Charlie Hebdo killings in France and "FREE SPEECH"

[CLIVE-TRIANGLE]

Look at it from a different perspective: if a group of people continually goad another group who are prone to violence then they have to take part responsibility for the consequences. I am not saying that the killings were justified, hell no, but if you continue to taunt people then you shouldn't be surprised when they react.

Put another way, when your beliefs are continually shown to be downright ridiculous and untenable....

A caricature of de Gaulle, or Jesus or TB Joshua might be an appropriate tit-for-tat. But slaughter? But then again, they did EXACTLY what the Qu'ran calls for.

I will never agree with your point of view, ever. The fact that you may have correctly predicted the consequences does not make it reasonable. Rushdie wrote about their absurdities, they drew cartoons. What's in between? Ignore it like it doesn't exist?

[Justloadit]

If one does protest too much, does it not show that there may be some truth in it?

It is also a sign of insecurity, it may be they do not wish the masses to be educated on the flaws, which ultimately means loss of membership.

The Spanish inquisition was also ruthless in its madness to sow the seed.

How the Spanish Inquisition Worked http://history.howstuffworks.com/his...quisition4.htm
While most people think of a single Inquisition, history isn't quite that simple. Most of the inquisitions had little to do with creating unity. Instead, the goal was to maintain authority and discourage rebellious behavior.

[adrianh]

I never said that it is 'reasonable' I said that if you poke fun at a schizophrenic child then that child will react. I am not looking at it from an emotional perspective nor a perspective of what is said to be right or wrong, I am merely stating my view on cause and effect.

The two groups are both wrong, the cartoonists knew full well that those people would react sooner or later and of course the reaction that they got was over the top.

[wynn]

I think this says it all!!

[ians]

Both made a statement, just in a different manner.

[IanF]

What cartoon can ever justify killing someone?
I see the point Adrian has made that the cartoons provoked the radical Muslims.
I remember my dad getting into big trouble in the 70's when he called the staff in and called them monkeys, he was forced to apologise, this was in Zambia. Also the K-word is a big no no and is not used openly.

The world needs tolerance from all sides.

[adrianh]

Both made a statement, just in a different manner.

It went like this;

FU...ha ha ha...

FU...bang bang bang...

[Justloadit]

So the shower head can send a hit man to take out Zapiro, because he does not like the cartoon about him, and the murder will be acceptable, After all, he is being poked all the time a cartoon about him is displayed.

Double standards?

One must take the poking with a pinch of salt, especially if it is coming from a known satirical source or from a comedian.
It's like trying to be politically correct, it does not make the situation better, it actually makes it worse.

[adrianh]

There is a clear difference between what "one must do" as seen from a particular perspective, what happened, and what may happen.

It was made clear very recently that they do not take "poking" with a pinch of salt, they showed that it really p1$$es them off. Ok, let's say your neighbour continually throws rocks on your roof, day in and day out...and he says that he likes the sound that it makes because in his culture it is the thing to do......what will you do...you sure as f*ck are not going to take it with a pinch of salt for 6 months straight.

[Justloadit]

Yes true, however the cartoons never appeared day in and day out, it may have occurred once or twice a year, and it was not always one specific subject, but was cartoons on members and leaders of the sect, statements or actions that appeared in the news.. One must also notice that the same magazine made cartoons of anyone that was appearing to create some sort of havoc on the planet.

So if your neighbour has a noisy party once or twice a year, is also not the same as throwing a party every night. The few times the noisy parties, does not warrant a day light, premeditated murder of a group of people, including the murder of innocent bystanders.

[adrianh]

hmmm.. aye well, my view is what it is!

[msmoorad]

[flaker]

"Comedian's arrest sparks free speech debate
2015-01-14 17:58


Notorious French comedian probed for remarks
French comic detained for defending terrorism

Paris - Notorious French comedian Dieudonne was arrested on Wednesday for condoning terrorism over a comment suggesting he sympathised with one of the Paris attacks gunmen, in a move that sparked a debate about free speech."

From News24.

Now what the heck happened to free speech!!!

[adrianh]

Free speech has always been, and still is a myth. How many people have been arrested, fined or put in jail over comments made on Facebook and Twitter. What about people arrested in America & the UK for supposedly supporting ISIS. People claim freedom of speech when it suits them yet they claim that others are infringing on their human rights when they don't like what is being said.

[CLIVE-TRIANGLE]

Let us learn to respect all religions. Let us be tolerant of all religions and then we would have learnt "what freedom of expression" truly is

What a joke! Religions are not even tolerant of each other, and very much intolerant of non religious.

Must we respect it because it is true? Or must we respect it because so many follow it? And then which one? The one that openly demands murder for apostasy?