Charlie Hebdo Attacks Strengthen European Anti-Immigration Parties

[georgephillip]

What you are doing is excusing violent murder, suggesting these attackers had no agency, and blaming the victims. You are a deeply immoral person, the kind of person that allows evil to exist unabated.

I'm excusing nothing, including the racist Jews and Americans responsible for the murder, maiming, incarceration, and displacement of millions of innocent Muslim civilians over the past half century. You apparently aren't willing to discuss why they hate us; I'm not.

 

[Steinlight]

What you are doing is excusing violent murder, suggesting these attackers had no agency, and blaming the victims. You are a deeply immoral person, the kind of person that allows evil to exist unabated.

I'm excusing nothing, including the racist Jews and Americans responsible for the murder, maiming, incarceration, and displacement of millions of innocent Muslim civilians over the past half century. You apparently aren't willing to discuss why they hate us; I'm not.

I am actually opposed the Iraq War. But to excuse this evil, to justify it in the context murdering French journalists in the context of the Iraq War is not only absurd, it is immoral. It is also odd, considering the terrorists made their reasons clear, it was blasphemy killing for their prophet. yet you continually excuse them and alleviate their responsibility for their actions. And to attack the victims of irrational hate as "racist" compounds your immorality. Thankfully, the fringe left position you hold is being discredited by the minute, as we speak, with absurd posts like yours.

 

[georgephillip]

But to excuse this evil, to justify it in the context murdering French journalists in the context of the Iraq War is not only absurd, it is immoral

I'm not justifying or excusing the murder of innocent cartoonists or Muslim civilians, but I can see why some Muslims might believe revenge on innocent westerners is warranted even if I don't. Those re$ponsible for inflicting a war of terror on Islam are responsible for dead innocent$ on both sides.

 

[Steinlight]

But to excuse this evil, to justify it in the context murdering French journalists in the context of the Iraq War is not only absurd, it is immoral

I'm not justifying or excusing the murder of innocent cartoonists or Muslim civilians, but I can see why some Muslims might believe revenge on innocent westerners is warranted even if I don't. Those re$ponsible for inflicting a war of terror on Islam are responsible for dead innocent$ on both sides.

Yes you are, you are rationalizing and justifying an evil and irrational act. Explain how opposing the American invasion of Iraq warrants killing French journalists and jewish market goers. You made the claim that is why they did this, and not because of the reasons they stated(the cartoon).

 

[rhodescholar]

So US Soldiers torturing Iraqis at Abu Gharib caused these terrorists to kill French satirists who drew some cartoons of Muhammad? Got to love the logic of the Left and Libertarians on this one.

The idiots like that will in one post claim that to be the case, then when confronted will claim otherwise, they lack the brainpower to be able to defend themselves - all they have is an anti US/anti-West agenda to spew.

 

[georgephillip]

Yes you are, you are rationalizing and justifying an evil and irrational act

No.
I'm not.
I'm condemning the murders of 12 cartoonists in Paris, AND the mass murder of millions of innocent Muslims by western colonial interests, AND I'm claiming the former was inspired by the latter.

"We should treat people like the Charlie Hebdo attackers as what they are: monsters who kill both for the simple sake of killing and to provoke exactly the sort of religious conflict that mosque-attackers are indulging. And we should treat Muslims as what they are: normal people who of course reject terrorism, rather than as a lesser form of humanity that is expected to denounce violence every time it happens."
Stop asking Muslims to condemn terrorism. It x27 s bigoted and Islamophobic. - Vox

 

[Steinlight]

Yes you are, you are rationalizing and justifying an evil and irrational act

No.
I'm not.
I'm condemning the murders of 12 cartoonists in Paris, AND the mass murder of millions of innocent Muslims by western colonial interests, AND I'm claiming the former was inspired by the latter.

"We should treat people like the Charlie Hebdo attackers as what they are: monsters who kill both for the simple sake of killing and to provoke exactly the sort of religious conflict that mosque-attackers are indulging. And we should treat Muslims as what they are: normal people who of course reject terrorism, rather than as a lesser form of humanity that is expected to denounce violence every time it happens."
Stop asking Muslims to condemn terrorism. It x27 s bigoted and Islamophobic. - Vox

Those cartoonists didn't murder anyone. France has opened its doors to Muslims, particularly Algerians, giving them job opportunities, welfare, affirmative action, "hate crime" and "hate speech" protections, allowed them to bring their families, and fully practice their faith. So to suggest the French have been anything other than open, generous, and tolerant towards Muslim immigrants is a vicious lie.

To frame this as retribution for Iraq is inaccurate and factually wrong as they very clearly listed their motive for the murder, which was to slaughter those who dishonor Muhammad, they said nothing about Iraq. To justify this act as retribution for Iraq is insane and immoral. France had nothing to do with Iraq, these journalists opposed the war. So again, your claim make no sense. You are excusing their behavior and giving justification to their terrorist attack.

Also to suggest these people will stop killing cartoonists if "We" leave Iraq(France was never there and the US has left) is suicidal and ignores the violent tendencies of Islam inherent the the religion. The only way to confront this problem is to stop Muslim immigration and begin at the very least to deport illegals and asylum seekers of Muslim background.

 

[georgephillip]

Those cartoonists didn't murder anyone. France has opened its doors to Muslims, particularly Algerians, giving them job opportunities, welfare, affirmative action, "hate crime" and "hate speech" protections, allowed them to bring their families, and fully practice their faith. So to suggest the French have been anything other than open, generous, and tolerant towards Muslim immigrants is a vicious lie

In fact, French colonialism in places like Algeria and Vietnam was among the most brutal of all European crimes against humanity. In Algeria the French ruled for 130 years, and Muslim independence came at a price of over a million lives. France has long and ignominious history of racial intolerance that Charlie Hebdo helped keep alive. While most French Muslims tolerated the racist insults, a few on the violent fringe did not. Cherif and Said Kouachi were long haired pot smokers with few thoughts of things political until the greatest purveyor of violence in the world brought torture and terror to Iraq on a scale Saddam Hussein could not even imagine. Possibly, you're in denial about the mechanics of blow back. If so, you really should acquaint yourself with the topic before it shows up on your doorstep.

 

[georgephillip]

Watch Christopher Hitchens get waterboarded:

 

[Steinlight]

Those cartoonists didn't murder anyone. France has opened its doors to Muslims, particularly Algerians, giving them job opportunities, welfare, affirmative action, "hate crime" and "hate speech" protections, allowed them to bring their families, and fully practice their faith. So to suggest the French have been anything other than open, generous, and tolerant towards Muslim immigrants is a vicious lie

In fact, French colonialism in places like Algeria and Vietnam was among the most brutal of all European crimes against humanity. In Algeria the French ruled for 130 years, and Muslim independence came at a price of over a million lives. France has long and ignominious history of racial intolerance that Charlie Hebdo helped keep alive. While most French Muslims tolerated the racist insults, a few on the violent fringe did not. Cherif and Said Kouachi were long haired pot smokers with few thoughts of things political until the greatest purveyor of violence in the world brought torture and terror to Iraq on a scale Saddam Hussein could not even imagine. Possibly, you're in denial about the mechanics of blow back. If so, you really should acquaint yourself with the topic before it shows up on your doorstep.

Also the idea that they were pot smoking losers until Abu Gharib, when they became radicalized terrorists willing to kill innocent civilians is so absurd it doesn't merit a response. But I will respond anyway. Does anyone with common sense truly believe this, that non-religious pot smoking Algerians become Islamic terrorists and attack a country that has given them every leg up, a country that opposed the Iraq War, because some US soldiers tortured Iraqis? This makes no sense and excuses and rationalizes an evil and irrational act. They were driven to terrorism by radical clerics in muslim ghettos who were allowed to fester in France because of a policy of mass immigration and multiculturalism. Everyone seems to get this except for muddle headed idiots like you.

Also, the idea that Charlie Hebdo is "racist", is absurd. Islam is not a race. Charlie Hebdo criticized all faiths, particularly Catholics with much venom. Though no terrorists attacks from Catholics, imagine that. They also attacked the so called "racist" Front National as "racists". So to claim these communist, secular, anti-racists perpetuate racism, much less that violence is somehow a legitimate reaction to their work and that their attackers are somehow victims is incorrect and immoral.

 

[Steinlight]

Watch Christopher Hitchens get waterboarded:

So waterboarding justifies murdering journalists? Is this the new line now that your bogus Iraq War one failed?

 

[georgephillip]

Those cartoonists didn't murder anyone. France has opened its doors to Muslims, particularly Algerians, giving them job opportunities, welfare, affirmative action, "hate crime" and "hate speech" protections, allowed them to bring their families, and fully practice their faith. So to suggest the French have been anything other than open, generous, and tolerant towards Muslim immigrants is a vicious lie

In fact, French colonialism in places like Algeria and Vietnam was among the most brutal of all European crimes against humanity. In Algeria the French ruled for 130 years, and Muslim independence came at a price of over a million lives. France has long and ignominious history of racial intolerance that Charlie Hebdo helped keep alive. While most French Muslims tolerated the racist insults, a few on the violent fringe did not. Cherif and Said Kouachi were long haired pot smokers with few thoughts of things political until the greatest purveyor of violence in the world brought torture and terror to Iraq on a scale Saddam Hussein could not even imagine. Possibly, you're in denial about the mechanics of blow back. If so, you really should acquaint yourself with the topic before it shows up on your doorstep.

Also the idea that they were pot smoking losers until Abu Gharib, when they became radicalized terrorists willing to kill innocent civilians is so absurd it doesn't merit a response. But I will respond anyway. Does anyone with common sense truly believe this, that non-religious pot smoking Algerians become Islamic terrorists and attack a country that has given them every leg up, a country that opposed the Iraq War, because some US soldiers tortured Iraqis? This makes no sense and excuses and rationalizes an evil and irrational act. They were driven to terrorism by radical clerics in muslim ghettos who were allowed to fester in France because of a policy of mass immigration and multiculturalism. Everyone seems to get this except for muddle headed idiots like you.

Also, the idea that Charlie Hebdo is "racist", is absurd. Islam is not a race. Charlie Hebdo criticized all faiths, particularly Catholics with much venom. Though no terrorists attacks from Catholics, imagine that. They also attacked the so called "racist" Front National as "racists". So to claim these communist, secular, anti-racists perpetuate racism, much less that violence is somehow a legitimate reaction to their work and that their attackers are somehow victims is incorrect and immoral.

France is reaping the Terror it has sown:
"The Terror started by the 1789 Revolution led to tens of thousands of deaths, with many of its victims guillotined in front of vengeful crowds. Savage mass murders continued on squares and boulevards throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, through the Commune and two world wars, the second of which saw tens of thousands of Jews persecuted before being sent to their deaths in concentration camps.

"Postwar, many of the Gestapo-trained gendarmes involved in the those atrocities showed a fresh brutality to Algerians displaced by their own nation’s fight for independence from France.

"The three French-Algerian men believed responsible for the 12 deaths in Paris on Wednesday would have been steeped in a recent history of this conflict which, in the 1960s, was exported from the battlefields of Algeria to Paris itself.

"During one notorious atrocity in 1961, up to 200 Algerians were slaughtered around national monuments, including the Eiffel Tower and Notre Dame cathedral.

"Many were tossed into the Seine from some of the most beautiful bridges in the world and left to drown."

Charlie Hebdo Don t blame this bloodshed on France s Muslims Nabila Ramdani Comment is free The Guardian

 

[georgephillip]

So waterboarding justifies murdering journalists? Is this the new line now that your bogus Iraq War one failed?

So much of this discussion seems to go over your head; Christopher Hitchens lost all credibility after 911 when he sided with Dick and Dubya and turned on Chomsky. Why would you think his opinion on Islam is worth listening to?

 

[Steinlight]

So waterboarding justifies murdering journalists? Is this the new line now that your bogus Iraq War one failed?

So much of this discussion seems to go over your head; Christopher Hitchens lost all credibility after 911 when he sided with Dick and Dubya and turned on Chomsky. Why would you think his opinion on Islam is worth listening to?

I didn't say I agree with Hitchens on everything, much less his opinion on the Iraq War. However, the video offers a succinct deconstruction of the bogus theory that Islamic terrorism is but a reaction to US intervention around the world, or is in anyway legitimate or justified because they are somehow victims, is absurd, and is suicidal to western society. That there would be no terrorism against the Western World, the non-Islamic world, and secular muslims as well if not for American foreign policy.

You have no credibility in saying who is worth listening to on any topic, much less the topic of Islamic Terrorism. You are the fool that suggested the terrorists murdered these journalists because of the torture at Abu Gharib.

Ironically, for someone who is very clearly blindly anti-American, it is ironic you have such an "amero-centric" view of the world. Pushing the idea these islamic terrorists have no agency, that they are victims of american foreign policy, and that american intervention abroad is to blame for these heinous acts, not the radical ideology of these monstrous people.

 

[georgephillip]

So waterboarding justifies murdering journalists? Is this the new line now that your bogus Iraq War one failed?

So much of this discussion seems to go over your head; Christopher Hitchens lost all credibility after 911 when he sided with Dick and Dubya and turned on Chomsky. Why would you think his opinion on Islam is worth listening to?

I didn't say I agree with Hitchens on everything, much less his opinion on the Iraq War. However, the video offers a succinct deconstruction of the bogus theory that Islamic terrorism is but a reaction to US intervention around the world, or is in anyway legitimate or justified because they are somehow victims, is absurd, and is suicidal to western society. That there would be no terrorism against the Western World, the non-Islamic world, and secular muslims as well if not for American foreign policy.

You have no credibility in saying who is worth listening to on any topic, much less the topic of Islamic Terrorism. You are the fool that suggested the terrorists murdered these journalists because of the torture at Abu Gharib.

Ironically, for someone who is very clearly blindly anti-American, it is ironic you have such an "amero-centric" view of the world. Pushing the idea these islamic terrorists have no agency, that they are victims of american foreign policy, and that american intervention abroad is to blame for these heinous acts, not the radical ideology of these monstrous people.

Are you ignorant of the fact the US has supported extremist Muslim groups over the past forty years including, but not limited to, the Taliban, al-Qaida, and IS? Why do you suppose the US government has chosen to do that, because it loves French cartoonists more than murdered childen?

 

[Steinlight]

So waterboarding justifies murdering journalists? Is this the new line now that your bogus Iraq War one failed?

So much of this discussion seems to go over your head; Christopher Hitchens lost all credibility after 911 when he sided with Dick and Dubya and turned on Chomsky. Why would you think his opinion on Islam is worth listening to?

I didn't say I agree with Hitchens on everything, much less his opinion on the Iraq War. However, the video offers a succinct deconstruction of the bogus theory that Islamic terrorism is but a reaction to US intervention around the world, or is in anyway legitimate or justified because they are somehow victims, is absurd, and is suicidal to western society. That there would be no terrorism against the Western World, the non-Islamic world, and secular muslims as well if not for American foreign policy.

You have no credibility in saying who is worth listening to on any topic, much less the topic of Islamic Terrorism. You are the fool that suggested the terrorists murdered these journalists because of the torture at Abu Gharib.

Ironically, for someone who is very clearly blindly anti-American, it is ironic you have such an "amero-centric" view of the world. Pushing the idea these islamic terrorists have no agency, that they are victims of american foreign policy, and that american intervention abroad is to blame for these heinous acts, not the radical ideology of these monstrous people.

Are you ignorant of the fact the US has supported extremist Muslim groups over the past forty years including, but not limited to, the Taliban, al-Qaida, and IS? Why do you suppose the US government has chosen to do that, because it loves French cartoonists more than murdered childen?

See, this proves my point even more. The US is stupidly backing groups that are allied with ISIS against Assad. These terrorists fought with ISIS in Syria and could have very well done so indirectly with American weapons. So this idea, that the islamic terrorists here are victims of America, when they take their weapons(indirectly), and because they are "victims" of the US, attack left wing anti-racist french journalists, is an insane conspiracy theory.

Have you ever heard of the principle of Occam's razor? It would serve you well here. The idea is that the simplest explanation is true. These guys were inspired by radical islamism and killed these journalists for blaspheming the prophet, and they said that much.

 

[Ernie S.]

The Press is beginning to turn.

 

[bripat9643]

So waterboarding justifies murdering journalists? Is this the new line now that your bogus Iraq War one failed?

So much of this discussion seems to go over your head; Christopher Hitchens lost all credibility after 911 when he sided with Dick and Dubya and turned on Chomsky. Why would you think his opinion on Islam is worth listening to?

You have it precisely backwards. Christopher Hitchens gained credibility when he sided with Republicans. Chomksy is Maoist. Anyone who defends his swill is a scumbag of the first water.

 

[I.P.Freely]

Yes, Marine Le Pen is inserting herself into this Hebdo affair. She's trying to convince the world that she's not her Nazi father, and she's immediately called for a return to capital punishment. She's complaining about not being invited to the parade on Sunday.

And now for the truth...... Marine Le Pen s party barred from national unity rally Blazing Cat Fur
Marine Le Pen’s party barred from national unity rally

Despite the French president calling for “unity” in the light of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, an almighty row broke out on Thursday after the National Front were not invited to Sunday’s Republican rally.

France’s politicians were not able to show their new found unity for long.

What also exposes the shallowness of the liberals in France is they are now barring the National Front from the National Unity Rally this Sunday. This exposes that they don't care about national unity, and the fact they won't identify the root of the problem shows they don't care about national security. All they are trying to do is stick to "the narrative" and gain back control of the political conversation that they so drastically loss after this attack. Since facts fly so in the face of their multicultural and egalitarian agenda. Everything with them is a political calculation. It is fake and manufactured and real people aren't buying into this decrepit system anymore.

Well Steinkamf its being reported over here that Netanyahu would have refused to turn up if Le Pen and her gang of anti-Semites had been allowed to march.
Ps Have you seen the news reports of 3 million marching for solidarity between human beings, Jews, Muslims, Christians, Atheists, Netanyahu and Abbas united in their hatred of terrorism?
Steinlight
Manonthestreet what do you do for a living?

 

[Steinlight]

Yes, Marine Le Pen is inserting herself into this Hebdo affair. She's trying to convince the world that she's not her Nazi father, and she's immediately called for a return to capital punishment. She's complaining about not being invited to the parade on Sunday.

And now for the truth...... Marine Le Pen s party barred from national unity rally Blazing Cat Fur
Marine Le Pen’s party barred from national unity rally

Despite the French president calling for “unity” in the light of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, an almighty row broke out on Thursday after the National Front were not invited to Sunday’s Republican rally.

France’s politicians were not able to show their new found unity for long.

What also exposes the shallowness of the liberals in France is they are now barring the National Front from the National Unity Rally this Sunday. This exposes that they don't care about national unity, and the fact they won't identify the root of the problem shows they don't care about national security. All they are trying to do is stick to "the narrative" and gain back control of the political conversation that they so drastically loss after this attack. Since facts fly so in the face of their multicultural and egalitarian agenda. Everything with them is a political calculation. It is fake and manufactured and real people aren't buying into this decrepit system anymore.

Well Steinkamf its being reported over here that Netanyahu would have refused to turn up if Le Pen and her gang of anti-Semites had been allowed to march.
Ps Have you seen the news reports of 3 million marching for solidarity between human beings, Jews, Muslims, Christians, Atheists, Netanyahu and Abbas united in their hatred of terrorism?
Steinlight
Manonthestreet what do you do for a living?

Where is it reported that Netanyahu wouldn't attend unless Le Pen was banned?

If that is the case, it is rather worrisome that a foreign leader is able to dictate internal French policy and discourage national unity by saying the third party in France, and the largest among the French EU Parliament contingent is not allowed.

I highly doubt this is the case.

I am of course aware of the rallies, what is your point?