lavatoz:


I'm not surprised at how you think, you come from a place that attacks victims more by feeling an antelope shouldn't have been dancing before the lion hence the reason for it being killed. In, Nigeria there is no freedom of speech concerning anything be it politcs, social issues not to mention religion. Instead, there are filled with sycophants and butt-kissers that is the big diff b/t western journalists and third world journalists. If he were in Nigeria he wud have died since. You condemn the killings while contradicting yourself for justifying their reasons for killing the man. They didn't just kill the man they killed and shot other innocent people. For what? Mocking islam? Other religions were mocked; do their followers like it? Of course not they wud be furious but they won't kill people for that. These terrorists have just proven western media that muslims are barbaric 1st century humans. Regardless of the existence of good, sane, sweet and philanthropic muslims that outweigh the demonic ones and condemn these acts; you can't help but think that islam is a very ambiguous religion with violent doctrines.

Have you been to any western country before?

No.
if anybody infringes on your rights, you take the person to court!
That is the whole essence of a republic.

By resorting to self-help, the jihadists have declared an open season on themselves.

Nihilist:
France abolished the offence of blasphemy in 1791; [size=18pt]but the offence persists in the regions of Alsace and Moselle as Articles 166 and 167 of the local penal code. The Articles persist as a holdover from the German criminal code of 1871. Validated by La loi du 17 Octobre 1919 and le Décret du 25 Novembre 1919, the Articles forbid public blasphemy against God[/size]. No convictions under Articles 166 and 167 have been registered

So even in France, there are still some places where it is ILLEGAL to Blaspheme?

PapiWata bone matter abeg....

I do not understand you.
If the journalist contravened a law, is the answer to gun them down?
or to take them to court for appropriate sanction?

tit:


I do not understand you.
If the journalist contravened a law, is the answer to gun them down?
or to take them to court for appropriate sanction?

Obviously not!

But why take the risk?

Why offend ?

if Islam is a religion of peace, why are her extremists not extremely peaceful?

Nihilist:


Obviously not!

But why take the risk?

Why offend ?

offend who?
a tyrant?

suppose I make comments that you will find offensive,
them follow it up by tracking you down and shooting you down like a dog,
will that be ok to you?
or would you rather our differences be settled in court?

you are gloating because your side initiated the killings.
just know you are not the only mad people on earth.

tit:


offend who?
a tyrant?

suppose I make comments that you will find offensive,
them follow it up by tracking you down and shooting you down like a dog,
will that be ok to you?
or would you rather our differences be settled in court?

you are gloating because your side initiated the killings.
just know you are not the only mad people on earth.

Already sounding very illogical....as I never said I was muslim.

Infact my username alludes to an irreverence for religion....but I'm not surprised you didn't notice

Anyway, have you asked yourself why it is illegal for Newspapers in UK\US\France to call black people Niggers on their front page?

Nihilist:



Already sounding very illogical....as I never said I was muslim.

Infact my username alludes to an irreverence for religion....but I'm not surprised you didn't notice

Anyway, have you asked yourself why it is illegal for Newspapers in UK\US\France to call black people Niggers on their front page?

I did notice your username and take it at face value.
Newspapers do not call people names because they will face sanctions of the law.
Not because nihilist will come and behead them.
these sanctions are broad enough to protect anybody who feels his rights have been infringed upon.

we have had anarchy before, and believe me, even you will not like it.

tit:


I did notice your username and take it at face value.
Newspapers do not call people names because they will face sanctions of the law.
Not because nihilist will come and behead them.
these sanctions are broad enough to protect anybody who feels his rights have been infringed upon.

we have had anarchy before, and believe me, even you will not like it.

Notice that I asked why racist speech is illegal?

The word 'illegal' implies 'sanctions of the law' as you call it.

The question is why....Why does racist speech attract legal sanction?

In other words, WHY IS IT ILLEGAL TO PUBLISH RACIST SPEECH?

Nihilist:


Have you been to any western country before?

Yes I have, lived in one for 4 years. When you do you won't have the totally conservative mindset that is the mentality of many africans

lavatoz:


Yes I have, lived in one for 4 years. When you do you won't have the totally conservative mindset that is the mentality of many africans

Good.

What do you think public reaction would be if Black people were caricatured as slaves on magazine\newspaper covers?

lavatoz:


I'm not surprised at how you think, you come from a place that attacks victims more by feeling an antelope shouldn't have been dancing before the lion hence the reason for it being killed. In, Nigeria there is no freedom of speech concerning anything be it politcs, social issues not to mention religion. Instead, there are filled with sycophants and butt-kissers that is the big diff b/t western journalists and third world journalists. If he were in Nigeria he wud have died since. You condemn the killings while contradicting yourself for justifying their reasons for killing the man. They didn't just kill the man they killed and shot other innocent people. For what? Mocking islam? Other religions were mocked; do their followers like it? Of course not they wud be furious but they won't kill people for that. These terrorists have just proven western media that muslims are barbaric 1st century humans. Regardless of the existence of good, sane, sweet and philanthropic muslims that outweigh the demonic ones and condemn these acts; you can't help but think that islam is a very ambiguous religion with violent doctrines.

You misunderstand me. I never justified the killings. I'm just saying that if those satirists were a little careful they'd have been alive by now. Read my previous posts again carefully to understand my point of view.

Nihilist:


Good.

What do you think public reaction would be if Black people were caricatured as slaves on magazine\newspaper covers?

Thank you. There'll be widespread demonstrations and riots. Some magazine staff may lose their lives. Their killers will be sentenced but that won't change the fact that what the satirists had done was also wrong. Journalists need to be ethical and know where to draw the line. This is a basic truth.

Chartey:

Thank you. There'll be widespread demonstrations and riots. Some magazine staff may lose their lives. Their killers will be sentenced but that won't change the fact that what the satirists had done was also wrong. Journalists need to be ethical and know where to draw the line. This is a basic truth.

EXACTLY!!!

Chartey:

Thank you. There'll be widespread demonstrations and riots. Some magazine staff may lose their lives. Their killers will be sentenced but that won't change the fact that what the satirists had done was also wrong. Journalists need to be ethical and know where to draw the line. This is a basic truth.

Killing the journalists is an evil act no doubt and every sane human should condemn the act.
But my concern with people especially from this part of the world is that we tend to look and judge things "myopically" from religious view point.
I said this on another thread and I'll repeat it here before I go to bed. There is freedom of speech everywhere in the world even in Saudi and other places where it appears there are gross violation of human rights. But what we fail to realise is that although every country guarantee everybody freedom of speech and expression, nobody can assure anybody of freedom after speech - not even in US (Edward Snowden comes to mind). People should realise that different cultures holds different issues sacred. People should be responsible enough to know the boundary and respect it no matter the topic - religious, politics, national security, economic etc.

What happen to peaceful protest/demostration against these journalists? No!!! These useless muslims with their rubbish Islam won't tour that path of honour......

These animals have turned our shopping mall and recreational centres to burial ground, cemetery and a war fronts.

I have to be watching my back today and everytime at Shopping malls cos one of these animals could just start killing people for no reason than Islam was insulted

How many people do you want to kill for insulting someone who couldn't even fight for himself in his grave

I learnt that people are unable to go to their Churches on Sunday in the Northern part of the country due to the fact that some followers of animal called Prophet my ass- Mohammed; curse unto him in grave

Please, pick the useless Quran and read all sort of gibberish inside

The main character in what they called Holy(Only/mere book)book is a bastard who killed, raped and maimed people who opposed his belief

I wish the world world could turn around and nuke these idiots to oblivion


I have said this before and I am repeating it again that all muslims are nothing but animals, yes they are animals in human flesh.

They all have soft spot in their heart for all these terrorists being killed by western world

If you have them as your neighbours, buy your guns and keep them close to you and your family at all time

Ensure your children stay away from their cursed children, what do you expect from the seeds of wicked souls if not cruelties........

These terrorists killed 12 people for a mere cartoon but millions of people have abused the same stupid cunt called mohammed on Youtube today

How I wish US, GERMANY, UK, ISRAEL, RUSSIA, CANADA, FRANCE, CHINA, JAPAN could all come together and nuke this muslim world to oblivion so that we can all live in peace after their sorrowful death.......................... This might eventually be our lasting solution

lavatoz:


[size=14pt] You condemn the killings while contradicting yourself for justifying their reasons for killing[/size] the man. They didn't just kill the man they killed and shot other innocent people. For what? Mocking islam?

[size=14pt]Other religions were mocked; do their followers like it? Of course not they wud be furious but they won't kill people for that.[/size]

Ah yes these are the questions that are never answered, and to these may I add the following musings of a CNN news junkie.

If any particular deity is deemed all-seeing and all-powerful by its adherents, then surely that God will NOT require the services of madmen with guns, if that Supreme Being is in fact petty enough to become vengeful over a few magazine cartoons published by mere mortals in France or any other free, secular and democratic state on God's green Earth.

Bearing that consideration in mind, it just makes sense that any immigrants to France who simply cannot bear the agony of reading "offensive" magazine articles published in France, should exercise their constitutional freedom to LEAVE The European Union, and go live forever in one of those Third World backwater non-nations where women rank lower than pack animals, and the penalty for any number of infractions is state-sanctioned mob justice.

If you don't love FREEDOM of the press, vote with your feet and GO AWAY from the democratic West, to take up residence where the state controls every aspect of human existence imaginable.

I

PapiWata:


Ah yes these are the questions that are never answered, and to these may I add the following musings of a CNN news junkie.

If any particular deity is deemed all-seeing and all-powerful by its adherents, then surely that God will NOT require the services of madmen with guns, if that Supreme Being is in fact petty enough to become vengeful over a few magazine cartoons published by mere mortals in France or any other free, secular and democratic state.

I like the way you write...witty and humourous...and obviously intelligent.

You're too intelligent to fall into the trap of Islam-bashing.

Surely, you can see that extremism is merely a bargaining chip, and a tool of expression in a conflict of ideas?

There's an underlying social factor behind the global jihadi movement, and jihad has become a cause célèbre for the misfits and downtrodden the world over.

Then there's also the fact that Islam is not merely a religion, but an all-encompassing cultural package that obligates/encourages its adherents to learn a particular language, dress in a particular way, and submit and conduct themselves by Islamic jurisprudence.

As such, an assault on Islamic religious icons might be seen by some of its adherents as an attack on their culture, and by extension a personal attack on muslims.

Infact, this is how it is spun by Jihadi leaders.

The truth is, what we are witnessing is a clash of cultures on a global scale...the blowback resulting from a century of Western meddling and instigation in the Middle East.

While the Western powers are infinitely rich, organized and posess superior weaponry...the jihadis have had to fight Guerilla warfare on a global scale.

The rest of us are just caught in the crossfire.

And the calls for Muslims to 'vote with their feet' and leave France is also quite ignorant

There are muslims in France who were born there as 3rd and 4th generation of immigrant families...

Where do they go?

Nihilist:
And the calls for Muslims to 'vote with their feet' and leave France is also quite ignorant

There are muslims in France who were born there as 3rd and 4th generation of immigrant families...

Where do they go?

Citizenship is in most nations regarded as a privilege that can be revoked for misconduct, and not a right that can be abused with impunity.

If a tenth-generation descendant of a Nigerian Ogun Worshiper should wake up one day in the London borough of Hackney, also known as "Little Nigeria", and decide that the UK government MUST bow to his demand for the RIGHT to slaughter stray dogs in the playground of his council flat, as sacrifices for the God of Iron, then such a wild-eyed misfit can expect either a stiff jail sentence for animal cruelty, OR a recommendation that they LEAVE the UK, where animal sacrifice is NOT allowed, and relocate to Nigeria or Haiti, where such cruel and inhumane forms of "worship" are permitted by law.

The same equitable logic must be applied to ANYONE who feels that they have a divine RIGHT to IMPOSE a dress code of Batman or Darth Vadar costumes on women in the heart of democratic Europe, and IMPOSE a regime of press censorship in a FREE democratic society. Such confused individuals SHOULD be encouraged FORCIBLY to leave the free country whose established laws they hope to modify to suit their personal whims, and relocate to any repressive rogue nation of their choosing on the globe.

kilokeys:
though i made jesuis charlie as a dp.

i still think they weren't innocent protraying religious icons in such light.

these men wanted to die as matyrs for what they believed in...

would charlie hebdo's staff choose death gladly over doing caricature cartoons?.. i dont think so.


morale.. never fight a man that has nothing to lose ( esp. if he thinks he gains everything if he dies fighting u)

if we are to follow ur advice then bokoaram will Hv a field day!

PapiWata:


Citizenship is in most nations regarded as a privilege that can be revoked for misconduct, and not a right that can be abused with impunity.

If a tenth-generation descendant of a Nigerian Ogun Worshiper should wake up one day in the London borough of Hackney, also known as "Little Nigeria", and decide that the UK government MUST bow to his demand for the RIGHT to slaughter stray dogs in the playground of his council flat, as sacrifices for the God of Iron, then such a wild-eyed misfit can expect either a stiff jail sentence for animal cruelty, OR a recommendation that they LEAVE the UK, where animal sacrifice is NOT allowed, and relocate to Nigeria or Haiti, where such cruel and inhumane forms of "worship" are permitted by law.

The same equitable logic must be applied to ANYONE who feels that they have a divine RIGHT to IMPOSE a dress code of Batman or Darth Vadar costumes on women in the heart of democratic Europe, and IMPOSE a regime of press censorship in a FREE democratic society. Such confused individuals SHOULD be encouraged FORCIBLY to leave the free country whose established laws they hope to modify to suit their personal whims, and relocate to any repressive rogue nation of their choosing on the globe.

Your arguments are just bouncing all over the place and lack any kind of consistency.

Firstly, animal sacrifice has no bearing on this debate, but I'll indulge you for argument's sake. A tenth generation descendant on a 'Nigerian Ogun Worshipper' is still a British citizen and cannot have his citizenship revoked 'forcibly' as you said, except it is 'conducive to the public good to deprive the person of British citizenship AND provided revoking said citizenship does not render him stateless' according to Section 40 of the British Nationality Act of 1981.

I doubt that even the most conservative of judges would rule that Animal Sacrifice is a threat to the public good, so your example is irrelevant.
For the purpose of argument again, even if animal sacrifice was somehow seen as a threat to national security, a 3rd generation immigrant to the UK is someone whose parents were themselves born and brought up in the UK. Where would you send such a person to without rendering him stateless? Let alone a tenth generation descendant like you mentioned....


Now back to the matter at hand.

The same equitable logic must be applied to ANYONE who feels that they have a divine RIGHT to IMPOSE a dress code of Batman or Darth Vadar costumes on women in the heart of democratic Europe, and IMPOSE a regime of press censorship in a FREE democratic society. Such confused individuals SHOULD be encouraged FORCIBLY to leave the free country whose established laws they hope to modify to suit their personal whims, and relocate to any repressive rogue nation of their choosing on the globe

Can you not see that there is already censorship of the press that suits you living in the West as a black man? Abi is it your country?
Can you imagine if a White man was telling you that he had the right to use the word Nigger instead of black in his newspaper, and if you didn't like it, you could get out?

The West is quick to defend freedom of speech when the targets is Islam, yet when the Guardian published articles about Edward Snowden,not only were articles pulled, the GCHQ actually destroyed the Guardian's property.

Abeg jare....

Nihilist:



Your arguments are just bouncing all over the place and lack any kind of consistency.

Firstly, animal sacrifice has no bearing on this debate, but I'll indulge you for argument's sake. A tenth generation descendant on a 'Nigerian Ogun Worshipper' is still a British citizen and cannot have his citizenship revoked 'forcibly' as you said, except it is 'conducive to the public good to deprive the person of British citizenship AND provided revoking said citizenship does not render him stateless' according to Section 40 of the British Nationality Act of 1981.

I doubt that even the most conservative of judges would rule that Animal Sacrifice is a threat to the public good, so your example is irrelevant.
For the purpose of argument again, even if animal sacrifice was somehow seen as a threat to national security, a 3rd generation immigrant to the UK is someone whose parents were themselves born and brought up in the UK. Where would you send such a person to without rendering him stateless? Let alone a tenth generation descendant like you mentioned....


Now back to the matter at hand.



Can you not see that there is already censorship of the press that suits you living in the West as a black man? Abi is it your country?
Can you imagine if a White man was telling you that he had the right to use the word Nigger instead of black in his newspaper, and if you didn't like it, you could get out?

The West is quick to defend freedom of speech when the targets is Islam, yet when the Guardian published articles about Edward Snowden,not only were articles pulled, the GCHQ actually destroyed the Guardian's property.

Abeg jare....

I suspect you might be a solicitor. Hell you might be MY solicitor for all I know, so I will now retire into my lair to study up some more on my UK law basics, before returning here with my rebuttal.

Suffice to say, all nations are at liberty to define freedom of expression as they see fit. In North Korea one is free praise the Dear Leader to high heavens, with the option to die in a concentration camp for failure to toe the party line.

On the other extreme end of the freedom scale, Americans are at liberty refer to their own president with any number of obscene expletives, with no fear of arrest, provided they do not advocate violence against anyone.

Similarly, France, as a free, democratic sovereign nation, retains the prerogative to legally define freedom of expression as they see fit, regardless of which minority groups may feel culturally excluded from a mainstream society which permits a wide latitude of printed opinions to to be published.

In short, the onus is on citizens to comply with state laws, rather than for the state to craft its legislation with the interests of fringe groups as a guiding and limiting framework.

PapiWata:


I suspect you might be a solicitor. Hell you might be MY solicitor for all I know, so I will now retire into my lair to study up some more on my UK law basics, before returning here with my rebuttal.

Suffice to say, all nations are at liberty to define freedom of expression as they see fit. In North Korea one is free praise the Dear Leader to high heavens, with the option to die in a concentration camp for failure to toe the party line.

On the other extreme end of the freedom scale, Americans are at liberty refer to their own president with any number of obscene expletives, with no fear of arrest, provided they do not advocate violence against anyone.

Similarly, France, as a free, democratic sovereign nation, retains the prerogative to legally define freedom of expression as they see fit, regardless of which minority groups may feel culturally excluded from a mainstream society which permits a wide latitude of printed opinions to to be published.

In short, the onus is on citizens to comply with state laws, rather than for the state to craft its legislation with the interests of fringe groups as a guiding and limiting framework.

Lol I work in IT.

France is home to the largest population of Muslims in Europe, with up to 10%(Around 5-6 million people) of the population identifying as Muslim. That is a very large demographic.

All Chartey and I have been saying, is that it is now expedient for the French Government to censor the press to a certain extent when it comes to Islam, to avoid offending the sensibilities of Muslims, and as a matter on National security.

Charlie Hebdo was already subject to some censorship in the past for some of their more extreme content, and some of their covers could be seen in a hateful light...case in question, portraying their holy prophet in a slobbery kiss with another man...a picture which was very insensitive to the beliefs of around 1.6 billion people around the world.

Under French law, it is impossible to put the editors of Charlie Hebdo to task and seek legal redress at this point in time. Without legal recourse, there is no legal option available to the conservative Muslim to seek justice or at the very least adjudication for what he would class as Hate Speech.

Otherwise these kind of things end up happening.

List of African countries participating to Charlie Hebdo republican march to support french unity:

-Algeria
-Benin
-Gabon
-Mali
-Niger
-Senegal
-Tchad
-Togo

Qu'est ce qu'on vous a fait Presidents Africains pour mériter ca? None of you ever walk in support for your African brothers victims of massacres organized by this same France on your continent, mais comme de bon negres vous courrez pour aller soutenir 12 disparus Francais!!! Ahiwaaa on vous voit deh umh!

Nihilist:

Lol I work in IT.
France is home to the largest population of Muslims in Europe, with up to 10%(Around 5-6 million people) of the population identifying as Muslim. That is a very large demographic.
All Chartey and I have been saying, is that it is now expedient for the French Government to censor the press to a certain extent when it comes to Islam, to avoid offending the sensibilities of Muslims, and as a matter on National security.
Charlie Hebdo was already subject to some censorship in the past for some of their more extreme content, and some of their covers could be seen in a hateful light...case in question, portraying their holy prophet in a slobbery kiss with another man...a picture which was very insensitive to the beliefs of around 1.6 billion people around the world.
Under French law, it is impossible to put the editors of Charlie Hebdo to task and seek legal redress at this point in time. Without legal recourse, there is no legal option available to the conservative Muslim to seek justice or at the very least adjudication for what he would class as Hate Speech.
Otherwise these kind of things end up happening.

In the same country (France) where...
...calling somebody a" bloody Jew" is regarded as anti-Semitism; a hate-speech that attract sanctions
...questioning and/or denying the rhetoric of Holocaust earn you a jail term
That is the Western Hypocrisy veiled as Freedom of Speech.


#CharlieHebdoDenigrationOfIslamIsWrong
#TheKillingOfTheCharlieHebdoJournalistsIsWrong