Someone explain the French: offend Moslems, no problem. Offend Jews, get arrested?

Thing is, there is jewish leadership/influence in the European/UK anti-islam movement. These and similar are also sponsoring the various direct and anti-direct campaigns against islam. And, controversially enough, they really enjoy having extremist muslim groups - as these are really advocating the anti-islam movement's objectives.

Its all hate based. Boring and sad.

Originally posted by CottonwoodStormy

Originally posted by Sinny
YOUR ALL ANTI-SEMITES!!

Actually Sinny, I am part Jew, Muslim converted and Western Christian born and raised, I am the least most racial person on the planet as I am made up of everything!


Just kidding

Part Jew. That statement amuses me.

"To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize." .....Voltaire

reply to post by gladtobehere


Insulting people like Galiano did brings you to court. Mocking religious figure do not qualify.

reply to post by gladtobehere


Thank you for your post!

You are raising a very true problem in France, but are not using the "proper" examples.

Charlie Hebdo is a satirical newspaper that has been in France for ages, caricaturing absolutely EVERYONE and EVERYTHING (from extreme left to extreme right, Jews, Muslims, Chritians, the Pope, Khomeyni, Obama, the Queen of UK, singers, TV people, you name it).
In their latest newspaper, they have made some caricatures which some (I do not know the proportion) muslim people do not like.
Well, most of them haven't even seen these so called blasphematory pictures! (Hell, I didn't even see them myself, but I'll make sure I put my hands on that paper).
They are caricatures, mocking, using traits of the religion in a satirical way, not an insult, not a call to hate these people.

On the other hand, John Galliano is a fashion prick who thinks he is so cool.
He told some Jewish people, when he was drunk, that he loved Hitler and they (the Jewish people) should be gassed...
That's insult, and even worse, a call to hate and kill.

However, you raise a very good point, which goes unspoken in France.
Many people (and I am not talking about Arab minorities, Arab descendant people, or muslim people) feel oppressed by the way you can criticize arabic culture a lot, but you should not even start thinking that you may a chance to discuss about Israel and/or Jewish people.

And here is a good example, which is everywhere in the French news (and has hopefully been captured by non-French media):
A Socialist party member, called Georges Frêches, died in 2010, said in 2009, regarding some elections in France, that he would not vote for Laurent Fabius (current foreign minister and then Socialist party member), because "his face is not catholic".
Here a quick note, in French, it is a very common sentence to say that something or someone does not look very catholic. That means that you would not fully trust the person. We use it when there is something fishy (e.g. the 5 people killed in the French Alps).
I use it sometimes (it tends to be less used, it feels a bit outdated in French), and I have absolutely nothing to do with any religion!
It turned out (I was not even aware of that fact!!!) that Mr Fabius is from a Jewish family. Laurent Fabius called this language foul, many people (including Socialist party memebers) have been saying this was disgusting from Mr Frêches and that he should quit!!!

So here is the issue we have in France.
I want to add that recently there is a big pressure from political correctness that you cannot make any jokes at all about Jewish or muslim people (private jokes or even stand up comedians), without having scandals all over the place.

Originally posted by gladtobehere
[...]freedom of speech laws (assuming France has any).[...]

Actually France has got those, you should maybe have had a read about it before being so ignorant, please. Their laws protecting freedom of speech are amongst the best in the world.

My only point is that the State should be consistent. Dont protect the feelings or sensibilities of one group while condoning offensive behavior towards another.

And then again, you should have had a read before accusing. You should know that antisemitism, racism, negationism and revisionism are all strictly forbidden by law.

Galliano had made antisemitic remarks, thus he was illegal.

Charlie Hebdo is not making any racist statment, they're publishing a humoristic drawing, a caricature. That does not make them illegal.

Also the Jews have a habit of buying politicians so they can make what they want illegal.

reply to post by buster2010


What, like circumcision in Germany?

reply to post by KarmaComa


Your points are pertinant, and I make a confirming nod to your observations as being what I have percieved too.

I would like to point out something else though too, that I think is an important point-

There is a distinction between refering to official, legitamate law,

and social peer pressure.

One difference I find interesting between the American and French cultures is that the french consider that social pressure as valuable- what people around you think, what the "norms" are, what is socially acceptable, is considered something to follow.

In the US, it is the opposite- peer pressure is a "bad" thing, it is what leads one into sin, NOT caring what others think about you is the ideal value. It makes you more individualized and "free".

While french kids are being told, you should never listen to yourself, american kids are being told, think for yourself and never follow the crowd!

So what you are refering to is NOT law... it is not enforced by the authorities. It is purely peer pressure.
I agree that it is very heavy pressure, especially to a peoples who are conditioned to submit to it.


I personally feel that that peer pressure is just as important as laws- and want to bring that forward in the discussion! We can go on and on about following the law and whether things are allowed, but whether they are "right to do" is outside that question and still worth taking into consideration.
Culture, the maternal education, is just as influencial in events as is Law, the paternal education.

In this situation there was a fundamental hypocrisy on the French side, and for me at least it makes it impossible to side with them.
They say that they will show the comic strip because of freedom of speech and whatnot.
But not too long ago the French government stopped some gossip magazines from showing some naked pictures of kate Middleton.
After something like that i find it hard to believe the French are defending "free speech/press" as much as they are just trying to stir sh*t up.
I fully understand the difference between showing naked pictures (violation of privacy) and making fun of a hypothetical God, but with delicate issues like privacy and religion you can't pick favorites, not if you are waving the freedom flag around.
So to answer your question, i guess it's the same old story: there are first class and second class citizens, races and religions.

reply to post by DeadSnow


They picked the fight 1300 years ago when they decided to attack Europe. To this day they instigate violence and should be dealt with in the same manner.

First of all, I'd like to say that I agree with you on the account where "freedom of speech should prevail". And that I'm really tired of hearing about Jews getting some sort of privelege treatment like they're higher class or something. And I most certainly am offended that any Muslim should be given any such "higher status" in the law. Christians are being humiliated all over the world.

However, you must try to understand the difference between addressing people in "third person" and in "second or first" person. I can go around and say I dislike jews, or christians or muslims. Or that I think Americans are this or that ... and I can talk here and voice my opinion that I think George Bush should be arrested for crimes done under his regime. But I cannot confront any American on street and call them "criminals" to their face.

The french newspaper is in its full rights to show the cartoons, and I vould like to see them show the same cartoons of both christian and jewish religions. Just to make it more just. And the riots amongst muslims, certainly tells us that they are emotionally and intellectually underdeveloped.

But the guy who confronted the two Jews, can be arrested. While at the same time, the work of the French newspaper is ok.

The problem here, is that Muslims and Jews walking on the street, yielling hatred against people into their faces should also be arrested, for these acts. But ONLY if these acts are done in "second or first" person.

That's where the line is drawn ... and you should try and understand the difference.

Somebody can say, people in white collars are bad. But they can't walk up to you, because you are wearing a white collar ... and call you names. The first, is an opinion. The second is not.

Originally posted by IShotMyLastMuse

I fully understand the difference between showing naked pictures (violation of privacy) and making fun of a hypothetical God, but with delicate issues like privacy and religion you can't pick favorites, not if you are waving the freedom flag around.
So to answer your question, i guess it's the same old story: there are first class and second class citizens, races and religions.

I don't really see the french as "waving the freedom flag around"?
I thought that was an american thing? You know, as in "they're jealous of our freedoms,
"they're trying to take away our freedoms, "we're going to go over and attack other countries to defend our freedom", and freedom fries ?

In France the oft repeated phrase is- "Your freedom ends where anothers begins."
They do value freedom, but percieve that it is not endless and without limits at all.

reply to post by IShotMyLastMuse

Originally posted by IShotMyLastMuse
But not too long ago the French government stopped some gossip magazines from showing some naked pictures of kate Middleton.

In France there is, and has always been, a very strong privacy protection.

I have to admit I have difficulties to understand your point - eventhough I appreciate your frankness.
On one side, you have papparazis taking photos of someone's privacy.
On the other hand, you have a cartoonist drawing satirical cartoons, not really the same.

If satirical cartoons of Kate Middleton (for example) had been made, and I'm sure Charlie Hebdo has already made some, there wouldn't be an issue.
But showing actual photos of her privacy/private life is very strongly reprimended in France. And this applies to anyone, not just nobility (and you know how we French people love royalty/nobility, so I cannot be accused of defending Kate Middleton because she is royalty).

However, one thing bothers me - I have learnt that a few days ago - is that depending on who attacks the magazine, they will receive more or less compensation.
E.g. recently Valerie Trierweiler (French president's girlfriend) received 2 or 3k € for some photos of her in swimsuit without her consent.
I read somewhere that Kate could get up to 100k €.
The article clearly stated that Royal families usually get more.

I am currently checking if this is a fact, but if it turns out to be true, then shame on France for that.

reply to post by Bluesma

Originally posted by Bluesma
reply to post by KarmaComa

 

So what you are refering to is NOT law... it is not enforced by the authorities. It is purely peer pressure.
I agree that it is very heavy pressure, especially to a peoples who are conditioned to submit to it.

Absolutely agree.

In France the oft repeated phrase is- "Your freedom ends where anothers begins."

Absolutely²!

It is good to get views/feedback about one's country from someone from a different background.
For example I always took the peer pressure for granted.

I think there are laws against holocaust denial in France. They have been passed in the aftermath of WWII and I guess they seemed like a good idea at the time, of course it can be argues whether laws of that kind should exist. The episode you mentioned seems to be rather personal, a guy confronting 2 jews in a way that could be deemed assault. I am not aware that somebody took heat for saying something about Judaism.

Originally posted by KarmaComa
A Socialist party member, called Georges Frêches, died in 2010, said in 2009, regarding some elections in France, that he would not vote for Laurent Fabius (current foreign minister and then Socialist party member), because "his face is not catholic".
Here a quick note, in French, it is a very common sentence to say that something or someone does not look very catholic. That means that you would not fully trust the person. We use it when there is something fishy (e.g. the 5 people killed in the French Alps).
I use it sometimes (it tends to be less used, it feels a bit outdated in French), and I have absolutely nothing to do with any religion!

Yes!

And we also have another common sentence here in France: "mettre de l'huile sur le feu" [that could be translated in English by "adding fuel to the flame"], which is unfortunately what some people in France are doing right now.....

reply to post by gladtobehere


Well maybe it has something to do with these, I could certainly see it putting the Jewish community on edge.
How about if you offend someone, no one gives a damn.? I'm so tired of all the PC crap now'a days.
Why does there have to be some kind of retaliatory reaction from some one who is offended by something they don't like?
Here's what I say; If you get offended, go pound your fists in the sand. No one cares about your lack of ability to handle a different opinion, and that applies to any belief/religion, and even to myself (if I were the PC type).

Mohammed Merah and the Jewish school shooting in France

Jewish Supermarket Bombed, French Embassies Closed due to Muslim Cartoonophobia

France: Muslim mob attacks three Jewish students with hammer and iron bars

It has been my experience that the followers of Islam are the most violent people on earth. The world could be a better place if that religion never existed or was eradicated. There is not much difference in the ideology’s but for some reason the Muslim religion acts upon the fairytales of a 1400 year old book and feel they are justified for it.

No I am not trying to be PC just truthful.

reply to post by elevenaugust

Originally posted by elevenaugust
And we also have another common sentence here in France: "mettre de l'huile sur le feu" [that could be translated in English by "adding fuel to the flame"], which is unfortunately what some people in France are doing right now.....

And as you know, there's nothing more fun that "adding fuel to the flame" in France.
Must be a latin/mediterranean thin.

To stay on the subject, Manuel Valls (French home affairs minister) is wearing a kippa during a special Jewish celebrations, while giving his best wishies to the Jewish community!!!
I (of course) do not have any issue with him being Jewish (or Raelist or what have you), but then he should not wear the kippa as an official French government member!!!

My Sunday rant.

Originally posted by KarmaComa
reply to post by gladtobehere

 

Thank you for your post!

You are raising a very true problem in France, but are not using the "proper" examples.

Charlie Hebdo is a satirical newspaper that has been in France for ages, caricaturing absolutely EVERYONE and EVERYTHING (from extreme left to extreme right, Jews, Muslims, Chritians, the Pope, Khomeyni, Obama, the Queen of UK, singers, TV people, you name it).
In their latest newspaper, they have made some caricatures which some (I do not know the proportion) muslim people do not like.
Well, most of them haven't even seen these so called blasphematory pictures! (Hell, I didn't even see them myself, but I'll make sure I put my hands on that paper).
They are caricatures, mocking, using traits of the religion in a satirical way, not an insult, not a call to hate these people.

On the other hand, John Galliano is a fashion prick who thinks he is so cool.
He told some Jewish people, when he was drunk, that he loved Hitler and they (the Jewish people) should be gassed...
That's insult, and even worse, a call to hate and kill.

However, you raise a very good point, which goes unspoken in France.
Many people (and I am not talking about Arab minorities, Arab descendant people, or muslim people) feel oppressed by the way you can criticize arabic culture a lot, but you should not even start thinking that you may a chance to discuss about Israel and/or Jewish people.

And here is a good example, which is everywhere in the French news (and has hopefully been captured by non-French media):
A Socialist party member, called Georges Frêches, died in 2010, said in 2009, regarding some elections in France, that he would not vote for Laurent Fabius (current foreign minister and then Socialist party member), because "his face is not catholic".
Here a quick note, in French, it is a very common sentence to say that something or someone does not look very catholic. That means that you would not fully trust the person. We use it when there is something fishy (e.g. the 5 people killed in the French Alps).
I use it sometimes (it tends to be less used, it feels a bit outdated in French), and I have absolutely nothing to do with any religion!
It turned out (I was not even aware of that fact!!!) that Mr Fabius is from a Jewish family. Laurent Fabius called this language foul, many people (including Socialist party memebers) have been saying this was disgusting from Mr Frêches and that he should quit!!!

So here is the issue we have in France.
I want to add that recently there is a big pressure from political correctness that you cannot make any jokes at all about Jewish or muslim people (private jokes or even stand up comedians), without having scandals all over the place.

totally agree





[yvid]