Shooting in Paris (Page 6)

Why am I still posting on this topic? Scorch tells me I have a stellium in Virgo...I don't find humor in HATE. Are you asking me to leave? Get in line.

Once again...

LIB in the cops topics where she agreed with the law "You don't like it, move elsewhere. gtfo of this topic"

LIB in a topic where she doesn't agree with the law in another country and is convinced she knows better "HATE HATE HATE"

Do you respect another country's legislation? Understand that it's that legislation that applies to qualifying the magazine, the attack and what would have been the trial.?

I swear you cannot even respect that..yet you keep on bringing the hate speech.

Posted by LetltB

Posted by Damnata
^I am not avoiding anything.

The magazine is as responsible for acts of violence in France as much as you are responsible for gang shootings in the US.

Prove the connecting link between the magazine and some random person committing an act of violence. Prove to me the magazine had the INTENT to do harm, followed up with Legislation on it, organized any kind of meetings to do harm. Show me an article where they propose muslims should die, be banned etc. Show me how they urge the population to back them up in this crussade. Otherwise, there is no involvement on the part of the magazine. And also there is no hate.

I mean at this point you're showing me random acts of violence while assuming the magazine is behind the mindet of all the culprits. It cannot get more illogical.

How about "If you don't like the laws of this country, you're free to go elsewhere". You don't like the French law, you don't understand the way they do satire, why are you still posting in this topic?

Of course there isn't proof Damnata, they hide behind a fucking newspaper with some ink and perpetuate and instigate the violence. They also REWARD VIOLENCE TOWARD MUSLIMS AND JEWS by printing that shit for christ sakes. Why aren't you admitting to that??

click to expand

I am not admitting to anything that is untrue. No one was rewarding any violence. Are you kidding me?

Posted by Damnata
Once again...

LIB in the cops topics where she agreed with the law "You don't like it, move elsewhere. gtfo of this topic"

LIB in a topic where she doesn't agree with the law in another country and is convinced she knows better "HATE HATE HATE"

Do you respect another country's legislation? Understand that it's that legislation that applies to qualifying the magazine, the attack and what would have been the trial.?

I swear you cannot even respect that..yet you keep on bringing the hate speech.

Now your getting desperate and pretty fucking weak. Why are you NOW bringing a totally different subject/thread up? One has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with another. You losing steam over there? I abosolutely respect the Article of Law I posted for France. That's why I'm still here too...

Posted by LetltB
Why am I still posting on this topic? Scorch tells me I have a stellium in Virgo...I don't find humor in HATE. Are you asking me to leave? Get in line.

Ofc you can stay. Just pointing the hipocrisy between your behavior when you agree with the law and when you don't.

Need to see it again?

"—Section 24 criminalizes incitement to racial discrimination, hatred, or violence on the basis of one's origin or membership (or non-membership) in an ethic, national, racial, or religious group. A criminal code provision likewise makes it an offense to engage in similar conduct via private communication.??

BLACK AND WHITE^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Posted by LetltB
Stop comparing my country to these HATEFUL fucks please.

—No one was doing that.

Who are the hateful fucks? The entire nationaly of France? Is someone comparing the US to 12 cartoonists? Where the hell did you read this?

Totally spinning out of control. Calm down and read the arguments again.

Posted by Damnata

Posted by LetltB
Why am I still posting on this topic? Scorch tells me I have a stellium in Virgo...I don't find humor in HATE. Are you asking me to leave? Get in line.

Ofc you can stay. Just pointing the hipocrisy between your behavior when you agree with the law and when you don't.

click to expand

I just quoted what I'm debating here. It's law it's written, and as consistent as always I am simply showing you I'm not the hypocrite here.

Posted by Damnata

Posted by LetltB
Stop comparing my country to these HATEFUL fucks please.

—No one was doing that.

Who are the hateful fucks? The entire nationaly of France? Is someone comparing the US to 12 cartoonists? Where the hell did you read this?

Totally spinning out of control. Calm down and read the arguments again.

click to expand

Someone is losing her steam...lol

Posted by LetltB
Need to see it again?

"—Section 24 criminalizes incitement to racial discrimination, hatred, or violence on the basis of one's origin or membership (or non-membership) in an ethic, national, racial, or religious group. A criminal code provision likewise makes it an offense to engage in similar conduct via private communication.??

BLACK AND WHITE^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Read it. Don't you think the judges also read this and took this article into consideration during the trial? Still the editor was acquitted. What does that tell you? Probably that they couldn't prove the incitement you so vehemently see fit here.

You're seriously trying to state that any crime that happens to France happens because people read this magazine? What about the people who don't read it..can they get acquitted of charges because they don't read it?

Again, prove how the intent of the magazine is hate speech and not satire. I'm not going to quote myself again on how lack of intent = lack of guilt.

I gotta skip out for now...my ride has arrived for a Patriot's playoff party.
God Bless America 😉

LOL

Have fun, LIB.

I was seriously waiting for "God bless America" at the end of that rant. LIB, in this respect you never disappoint. I'll tip my hat to you.

Good luck to anyone supporting teams (I don't have a clue about playoffs)

Posted by LetltB

Posted by Damnata
Once again...

LIB in the cops topics where she agreed with the law "You don't like it, move elsewhere. gtfo of this topic"

LIB in a topic where she doesn't agree with the law in another country and is convinced she knows better "HATE HATE HATE"

Do you respect another country's legislation? Understand that it's that legislation that applies to qualifying the magazine, the attack and what would have been the trial.?

I swear you cannot even respect that..yet you keep on bringing the hate speech.

Now your getting desperate and pretty fucking weak. Why are you NOW bringing a totally different subject/thread up? One has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with another. You losing steam over there? I abosolutely respect the Article of Law I posted for France. That's why I'm still here too...

It has everything to do with this thread: your principles

should follow you-- they shouldn't change, nor are they

(suddenly!) irrelevant just because you're in a new thread.


And this has absolutely nothing to do with what happened at Hebdo--

Posted by LetltB
Need to see it again?

"—Section 24 criminalizes incitement to racial discrimination, hatred, or violence on the basis of one's origin or membership (or non-membership) in an ethic, national, racial, or religious group. A criminal code provision likewise makes it an offense to engage in similar conduct via private communication.??

BLACK AND WHITE^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

click to expand

It would only apply if it had been taken to court, instead

of ending in 12 murders.


Seems you're using it, instead, to justify the murders--

In other words... if someone's perception is that they are

a victim of hate speech, they are entitled to vigilante justice.

There's no other conclusion we can draw.

Obviously, no civilized society can survive like that.

^Good call.

I didn't say when it applies. After the act is done, as means of evidence in a court of law.

Mea culpa for not being detailed.

I've tried translating in English institutions of criminal law but I still need to look over clarifications.

Anyway, I explained what I see as intent in 3 or 4 posts already. I'm turning allergic to some words in these topic. Need to expand on my vocab a bit.

Posted by Rambunctious76

Posted by Damnata
lack of intent = lack of guilt.

This is what would happen if intent = guilt

Or even perceived intent.


That was unsettling btw. 😐

^Um it's not the same thing at all.

When dealing with people, the concept of "they deserved it" can only be applied in a sentence in a court of law. That law will tell you the extent of the damage and the reparations that are in order, thus righting a wrong if there is one comitted, ensuring everyone gets what they "Deserve". That's why we have laws.

The butt of the joke changes in accordance to whom makes the joke. I make a joke about you, you're the butt of it (if you want to call it so). You make one, I'm the butt of it. Nowhere does bodily harm factor into this.

There are no "my rules". They are the rules of the society you live in and we all should abide them. Disagree with it? Sue or take the lenghty alternative to change the legislation process. You don't want to do that? Live in a society where you agree with the laws that govern that particular society.

No amount of "invitation" or "provocation" justifies murder. They are not the same thing as a direct action to someone's well being. Again, you see it as provocation, follow the legal procedure. Don't pick up a gun and take justice in your own hands because you deem yourself above laws.

I should also add, in the case where you find the national law system too biased, you have the option to address yourself to the European Court for Human Rights. The sentence passed by this institution cannot be overtuner and it sets a precendence for further cases.

CASE OF HANDYSIDE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

7 december 1976

"The Court's supervisory functions oblige it to pay the utmost attention to the principles characterising a "democratic society". Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of such a society, one of the basic conditions for its progress and for the development of every man. Subject to paragraph 2 of Article 10 (art. 10-2), it is applicable not only to "information" or "ideas" that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive or as a matter of indifference, but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population. Such are the demands of that pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no "democratic society". This means, amongst other things, that every "formality", "condition", "restriction" or "penalty" imposed in this sphere must be proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued."

Full transcript of the case here: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-57499#{% 22itemid% 22🦇% 22001-57499% 22]}

Let me caps lock this for you LIB:

"BUT ALSO TO THOSE THAT OFFEND, SHOCK OR DISTURB THE STATE OR ANY SECTOR OF THE POPULATION"

Judgment on Charlie Hebdo, Paris 2008

http://www.rtdh.eu/pdf/20080312_ca_paris.pdf => full transcript

A couple of passages I translated into English.

"Charlie Hebdo is a satirical magazine which, in the years from its publication, published many caricatures which dispute different religious beliefs in the litterary genre of the caricature, sometimes deliberately provocative, which is a part of the freedom of expression and of free comunication of ideas and opinions"

"The Court observes that the freedom of expression protects both the popular informations or ideas or those considered as inoffensive or indifferent in a society, as well as those that hurt, shock or give a sense of uneasiness"

"The Court also points out that in France, a laic and pluralist society, the respect of all beliefs goes hand in hand with the liberty to criticize religious beliefs, whatever those are, and with it the liberty to represent the subjects or objects of religious worship, blasphemy not being sanctioned"

"The Court considers that these caricatures, which clearly depict one fraction and not the entirety of muslim community, don't constitute harm, injury or personal and direct attack against a group of people based on their religious affiliation"

http://leplus.nouvelobs.com/contribution/1303612-attentat-a-charlie-hebdo-derriere-ces-meurtres-la-volonte-de-tuer-le-droit-a-l-humour.html<BR>
^Good article on this.

Posted by backtokemet
I've seen people arguing that if Islamists felt offended by the satiric jokes they should have answered with a pencil.

Nor necessarily. They should have responded by suing (which can be done in this less than ideal utopic society). What they absolutely should not have done is respond by killing. And by "they" I mean a small faction of the muslim community because I haven't seen the majority bursting into that building and killing them.

No, in a sense the French society did not create conditions for people to choose an extreme faction. No society actively creates that. You have a choice and I find this disrespectful to people who actually are a minority in a country yet still respect laws. That's akin to saying a person who immigrates into another country should demand the country to morph into their own culture. No, you the person who immigrates have to adapt to that society. You can keep your self identity but that whole society isn't required to substitue their identity for yours.

Seriously, there can be absolutely no reasoning for murder in this case. And when judgments differ, we backtrack to law. And in this case, the law stated it plain and clear. Don't like it? Yes, move to another country with another set of laws.

Posted by backtokemet
(being a LIBRA I'm gonna play the devil's advocate)

this is Charlie:

Sooo...

obviously it's Hebdo's fault for taunting what is

essentially a dangerous, wild animal that has no

place in society?


That's a little cold, but you are entitled to your

opinion.

Posted by tamara

😐

Posted by backtokemet


LOL such a virgoesque perspective .. you're making a lot of sense from a purely logical perspective

Yeah, and luckily there is no war on logic yet. Or if there is, it has passed me by.

For the rest of your post..

Yes, I understand all that. If you want me to get downright cynical, every group of people has a sad story somewhere in history. Does not alleviate personal responsibility so yes, it's still normal to expect people to abide the laws in the country they live in.

Get as frustrated as you want, as mad as you want. Sue everybody (god knows my dad has made an art in the recent years over suing everyone who upsets him) but do not take someone's life.

Basically waiting for the frustrated to grasp that frustration is internal and does not give you the right to take it against the world at large. But hey, I'm a Virgo..who am I to talk about emotions?

Posted by backtokemet
All I'm saying is: there's a reaction to every action and sometimes the reaction turns out to be disproportionate.

Yeah, that's all I'm saying too. While adding that in the fact that the reaction is disproportionate lies exactly what's wrong with that train of thought.

Posted by tiziani
"I think we all experienced our own ballet here today. A ballet of emotion... and feelings."

I lack emotions and feelings so I can only experience ballots. There's a ballet and a ballot for everyone.

I'll check it out.

I really liked one comment I read from a muslim man who condemned the attacks:

"If your religion asks for you to kill in the name of God, start by killing yourself"

I. What is —Hate Speech—

One helpful definition can be found in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1976) — Article 20 (2):
—?_any propaganda for war and any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.??

The Council of Europe Recommendation on Hate Speech (1997) defines it this way:
—[T]he term —hate speech?? shall be understood as covering all forms of expression which spread, incite, promote or justify racial hatred, xenophobia, antisemitism or other forms of hatred based on intolerance, including: intolerance expressed by aggressive nationalism and ethnocentrism, discrimination and hostility against minorities, migrants and people of immigrant origin.??

The American Bar Association defines hate speech as —speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits.

—The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) (1965), to which 174 states belong, obliges governments to condemn and eliminate racial discrimination by both public institutions and officials and private individuals, guaranteeing to everyone—without distinction as to race, color, or national origin, —the right to security of person and protection by the State against violence or bodily harm.

??Some Key Factors in what is considered —Hate Speech??:

1 — Intent of inciting hatred
2- Incitement (actually causing acts of hatred and violence)
3- Proscribed results: e.g. violence and discrimination
—Statements which are made without an intention to incite others to hatred should not be proscribed as hate speech. To constitute incitement, there must be a close nexus between the??_statement and the risk of harm, for example as evidenced by causality or likely impact. However, specific (and illegal) acts such as discrimination and violence are not the only recognised harms; it is enough if statements incite others to hatred, even if they do not act on it.?? — Toby Mendel, Center for Law and Democracy, Hate Speech Under International Law
http://www.law-democracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/10.02.hate-speech.Macedonia-book.pdf<BR>
Keyword.................I N C I T E M E N T

incite, instigate, abet, foment mean to spur to action. incitestresses a stirring up and urging on, and may or may not imply initiating . instigate definitely implies responsibility for initiating another's action and often connotes underhandedness or evil intention . abet implies both assisting and encouraging. foment implies persistence in goading .


Back to the Dallas/Green Bay game... 😄

Already explained why it isn't propaganda - Check

Already posted the ruling on satire - Check

European Court of Human Rights > Any other forum for European law - Check

The recommendations are talking about hate speech and not satire, when it was already decreed it is satire and it's allowed by law - Check

American Bar Association - LOL. Also check because once again American law does not apply to France.

Mindset of "American law should have a say in this above the supreme european law court" - Check

Talking about apples (hate speech) after we already know they are oranges (satire) - Check

I am right, you are wrong. America knows best and God bless America - Sadly unchecked tonight.

Got nothing for you LIB. Hope you can read the 2 European rulings on satire and maybe get something out of it, like the difference between satire and hate speech or the fact that those rulings > your judgment of what constitues free speech in Europe.

Posted by backtokemet
(being a LIBRA I'm gonna play the devil's advocate)

this is Charlie:

So basically Muslims should be considered to have the same intellectual capacity of a crocodile? And because of that we should all just tiptoe around them? Yeah nice try Leeb, I bet you thought you were really clever there.. 😉

There's a point you're not making with that crocodile analogy* though... many of these poor saps turned fucktards come from war-torn parts of the world, seeking refuge in the free world, they come from war and then bitch that our way of life doesn't suit their sentiments. If it isn't to your liking go back to where you came from & your way of life then. *Don't bite the hand that feeds you.


The ex-Yugoslavs adapted, "where do I sign up to take it up the ass?"

Chinamen have adapted for centuries.

Jews adapt, serve and respect the way of life in whatever country they come to live in.


I find this arrogance completely mind-boggling. It's one thing demanding your rights, it's something else expecting the society to adapt to you, instead of vice versa.

Posted by Damnata
... "If your religion asks for you to kill in the name of God, start by killing yourself"

that'd solve lots of Problem on an international Level.

"Jews adapt, serve and respect the way of life in whatever country they come to live in."


Puleeeeeeez,
The extent of integration Jews in Eruope had (and in the 3rd Reich) was number one in the history of immigrants. Mabye second to the Parses in India.

Butttttttt did that help them?

We are animals. Periode.

We had to fight for women's rights. For worker's pension. For republic instead of monarchy.
Still men are waiting for feminism to be canceled.

We are animals cause we would not give anybody his rights, voluntarily.
Were the first Christians free to have their faith?

We let people work/sweat/bleed to get our respect (well with Pisces/Sag as exception).

We would give nobody a single smile without a reason.

Posted by DwellingOnMove
"Jews adapt, serve and respect the way of life in whatever country they come to live in."


Puleeeeeeez,
The extent of integration Jews in Eruope had (and in the 3rd Reich) was number one in the history of immigrants. Mabye second to the Parses in India.

Butttttttt did that help them?

So if the Jews had resorted to terrorism the outcome would have been different? I really have nada clue what point you're trying to make. You're taking a historical event relevant to a specific time and place, and applying it to the present day.

Posted by backtokemet

actually the crocodile is an analogy for religious fanatics (so-called Islamists in this case) .. I should have explained this sooner but being an optimist I expected your higher intellect to get this 🙂

my point, in a nutshell, is that if you keep taunting the wrong crowd you might get an unpleasant reaction

No shit, Sherlock. I got that, hence my reply to you.

Totally facepalm'ing @ your level of comprehension.

some people argue just for the sake of it.

one has to overlook the Overhead to get the kernel.

often A finds B hypocrite, did not collect facts or is biased etc. B says this to A too.

Posted by LetltB
I. What is —Hate Speech
—[T]he term —hate speech?? shall be understood as covering all
??Some Key Factors in what is considered —Hate Speech??:

1 — Intent of inciting hatred
2- Incitement (actually causing acts of hatred and violence)
3- Proscribed results: e.g. violence and discrimination
—Statements which are made without an intention to incite others to hatred should not be proscribed as hate speech. To constitute incitement, there must be a close nexus between the??_statement and the risk of harm, for example as evidenced by causality or likely impact. However, specific (and illegal) acts such as discrimination and violence are not the only recognised harms; it is enough if statements incite others to hatred, even if they do not act on it.?? — Toby Mendel, Center for Law and Democracy, Hate Speech Under International Law

That law is about "inciting hatred" AGAINST THE OBJECT

of your so called "hate" speech.

OBVIOUSLY that is not what happened.

Posted by DwellingOnMove
We are animals. Periode.

We had to fight for women's rights. For worker's pension. For republic instead of monarchy.
Still men are waiting for feminism to be canceled.

We are animals cause we would not give anybody his rights, voluntarily.
Were the first Christians free to have their faith?

We let people work/sweat/bleed to get our respect (well with Pisces/Sag as exception).

We would give nobody a single smile without a reason.

The only difference is that most people are quite

unaware when they do it.

Sag/Pisces is hyper-aware.

🙂

how ironic that the israeli prime minister was there. This whole thong with well known people makes me uneasy, people die like this all over the world now that it's happenin to euros...

Give me a break..! Even a wooden horse knows that this incident is a work of MOOSAD & co. as to respond to frencheies support for the Palestinian independent state.

Fuck Israhell and their supporters??_

Posted by KVZZMIR11

Posted by Qbone
Give me a break..! Even a wooden horse knows that this incident is a work of MOOSAD & co. as to respond to frencheies support for the Palestinian independent state.

Fuck Israhell and their supporters??_

Inb4 this guy is accused of being antisemitic followed by blocks

click to expand

Block all you can idiot, you can't hide the truth??_

...proud to not support hypocrits! 🙂

*hypocrites

This is the latest Charlie Hebdo, SOLD OUT !
And they were up 5 billions of copies of this newspaper..

Oh, And the title says : " All is forgiven"

Posted by KVZZMIR11

Posted by Qbone

Posted by KVZZMIR11

Posted by Qbone
Give me a break..! Even a wooden horse knows that this incident is a work of MOOSAD & co. as to respond to frencheies support for the Palestinian independent state.

Fuck Israhell and their supporters??_

Inb4 this guy is accused of being antisemitic followed by blocks

Block all you can idiot, you can't hide the truth??_

I'm actually agreeing with you, dumbass!

Truth doesn't matter...

Jews are great schemers, nothing can stop at all, your cynicism only fuels them.

click to expand

You are agreeing with me dumbass..??

Far from it, I am not against the Jews but the fucking Zionist state of the Israhell... That is making differences. Jews suffered by being Jews, put that in your fucking head