12 dead in attack on Paris newspaper; France goes on alert

[mentalfloss]

I'm sorry, but that is just so ignorant of the reality.......

How many newspapers in Canada printed any of the Mohammed cartoons?

This does not qualify as evidence that they do not have the opportunity to do so.

Sorry.

Simon SchamaVerified account ‏@simon_schama

#CharlieHebdo Satire was the father of true political freedom, born in the 18th century; the scourge of bigots and tyrants. Sing its praises


long live Voltaire...or not.

I guess this would explain your unconditional love for Colbert lol

 

[Colpy]

This does not qualify as evidence that they do not have the opportunity to do so.

Sorry.

l

Excuse me??

It was news.

Freedom of speech means the ability to speak (or print) without having to pay......you know, free of retribution.

If you do not speak because you are afraid, then you have no freedom.

Charb, one of the caricaturists killed today, said earlier, after receiving death threats from islamists: "I am not afraid of retaliation. I have no kids, no wife, no car, no credit. It perhaps sounds a bit pompous, but I prefer to die standing than living on my knees." Source: "Charlie Hebdo" : Charb, Cabu, Tignous et Wolinski morts dans la fusillade - Le Point

 

[Locutus]

I mock colbert, think his bit is tired and old like he is and certainly haven't threatened him.

anyway, press freedom, editorial values and such eh? welcome to the progressive test world kid.

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

Actually, this is a good thing for freedom of speech. Attacks on the media will not help these scumbags in their attempt to muzzle free speech. In fact I think it will have the exact opposite effect.

 

[mentalfloss]

Excuse me??

It was news.

Freedom of speech means the ability to speak (or print) without having to pay......you know, free of retribution.

If you do not speak because you are afraid, then you have no freedom.

Charb, one of the caricaturists killed today, said earlier, after receiving death threats from islamists: "I am not afraid of retaliation. I have no kids, no wife, no car, no credit. It perhaps sounds a bit pompous, but I prefer to die standing than living on my knees." Source: "Charlie Hebdo" : Charb, Cabu, Tignous et Wolinski morts dans la fusillade - Le Point

I get that, but there is no reason a major publication needs to fear retribution just as there is no reason why Parliament should fear retribution, even after last year's attack.

 

[Colpy]

Actually, this is a good thing for freedom of speech. Attacks on the media will not help these scumbags in their attempt to muzzle free speech. In fact I think it will have the exact opposite effect.

I only wish.

But I think you are mistaken.

 

[mentalfloss]

Actually, this is a good thing for freedom of speech. Attacks on the media will not help these scumbags in their attempt to muzzle free speech. In fact I think it will have the exact opposite effect.

Exactly.

We have more than ample resources to properly protect high profile journalists and they have the freedom to continue their work. I

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

The only way to secure freedom of speech is to deny freedom of religion.

 

[Colpy]

I get that, but there is no reason a major publication needs to fear retribution just as there is no reason why Parliament should fear retribution, even after last year's attack.

I would re-word that.

There should be no reason a major publication needs to fear retribution.

The event in Paris proved quite conclusively that there definitely is reason to fear retribution.

The only way to secure freedom of speech is to deny freedom of religion.

Oh Bullshyte.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

Don't shoot the messenger.

Isn't that what just happened today in France?

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

I would re-word that.

There should be no reason a major publication needs to fear retribution.

The event in Paris proved quite conclusively that there definitely is reason to fear retribution.



Oh Bullshyte.

OK, check my reasoning. You want to limit immigration, and possibly deport non-citizen immigrants, for no reason but the fact that they are Muslims. How is this not denying freedom of religion? It is specifically taking government action against the people of one religion because of their religion. That's kinda the definition of denying freedom of religion.

 

[mentalfloss]

I would re-word that.

There should be no reason a major publication needs to fear retribution.

The event in Paris proved quite conclusively that there definitely is reason to fear retribution.

Well then I would agree for small outlets with little to no security, but if extremists have access to weaponry and they are not adequately prepared with proper security, then this is what happens.

 

[Colpy]

Exactly.

We have more than ample resources to properly protect high profile journalists and they have the freedom to continue their work. I

So many things wrong with this....

First, why should they need protection?

Secondly, only "high profile journalists" need (or deserve) protection? Or the freedom to speak?

Thirdly, if you think the powers that be will protect you, you got another think coming.

Fourth, the offices in Paris were "protected". The unfortunate officer on duty was the first to die.

 

[WLDB]

Every paper in the western world should print the Mohammed cartoons on the front page tomorrow.

Im all for this. Not printing it at all lets them win.

 

[Blackleaf]

Obviously, nothing to do with the Religion of Peace.

Every paper in the western world should print the Mohammed cartoons on the front page tomorrow.

And it is time to limit Muslim immigration to the west.

Great post. It's a pity I can't award you a gold star.

 

[mentalfloss]

So many things wrong with this....

First, why should they need protection?

Secondly, only "high profile journalists" need (or deserve) protection? Or the freedom to speak?

Thirdly, if you think the powers that be will protect you, you got another think coming.

Fourth, the offices in Paris were "protected". The unfortunate officer on duty was the first to die.

How often do these events happen?

Not enough to warrant your immigration policy.

The proportional response of security for high risk areas is the appropriate one.

 

[Blackleaf]

It's the tenth anniversary of 7/7 on 7th July. I just have a feeling that the Religion of Peace is planning an atrocity in London or elsewhere in the UK to celebrate.

 

[Colpy]

Christie Blatchford: Man jailed for a year after anti-Islam speech spurs emergency-alarm on Toronto subway train | National Post

 

[WLDB]

They can not.

Read the Koran.

Learn a bit about the religion.

How many Christians do you know who follow the Bible literally? Or Jews with the Torah? If they did, things would be very different.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

So many things wrong with this....

First, why should they need protection?

Because criminals are threatening them.

That's the key - criminals. When people receive police protection in the U.S., we protect them from criminals. When people go into the Witness Protection Program, they are being protected from criminals. When Federal marshals escorted the black children into white schools in the 50s, they were protecting them from criminals, not from white people.

Secondly, only "high profile journalists" need (or deserve) protection? Or the freedom to speak?

No, anybody who the government thinks is under more-than-ordinary threat deserves protection.

Thirdly, if you think the powers that be will protect you, you got another think coming.

Inconsistent with your very next statement.

Fourth, the offices in Paris were "protected". The unfortunate officer on duty was the first to die.

That is unfortunate. The fact that the protection was inadequate in this case, however, is not a very good argument against protection.