‘I AM NOT CHARLIE’: Leaked Newsroom Emails Reveal Al Jazeera Fury over Global Support for Charli

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

It's pretty clear at the moment there is an incessant drum beating. A renewed push to hate all Muslims, to fear them... the intentional "You must interpret this letter as al Jazeera condoning mass murder!" is simply an attempt to also silence them. That's how I see it anyway.

I just realized I said the same thing as you in a previous post lol.

a reply to: Kali74

Can't be said often enough I don't think :-)

I think what we're looking at here is fear and ignorance looking for a home

Someplace simple and safe, that doesn't require a great deal of thinking - with no bright lights

I have this feeling that anything that's ant-Muslim will now be considered satire. And freedom of speech is a luxury afforded some - while others...well - they're all terrorists. Freedom of speech was never meant for them

a reply to: kloejen

They do post Jewish jokes. Jews tend not to riot, kill people, and set a thousand cars on fire in one night. So they probably get less jokes made about them.

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

You are a terrorist when you trade your pen in for a gun.

a reply to: anarchychaos56

Where did that come from? Good grief.


2nd line.

a reply to: Lolliek

ATS is full of hatred towards Jews, that's where it came from. It's actually kind of sickening.

I find those cartoons, and any others that mock the beliefs of others offensive. No way around that. Nor will I back away from that.

However...

When the right to say it is threatened, and/or attacked, I will stand with their right to say it. Disagree, but defend.

I disagree with Charlie. But I defend Charlie.

Je suis Charlie. Forever.

Back when, here in Canada,
porn magazines/playboy mags, cigarets were
displayed out in the open in stores.
The law has changed since,
now such adult material is discrete and
only the title is displayed.
Is this censorship ? ?
Most people do not realize that the
illustrations of charlie hebdo are not just mere comics.
The installations are verrry graphic and pornographic,
which can be verry disturbing and highly influential to young children.
All in all the illustrations are not for the general public, at
lest definitely not suitable for children's eyes with out having
dire consequences, socially and morally.
samples :
THESE ARE NOT MERE 'CARTOONS' :

palladio.free.fr...

palladio.free.fr...

palladio.free.fr...

palladio.free.fr...

rocbo.lautre.net...

palladio.free.fr...

palladio.free.fr...

Do you want your kids to see ^ that in a store display or at
a public coffee shop ?
Banning is not democratic, but nether is public display an option.
Have some sensibility, and the political biased propaganda needs to STOP !

. . . . . .

a reply to: ToneDeaf

Whether children should see it or not is a logical fallacy. The issue is whether they have the right to make it, they do, and whether someone has the right to kill them over it in order to silence them, they do not.

It's designed to stifle free speech. No 2 ways about it.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

stifle free speech. No 2 ways about it.

Repeat :
Back when, here in Canada,
porn magazines/playboy mags, cigarets were
displayed out in the open in stores.
The law has changed since,
now such adult material is discrete and
only the titles are displayed.
Is this censorship ? ? Think not !
. . . but then some want to have their cake yet eat it too.
What ever happened to sensibility and compromise ?

. . . . . .

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: blupblup

I also support the right to draw offensive cartoons but I don't support drawing offensive cartoons. A lot of people won't be able to make sense of that statement.

Exactly... exactly how I feel