HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Satirist Charged With Vio...

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 01:23 AM

Satirist Charged With Violating French Speech Restrictions

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/16/world/europe/french-rein-in-speech-backing-acts-of-terror.html


The most prominent case now pending in the French courts is that of Dieudonné M’bala M’bala, a provocative humorist who has been a longtime symbol in France of the battle between free speech and public safety. With nearly 40 previous arrests on suspicion of violating antihate laws, for statements usually directed at Jews, he was again arrested on Wednesday, this time for condoning terrorism.

He faces trial in early February in connection with a Facebook message he posted, declaring, “Tonight, as far as I’m concerned, I feel like Charlie Coulibaly.” It was a reference to the popular slogan of solidarity for the murdered Charlie Hebdo cartoonists — “Je suis Charlie” — and one of the attackers, Amedy Coulibaly, who killed a policewoman and later four people in a kosher supermarket last Friday.

138 replies, 9792 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 138 replies Author Time Post
Reply Satirist Charged With Violating French Speech Restrictions (Original post)
jberryhill Jan 2015 OP
HERVEPA Jan 2015 #1
jberryhill Jan 2015 #3
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #10
jberryhill Jan 2015 #11
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #20
jberryhill Jan 2015 #28
La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2015 #4
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #7
La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2015 #8
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #9
jberryhill Jan 2015 #12
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #21
jberryhill Jan 2015 #29
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #34
jberryhill Jan 2015 #36
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #41
jberryhill Jan 2015 #43
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #45
jberryhill Jan 2015 #54
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #89
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #108
FunkyLeprechaun Jan 2015 #59
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #48
jberryhill Jan 2015 #52
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #58
jberryhill Jan 2015 #64
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #65
jberryhill Jan 2015 #66
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #88
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #90
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #92
840high Jan 2015 #102
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #103
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #105
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #14
jberryhill Jan 2015 #16
LittleBlue Jan 2015 #27
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #82
LittleBlue Jan 2015 #84
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #87
LittleBlue Jan 2015 #91
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #93
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #81
jberryhill Jan 2015 #83
Warpy Jan 2015 #31
La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2015 #73
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #106
ucrdem Jan 2015 #110
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #112
ucrdem Jan 2015 #114
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #117
ucrdem Jan 2015 #118
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #121
ucrdem Jan 2015 #124
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #123
ucrdem Jan 2015 #126
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #127
kelliekat44 Jan 2015 #122
markpkessinger Jan 2015 #71
840high Jan 2015 #101
ucrdem Jan 2015 #2
HERVEPA Jan 2015 #5
jberryhill Jan 2015 #15
HERVEPA Jan 2015 #17
jberryhill Jan 2015 #18
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #22
jberryhill Jan 2015 #23
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #26
jberryhill Jan 2015 #30
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #33
jberryhill Jan 2015 #35
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #38
jberryhill Jan 2015 #42
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #46
jberryhill Jan 2015 #50
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #49
jberryhill Jan 2015 #51
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #53
jberryhill Jan 2015 #55
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #57
jberryhill Jan 2015 #61
Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #77
jberryhill Jan 2015 #79
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #96
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #95
La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2015 #74
jberryhill Jan 2015 #75
La Lioness Priyanka Jan 2015 #76
jberryhill Jan 2015 #78
countryjake Jan 2015 #80
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #94
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #6
jberryhill Jan 2015 #13
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #19
jberryhill Jan 2015 #24
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #32
jberryhill Jan 2015 #40
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #44
jberryhill Jan 2015 #47
geek tragedy Jan 2015 #85
jberryhill Jan 2015 #138
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #99
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #98
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #39
jberryhill Jan 2015 #56
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #60
jberryhill Jan 2015 #62
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #67
jberryhill Jan 2015 #68
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #72
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #100
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #104
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #129
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #97
LittleBlue Jan 2015 #25
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #37
jberryhill Jan 2015 #63
Stephen Retired Jan 2015 #69
jberryhill Jan 2015 #70
tritsofme Jan 2015 #86
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #107
ucrdem Jan 2015 #109
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #111
ucrdem Jan 2015 #113
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #115
ucrdem Jan 2015 #116
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #119
ucrdem Jan 2015 #120
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #125
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #131
tritsofme Jan 2015 #128
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #133
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #130
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #132
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #134
Pooka Fey Jan 2015 #135
ND-Dem Jan 2015 #136
whatchamacallit Jan 2015 #137

Response to jberryhill (Original post)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 06:53 AM

1. Not really a satirist, just a virulent anti-semite.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HERVEPA (Reply #1)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 09:41 AM

3. Well, he thinks he's funny

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #3)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 10:40 AM

10. And Hitler thought he was a moral human being. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #10)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 11:24 AM

11. Hitler did more than merely speak


This guy was arrested for a Facebook post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #11)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 03:25 PM

20. So Goebbels was harmless then? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #20)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 03:47 PM

28. Goebbels did more than merely speak


And, in any event, government speech - official speech - is another story entirely.

We restrict even the US government from promoting any particular religion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HERVEPA (Reply #1)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 10:01 AM

4. its always free speech till we disagree with the speech

 

then its hate speech

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #4)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 10:30 AM

7. Are you disputing that he peddles hate speech?

 

This guy is worse than David Duke.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #7)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 10:31 AM

8. i am saying that just 24 hours ago people were advocating complete free speech. period. nothing else

 

clearly, when we disagree we can start seeing shades of gray in free speech.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #8)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 10:34 AM

9. He's advocated killing every Jew on the planet

 

and used the Nazi salute.

His stuff falls under the "never again" rule and I don't blame Europe from banning attempts to launch campaigns of genocide.

That is quite a bit different from blasphemy.

There's enough violence against Jews from his fan base that he incites to violence. His popularity in France is a recruiting bonanza for Bibi in his attempts to get Jews to abandon France.

Attempts to kindle a 4th reich are inherently dangerous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #9)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 11:26 AM

12. The previous Charlie Hebdo editor had the same problem

What he advocates is indeed odious, I agree.

But let's not pretend we are for "free speech" when one's freedom to do so depends on what one is saying.

He "used the Nazi salute".... so banning gestures also falls outside the bounds of "free speech", yes?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #12)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 03:28 PM

21. Mocking a figure from history and attempting

 

to incite genocide are not comparable, certainly given the continent's history with Jews.

It is okay for the US and Europe to have different approaches.

"Never again" means a lot more over there than it does here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #21)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 03:48 PM

29. "attempting to incite genocide"

And very few people understand the specific context of this cartoon.

What does this image suggest?



"The Koran is shit. It doesn't stop bullets."

Okay with a Torah and a Jew? Or not okay? And if you think there is a difference to be had there, what is it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #29)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:02 PM

34. The point is that holy books don't stop bullets.

 

Dieudonne was celebrating a guy who shot up a bunch of shoppers because they were Jews.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #34)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:07 PM

36. And the Hebdo cartoon was celebrating a massacre of Muslims


Are you trying to make a distinction?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #36)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:13 PM

41. What massacre of Muslims?

 

And no, it was not celebrating it. It was treating it as a bad thing, against which a holy book was worthless.

You're actively misrepresenting things now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #41)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:16 PM

43. You obviously don't know the context of that cartoon


No, it was treating it as a GOOD thing. It was a commentary on the killing of Muslim Brotherhood supporters in Tahrir Square.

Please, if you are going to attempt to interpret the cartoon, it would be useful for you to know what it was expressly intended to be about.

It was a celebration of a mass shooting of human beings, and a statement that their beliefs were no protection against them being shot en masse.

You don't know what you are talking about here.

But absent that context, it says "Kill Muslims".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #43)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:19 PM

45. Celebration? No, just a point that

 

it happened and that their god did not protect them.

There is no such ambiguity with Dieudonne.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #45)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:29 PM

54. Still dodging the point


Making that point graphically with respect to one group of people is okay. The other is illegal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #45)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 09:34 PM

89. lol. hoist on your own petard

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #43)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 08:29 AM

108. OMFG

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #36)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:38 PM

59. No, it wasn't

Try again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #29)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:23 PM

48. Corrected no longer relevant

Last edited Sat Jan 17, 2015, 08:30 AM - Edit history (1)

Prove me wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #48)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:28 PM

52. What do you mean "fake"


The first is the Charlie Hebdo cover.

The second is an obvious parody of the Charlie Hebdo cover, pointing out that an image of that kind would not be allowed in France, and pointing out a double standard.

One clue might be that it does not even say "Charlie Hebdo".

What do you mean "fake"? It is a take-off on the CH cover, used to make a point about how it is acceptable to "parody" a massacre of one group of people, but not another.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #52)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:37 PM

58. Corrected no longer relevant

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #58)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:51 PM

64. The first is the July 2013 CH cover


In fact, Charlie Hebdo was sued over that cover.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/france-satirical-mag-charlie-hebdo-sued-by-islamists-blasphemy-1437073

French Islamists have sued satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo for blasphemy in Strasbourg for publishing a cover page with the headline: "The Koran is shit – it doesn't stop bullets."

The League of Judicial Defence of Muslims (LDJM) led by former lawyers Karim Achoui, has brought the case before the criminal court in Alsace-Moselle's capital.

The region, which was annexed by Germany in 1871 and 1940-45, still retained part of the old German code that includes the "blasphemy" crime – which no longer exist in the rest of France.

The LDJM has also sued Charlie Hebdo in Paris for "provocation and incitement to hatred on the basis of religious affiliation and insult".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #64)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:56 PM

65. I stand corrected. It is a real cover commenting on Muslims getting shot by other Muslims in Egypt

and thus the parody "The Coran is shit, it doesn't stop bullets"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #65)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:58 PM

66. Whew...


Glad we cleared that up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #9)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 09:32 PM

88. i'd really like a cite for that 'advocated killing every jew on the planet' thing, especially

 

knowing that he started his career in partnership with his best friend from childhood -- a jew. and they were partners into the 90s.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ND-Dem (Reply #88)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 09:48 PM

90. You're defending this pig? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #90)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 11:36 PM

92. you made a claim. i asked for a link to support your claim.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ND-Dem (Reply #88)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 01:06 AM

102. Look up his arrests.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 840high (Reply #102)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 01:12 AM

103. just give me a link to where he advocates killing every jew on the planet please.

 

the poster made the claim, why should I have to find the (apparently non-existent) evidence for her claim?


btw:

Dieudonné M'bala M'bala (born 11 February 1966), was born in Fontenay-aux-Roses, Hauts-de-Seine, France. He is the son of a retired sociologist from Brittany, who is also a painter and exhibits under the name Josiane Grué, and an accountant from Ekoudendi, Cameroon. He attended Catholic school, though his mother was a New Age Buddhist.

Performing career

After getting his baccalaureate in computer science, Dieudonné began writing and practicing routines with his childhood friend, Jewish comedian and actor Élie Semoun. They formed a comedic duo, Élie et Dieudonné, and performed in local cafés and bars while Dieudonné worked as a salesman... In the 1990s, they appeared on stage and on television together as "Élie et Dieudonné". In 1997 they split and each went on to a solo theater career. In 1998, they reunited in a screen comedy, Le Clone...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieudonn%C3%A9_M'bala_M'bala

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ND-Dem (Reply #103)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 08:12 AM

105. I followed your link. You somehow didn't post the controversial stuff. I wonder why

Dieudonné released a song and dance called "Shoananas", performed to the tune of the 1985 children's video and song by Annie Cordy "Cho Ka Ka O" (Chaud Cacao or Hot Chocolate in English),[74] which itself by today's standards might be considered racist.[75] The term "Shoananas" is a portmanteau of Shoah, the French word used to refer to the Holocaust, and ananas, the French word for pineapple.[76]

Dieudonné started a trend among his supporters of getting photographed making a unique gesture he invented and dubbed the "quenelle". For some it is just a vulgar gesture of opposition to French institutions, for others it is an antisemitic gesture and was dubbed a "reverse Nazi salute" because while a Nazi salute involves an upraised straight arm, the quenelle involves a straight arm pointed at the ground.

In December, while performing onstage, Dieudonné was recorded saying about prominent French Jewish radio journalist Patrick Cohen: "Me, you see, when I hear Patrick Cohen speak, I think to myself: ‘Gas chambers... too bad.”’"[77]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #4)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 11:33 AM

14. yes, so it seems.

 

Dieudonné initially achieved success with a Jewish comedian, Élie Semoun (his childhood friend), humorously exploiting racial stereotypes. He campaigned against racism and was a candidate in the 1997 and 2001 legislative elections in Dreux against the National Front, the French far-right political party that he perceived as racist.[1][2]

On 1 December 2003, Dieudonné performed a sketch on a TV show about an Israeli settler whom he depicted as a Nazi. Some critics argued that he had "crossed the limits of antisemitism" and several organizations sued him for incitement to racial hatred. Dieudonné refused to apologize and denounced Zionism and the Jewish lobby.[3]

Dieudonné approached Jean-Marie Le Pen, leader of the National Front political party that he had fought earlier, and the men became political allies and friends...Dieudonné was convicted in court eight times on antisemitism charges.[8][9] Dieudonné subsequently found himself with increasing frequency banned from mainstream media, and many of his shows were cancelled by local authorities.

French Interior Minister Manuel Valls stated that Dieudonné was "no longer a comedian" but was rather an "anti-Semite and racist" and that he would seek to ban all Dieudonné's public gatherings as a public safety risk.[18] The ban on his shows has been upheld by French courts.

Dieudonné was initially active on the anti-racist left. In the 1997 French legislative election, he worked with his party, "Les Utopistes", in Dreux against National Front candidate Marie-France Stirbois and received 8 percent of the vote.[33] Verbally and in demonstrations, he also supported migrants without a residence permit (the so-called "sans papiers" and the Palestinians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieudonn%C3%A9_M'bala_M'bala

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ND-Dem (Reply #14)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 12:58 PM

16. He is a raging anti-Semite for sure


So that type of speech should be illegal, correct?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #16)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 03:45 PM

27. The hypocrisy on DU is strong

 

The same people who decry any censorimg of their own opinions support imprisoning people for expressing theirs.

The difference between the Islamist fundamentalists and these folks is the degree to which they will punish you for speaking. Imprisonment is a more appropriate punishment than death for speech crime, at least in their minds.

The founders saw these types from a mile away. Thank fuck for the First Amendment

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LittleBlue (Reply #27)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 07:36 PM

82. the only person who's been arrested or imprisoned is the islamic comic, & it seems you

 

guys are all just fine with it.

he's been arrested multiple times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ND-Dem (Reply #82)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 08:23 PM

84. Wrong

 

A 22-year-old man was jailed for a year on Tuesday evening for another Facebook posting - a video mocking Ahmed Merabet, the police officer killed during the Charlie Hebdo attack.

And a 34-year-old man was jailed for four years after praising the Kouachi brothers, who killed Merabet and 11 other people on Wednesday, when police arrested him for drunk driving after a car accident in which several people were injured.
http://www.english.rfi.fr/france/20150114-comedian-dieudonne-arrested-defending-charlie-hebdo-attacks-others-jailed

French authorities on Wednesday detained and charged a notorious comedian, Dieudonné M’bala M’bala, with “glorifying terrorism” for an ambiguous Facebook post Sunday that, to some, appeared to show support for the gunman who killed four people in a kosher market Friday.

Since last week’s attacks, at least 54 people have faced similar charges — including several underage pranksters and drunken louts who were mouthing off.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/parisians-line-for-blocks-for-new-charlie-hebdo-authorities-detain-comedian/2015/01/14/5a25ad74-9bc8-11e4-bcfb-059ec7a93ddc_story.html

You have no idea what you're talking about

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LittleBlue (Reply #84)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 08:52 PM

87. neither do you, since that's the best you can do. the article you quote supports my point:

 

the people who get arrested and jailed are arabs and muslims.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ND-Dem (Reply #87)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 09:59 PM

91. You said: "the only person who's been arrested or imprisoned is the islamic comic"

 

I just wanted to point out that the prosecution of speech is more widespread than one man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LittleBlue (Reply #91)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 11:43 PM

93. yes, and those being prosecuted are arabs and muslims. which was my actual point.

 

kind of like how the free-thinking 'charlie' editor regularly ran anti-muslim editorials and fired two staffers who took issue with his anti-arab policies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #16)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 07:35 PM

81. i'm not sure how or why you drew that conclusion from anything that was said.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ND-Dem (Reply #81)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 07:37 PM

83. In his previous stuff, not this particular statement at hand


But the article is interesting in the number of people who have been arrested lately in France for "saying things".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #4)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 03:52 PM

31. Well, not really

"Free speech" directed against groups of people who are who they are as a birthright because of something they are powerless to change (like skin color, ethnicity, sexual orientation) is hate speech.

"Free speech" directed at the sillier aspects of any belief system is fair game.

Get it? The line exists between living people and abstract ideas, at least in France.

Here it's more of an absolute, so hate speech is right out in the open where we can keep an eye on it in case it starts exhorting people to violence against their neighbors, at which point it becomes inciting riot and is actionable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warpy (Reply #31)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 05:24 PM

73. and saying je suis Coulibaly on facebook rises to this level?

 

because i dont think it does.

more over since we are all in the US discussing this in the US context of free speech, my comment is pertinent. what we don't agree with is very easily justified into hate speech.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #73)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 08:19 AM

106. Just to clarify "Je suis Coulibaly" the problem is "Support for a Terrorist Act" which is illegal nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #106)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 08:55 AM

110. But satire we're told is protected. So if we call it satire it's legal n'est-ce pas?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #110)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:02 AM

112. Who told you satire was protected? Yes by all means, lets see how low we can go

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #112)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:03 AM

114. Je suis Charlie is supposedly a slogan proclaiming it.

And you can't get much lower than the Charlie cartoons which are utterly despicable. You really should take a closer look at the bastion of liberté you're defending. I'd post a few but I can guarantee you they'd be immediately hidden.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #114)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:08 AM

117. Cartoons followed by Terrorist Attack. Je suis Coulibaly followed by a court date in FR justice

Yes I see how these two events are equivalent now

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #117)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:10 AM

118. Either satire is protected or it isn't. If it is, the charges should be dismissed. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #118)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:15 AM

121. You've confused "SATIRE" with "Condoning a TERRORIST ATTACK" That is the question at hand

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #121)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:18 AM

124. Apparently there is enough confusion to warrant an arrest, yes. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #118)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:17 AM

123. Again, Excellent dodge for providing equivalence between a terrorist attack and a court date

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #123)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:20 AM

126. D'accord, fine, I think the point has been made. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #126)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:22 AM

127. Far from your point being made, I've given up on trying to understand you actually.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:16 AM

122. Stop making sense. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HERVEPA (Reply #1)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 05:08 PM

71. Having looked as some of the Charlie Hebdo cartoons that have given offense to Muslims . . .

. . . I am hard pressed to call them 'satire.' Crude, vulgar mocking that makes no larger point, that is calculated to offend for the sake of offending, is far from my definition of 'satire.'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HERVEPA (Reply #1)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 01:03 AM

101. Yes.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Original post)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 06:57 AM

2. So much for liberté d'expression. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #2)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 10:26 AM

5. There's a reason for the hate speech laws in Europe

 

It's the 11 million people murdered by the Nazis.
And there's a huge difference between a satirical magazine and what this guy does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HERVEPA (Reply #5)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 12:56 PM

15. Do the French have some kind of brain defect?


That they cannot resist being persuaded by bad speech?

We had a war here, and slavery for centuries. But we didn't make it illegal to show the Confederate flag or advocate a return to slavery.

Is it because of something in the water that makes Americans immune to hate speech I a way others aren't?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #15)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 01:15 PM

17. Americans are not imnmune to hate speech.

 

However the murder of 11 million or so people occurred in Europe, not here.
There's a history there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HERVEPA (Reply #17)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 01:30 PM

18. There is a history of slavery here, and of lynchings, and of civil war


But despite the continued rantings of "White Power" folks here, among other things, it does not look as if slavery is coming back anytime soon.

Those 11 million deaths did not happen in France. What is it about Americans, who manage to resist the ravings of Confederate supporters to this day, which French people do not have?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #18)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 03:32 PM

22. Do Jews in New York have the same safety concerns

 

that Jews in Paris have?

No. France is committed to making its Jewish citizens safe. That means not tolerating the first steps of anti-Jewish genocidalists.

France has to find a way to make sure a Muslims and Jews can live together.

They have made a very rational calculation that the right of Jews to leave in peace instead of terror and being driven out of France is worth muzzling the Nazis and their ilk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #22)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 03:37 PM

23. How many African Americans were killed by police in NY in the last year?


Again, I have to ask, do the French have a genetic defect that makes them violent when they hear things, which Americans don't have?

We do not think of limiting racist speech merely because our police have a tendency to shoot people to death in numbers out of proportion to their representation in society.

"France has to find a way to make sure a Muslims and Jews can live together."

How do we manage to do that in the US?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #23)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 03:44 PM

26. France and the US are different places.

 

Incitement doesn't need to work on everyone. If it inspires .1% to violence that's unacceptably high and merits proscription.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #26)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 03:49 PM

30. You brought up New York

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #30)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 03:57 PM

33. New York is part of the US. Paris is part of France.

 

There is practically zero violence and conflict between Jews and Muslims here.

Because here Muslim Americans see themselves as being of the same loyalty as American Jews.

A great many (OBVIOUSLY NOT ALL OR EVEN MOST) French Muslims see French Jews as enemies in a holy war that transcends national boundaries and stretches from Toulouse to Jenin.

That is a problem they have that we do not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #33)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:06 PM

35. But you are leaving out one part


Muslims are fair game for stereotyping in France. Jews are not. Do you think a double standard helps or hurts the perception of those Muslims you are talking about, or the broader purpose of getting them all to get along?

And I'm sure all of the Sikhs in the US, including the ones shot to death in Wisconsin, are happy to know that there are no problems with people getting the notion that anyone with a turban and beard is a terrorist.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #35)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:10 PM

38. Stereotyping is different than incitement.

 

Are you intentionally conflating the two?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #38)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:14 PM

42. Swarthy Hook-Nosed Guys With Beards And Turbans Are Terrorists



None of the cartoons celebrated on DU suggest otherwise.

Nope. No stereotyping there. I sit corrected. Carry on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #42)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:21 PM

46. Perhaps you should address the actual statement, counselor.

 

I said stereotyping and incitement are different things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #46)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:25 PM

50. To wit: “Tonight, as far as I’m concerned, I feel like Charlie Coulibaly.”


He was arrested for saying that.

I suppose we are going to have to agree on a standard of "incitement" here, since you obviously don't subscribe to Brandenburg v. Ohio.

Take the statement:

“Tonight, as far as I’m concerned, I feel like Charlie Coulibaly.”

Who does it direct to engage in violence?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #35)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:24 PM

49. What is your source for these comics, please?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #49)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:26 PM

51. Google Image Search With Appropriate Keywords


I used Google Image Search and variations of "Hebdo" and "Anti-Semitic" as keywords.

Then, I click "view image" and copy the URL.

I have no doubt that the sources of them are disgusting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #51)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:29 PM

53. Corrected no longer relevant

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #53)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:32 PM

55. what do you mean by that?

You seem to have missed the point.

One image is a Charlie Hebdo cover.

The other image is a take-off on the Charlie Hebdo cover, which, in all likelihood comes from some horribly anti-Semitic site.

The two are posted for comparison because:

1. The one showing Muslims being shot by Egyptians in Tahrir Square is "free speech".

2. The one showing a Holocaust victim being gassed is "illegal speech".

Yes it is a "fake" cover. That's the POINT. It is a hypothetical intended to point out a double standard when it comes to "free expression".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #55)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:35 PM

57. Corrected no longer relevant

Last edited Sat Jan 17, 2015, 08:07 AM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #57)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:43 PM

61. Let me try this one more time....


Are you saying the one with the Koran is not a Charlie Hebdo cover?

The one with the Talmud is NOT a Charlie Hebdo cover. It is indeed a "fake" cover. It is a cartoon of a cartoon, intended to make the point that such a cover would not be legal in France.

It probably comes from some awful anti-semitic website making some anti-semitic point of some kind.

The one that says "SHOAH HEBDO" and not "CHARLIE HEBDO" is not even TRYING to be a magazine cover. It is an illustration posted by a cartoonist who is apparently Joe LeCarbeau, who is apparently a raging anti-Semite.

Still don't know what you mean by "fake" - yes, it's a "fake".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #61)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 05:39 PM

77. You are doing yeoman' work. I salute you. The double standard is glaring on what speech is

incitement or hatred, depending on the religious target of the alleged speaker....the hate speech prohibition has to be consistent, other wise what is the principle of law being defended?

To me the French do not have all the answers but they have historical experience, Anit-Semitism is a huge problem as is anti-Islam and anti-Roma, so I have to give them a pass and let Justice take its course in a court of law, not the court of public opinion..... he is going to have an actual trial, not a media one.
I think he will be acquitted, the individual single charge, not his reputation, is going to be on trial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #77)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 05:49 PM

79. I actually am of two minds on this whole "hate speech" shebang


I respect Geek Tragedy a lot and on historical threads about "Is Limbaugh inciting violence" or the Phelps Clan, GT is a First Amendment champ.

I can also see where this sort of thing can be perceived as a double standard.

(and yes I KNOW we are talking about France here, whose population is apparently too feeble minded, relative to Americans, to deal with the US notion of Free Speech; especially since the French became Nazis and took over Europe in WWII)

But where did the French have this "historical experience" of "speech leading to bad things"? The Germans invaded - they didn't persuade the French to give up.

So, sure, I can see where they would want to restrict the speech of Germans, but the French certainly had the "historical experience" of being punished for insulting the Nazis.

But I don't know where it became a Progressive value to insult people purely for the sake of insulting them. The notion seems to be "If we make fun of them enough, they'll change and see things our way."

I dunno, the response to violence should be to remove those committing violence from society by locking them up. I'm all for going after behavior.

But now we know that there are people who will get upset if their religion is insulted. So, let's amp it up to eleven! Like that kid in grade school who would go into a crying rage if you said bad things about his mother. He'll get over it if we all keep doing it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #79)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 11:53 PM

96. +100. seems to me the whole 'free speech = the right to insult others' is all about keeping

 

people divided, the better for others to subjugate and rule them.

just part of the ongoing divide and conquer

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #57)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 11:50 PM

95. You're confused. the poster never claimed the parody version was the original version.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #15)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 05:27 PM

74. ..

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #74)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 05:30 PM

75. Surprisingly, the French were not on the German side of WWII anyway!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #75)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 05:32 PM

76. i think the french are being insanely hypocritalical in this arrest

 

the guy is an asshole, but his words really do not rise to hate speech "je suis Coulibaly' is really anti-semitic but not hate speech.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #76)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 05:40 PM

78. I'm ambivalent about these kinds of restrictions


The First Amendment, in the context of its adoption, guaranteed the right of all white, property-owning men to speak freely.

Maybe that's gotten out of hand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #78)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 06:07 PM

80. Referring to the First Amendment, how about saying, "Death to the Klan"?

Do you think that a statement like that is hate-speech or inciting violence?

Fifteen people were gunned down by the Klan and Neo-Nazis...four died in the street holding their protest signs, another never recovered, dying in a hospital, and others were paralyzed by their wounds...because they dared to say, "Death to the Klan".

Oddly enough, no member of the Ku Klux Klan nor the American Nazi Party was ever found guilty for these five murders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #15)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 11:44 PM

94. according to one poster from france, americans simply can't understand the uniquely droll

 

humor of the French and shouldn't even try.

I imagine that applies to their attitudes toward bad speech too.

they're unique, don't ya know. we lesser beings simply can't understand them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Original post)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 10:28 AM

6. He's as much a satirist as Fred Phelps was.

 

Pretty much just hates Jews.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #6)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 11:26 AM

13. And he should go to jail for saying "I hate those people"?


This guy has not killed anyone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #13)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 03:25 PM

19. Europe takes a zero tolerance approach to

 

attempts to exterminate Jews. I can't say I blame them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #19)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 03:39 PM

24. "attempt to exterminate" <> "speech"

And, in this latest arrest, it wasn't an anti-semitic statement, so you are dodging what he, and others in the story, have actually been arrested for doing.

In other words:

OKAY IN FRANCE:

A cover showing a Muslim being shot to death, and the Koran is no help:




NOT OKAY IN FRANCE:

A cover showing a Jew being gassed to death, and the Talmud is no help:



I believe both images are offensive, but I can certainly understand how this has nothing to do with getting Jews and Muslims to live together peacefully, and is a double standard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #24)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 03:52 PM

32. He was openly identifying with someone who

 

shot up a bunch of Jews because they were Jews. He is trying to turn a mass-murdering Jew-hating bigot into a folk hero amongst the country's Muslim youth. That is far worse than a fucking cartoon. That is actually dangerous.

Note that the violence between Muslims and Jews in France is not reciprocal. It flows in one direction--from the numerous against the few.

Your priority is protecting the right of Nazis and their ilk to incite violence and harassment of Jews over protecting the Jewish community. France is not incorrect in disagreeing with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #32)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:12 PM

40. "Your priority is protecting the right of Nazis and their ilk to incite violence"


Oh isn't that cute.

The ACLU is a bunch of Nazis too, right?

I find the Hebdo cartoons and Holocaust denial crap to be demeaning to their targets.

But speech is speech. If people become violent over it, then you have actions which are not speech.

Speech does not have magical properties in France which it does not have in the United States.

Just ask Martin Luther King, Jr.... oh, wait, you can't. There was a lot of "speech" about him too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #40)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:17 PM

44. The ACLU is an American organization that has no standing

 

in a French affair.

Nazi propaganda and incitement helped kill millions. Speech that helps kill millions is not worthy of protection.

And again the false equivalency between insulting a religious figure and inciting murder and genocide. Not the same thing, not operationally, not morally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #44)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:22 PM

47. The ACLU defended the right of Nazis to march in Skokie

Last edited Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:59 PM - Edit history (1)

Skokie has a high Jewish population.

That's why the Nazis wanted to march there.

You do not seem to understand that France was INVADED by the Germans in WWII. France did not become part of Germany during that time voluntarily.

Let's go back and look at the statement for which this guy was arrested. He wasn't "inciting" jack shit.

But you are saying that because the Germans committed atrocities against Jews, then Nazi speech should "morally" be banned in some OTHER country where that didn't happen - i.e. France; which is different from the United States in some manner which you have not defined.

Do you know which side of WWII France was on?

And if this is a "moral" imperative, then I had no idea that something as fundamental as what is "morally" wrong depends on what side of the Atlantic Ocean one is on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #47)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 08:37 PM

85. Vichy French rounded up the Jews.

 

And let's not even get into Dreyfus etc.

I do not think the US has the market cornered on wisdom, and that we know what is good for Europe more than they do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #85)

Sun Jan 18, 2015, 01:14 AM

138. The future is not yet history...

So we have to wait for another 11 million bodies to be stacked up over some new bullshit before saying, "Hmmm... Maybe that wasn't a good idea."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #47)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 12:08 AM

99. "special pleading". there's a lot of it going round.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #32)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 12:04 AM

98. "It flows in one direction--from the numerous against the few." right. because the folks

 

in the banlieus are so damn powerful. because there are so many of them!!!!

sounds familiar.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #24)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:10 PM

39. Corrected no longer relevant

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #39)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:35 PM

56. The one which doesn't say "Charlie Hebdo" is not a Hebdo cover


I'm certain you don't understand the point.

If by "fake" you mean "not a Charlie Hebdo cover" you are correct. The "fake" one would be illegal in France.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #56)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:39 PM

60. Corrected no long relevent (OP posted source I stand corrected)

Or you can prove me wrong. Ever heard of photoshop?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #60)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:46 PM

62. It is the July 2013 cover



http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/charlie-hebdo-paris-shooting-french-magazine-that-satirised-prophet-mohammed-1482344


After another cartoon showing Mohammed, its website was targeted by hackers. When it published a cartoon showing a Muslim holding up a Quran with bullets being fired through it, captioned "The Quran is shit – it doesn't stop bullets", a group of Islamists tried to sue Charlie Hebdo in the French courts under old French blasphemy laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #62)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:59 PM

67. Did you notice the caption "Tuererie en Egypt" (Killings in Egypt) SATIRE ALERT

OMFG. Why do I even bother?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #67)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 05:00 PM

68. Yes, and?

Mass killings are funnier there?

Yes, it is making light of a massacre of a group of unarmed people. Ha ha!

Please read my other posts in the thread. I already pointed out it was about the killing of Muslim Brotherhood supporters in Tahrir Square.

What do you think the image says to people who are unaware of that hi-larious comedic context?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #68)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 05:09 PM

72. Gee I don't think they expected to be shot up all to hell last week

and have their very small niche market magazine posted all over the internets by people who don't speak French and have no idea that Charlie Hebdo is a radical left wing satire magazine.

"Charb"'s funeral was today, it was on the French news. Dude was a communist for Christ's sake. They played some Communist anthem at his funeral.

Oh fuck it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #72)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 12:12 AM

100. he was a communist -- so what? you're still wrong about that cover being a 'forgery'.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ND-Dem (Reply #100)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 07:48 AM

104. I admitted that at least 4x all over this thread. Compared to Charb, you're a Wing-Nut

I won't continue to waste my time defending Charlie Hebdo's left wing creds to DU, it's hopeless. Y'all need your outrage fix and you'll get it from whatever source suits your purpose, not matter how absurd. I'll just state clearly for the record that Charlie Hebdo was against all forms of racism, classism, sexism, religious authoritarianism, and cretinism.

Taken out of context, I could turn anyone into whatever filthy thing I chose and then post it all over the internet, especially after they're DEAD and unable to defend themselves. I could search DU, take any 5 sentences you've written out of their context, and turn you into a wife-beater.

What is even more ironic is that Charb and Tignous and company were assassinated by an Islamist terrorist, the guys that Dieudonné thinks are just peachy, because they are going ahead and "taking care of the Jewish problem".

Whoa take that phrase out of context, and Pooka Fey is AN ANTI-SEMITE

Nuance ALERT. Put on your thinking cap now. Dieudonné is being questioned (he has been taken in for questioning, all you non-French speakers btw) for appearing to publicly support a terrorist attack. He has not been convicted of anything, and HE MAY NOT BE.

Charb is not alive to defend himself, but he was so left-wing he makes everyone on DU look like a Wing-Nut. That means you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #104)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 12:33 PM

129. Even former staffers have called Charlie disingenuous.

 

I don't think anyone thinks Dieudonne is "peachy"; more like people see special pleading for Charlie, while dieudonne has been arrested multiple times for his speech.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #19)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 11:56 PM

97. where is the 'attempt to exterminate jews'?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Original post)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 03:40 PM

25. If the Charlie Hebdo writers died for free speech, then this shits all over their sacrifice

 

They sentenced one man to a 4 year sentence, and another to 1 year hard time for a Facebook post. They are prosecuting 50 people for speech they deem incorrect.

France is dead wrong on this. It makes their country look weak and hypocritical. And perhaps they are confirming those perceptions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Original post)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:08 PM

37. NYT calling Dieudonné a "provocative humorist" is like calling Goebbels a "marketing executive"

WTF. Seriously, these journalists need to do their homework.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #37)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 04:49 PM

63. He's probably hilarious to people who hate Jews

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Original post)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 05:02 PM

69. "Freedom of speech means nothing if it does NOT mean the freedom to offend"

 

from 2:33 in.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stephen Retired (Reply #69)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 05:03 PM

70. And the key to obtaining a majority in democratic politics is offending as many people as possible!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Original post)

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 08:51 PM

86. How incredibly hypocritical of the French. The Charlie Hebdo people ought to stand with him.

To spend a week celebrating free speech and free expression, only to turn around and restrict the speech of those they find objectionable, is the height of hypocrisy.

I understand that many European countries have hate speech laws and other restrictions on free speech; I oppose them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tritsofme (Reply #86)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 08:24 AM

107. To clarify "Je suis Coulibaly" is printed "Support for a Terrorist Act" which is illegal in FR

Last edited Sat Jan 17, 2015, 12:50 PM - Edit history (1)

Curiously, the French don't support people who publish their support of bloody terrorist attacks upon their countrymen.

Or didn't you know that the Coulibaly brothers are the names of the terrorists who shot up the cartoonists and the police?

Please say "Oh gosh, I didn't know that"

On EDIT -

Coulibaly - terrorist attacker on Kosher Supermarket, killed 4 on Friday, killed police officer on Thurs and at this point, presumed leader of FR terrorist cell linked to ISIS Yemen
Quachi Brothers - terrorist partners of Coulibably who shot up offices of Charlie Hebdo, and took hostages N. of Paris


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #107)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 08:48 AM

109. By that logic the CH cover you thought was a forgery is support for a genocidal act.

In context, we're told, the CH cover is perfectly defensible, a satirical comment on a current event, despite the fact that it graphically illustrates the assassination of a Muslim representative of all Muslims. Fine, but the same exoneration could be applied to the facebook comment, which was made by a comedian and is in all likelihood satirical comment on the heavily promoted je suis Charlie slogan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #109)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:00 AM

111. "despite...that it ... illustrates the assassination of a Muslim rep of all Muslims by MUSLIMS

is the correct context of the cartoon. "Tuererie en Egypt" (killing in Egypt) Once we get the context right, we can discuss the content.

The French court will examine whether or not the printed statement is "supporting a terrorist act". They don't know yet. Will you argue that the don't have the right to ask this question?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #111)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:02 AM

113. If context exonerates one is should exonerate both. There is clearly a double standard. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #113)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:04 AM

115. Why don't you flesh out your argument so that a reasonable person can understand it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #115)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:07 AM

116. I think most of us understand it pretty well, and the cartoons are unspeakably vile.

If I posted them they'd get hidden. Use google and enter "Charlie Hebdo cartoons" and then click images. You'll get the picture soon enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #116)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:12 AM

119. Excellent attempt at dodging the question. My question is "how does context exonerate both"

You will undoubtedly come to a conclusion before the FR justice system, because you're so unquestionable sure of yourself. Like I said, the FR justice system does not have their answer yet. They may agree with you.

BUH-BYE

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #119)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:15 AM

120. Here's how:


In context, we're told, the CH cover is perfectly defensible, a satirical comment on a current event, despite the fact that it graphically illustrates the assassination of a Muslim representative of all Muslims. Fine, but the same exoneration could be applied to the facebook comment, which was made by a comedian and is in all likelihood satirical comment on the heavily promoted je suis Charlie slogan.


Yes, that is exactly what I wrote just above, but you asked me to flesh out the argument, and I did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ucrdem (Reply #120)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 09:20 AM

125. FAIL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #125)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 12:43 PM

131. Flesh out your argument please

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #107)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 12:04 PM

128. Should a Facebook post qualify as "support for a terrorist act"? I don't think so.

Should it make him a social pariah, unemployable, ect? Yes. But a satirical Facebook post shouldn't make him a criminal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tritsofme (Reply #128)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 12:54 PM

133. He hasn't been convicted yet. The FR justice system may agree with you after the court date

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #107)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 12:39 PM

130. You didn't know it either, because Coulibaly was the black guy who shot up the supermarket.

 

which kind of shows how careful you are with your facts.


http://news.yahoo.com/paris-gunman-spent-three-days-madrid-101436598.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ND-Dem (Reply #130)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 12:52 PM

132. I guess that invalidates all my points then

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #132)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 01:13 PM

134. well, we know they're not based on careful examination of the facts, since you can't even

 

keep the players straight

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ND-Dem (Reply #134)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 01:25 PM

135. yawn

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pooka Fey (Reply #135)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 01:31 PM

136. you get very basic facts wrong; no wonder you think 'yawn' is some kind of convincing argument.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Original post)

Sat Jan 17, 2015, 01:57 PM

137. All religions are equal, but some religions are more equal than others

- DUer Squealer

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread