French newspaper attacked by Muslims!

[nietzschefan]

SAM you jump around too much, impossible to have a discussion with you on this topic(s).

 

[S.A.M.]

I commend you on your honest admission, however long it took to wring it out of you

??? I have said this innumerable times. I won't bother to search for it, since like the last time I searched for it, it has left the colander that passes for your brain. Suffice to say that the French immigrants in Algeria inspite of a looooooooooooooooooooooonnnnnnnggggggggggg sojourn there, did not assimilate to any great extent. Like Europeans everywhere else, they expected the people of the land they immigrated to, to speak their language, follow their religion and obey their laws. So once again, I have to ask, when Europeans talk about assimilating with the country you move to, which one of their successful examples of assimilation are they referring to?

 

[adoucette]

it has left the colander that passes for your brain.

SAM has clearly lost it and has gone from Trolling to hurling insults.

I think you need a nap.

 

[GeoffP]

??? I have said this innumerable times. I won't bother to search for it, since like the last time I searched for it, it has left the colander that passes for your brain.

?? Actually you were quite evasive about it at the start. It's just to get it cemented. And that, I think, just about does the argument. As in it does it in for you: your comments are poison fruit from a poison tree.

I deleted the rest since it was just more argument-hopping.

 

[S.A.M.]

?? Actually you were quite evasive about it at the start. It's just to get it cemented. And that, I think, just about does the argument. As in it does it in for you: your comments are poison fruit from a poison tree.

I deleted the rest since it was just more argument-hopping.

I'm never "evasive" about my opinions, far from it. Its not my problem that your brain reboots every night so I have to repeat every argument because you don't remember making it before

I just find it highly offensive that the French use their so called secularism as an excuse to further marginalise Muslims in their society and other morans who are only too trigger happy where Muslims are concerned are happy to jump in with their standard free speech catechisms, which btw, are nowhere to be seen when it comes to the right of people to live without persecution as minorities in western countries especially when the economy of such countries is driven by a full time occupation of bombing Muslim countries for frivolous reasons.

Do these people look like they could use a mosque?

The reason they are "hampering" traffic to "block those streets completely off" is because other morans who object to mosques have had their nearby mosque - which accomodated 4000 of them - closed off.

France, home to Europe's largest Muslim population, this year banned the face-covering burqa and earlier this week Interior Minister Claude Gueant warned that "from September 16 there will be no more prayers in the street."

"If anyone happens to be recalcitrant we will put an end to it," Gueant said, suggesting police could be brought in.

"Prayers in the street are unacceptable, a direct attack on the principle of secularism," Gueant told AFP last month, citing the government's defence of the republic's secular values as reason for the new policies.

In Paris, a former barracks just north of the city limits has been designated the new prayer area for those living in the multi-ethnic Goutte d'Or neighbourhood, around two kilometres (over a mile) away.

The praying faithful at the Goutte d'Or's two mosques have overflowed into the streets since a nearby mosque where 4,000 people could pray closed years ago, sparking the ire of French right-wing and anti-immigration parties.

The neighbourhood's mosques are to be closed for at least the coming three Fridays in order to encourage those wanting to pray to go to the renovated barracks, one of the mosques' preachers, Sheikh Mohammed Hamza, told AFP.


Read more at: http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/france-ban-on-muslim-street-prayers-comes-into-effect-134211&cp

So yeah, I am not impressed with the French freedom of speech at all, I don't think they set a good example of religious tolerance that anyone would want to follow.

next: the suitcase or the coffin?

 

[adoucette]

The reason they are "hampering" traffic to "block those streets completely off" is because other morans who object to mosques have had their nearby mosque - which accomodated 4000 of them - closed off.

The only "moran" appears to by you SAM.

The article simply says the Mosque closed.

The praying faithful at the Goutte d'Or's two mosques have overflowed into the streets since a nearby mosque where 4,000 people could pray closed years ago

Nothing SINISTER in that statement and no suggestion that the French Government had anything to do with the closing of the mosque either.

Nor does anything justify blocking off the public streets just because they wish to practice their religion.

Clearly with a little common sense and a bit of respect for others who don't share their religion they could pray and not do so.

Like I said, you need a nap.

Arthur

 

[S.A.M.]

The only "moran" appears to by you SAM.

The article simply says the Mosque closed.

The sentence ends at the period

The praying faithful at the Goutte d'Or's two mosques have overflowed into the streets since a nearby mosque where 4,000 people could pray closed years ago, sparking the ire of French right-wing and anti-immigration parties.

Nothing SINISTER in that statement and no suggestion that the French Government had anything to do with the closing of the mosque either.

Oh who closed it then? Could you let us know?

Nor does anything justify blocking off the public streets just because they wish to practice their religion.

Clearly with a little common sense and a bit of respect for others who don't share their religion they could pray and not do so.

Like I said, you need a nap.

Arthur

Apparently what I need is a mind filter which only reads partial sentences

The good news is that the Muslims got together and bought a disused fire station nearby and will invest 80,000 euros in converting it to a mosque. That should keep them off the streets, yes? And it won't even be as big a mosque as those numerous churches in India


And just FYI, I am waiting for the cops to declare who firebombed that newspaper. Cos like the title of this thread, the conclusion is still preemptive. Of course, the fact that they don't know who did it, shouldn't stop the newspaper from making fun of Muslims. Thats what Muslims are for in France, to be the general subject of ridicule

 

[adoucette]

The sentence ends at the period

Yeah, I know.

But the part after the comma just explains why they are upset.

The praying faithful at the Goutte d'Or's two mosques have overflowed into the streets

Because they are blocking the public street.
Is THAT so hard to understand?
That public streets aren't to be closed down just because you want to pray?

Oh who closed it then? Could you let us know?

Who closes ANY church?
The people who operate it and normally because they can't afford to keep it open.
Which unless you have OTHER information to the contrary is the most logical presumption.

Apparently what I need is a mind filter which only reads partial sentences

No, you need to understand what you read.
NOTHING in that sentence indicates that anyone but the Muslims who ran the mosque closed it.

The good news is that the Muslims got together and bought a disused fire station nearby and will invest 80,000 euros in converting it to a mosque. That should keep them off the streets, yes?

Yup, but in the mean time there is no justification for blocking traffic.

And it won't even be as big a mosque as those numerous churches in India

So what?

If you can find any relation at all between these two subjects please let the rest of us know.

 

[GeoffP]

And just FYI, I am waiting for the cops to declare who firebombed that newspaper. Cos like the title of this thread, the conclusion is still preemptive.

Well, your conclusion is certainly pre-emptive, and biased. Troll off. Thanks.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, back onto the real discussion: what does this mean for dialogue and free critique in France? Will it serve its purpose - to close off criticism of a particular religion's more extreme and unreasonable tenets - or will it largely be ignored? Will other religions follow suit? What is the appropriate response to an attack on the freedom of the press in France, such as it is?

 

[GeoffP]

BBC coverage describes the publication as a 'celebration' (tongue in cheek) of the victory of Islamist parties in Tunisia. Ironic, in a way.

It was described as a special edition on the Arab Spring, intended to "celebrate" the victory of an Islamist party in last month's Tunisian elections.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15560790

The only line that can be drawn between that and the attack per se is in attitudes, naturally: a plurality of opinion in France, probably.

Edit: interesting comment here:

He said: "If we can poke fun at everything in France, if we can talk about anything in France apart from Islam or the consequences of Islamism, that is annoying."

Clearly, rather, it's fascism.

 

[S.A.M.]

I'll be looking out for issues of that newspaper making fun of Jews, blacks and gays then. In the interest of freedom of speech, that is - don't want them to feel "left" out do we?

Have they done an issue on the French flag ie NOT the contraceptive, yet?

According to French law,[15] outraging the French national anthem or the French flag during an event organized or regulated by public authorities is liable for a fine of €7,500 (and six months' imprisonment if performed in a gathering). The law targets outrageous behaviour during public ceremonies and major sports events.
This clause was added as an amendment to a large bill dealing with internal security, in reaction to a football match during which there had been whistles against La Marseillaise, but also to similar actions during public ceremonies.[16] The amendment initially prohibiting such outrage regardless of the context, but a parliamentary commission later restricted its scope to events organized or regulated by public authorities,[17] — which is to be understood, according to the ruling of the Constitutional Council as events organized by public authorities, mass sport matches and other mass events taking place in enclosures, but not private speech, literary or artistic works, or speech during events not organized or regulated by public authorities.[18]
In 2006, a man who had publicly burnt a French flag stolen from the façade of the city hall of Aurillac during a public festival, organized and regulated by public authorities, was sentenced to a €300 fine.[19]
A July 2010 law makes it a crime to desecrate the French national flag in a public place, but also to distribute images of a flag desecration, even when done in a private setting.[20] On December 22, 2010, an Algerian national was the first person to be convicted under the new status, and ordered to pay a €750 after breaking the pole of a flag hung in the Alpes-Maritimes prefecture a day prior.[21]

Looks like the French are pretty particular about their own symbols, ja?

 

[GeoffP]

I'll be looking out for issues of that newspaper making fun of Jews, blacks and gays then. In the interest of freedom of speech, that is - don't want them to feel "left" out do we?

Oh. Did you mean like this? Let me know if you can't wade through any of the big words.

And definitely let me know when one of those groups burns that newspaper to the ground for them doing that, ok? And make sure that whatever they make fun of, it's related to the victory of Jewish, black or gay supremacist groups elsewhere. Because then you'd have a parallel.

Looks like the French are pretty particular about their own symbols, ja?

Because no other nation - including Saudi Arabia, say - is. And fortunately they're not terribly religious about it.

Good parallel.

Oh, wait: nein.

 

[spidergoat]

I guess anything is better than focusing on the economy. Look there be Muslims!!!!

Because we can't do two things at once!!!!!

 

[spidergoat]

Muslims are supposed to accept people trampling over what we hold sacred?

No one trampled your mosque, only your precious feelings.

 

[spidergoat]

Its hardly "freedom of the press" when the corporate sector is manipulating their morans to become cannon fodder for them by whipping up anti-Muslim sentiment. ...

How about Muslims just stop lashing people for things that should not be crimes? ...Like getting raped?

 

[S.A.M.]

How about Muslims just stop lashing people for things that should not be crimes? ...Like getting raped?

I knew they had rabbinical courts in "secular" France but I did not know they had incorporated sharia courts based on their BFF Saudi Arabia as well.

Meanwhile, you might take a dekko at the gender segregation in buses in Brooklyn NY.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-orthodox-Jewish-bus-women-told-sit-back.html

All these secular countries with rabbinical courts might want to inform themselves on what separation of church and state means

 

[spidergoat]

Irrelevant.

 

[adoucette]

I knew they had rabbinical courts in "secular" France but I did not know they had incorporated sharia courts based on their BFF Saudi Arabia as well.

Meanwhile, you might take a dekko at the gender segregation in buses in Brooklyn NY.

Nope, that's a private firm and their "rule" is not a law.

Women can legally sit anywhere they want on any bus in the country.

Arthur

 

[chimpkin]

GeoffP:
It's a funny thing: none of them Christian types seems to so much as bat an eye about the denigration of their icons. Oh, sure, there's some letter-writing and people bitch about it endlessly, but no real torch-and-pitchfork stuff. It's as though the reactionary core of some plurality of some faith needs a serious rewrite or a good solid shaking.

Piss Christ was vandalized recently:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/201...no-piss-christ-destroyed-christian-protesters

 

[GeoffP]

That's true. They didn't burn the artist out of his home, mind, but it is more than letter-writing.