Muslims take part in anti-Charlie Hebdo protest outside Downing Street

[MHz]

Seems they like to collect names of 'certain readers', wonder what kind of surprise they have in store for them, a free subscription perhaps.

Free Speech? British Police Hunt Down Buyers of Charlie Hebdo

 

[taxslave]

Good on them; finally some reasonable voices at least saying reasonable things.

Where did you possibly find a reasonable voice in there?
A reasonable voice would say that a magazine has the right to publish whatever it wants and the public has the right to read it or not.

Taking part in an anti-Charlie Hebdo march? Exercising their right to free speech by protesting against free speech?

Why not? we have human rights tribunals that don't much believe in human rights and civil liberties groups that only believe in civil liberties for some.

 

[MHz]

Where did you possibly find a reasonable voice in there?
A reasonable voice would say that a magazine has the right to publish whatever it wants and the public has the right to read it or not.

If you have so much freedom do a Jewish cartoon.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=BF4U95Z2hPU

 

[Serryah]

Where did you possibly find a reasonable voice in there?
A reasonable voice would say that a magazine has the right to publish whatever it wants and the public has the right to read it or not.

“Such actions are deliberating, insulting and provoking to Muslims worldwide. As British citizens, we believe that these publications will continue to ‘sow the seeds of hatred’ and damage community relations.

“In an already fragile world we need to move from actions of incitement, hatred and provocation to civility , consideration and respect.”

IMO, the quote above is perfectly reasonable and in reality, true.

If the magazine has a right to publish what it wants, then great, no one should outcry when people are offended by what's posted and retaliate against said magazine, ESPECIALLY when it's known those people who would object aren't exactly sane when it comes to certain things.

And before it's asked - no, I think those who murdered the people at the magazine are crazy, radicalized wackadoodles and they deserved what they got/deserve what they get. BUT, I have to question the intelligence of Charlie Hebo for continually mocking the prophet of Islam, KNOWING that the radicals out there would most likely, at some point, come at them with literal guns blazing.

It's not right that they were killed, but they brought it on themselves. Poke the rabid animal enough and don't whine to me that it mauls your stupid azz.

 

[MHz]

Here is who own the rag.
www.quotenet.nl/Nieuws/De-Rothschild-s-drukken-Charlie-Hebdo-Wij-twijfelden-of-we-krant-moeten-uitgeven-142940 - Translator
The Rothschild's press Charlie Hebdo: ' we doubted whether we have to edit ' newspaper
France is on fire, after the cowardly attack on Charlie Hebdo and the spectacular developments thereafter. The newspaper Libération, where, fortunately, the satirical magazine next week just made, has recently become in the hands of a Scion of the illustrious banking family De Rothschild.

ENGLISH VERSION HERE: The Rothschild's print Charlie Hebdo: ' We doubted whether we should buy newspaper Libération '

But that purchase made within the family quite a lot of discussion on The Rothschild, baron Philippe de Rothschild told Scion recently in an exclusive interview to Quote, published in the January issue.

' There is a lot of debate about the takeover by my uncle baron Édouard de Rothschild ', says Philippe. ' Some family members wanted to block the purchase, because the medium would make us a political force. That is what we want to avoid at all costs. We have nothing to do with politics, or at least not outwardly. In the end, the critics in the family drowned out. '

The interview with the Rothschild-Scion took place in his Office on the Champs-Élysées, well before the attacks. The entire interview can be read here: ' People are always jealous. '
The Rothschild's press Charlie Hebdo: ' we doubted whether we have to edit ' newspaper

France is on fire, after the cowardly attack on Charlie Hebdo and the spectacular developments thereafter. The newspaper Libération, where, fortunately, the satirical magazine next week just made, has recently become in the hands of a Scion of the illustrious banking family De Rothschild.

 

[Goober]

American cops, in the "Land of the Free", would have taken all the necessary action to stop them protesting, I'm assuming.

The thing about England is that these people are allowed to protest, however wrong their views are.

They are, VERY ironically, using freedom of speech to march AGAINST freedom of speech.

And they are within their right to use the rights afforded them as any other can, as those that oppose their views do. Would you prefer prohibiting their right to free speech?

Freedom of speech does not mean the expression of only one point of view however popular.

For far to many it does.
Welcome to the new view of democracy by substantial numbers in the EU - OP is from a Fascist.

 

[MHz]

For far to many it does.
Welcome to the new view of democracy by substantial numbers in the EU - OP is from a Fascist.

You are kind of scarey in a tingly sort of way.

 

[EagleSmack]

“Such actions are deliberating, insulting and provoking to Muslims worldwide. As British citizens, we believe that these publications will continue to ‘sow the seeds of hatred’ and damage community relations.

“In an already fragile world we need to move from actions of incitement, hatred and provocation to civility , consideration and respect.”

IMO, the quote above is perfectly reasonable and in reality, true.

If the magazine has a right to publish what it wants, then great, no one should outcry when people are offended by what's posted and retaliate against said magazine, ESPECIALLY when it's known those people who would object aren't exactly sane when it comes to certain things.

And before it's asked - no, I think those who murdered the people at the magazine are crazy, radicalized wackadoodles and they deserved what they got/deserve what they get. BUT, I have to question the intelligence of Charlie Hebo for continually mocking the prophet of Islam, KNOWING that the radicals out there would most likely, at some point, come at them with literal guns blazing.

It's not right that they were killed, but they brought it on themselves. Poke the rabid animal enough and don't whine to me that it mauls your stupid azz.

So I guess all that needs to be done then! Kill and Kill!

 

[taxslave]

“Such actions are deliberating, insulting and provoking to Muslims worldwide. As British citizens, we believe that these publications will continue to ‘sow the seeds of hatred’ and damage community relations.

“In an already fragile world we need to move from actions of incitement, hatred and provocation to civility , consideration and respect.”

IMO, the quote above is perfectly reasonable and in reality, true.

If the magazine has a right to publish what it wants, then great, no one should outcry when people are offended by what's posted and retaliate against said magazine, ESPECIALLY when it's known those people who would object aren't exactly sane when it comes to certain things.

And before it's asked - no, I think those who murdered the people at the magazine are crazy, radicalized wackadoodles and they deserved what they got/deserve what they get. BUT, I have to question the intelligence of Charlie Hebo for continually mocking the prophet of Islam, KNOWING that the radicals out there would most likely, at some point, come at them with literal guns blazing.

It's not right that they were killed, but they brought it on themselves. Poke the rabid animal enough and don't whine to me that it mauls your stupid azz.

Too bad if they don't like it. But do tell since when did it become OK in civilized society to murder people over a cartoon?

 

[pgs]

Too bad if they don't like it. But do tell since when did it become OK in civilized society to murder people over a cartoon?

It's not but it makes more sense to hide your head in the sand then confront reality .
The reality being that the so called radicalised muslim is actually the main stream muslim in certain sects .

 

[petros]

In Iran people have pictures of Mohammad. This no image thing came from the screwball Wahhabis to divide and conquer Shiite and Sunni Arabs.

 

[MHz]

Why is this getting a media blackout in the West? (free speech and all that crap)

(in part)
A scandalous art exhibit opened in the Estonian city of Tartu over the weekend, featuring comics, paintings and video projects by Polish artists offering a 'humorous' treatment of the Holocaust.

The exhibition features work by artists including Artur Zmijewski's, whose humerous Holocaust 'art' has already been banned in Germany. A piece of film art by the artist features naked people happily playing tag in the gas chambers of Auschwitz. Another shows what appears to be a former inmate of the infamous concentration camp deciding to update the serial number tattoo on his wrist.
A painting at the opening of the exhibit features people in a car driving in what appears to be Hollywood, but the iconic white letters of the 'Hollywood' sign are replaced with the word 'Holocaust.' The Estonian Academy of Arts features a black and white photo advertising the event meant to resemble the famous images of concentration camp survivors behind barbed wire, except featuring mostly smiling, happy, well-fed people.

Read more: Polish Holocaust 'Humor' in Estonian Gallery Tests Boundaries of Art / Sputnik International




​

 

[Serryah]

So I guess all that needs to be done then! Kill and Kill!

Depends on who you want killed...

Too bad if they don't like it. But do tell since when did it become OK in civilized society to murder people over a cartoon?

Read what I wrote please, nowhere did I say it was okay to murder people over a cartoon. I said we shouldn't be SURPRISED, but not that it was okay.

 

[taxslave]

It's not but it makes more sense to hide your head in the sand then confront reality .
The reality being that the so called radicalised muslim is actually the main stream muslim in certain sects .

Which makes them the ones with a problem, not us. Appeasing them is the wrong thing to do.

Why is this getting a media blackout in the West? (free speech and all that crap)

(in part)
A scandalous art exhibit opened in the Estonian city of Tartu over the weekend, featuring comics, paintings and video projects by Polish artists offering a 'humorous' treatment of the Holocaust.

The exhibition features work by artists including Artur Zmijewski's, whose humerous Holocaust 'art' has already been banned in Germany. A piece of film art by the artist features naked people happily playing tag in the gas chambers of Auschwitz. Another shows what appears to be a former inmate of the infamous concentration camp deciding to update the serial number tattoo on his wrist.
A painting at the opening of the exhibit features people in a car driving in what appears to be Hollywood, but the iconic white letters of the 'Hollywood' sign are replaced with the word 'Holocaust.' The Estonian Academy of Arts features a black and white photo advertising the event meant to resemble the famous images of concentration camp survivors behind barbed wire, except featuring mostly smiling, happy, well-fed people.

Read more: Polish Holocaust 'Humor' in Estonian Gallery Tests Boundaries of Art / Sputnik International




​

Because it is a non event?

 

[MHz]

Read what I wrote please,

The readers here are agenda driven rather than reading inspired. Please post more relevant posts like you have been doing.

 

[taxslave]

The readers here are agenda driven rather than reading inspired. Please post more relevant posts like you have been doing.

That is a fact. Our agenda is to make the world a better place for our children and grandchildren than when we found it.

 

[Blackleaf]

A new low: Charlie Hebdo's murdered staff receive an 'Islamophobe of the Year' award

10 March 2015
Douglas Murray
The Spectator
41 comments

The IHRC gave their international ‘Islamophobe of the Year’ award to the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo (Photo: Damien Meyer/AFP/Getty)

I have always treated the ‘Islamophobe of the Year’ event with the scorn it deserves. Not least because each year this fantasy prize for a fantasy concept is run by a British Khomeinist organisation laughably named the ‘Islamic Human Rights Commission.’ The nominees include anybody opposed to the agenda of Islamic extremists, including Muslims. Of course each year, whilst laughing at it, those of us who are regular nominees also regard it as being to our great good fortune that the IHRC is a British charity operating in the United Kingdom rather than an Islamic charity operating in an Islamic country. If the latter were the case then rather than laughing at the IHRC every year, those of us who it annually attacks would be hanging from cranes.

However, readers will perhaps excuse me if the laughter is slightly quieter this year. The first reason is that the ‘Islamophobe of the Year’ award seems to be gaining ‘mainstream’ ground. This year the awards were not only endorsed by Islamic extremists on the one hand and pseudo-academics like Arun Kundnani on the other, but also by a number of more prominent public figures including the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams (who said the CofE nowadays is run by a bunch of woolly-headed, PC liberals?), and former Telegraph journalist Peter Oborne.

Once again I made the shortlist but missed out on the main award. However the UK award for ‘Islamophobe of the Year’ did go to Maajid Nawaz. It would be hard to invent a better display of the agenda of the IHRC and the people involved with it. Because of course Maajid has devoted his life to, and risks his life by, attacking the extremists within the Islamic faith – his faith. The IHRC and their supporters seem to have much in common with fundamentalist and extremist Muslims, in that both are deeply irritated by the few brave Muslims like Nawaz. Indeed they hate him even more than they hate people like me. Readers will have to guess what variety of Islamic group might choose to attack liberal Muslims, what this says about their agenda and what it tells us about the intelligence of the people who support them.

But there is another reason why my laughter is lessened this year. Although I am assured that the laughter at the IHRC’s ‘ceremony’ in London on Saturday was as raucous as ever, this weekend the IHRC gave their international ‘Islamophobe of the Year’ award to the left-wing French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. This might be thought laughable in any other circumstances. The IHRC, one should remember, is a registered British charity. But of course it is not very funny, because only two months ago another group of people who thought Charlie Hebdo is ‘Islamophobic’ went into the magazine’s offices and gunned down their journalists and cartoonists. This is the way the pattern works now – the Islamic terrorists break through the front door with Kalashnikovs and then a whole network of fellow travellers try to sneak in through the back door and explain why the cartoonists and journalists might have had it coming.

Of course the IHRC and their supporters like to pretend that Muslims in Europe are being ‘otherised’ in the manner of Jews in Nazi Germany. But nothing could be further from the truth. Not just because it was concentration camps rather than ‘othering’ which was the main issue in Germany in the middle of the last century. But also because Muslims in Europe enjoy full equal rights – far more so than in any Islamic country in the world today or ever. If there are any negative feelings towards elements of the Muslim community it is towards the extremists. And why shouldn’t people hate those who blow up trains and buses, crash planes into buildings, shoot at free speech seminars and synagogues and target Christians, Hindus, Jews and liberal Muslims around the world? If that ire does end up being more widely and less discerningly directed then it will be precisely because a growing number of non-Muslims begin to notice that Muslim communities seem capable not only of producing the sort of people willing to slaughter journalists and cartoonists but also of then providing a multitude of pseudo-moderate organisations which compare the victims of Islamist violence – rather than the perpetrators – to Nazis.

I hope the IHRC and their supporters had an amusing time at their awards ceremony at the weekend, laughing as they smeared and mocked dead journalists. To my mind it provides a good reminder of what the civilised world is up against, abroad and at home.

A new low: Charlie Hebdo's murdered staff receive an 'Islamophobe of the Year' award » Spectator Blogs