Paris Attack | Page 4 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Paris Attack

Sunny has a unique train of thought. . Closer to tge extreme side


Most likely by them he means muslims
 
Your right to swing your fist ends where your neighbor's nose begins.

And that applies to both the satirical journalists who surely knew that what they were publishing was going to be offensive, and the people who decided that violence would be how they would respond.

Religious extremism is not confined to any particular religion - it's ALL destructive.
 
Brian P said:
Your right to swing your fist ends where your neighbor's nose begins.

And that applies to both the satirical journalists who surely knew that what they were publishing was going to be offensive, and the people who decided that violence would be how they would respond.

Religious extremism is not confined to any particular religion - it's ALL destructive.
Click to expand...
+1..
 
shahfaisal said:
Anti occupation is not the same as anti jewish... judaism is a faith not a legal status..

It is funny how you jumped to anti-semitism when I pointed to israeli occupation.. you attempted to connect me with semitism

Recognizing genocide and hating a faith are two completely different things

Just like recognizing the holocaust is not hating the german nation.. its a recognition of fact


Back to the topic at hand...
Click to expand...

I think you got me all wrong. I'm absolutely anti Zionist and only too aware of when the racist card is played when arguing about an illegal occupation. What I'm arguing here is that the cartoons in question are political satire, not racism and are a historical part of this area of Europe. If you aren't from this part of the world and look at it on the surface it seems like a cruel bunch of playground kids calling names at people. What it is though is one in a long line of satirical publications. If in doubt look up "Punch" from the UK and similar things. As I've said, if the cartoons offend you then you have a very thin skin and I'd question why a rational person could be upset by such a gross exaggeration of the character (which is what a caricature is). Surely most people would look at the cartoons and say, "that's a caricature of the fanatics version of my god".
 
@ jc100--- somethings are to sacred and a s such off limits... joke among friends is a joke among friends... if christians were to joke about christianity thats their internal thing..

what i am saying is their is a fine line between journalism( even satires) and psychological warfare... charlie hebdo and others have been carrying out a sustained and strategic attack on a particular faith.. yes they target others but never have they gone to such extreme extent when it comes to others... as far as i am concerned charlie hebdo is acting as a undercover wing of the military since they are carryng out military activities(psyops).. these guys went so far beyond the fine line...its not even funny.. the danish guys were even worse... i am a bit surprised it was charlie hebdo instead of those danish cartoonist(they needed body guards if i remember correctly).. french satires were too soft compared to the danish junk
 
Last edited:
So what are you saying Shah? That publishing depictions of Muhammad should be illegal?

What if they are non-inflammatory depictions of Muhammad, like this:

ea60a61e9df71830e6733cdc8a3602cd.jpg


or this:

angel-gabriel-clense-muhammad-heart.jpg
 
They may be sacred in some countries but not in others is exactly what I'm trying to say. People shouldn't act surprised when a culture of satire and mockery selects a current topic that creates a lot of debate. Cartoons create debate both good and bad. Debate is part of a free society. Censorship stifles debate.

Isnt it expected that in the western world free speech leads to the mention of some things that some people find distasteful?
 
I'm trying to understand the point some people are trying to make in this thread... is it 'if there isn't total and absolute free speech, then there shouldn't be any free speech at all'?

Is that it?

Because I don't really get what you want. Sure, it might be taboo and possibly even illegal to say certain things in this country, and as a free speech absolutist, I am against those prohibitions too.
 
In my view ALL rights come with responaibilities... if you fail at full filling those responsibilities you forfeit those rights.... a point I made earliae.. how come they did not have cartoons of church officials "playing" with lil boys and girls? Thats far more relavent to the western society as a whole.. how come absolute silence on isreali crimes.. thats heck of alot more current the anything prophet Mohammad(pbuh) ever did... shows that this is not satire but use of satire for targeted harassment


A previous point was it was a private organization doing it not the government so its not systematic .... it is illegal to question or even investigate the holocaust.. if you say ANYTHING that can be twisted to represent antisemitism. . YOU GO TO JAIL... even in france.. islamophobic attacks means its free speech.. say anything about your own connections.. not about others..


A jestee makes a fool of himself to entertain... not a people who are mostly thousands of miles away.. and not to an extent that it represent an attack on their beliefs
 
Last edited:
shahfaisal said:
In my view ALL rights come with responaibilities... if you fail at full filling those responsibilities you forfeit those rights.... a point I made earliae.. how come they did not have cartoons of church officials "playing" with lil boys and girls? Thats far more relavent to the western society as a whole.. how come absolute silence on isreali crimes.. thats heck of alot more current the anything prophet Mohammad(pbuh) ever did... shows that this is not satire but use of satire for targeted harassment


A previous point was it was a private organization doing it not the government so its not systematic .... it is illegal to question or even investigate the holocaust.. if you say ANYTHING that can be twisted to represent antisemitism. . YOU GO TO JAIL... even in france.. islamophobic attacks means its free speech.. say anything about your own connections.. not about others..


A jestee makes a fool of himself to entertain... not a people who are mostly thousands of miles away.. and not to an extent that it represent an attack on their beliefs
Click to expand...

And I'll repeat... so since you can't say anything against the holocaust, therefore you shouldn't say anything against Islam? Is that your reasoning?

Edit, by the way, that French satirical newspaper had tons of offensive stuff towards all religions -- they had stuff about priests diddling kids and jewish stuff too... not sure how you can say they didn't. I'm going to link to images, but a quick google will find it.
 
Last edited:
In short yes... fairness and respect for all... and we shouldnt be SAYING anything to degrade jesus, moses, mohammad (pbuta), etc.... question rwligion if you must... dont insult it.. that not a right held by any human living or otherwise..


They linked priest with that stuff but never jesus or moses... thats what I mean... when it came to islamm they werent mocking.. it was all out attack...
 
Last edited:
shahfaisal said:
In my view ALL rights come with responaibilities... if you fail at full filling those responsibilities you forfeit those rights....
Click to expand...

What? Are you kidding me?

So lets say a person has a right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, but if they fail in any of them they then forfeit those rights? Is that what you are getting at?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom