Toronto Escorts

I am NOT Charlie either.

oil&gas

Well-known member
Apr 16, 2002
12,581
1,748
113
Ghawar
I swear I'm not trolling.
Previous post is just an offhand remark. Wasn't meant to be
directed to you. I had in my mind if something like that happened
in the US gun nuts would have raved about the merit of guns as
a terrorist deterrent.

On second thought if the killers were disgruntled former employee
of the magazine the massacre wouldn't have been deemed a terrorist
attack.
 

rhuarc29

Well-known member
Apr 15, 2009
9,636
1,237
113
Gun control?! If only the staff at Charlie were armed instead of
seeking protection from inept police they would have defended
themselves or even killed the gunmen.
There are negatives and positives, let's not get into that now.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,487
2,718
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com

Jiffypop69

Active member
Jul 7, 2009
1,474
0
36
it's offensive is not an argument
You're right...but should we weep when those chickens we've offended come home to roost ?
I will never condone the killing of innocent people by the means demonstrated in Paris last week...or for that matter, drone strikes on innocent people in far off lands.
We (the west, for lack of better description) consider ourselves enlightened, yet in many ways we still must come to terms with our own inherent hatreds.
I'm certainly not perfect by any means, after all I'm a member on a board that routinely gives voice to misogyny, racism, and exploitation. ..ffs. ...I feel awful...again.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
31,487
2,718
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
You're right...but should we weep when those chickens we've offended come home to roost ?
I will never condone the killing of innocent people by the means demonstrated in Paris last week...or for that matter, drone strikes on innocent people in far off lands.
We (the west, for lack of better description) consider ourselves enlightened, yet in many ways we still must come to terms with our own inherent hatreds.
I'm certainly not perfect by any means, after all I'm a member on a board that routinely gives voice to misogyny, racism, and exploitation. ..ffs. ...I feel awful...again.

excuses excuses excuses
 

Jiffypop69

Active member
Jul 7, 2009
1,474
0
36
excuses excuses excuses
why would I make excuses for the world's most predictable event...The only thing as predictable will be the eventual response.
and round and round we go...
We all know that the crazies don't need provocation...but what the heck, let's give it to them anyway.
 

IM469

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2012
10,983
2,288
113
...there are people who feel the mocking of religious figures is as abhorrent an act as the killing of cartoonists.
Yes - the terrorists would agree. I think those who support Je Suis Charlie share a completely opposite viewpoint..
 

peterborough

Banned
Aug 18, 2013
62
0
0
Where does humor end and hate-speech begin?:

question: "what is the difference between a Jew and a pizza?
answer:"pizzas don't scream when you put them in an oven"

Why are insults to Catholics and Muslims funny, but insults to Jews not?
Why the double-standard?
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
60,312
6,463
113
...
An example might help. During the conflict in the Balkans I knew a Croat who really hated Serbs and said that they deserve to die because they were scum and he would willingly express this point of view openly over a few cocktails. As I understand the argument here, we needn't agree with him but he has the right to express his views.
Now, if he were a journalist or cartoonist, should he be held accountable in a different way if he expresses his opinion given that his opinions could a) Offend a larger audience or b) motivate some in his audience to use his words as justification to attack Serbs?
Maybe I'm wrong but I don't believe that Charlie Hebdo said Muslims are scum and deserve to die.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
60,312
6,463
113
why would I make excuses for the world's most predictable event...The only thing as predictable will be the eventual response.
and round and round we go...
We all know that the crazies don't need provocation...but what the heck, let's give it to them anyway.
Umm, if they don't need specific provocation then it doesn't matter what we do.

And how about the Kosher market? There the killer stated that he wanted to kill Jews. What did French Jews do that predicated their death? Maybe it should be "Je suis Kosher"
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
60,312
6,463
113
Where does humor end and hate-speech begin?:

question: "what is the difference between a Jew and a pizza?
answer:"pizzas don't scream when you put them in an oven"

Why are insults to Catholics and Muslims funny, but insults to Jews not?
Why the double-standard?

Saying Catholics should get real about birth control or radical Muslims would kill Mohammed if he was alone now are a far cry from joking about the extermination of Jews.
 

trod

Active member
Aug 3, 2009
1,091
1
38
I fully support their right to freedom of speech, and I would never take away from what happened. It was wrong, but I am not Charlie. Just because I have the right to be an offensive bitch, doesn't mean I will use it to throw it in people's faces. I am against trolling on the internet and therefore in all forms of it. Charlie was a trolling offensive print media that I simply can not get behind. I will defend their right to be assholes, but I will not agree with their choice to be.
If you are defending their right to be assholes, then you are defending their choice as well, even if you don't necessarily agree with the choice. And that means you stand with freedom of expression.

The point is, they have the right in the first place to be assholes. They can be insensitive, provocative or insulting. Just like how some people would see SPs or MPAs to be offensive bitches. It doesn't necessarily mean that they are 'trolling' to get at people's faces.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
80,012
7
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
There are already plenty of limits on free speech. You may not utter threats. You may not incite panic (scream fire in a packed theatre). Etc. etc.

there are people who feel the mocking of religious figures is as abhorrent an act as the killing of cartoonists.
I know people who would like to see laws against mocking religious figures, but I hope I don't know anyone who thinks it is as abhorrent as politically motivated murder.
 

peterborough

Banned
Aug 18, 2013
62
0
0
Patrick Buchanan is my go-to main-man!:
"Western media are declaring the million-man march in Paris, where world leaders paraded down Boulevard Voltaire in solidarity with France, a victory over terrorism.

Isn't it pretty to think so.

Unfortunately, the massacre at Charlie Hebdo, its military-style execution, the escape of the assassins, and their blazing end in a shootout Friday was a triumph of terrorism not seen since 9/11.

Unlike the Boston Marathon bombing where the Tsarnaevs did not know or care whom they maimed or killed, the attack on Charlie Hebdo by the Kouachi brothers was purposeful and targeted terrorism.

And like a flash of lightning in the dark, it exposed the moral contradictions and confusion of the West.

During the slaughter the Kouachis shouted "Allahu akbar," said they had "avenged the Prophet," and spoke of ties to al-Qaida.

And the first response of President Francois Hollande?

These terrorists "have nothing to do with the Muslim religion."

This is political correctness of a rare order. Perhaps terminal.

Linking arms with Hollande in solidarity and unity Sunday was Bibi Netanyahu who declared, "I wish to tell to all French and European Jews -- Israel is your home." Colleagues urged French Jews to flee to Israel.

Marching on the other side of Hollande was Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas who seeks to have Netanyahu's Israel indicted in the International Criminal Court for war crimes in Gaza. Solidarity!

In chanting "Je Suis Charlie," the marchers showed support for a magazine French Muslims rightly believe is racist and anti-Islamic.

Yet, Marine Le Pen, leading in the polls for the French presidency, was blacklisted from marching for remarks about Muslim immigration that are benign compared to what Charlie Hebdo regularly publishes.

All weekend long, journalists called it an imperative for us all to defend the lewd and lurid blasphemies of the satirical magazine.

But as journalist Christopher Dickey points out, Muslims in the banlieues wonder why insulting the Prophet is a protected freedom in France, while denying the Holocaust can get you a prison term.

Hypocrisy is indeed the tribute that vice pays to virtue.

Moreover, all this chatter about freedom of speech and of the press misses the point. It was not the right to publish that provoked the slaughter, but the content of what was published.

When Aaron Burr challenged Alexander Hamilton to a duel, and killed him, he was not attacking the First Amendment freedom of the press, but rather Hamilton, for defamation of Burr's character, which had helped to destroy Burr's career.

What the commentators seem to be saying about the assault on Charlie Hebdo is that not only is what is spoken or published protected by the First Amendment, but those who print and publish vile things must never suffer violent consequences.

People who believe this is attainable are living in a dream world, and may not be long for this one.

Even as children you knew there were words you did not use about someone else's girlfriend, mother, family, faith or race, if you did not want a thrashing.

That same day millions marched in France, Saudi Arabia was administering 50 lashes to blogger Raif Badawi convicted of insulting Saudi clergy, the first of 1,000 lashes over 20 weeks in addition to his 10-year jail sentence. Had Badawi been guilty of apostasy, he would have been executed.

Welcome to the new Middle East, same as the old Middle East.

And Islam and the Prophet were not the only targets of Charlie Hebdo. Catholicism was also. In one cartoon, Charlie Hebdo depicts the First and Second Persons of the Blessed Trinity in incestuous activity.

And we all supposed to march in solidarity with that?

A liberal secular West might find this a democratic duty. Not all will. When people are using the First Amendment to assault the somewhat older Second Commandment, "Though shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain," they should not be surprised when devout followers of Abrahamic faiths take a pass.

These Islamic terrorists are sending us a message: In the post-Christian West, Christians may turn the other check at insults to their God and faith. We are not turn-the-other cheek people. Insult our faith, mock the Prophet, and we kill you.

An awakening and rising Islamic world -- a more militant faith than Christianity or secularism -- is saying to the West: We want you out of our part of the world, and we are coming to your part of the world, and you cannot stop us.

And Francois Hollande's response? Show solidarity with Islam by ostracizing Marine Le Pen.

This is the true heir of Edouard Daladier of Munich fame.

The Kouachi brothers sent yet another message.

If you are a young Muslim willing to fight and die for Islam, do not waste your life as some suicide bomber in the wilds of Syria or Iraq. Do as we did; shock and awe your enemies right inside the belly of the beast."
 

Jiffypop69

Active member
Jul 7, 2009
1,474
0
36
Patrick Buchanan is my go-to main-man!:
"Western media are declaring the million-man march in Paris, where world leaders paraded down Boulevard Voltaire in solidarity with France, a victory over terrorism.

Isn't it pretty to think so.

Unfortunately, the massacre at Charlie Hebdo, its military-style execution, the escape of the assassins, and their blazing end in a shootout Friday was a triumph of terrorism not seen since 9/11.

Unlike the Boston Marathon bombing where the Tsarnaevs did not know or care whom they maimed or killed, the attack on Charlie Hebdo by the Kouachi brothers was purposeful and targeted terrorism.

And like a flash of lightning in the dark, it exposed the moral contradictions and confusion of the West.

During the slaughter the Kouachis shouted "Allahu akbar," said they had "avenged the Prophet," and spoke of ties to al-Qaida.

And the first response of President Francois Hollande?

These terrorists "have nothing to do with the Muslim religion."

This is political correctness of a rare order. Perhaps terminal.

Linking arms with Hollande in solidarity and unity Sunday was Bibi Netanyahu who declared, "I wish to tell to all French and European Jews -- Israel is your home." Colleagues urged French Jews to flee to Israel.

Marching on the other side of Hollande was Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas who seeks to have Netanyahu's Israel indicted in the International Criminal Court for war crimes in Gaza. Solidarity!

In chanting "Je Suis Charlie," the marchers showed support for a magazine French Muslims rightly believe is racist and anti-Islamic.

Yet, Marine Le Pen, leading in the polls for the French presidency, was blacklisted from marching for remarks about Muslim immigration that are benign compared to what Charlie Hebdo regularly publishes.

All weekend long, journalists called it an imperative for us all to defend the lewd and lurid blasphemies of the satirical magazine.

But as journalist Christopher Dickey points out, Muslims in the banlieues wonder why insulting the Prophet is a protected freedom in France, while denying the Holocaust can get you a prison term.

Hypocrisy is indeed the tribute that vice pays to virtue.

Moreover, all this chatter about freedom of speech and of the press misses the point. It was not the right to publish that provoked the slaughter, but the content of what was published.

When Aaron Burr challenged Alexander Hamilton to a duel, and killed him, he was not attacking the First Amendment freedom of the press, but rather Hamilton, for defamation of Burr's character, which had helped to destroy Burr's career.

What the commentators seem to be saying about the assault on Charlie Hebdo is that not only is what is spoken or published protected by the First Amendment, but those who print and publish vile things must never suffer violent consequences.

People who believe this is attainable are living in a dream world, and may not be long for this one.

Even as children you knew there were words you did not use about someone else's girlfriend, mother, family, faith or race, if you did not want a thrashing.

That same day millions marched in France, Saudi Arabia was administering 50 lashes to blogger Raif Badawi convicted of insulting Saudi clergy, the first of 1,000 lashes over 20 weeks in addition to his 10-year jail sentence. Had Badawi been guilty of apostasy, he would have been executed.

Welcome to the new Middle East, same as the old Middle East.

And Islam and the Prophet were not the only targets of Charlie Hebdo. Catholicism was also. In one cartoon, Charlie Hebdo depicts the First and Second Persons of the Blessed Trinity in incestuous activity.

And we all supposed to march in solidarity with that?

A liberal secular West might find this a democratic duty. Not all will. When people are using the First Amendment to assault the somewhat older Second Commandment, "Though shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain," they should not be surprised when devout followers of Abrahamic faiths take a pass.

These Islamic terrorists are sending us a message: In the post-Christian West, Christians may turn the other check at insults to their God and faith. We are not turn-the-other cheek people. Insult our faith, mock the Prophet, and we kill you.

An awakening and rising Islamic world -- a more militant faith than Christianity or secularism -- is saying to the West: We want you out of our part of the world, and we are coming to your part of the world, and you cannot stop us.

And Francois Hollande's response? Show solidarity with Islam by ostracizing Marine Le Pen.

This is the true heir of Edouard Daladier of Munich fame.

The Kouachi brothers sent yet another message.

If you are a young Muslim willing to fight and die for Islam, do not waste your life as some suicide bomber in the wilds of Syria or Iraq. Do as we did; shock and awe your enemies right inside the belly of the beast."
Obviously I'm not as smart as this guy...
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts