12 dead in attack on Paris newspaper; France goes on alert
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
It's the finding them once we decide to get rid of them that we're still struggling with.
Justin Trudeau will fix that.. another "if we only try to understand these people." :roll:
I'm impressed. you guys have discovered 'math'. Not as impressed with the final answer though. Baby formula used to be the codeword for Afghan heroin, you sure you are reading those e-mails correctly.
So 'France sends some radical Frenchmen to Syria where they are kill a lot of civilians and when they come back all that wanton killing of innocents in Syria has made them even more insane and they go off the deep-end back home in France so the solution is to bomb, Syrian, and Iran if they could slip that in.
Notice that ISIS hasn't been mentioned once in any of this, is that so the West isn't seen as offending the next rules of Iraq and all point west all the way to the Atlantic?
Whos is going to feel the pain the worst, the Western countries for Muslim exiles or the West when it gets exiled out of the Muslim Nations who just happen to have most of the best oil. Go ahead boycott them and we can relax in out new level of stupid.
Ask Cuba and Iran and Venezuela what the West does when it is asked to pick up it's toys and go home. Suddenly the right to travel takes on a whole new meaning.
Canada is right to be a tad worried as it will be defeated rebels that will be getting the refugee status in Canada rather than orphaned children and displaced women. You will notice that when the shiploads of =Nazi SS troops came to North America is was all quietly done and to keep it a secret they were all given jobs at the same factory, the CIA, didn't even need any new training as their old jod had the same duties, just not the same pay.
Mark Steyn sure sounds angry.
Not the best at making any convincing points, however.
When your major tenets are so easily, and clinically picked apart, it's time find another script.
Charlie Hebdo and free speech - News - CBC Player
Not the best at making any convincing points, however.
When your major tenets are so easily, and clinically picked apart, it's time find another script.
Charlie Hebdo and free speech - News - CBC Player
Sure, sure "carried by 6" dodging a question after making a blanket statement above to everyone..
You're really a drooling idiot troll.
I doubt the Muslims have the marketing skill that the West does.
PARIS SHOOTING: Charlie ‘Magazine Murders’ Reveals Evidence of Deliberate Staging
There there is the 'usual suspects'.
PARIS SHOOTING: Charlie ‘Magazine Murders’ Reveals Evidence of Deliberate Staging
www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6KvOxnyBSo
PARIS SHOOTING: Charlie ‘Magazine Murders’ Reveals Evidence of Deliberate Staging
There there is the 'usual suspects'.
PARIS SHOOTING: Charlie ‘Magazine Murders’ Reveals Evidence of Deliberate Staging
www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6KvOxnyBSo
Guess you missed this:
'Female suicide bomber' attacks Istanbul tourist district police station - Telegraph
Its far from unheard of for Islamic terrorists to have and use women.
Criminal violence. Your free speech rights exist vis-a-vis the government. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads "Congress shall make no law. . . abridging the freedom of speech."
Congress, which the courts have interpreted to mean the whole government. Radical Muslims are not the government in France.
There are many ways to limit your freedom of speech, some legitimate, some not. If you are an employee, your employer can tell you what you may or may not say, and fire you if you disobey. Perfectly legal and legitimate. You have no free speech rights vis-a-vis your employer. If you own a shop, your customers may limit your freedom of speech by declining to do business with you if you say certain things, such as "Hitler was right." Again, perfectly legal and legitimate. If you go to a party at someone's house and espouse racism, the owner of the house can limit your freedom of speech by telling you that if you continue, you'll have to leave. Perfectly legal and legitimate.
The key here is, again, that your "free speech" right exists vis-a-vis the government, not private parties.
Then there are illegitimate ways to limit your freedom of speech. One of these is private individuals threatening or committing violence against you. But if they do that and are caught, they will not be punished for limiting your freedom of speech. They will be punished for the crime they committed. If you beat the heck out of somebody because of what he said, the law will punish you just as it would if you beat the heck out of him for looking at your girlfriend, or supporting the wrong sports team, or because you want his wallet. That demonstrates that the Paris thing was not about freedom of speech, it was about mass murder.
