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

Colpy

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
MHz said:
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
Click to expand...

Yeah....that is why they killed Jews in an attack on a kosher grocery.
 
Last edited:
Blackleaf

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,914
1,907
113
One of the two people doing the nightly Sky News newspaper review of the next day's newspapers last night complained that neither Sky News nor BBC News mentioned the fact that the attack on the kosher supermarket was an anti-Semitic attack.

He mentioned, fairly angrily, that both of the 24 hours rolling news broadcasters were quick to point out that the attack on satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo was an attack on free speech, yet they didn't point out that the attack on the kosher supermarket was an anti-Semitic attack, and they should have done.

On the politically correct BBC News newspaper review one goon was saying France has a "big problem with Islamophobia" and that he hopes that these attacks will not lead to "increased Islamophobia". But not once did he mention France's problem with anti-Semitism, which is far worse than its supposed problem with Islamophobia, and that the attack on the kosher supermarket yesterday was an anti-Semitic attack.

B00Mer said:
Same could be said for other religions too..

Click to expand...


Yeah. Because, as we all know, all of the 1 billion or so Christian women in the world are nuns
 
Blackleaf

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,914
1,907
113
B00Mer said:
Why you live in the Mecca of Europe. .
Click to expand...


No. France is the Mecca of Western Europe. It has Europe's biggest Muzzie population, with vast areas of their main cities and towns turned into Islamic slums.

As for this Muzzie strike in France, it's been revealed that both the UK, US and even Algeria knew about these people beforehand and tried to warn the French about them, yet the French, for some reason, ignored the warnings. So I like to think that the far superior British security forces are keeping tabs on all the Muzzies they know about who want to attack Great Britain.

The French security forces are also facing criticism for the way they allowed the Kouachi brothers to remain at large for so long after the attack on Charlie Hebdo and for the fact that around 17 minutes passed between them taking out the Kouachi brothers at the printworks and rescuing the hostages at the kosher supermarket, even though the terrorists at the kosher supermarket said they would kill hostages if the Kouachi brothers were killed.
 
mentalfloss

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
Wow, this thread really turned into a **** show again.

How about a palette cleanser for the free speechers who so desperately require the reassurance.


Bill Hicks on Freedom of Speech


As an outspoken stand-up comedian with strong, unbending views on the most divisive of subjects, the late-Bill Hicks was no stranger to controversy during his all-too-brief career. In May of 1993, less than a year before he succumbed to pancreatic cancer at the age of 32, a live recording of Hicks’ Revelations show was broadcast on television in the UK. Shortly afterwards, deeply offended by its "blasphemous" content, a priest wrote to the broadcaster, Channel 4, and complained about the recent screening. After reading the complaint, Hicks, never one to avoid a discussion, replied to the priest directly by letter.

(Source: Love All the People: The Essential Bill Hicks, Revised Edition. Reprinted with permission; Image: Bill Hicks, via The Quiet Front.)

8 June 1993

Dear Sir,

After reading your letter expressing your concerns regarding my special 'Revelations', I felt duty-bound to respond to you myself in hopes of clarifying my position on the points you brought up, and perhaps enlighten you as to who I really am.

Where I come from — America — there exists this wacky concept called 'freedom of speech', which many people feel is one of the paramount achievements in mankind's mental development. I myself am a strong supporter of the 'Right of freedom of speech', as I'm sure most people would be if they truly understood the concept. 'Freedom of speech' means you support the right of people to say exactly those ideas which you do not agree with. (Otherwise, you don't believe in 'freedom of speech', but rather only those ideas which you believe to be acceptably stated.) Seeing as how there are so many different beliefs in the world, and as it would be virtually impossible for all of us to agree on any one belief, you may begin to realize just how important an idea like 'freedom of speech' really is. The idea basically states 'while I don't agree or care for what you are saying, I do support your right to say it, for herein lies true freedom'.

You say you found my material 'offensive' and 'blasphemous'. I find it interesting that you feel your beliefs are denigrated or threatened when I'd be willing to bet you've never received a single letter complaining about your beliefs, or asking why they are allowed to be. (If you have received such a letter, it definitely did not come from me.) Furthermore, I imagine a quick perusal of an average week of television programming would reveal many more shows of a religious nature, than one of my shows — which are called 'specials' by virtue of the fact that they are very rarely on.

All I'm doing in 'Revelations' is giving my point of view in my language based on my experiences — much the same way religious broadcasters might organize their programs. While I've found many of the religious shows I've viewed over the years not to be to my liking, or in line with my own beliefs, I've never considered it my place to exert any greater type of censorship than changing the channel, or better yet — turning off the TV completely.

Now, for the part of your letter I found most disturbing.

In support of your position of outrage, you posit the hypothetical scenario regarding the possibly 'angry' reaction of Muslims to material they might find similarly offensive. Here is my question to you: Are you tacitly condoning the violent terrorism of a handful of thugs to whom the idea of 'freedom of speech' and tolerance is perhaps as foreign as Christ's message itself? If you are somehow implying that their intolerance to contrary beliefs is justifiable, admirable, or perhaps even preferable to one of acceptance and forgiveness, then I wonder what your true beliefs really are.

If you had watched my entire show, you would have noticed in my summation of my beliefs the fervent plea to the governments of the world to spend less money on the machinery of war, and more on feeding, clothing, and educating the poor and needy of the world ... A not-so-unchristian sentiment at that!

Ultimately, the message in my material is a call for understanding rather than ignorance, peace rather than war, forgiveness rather than condemnation, and love rather than fear. While this message may have understandably been lost on your ears (due to my presentation), I assure you the thousands of people I played to in my tours of the United Kingdom got it.

I hope I helped answer some of your questions. Also, I hope you consider this an invitation to keep open the lines of communication. Please feel free to contact me personally with comments, thoughts, or questions, if you so choose. If not, I invite you to enjoy my two upcoming specials entitled 'Mohammed the TWIT' and 'Buddha, you fat PIG'. (JOKE)

Sincerely,

Bill Hicks

Letters of Note: Bill Hicks on Freedom of Speech
 
B00Mer

B00Mer

Make Canada Great Again
Sep 6, 2008
47,127
8,145
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.canadianforums.ca
mentalfloss said:
Wow, this thread really turned into a **** show again.

How about a palette cleanser for the free speechers who so desperately need the reassurance.


Bill Hicks on Freedom of Speech


As an outspoken stand-up comedian with strong, unbending views on the most divisive of subjects, the late-Bill Hicks was no stranger to controversy during his all-too-brief career. In May of 1993, less than a year before he succumbed to pancreatic cancer at the age of 32, a live recording of Hicks’ Revelations show was broadcast on television in the UK. Shortly afterwards, deeply offended by its "blasphemous" content, a priest wrote to the broadcaster, Channel 4, and complained about the recent screening. After reading the complaint, Hicks, never one to avoid a discussion, replied to the priest directly by letter.

(Source: Love All the People: The Essential Bill Hicks, Revised Edition. Reprinted with permission; Image: Bill Hicks, via The Quiet Front.)
Click to expand...

 
Blackleaf

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,914
1,907
113
B00Mer

B00Mer

Make Canada Great Again
Sep 6, 2008
47,127
8,145
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.canadianforums.ca
Blackleaf said:
When are YOU going to convert? After all, Canada's Muslim population is larger than Britain's - 3.2% compared to Britain's 2.8%.

Canada's Muslim population is also the fastest-growing of all Western countries bar Ireland.
Click to expand...

Google it

Islam in United Kingdom is the second largest religion with results from the United Kingdom Census 2011 giving the UK Muslim population in 2011 as 2,786,635, 4.4% of the total population. The vast majority of Muslims in the United Kingdom live in England: 2,660,116 (5.02% of the population).

According to Canada's 2011 National Household Survey, there were 1,053,945 Muslims in Canada or about 3.2% of the population, making them the second largest religion after Christianity and the fastest growing religion in Canada.

Try again buddy.
 
Blackleaf

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,914
1,907
113
B00Mer said:
Ya ya :lol: and Tower Hamlets is just Mecca of Europe.
Click to expand...


You've obviously never been to the extensive Islamic slums of France's major cities.

The populations of France and Britain are almost exactly identical. France, however, has 5 million Muslims (around 7% of the population) compared to Britain's 2 million.

Not including France's overseas territories, which the French sometimes like to include into their total population figure, unlike the British, who don't include the total population of their overseas territories into their total population figure, Britain's population overtook that of France in size in 2013. Yet France still has many, many more Muslims living in it than Britain has.

SIMON HEFFER: France, a land tormented by its history as hostility between natives and increasing Muslim population grows

By Simon Heffer for the Daily Mail
8 January 2015 ​

Even before yesterday’s outrage, France was in torment over Islam. Racial tensions have run high for years, and have partly accounted for the rise in popularity of the Front National, the right-wing party that demands adherence to a traditional French cultural identity.

Now, at a time of shock and disbelief, many moderates will fear for a society so deeply divided. Already fresh in the memory are the murder of seven people in Toulouse by an Al Qaeda fanatic in 2012 and a similar killing spree at a Jewish museum in Brussels last year, for which a man with French and Algerian citizenship was arrested.

Ever since the Algerian war of independence broke out 60 years ago, there has been hostility between native French and the country’s increasing Muslim population (estimated now to total as much as 7 per cent).



Racial tensions have run high for years in France and the fact is that there is a clash of cultures and a cauldron of hatreds that made yesterday’s attack at Charlie Hebdo headquarters almost inevitable

The fact is that there is a clash of cultures and a cauldron of hatreds that made yesterday’s attack almost inevitable.

Above all, France has an abominable record of managing its Muslim community – which has, in turn, become increasingly radicalised in the grim suburbs (banlieues) of northern Paris, from which countless young men have gone to fight as jihadis in Syria.

France never used to have this problem. During the 19th and 20th centuries, many French wholeheartedly embraced the Maghrebi culture of those who lived under French colonial rule.

The affection was reciprocated. Even in 1954, when the Algerian war broke out, thousands of Muslim soldiers remained loyal to the Fourth Republic.

However, these courageous people – known as the Harkis – were subject to the most appalling betrayal by the French state after independence in 1962.

President Charles de Gaulle was unsympathetic to their fate, denying them the right to settle in France. Some managed to escape – and were treated by the French as third-class citizens herded into internment camps.

Eventually, the Paris government allowed more to settle in France, but widespread discrimination against them has become entrenched and there is an historic grudge that has undoubtedly fuelled Islamic extremism.

In the 1960s and 1970s, economic boom years in France, there was a huge immigration of labourers from Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia. But they were dumped in ghettos without any thought given to their integration.

As a result of this social ostracisation and the parallel growth of extremism among the Muslim young, there was a backlash among the indigenous French people who voted, in 2002, for the right-wing Front National – with the party’s leader, Jean-Marie Le Pen, coming runner-up in the presidential election.

The election victor, Jacques Chirac, took an equally hard line and said that the wearing of the hijab – seen as a symbol of the Muslim faith – breached France’s formal division between Church and State. Women were banned from wearing the veil and head-scarf on government premises the following year.

Perhaps it is not surprising that young Muslims who have grown up in the squalid banlieues, feeling they are victims of racism and persecution, regard themselves as soldiers in a modern-day extension of the old colonial wars.

When riots broke out in Clichy-sous-Bois in the eastern suburbs of Paris in 2005, newspapers termed it ‘the French intifada’ – a term the angry Muslims embraced with pride, because of the comparison it made with their Palestinian brothers fighting Israeli occupation. Those riots were caused by two Muslim youths electrocuting themselves fleeing the police.

The violence and destruction lasted for days, with President Chirac declaring a state of emergency and politicians accusing the radical Union of Islamic Organisations of France of stirring up the trouble.

Order was restored, but conditions in the Muslim banlieues have since deteriorated, and over recent years, the divide has deepened.

President Charles de Gaulle was unsympathetic to the fate of Harkis or Muslim soldiers. While Jacques Chirac said that the wearing of the hijab breached France’s formal division between Church and State


They couldn't see the irony: Two masked gunmen brandishing Kalashnikovs and rocket launchers attacked Charlie Hebdo because it condemned Islam as violent

In 2009, President Nicolas Sarkozy said the burqa was not welcome in France, as it was a symbol of female subservience. His opponents on the Left took a similarly tough position.

The attitude of the wider French public also hardened against Muslims. A survey in 2013 found that only 26 per cent felt that Islam was compatible with French society.

Added to this incendiary mood was the decision of the current president, Francois Hollande, to bomb Islamist militant positions in northern Mali (another former French colony) to drive out al-Qaeda-linked groups.


In 2009, the then President Nicolas Sarkozy said the burqa was not welcome in France, as it was a symbol of female subservience

Most disturbingly, terror groups’ networks are said to be particularly developed in France, and intelligence services believe at least 700 French nationals or people living in France are either fighting in Syria, had already returned or were planning to become jihadists.

To add to the inflammatory mix, hours before yesterday’s attack, Michel Houellebecq, France’s most controversial living novelist, published a book, Submission, predicting how France will soon become an Islamicised country where universities are compelled to teach the Koran, women are made to wear the veil and polygamy is lawful.

Such scare-mongering – combined with a murderous minority of Muslim extremists and a dreadful economy – leaves France dangerously on the edge of social breakdown


Read more: SIMON HEFFER: France, a land tormented by its history as hostility between natives and increasing Muslim population grows | Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

And the thing is, the French dubbed the term "Londonistan" because of all the Muslims they perceived to be leaving Britain and joining terror groups abroad.

But the irony is that France now has a bigger problem with this than Britain has. France has more of its citizens fighting for ISIS than any other European country.
 
Last edited:
mentalfloss

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
Voice of reason:

The terror dredged up long-known stresses in French society, including the lingering problems of disadvantaged young Muslims living in hives of apartments in the poor Paris suburbs. Yet President François Hollande, addressing the nation Friday, appealed to his citizens that they not see the violence this week as the product of Islam, but rather as the acts of “fanatics” that “have nothing to do with the Muslim religion.”

France remains anxious as police kill Charlie Hebdo terror suspects and ally - The Washington Post
 
Blackleaf

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,914
1,907
113
mentalfloss said:
appealed to his citizens that they not see the violence this week as the product of Islam, but rather as the acts of “fanatics” that “have nothing to do with the Muslim religion.”
Click to expand...

The Western world's left-wing Ruling Establishments always say that whenever Muzzie strikes again. They ALWAYS say it. "These terrorists have nothing to do with Islam" and "Islam is a peaceful religion" "These terrorists do not represent all Muslims" etc etc etc etc etc.

They're exactly the same platitudes which are always spouted after each attack by Muzzie. It's as though the leaders of the Western world each have a big list of pro-Muzzie things to say and they just choose a few of them to say whenever Muzzie strikes again. They're always the same or similar.

Of course, when Anders Breivik committed his terrorist attack in Norway I don't recall one world leader, not one, saying "This man does not represent Christianity and Christians" etc etc etc. No, he was merely a "'far-right' Christian extremist." There was no attempt whatsoever, as is always the case when Muzzie strikes, to separate the actions of Breivik from his religion and most other Christians.
 
mentalfloss

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
Hopefully they will honor your wish to separate all terrorism from religion in the future BlackLeaf.

But I think the reason we don't emphasize it during Christian acts of terror is partly because most of us recognize that the acts themselves are forms of extremism, even if there is some basis in their membership of a particular religion.

People would immediately recognize Brevik as an extremist because many of us are familiar with most Christians but the same principle actually holds true for all religions, including Islam.
 
Last edited:
Blackleaf

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,914
1,907
113
mentalfloss said:
Hopefully they will honor your wish to separate all terrorism from religion in the future BlackLeaf.
Click to expand...


They'll always separate the actions of Muzzie terrorists from the Muzzie religion, that's for sure, even though there is every indication that it is Islam itself, and the teachings of Islam, which makes that religion far more prone to producing terrorists and bloodthirsty savages than any other religion.

Anders Breivik's actions had nothing whatsoever to do with Christianity. He was just a madman and Christianity had no bearing whatsoever on his actions. Yet the actions of the Muslim terrorists are all caused by the teachings of the violent and savage religion of Islam. It is Islam itself which is reponsible for the actions of Muzzie terrorists and polls show that a fairly and disturbingly large amount of Western Muzzies support the terrorists' actions. Yet whenever Muzzie strikes again our identikit, left-wing, PC Western leaders spout identikit, PC platitudes about how "This has nothing to do with Islam" etc etc etc - always the same platitudes as though they each have a list of such pro-Islamic platitudes to spout whenever Muzzie strikes again - yet they never attempt to separate the actions of a terrrost from his religion in the much rarer occasion that that terrorist is a Christian or a Jew or a Sikh even though, in most cases, the terrorist just happened to have Christianity as his religion yet his religion had no bearings on his actions.

This is how it works:

Muzzie terrorists - "These terrorists do not represent Islam. Islam is a religion of peace."

Christian terrorists (which are much rarer) - "These are far-right, racist, Christian extremists."
 
mentalfloss

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
Brevik, like muslim terrorists, pervert their own religion to justify extremism.

So there is indeed a relationship, but only to the extent that it is reinvented in the minds of terrorists.

It is this perversion that should be the focus when discussing the religion attributed to the act of terrorism. Otherwise, we run into these circular conversations about religion that reinforce an error in semantics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom