportedly opened 54 criminal cases for “condoning terrorism.” AP reported this morning that “France ordered prosecutors around the country to crack down on hate speech, anti-Semitism and glorifying terrorism.”
As pernicious as this arrest and related “crackdown” on some speech obviously is, it provides a critical value: namely, it underscores the utter scam that was this week’s celebration of free speech in the west. The day before the Charlie Hebdo attack, I coincidentally documented the multiple cases in the west – including in the U.S. – where Muslims have been prosecuted and even imprisoned for their political speech. Vanishingly few of this week’s bold free expression mavens have ever uttered a peep of protest about any of those cases – either before the Charlie Hebdo attack or since. That’s because “free speech,” in the hands of many westerners, actually means: it is vital that the ideas I like be protected, and the right to offend groups I dislike be cherished; anything else is fair game.
It is certainly true that many of Dieudonné’s views and statements are noxious, although he and his supporters insist that they are “satire” and all in good humor. In that regard, the controversy they provoke is similar to the now-much-beloved Charlie Hebdo cartoons (one French leftist insists the cartoonists were mocking rather than adopting racism and bigotry, but Olivier Cyran, a former writer at the magazine who resigned in 2001, wrote a powerful 2013 letter with ample documentation condemning Charlie Hebdo for descending in the post-9/11 era into full-scale, obsessive anti-Muslim bigotry).
Despite the obvious threat to free speech posed by this arrest, it is inconceivable that any mainstream western media figures would start tweeting “#JeSuisDieudonné” or would upload photographs of themselves performing his ugly Nazi-evoking arm gesture in “solidarity” with his free speech rights. That’s true even if he were murdered for his ideas rather than “merely” arrested and prosecuted for them. That’s because last week’s celebration of the Hebdo cartoonists (well beyond mourning their horrifically unjust murders) was at least as much about approval for their anti-Muslim messages as it was about the free speech rights that were invoked in their support - at least as much.
https://prod01-cdn02.cdn.firstlook.o...d2-540x225.png
The vast bulk of the stirring “free speech” tributes over the last week have been little more than an attempt to protect and venerate speech that degrades disfavored groups while rendering off-limits speech that does the same to favored groups, all deceitfully masquerading as lofty principles of liberty. In response to my article containing anti-Jewish cartoons on Monday - which I posted to demonstrate the utter selectivity and inauthenticity of this newfound adoration of offensive speech - I was subjected to endless contortions justifying why anti-Muslim speech is perfectly great and noble while anti-Jewish speech is hideously offensive and evil (the most frequently invoked distinction – “Jews are a race/ethnicity while Muslims aren’t” – would come as a huge surprise to the world’s Asian, black, Latino and white Jews, as well as to those who identify as “Muslim” as part of their cultural identity even though they don’t pray five times a day). As always: it’s free speech if it involves ideas I like or attacks groups I dislike, but it’s something different when I’m the one who is offended.
Think about the “defending terrorism” criminal offense for which Dieudonné has been arrested. Should it really be a criminal offense – causing someone to be arrested, prosecuted and imprisoned – to say something along these lines: western countries like France have been bringing violence for so long to Muslims in their countries that I now believe it’s justifiable to bring violence to France as a means of making them stop? If you want “terrorism defenses” like that to be criminally prosecuted (as opposed to societally shunned), how about those who justify, cheer for and glorify the invasion and destruction of Iraq, with its “Shock and Awe” slogan signifying an intent to terrorize the civilian population into submission and itsmonstrous tactics in Fallujah? Or how about the psychotic calls from a Fox News host, when discussing Muslims radicals, to “kill them ALL.” Why is one view permissible and the other criminally barred – other than because the force of law is being used to control political discourse and one form of terrorism (violence in the Muslim world) is done by, rather than to, the west?
For those interested, my comprehensive argument against all “hate speech” laws and other attempts to exploit the law to police political discourse ishere. That essay, notably, was written to denounce a proposal by a French minister, Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, to force Twitter to work with the French government to delete tweets which officials like this minister (and future unknown ministers) deem “hateful.” France is about as legitimate a symbol of free expression as Charlie Hebdo, which fired one of its writers in 2009 for a single supposedly anti-Semitic sentence in the midst of publishing an orgy of anti-Muslim (not just anti-Islam) content. This week’s celebration of France – and the gaggle of tyrannical leaders who joined it – had little to do with free speech and much to do with suppressing ideas they dislike while venerating ideas they prefer.
Perhaps the most intellectually corrupted figure in this regard is, unsurprisingly, France’s most celebrated (and easily the world’s most overrated) public intellectual, the philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy. He demands criminal suppression of anything smacking of anti-Jewish views (he called for Dieudonné’s shows to be banned (“I don’t understand why anyone even sees the need for debate”) and supported the 2009 firing of the Charlie Hebdo writer for a speech offense against Jews), while shamelessly parading around all last week as the Churchillian champion of free expression when it comes to anti-Muslim cartoons.
But that, inevitably, is precisely the goal, and the effect, of laws that criminalize certain ideas and those who support such laws: to codify a system where the views they like are sanctified and the groups to which they belong protected. The views and groups they most dislike – and only them – are fair game for oppression and degradation.
The arrest of this French comedian so soon after the epic Paris free speech march underscores this point more powerfully than anything I could have written about the selectivity and fraud of this week’s “free speech” parade. It also shows – yet again – why those who want to criminalize the ideas they most dislike are at least as dangerous and tyrannical as the ideas they target: at least.
I never said that. I responded to the people on this thread, never made any generalization.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splits
This article is totally bogus... I don't even know where to start... to take one why author is talking about anti-muslim ? since when charlie is anti-muslim ? Charlie Hebdo is full 68's guys mostly communists, as such they don't like religions. That's a fact. If you think they are anti-muslim, say also they are anti-christian and anti-judaism. Calling them out over their anti-muslim side is dishonest.Quote:
Originally Posted by Splits
Then I love the part on BH Levy... France's most celebrated public intellectual ? :lmao since when ? Dude is known in France because he fucks a French actress. He is getting his shit pushed on regularly. Using Levy saying he is kinda representative of French intellectuals is dishonest.
globally and I'm sorry this article is full of shit
Americans invented eugenics which was a cradle for Nazism, but the winners write the history books, right?
Cyran, the former writer, is the one who accused them of being overly fixated on anti-Muslim "satire":Quote:
Originally Posted by Brazil
http://posthypnotic.randomstatic.net...ticle%2011.htm
And you're seriously going to claim Levy isn't influential? Cmon, maybe "most celebrated" is a bit over the top but don't pretend he's a nobody, and it is true he's aligned with CH
yeah very former... he left in 2001, 14 years ago.... and apparently is quite salty. Dude left because he could not stand P. Val. In this article he is basically saying charlie became slowly anti-muslim after 9/11 which was after his departure.. so basically he is giving an outsider opinion and during his tenure Charlie was not racist ...:rolleyesQuote:
Originally Posted by Splits
I did not say BHL is nobody, I used this example to show this article is dishonest with a big fat agenda. Dude is writting "Perhaps the most intellectually corrupted figure in this regard is, unsurprisingly, France’s most celebrated (and easily the world’s most overrated) public intellectual" this sentence is full of shit. He is not the most celebrated intellectual by far... plus he is one of the very few intellectual in France who is pro Israel (normal he is jew), "intellectuals philosopher" in France are usually from the left side of the political spectrum and mostly pro palestinian... so using BHL as being kinda representative of intellectuals in France is once again dishonest.
On a side note I love the unsurprisingly after most intellectually corrupted figue... what the message ? France loves corrupted figure ? just an overall very bad article
I think the Greenwald article is typical of its type - hyperbole and bias with limited fact checking and a lack of context. Brazil has addressed the intellectual piece. Greenwald is attempting a persuasive piece with limited structure and clearly limited research. Sadly this is reflective of the need for churn in the WWW newsfeeds. He alleges much, esp with the suggestion that the comic will go to jail etc. DD has been arrested, charged and will have his day in court to argue his case. The justice system will be open and he will have his chance to defend himself. The end. If nothing else it was in poor taste, unwise given his previous convictions for antisemitism and had no element of humour in it. So what was the purpose? Bit like lefty on this forum saying I support Jeffrey Dahmer!
I find it ironic who on this forum is railing about free speech in another country, esp given the context. I suggest that it reflects their personal biases as much as anything else.