Forum menu
jambalaya - Member
As for the Turkish boat thing it got a huge amount of coverage at the time and afterwards and lead to an international investigation at the UN (I recall) where Israel was cleared.
More spin than a roulette wheel!
"Israel's decision to board the vessels with such substantial force at a great distance from the blockade zone and with no final warning immediately prior to the boarding was excessive and unreasonable"
Your comparison with Iran makes no sense
Is this an edit as I missed it
Yes its my comparison rather than your principles that make no sense
My bad.
We fought over hundreds of years to limit the power of religion, and have a secular state, we don't need to return to 1697 because of a minority of deeply insecure religious nut jobs that can't take a joke.
Let's remember that just a few years ago we had a religious minority who were deeply upset by a parody of their prophet that was so offensive that it should be banned
Did we respond to this by self censoring and never saying anything nasty that might upset them in the future, or by telling them to stop being so silly?
Wow so Israel gets to decide what goes to other counties from TurkeyWith respect to Gaza yes.
why? its not their land and neither is the occupied territory...as decreed by the UN.
JY - I think I did edit that line as it didn't make sense when I read it back. Funny how my principals seem to be aligned to UK government policy over the past 20 years, governments of all persuasions Labour, Conservative and coalition ?
If Iran tried to blockade Israel ? Mute point really as it's impossible and Iran knows the response from the US and Israel would be pretty dramatic.
@Lifer I thought that was nothing more than a slap on the wrist and in any case if you have navy ships alongside and helicopters overhead and a deck full of people with iron bars and marbles you are expecting to be boarded. Israel was cleared with respect to shooting those on-board, that was the central charge.
I don't mean to get the thread off-topic although I am probably guilty of that.
why? its not their land and neither is the occupied territory...as decreed by the UN.
Because the government of Gaza has as it's main policy the elimination of the state of Israel. Doing anything else other than tightly managing the borders to prevent the importation of weapons would be naive in the extreme. It wasn't like this when the Israeli's pulled out in 2005, it changed when Hamas was elected in 2006. The Egyptians have now widened the buffer zone to 1km demolishing houses and destroying tunnels, on Al Monitor Hamas were complaining about how much this would limit their ability to smuggle weapons including more sophisticated ones with a token complaint about less food.
Funny how my principals seem to be aligned to UK government policy over the past 20 years, governments of all persuasions Labour, Conservative and coalition ?
Are you claiming they are never wrong? FWIW you are meant to explain how your view is correct not list all the folk who agree with it
If Iran tried to blockade Israel ? Mute point really as it's impossible and Iran knows the response from the US and Israel would be pretty dramatic.
How is that meant to explain the "principle" you apply ? as I said if your views dont stand up to rational analysis change them. You are not even prepared to try.
Your, repeated, side steps of the clear and salient point being made to you tell us all what we already knew. It also shows us that you know it too 😳
Israel was cleared.
nothing more than a slap on the wrist
Which one of these are you claiming happened now ?
It was cleared or it was lightly punished ?
Very brave lady [url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11342699/Newsagent-defies-threats-by-stocking-Charlie-Hebdo-magazine.html ]Local newsgent will stock Charlie Ebdo[/url]
For being able to explain her position or for the position 😉
I agree lets not get sidetracked, no more from me.
A very good explanation of the Charlie Hebdo cartoons
http://www.understandingcharliehebdo.com
(The Castorama one is brilliant)
@ninfan, thanks for sharing that, very interesting and amusing. Most of those cartoons I like most people here will ever have seen before.
I look forward to having a good go through that, thanks Ninfan.
Yup that's an interesting link and I will admit that gives some context that I wasn't aware of. I still think some of those cartoons are very dodgy though, especially the Boko Haram benefits one.
'We published something really racist but it's ok because we're actually taking the piss out of racists' - hmmm...
The one of bullets going through the Koran is pretty dubious too, and not mentioned on that link.
@grum, I think the Boko Haram one is indeed controversial as the captured women where to be sold as sex slaves. As the explanation says its a comment on benefit claimants which itself is interesting as Charlie Ebdo is a very left wing magazine. Most of us have never read the magazine, I used to see it on newsstands in Paris but never thought to buy it before. I think now after the evens in Paris that has changed fundamentally. Even Arnie now has a subscription.
Print run now expected to be 5m, all copies today sold out in minutes.
[url= http://www.mcb.org.uk/defend-beloved-prophet-let-us-exemplify-true-ideals-say-imams/ ]Muslim Council of Britain Responce[/url]
EDIT: To me the bullets/Koran one shows that the terrorists are damaging their own religion, their own Prophet and that the Koran is no protection against evil acts.
Does anyone know where to find comparisons between how many of each religion are in editorial positions in the western media?
i.e. Something along the lines of how many Muslims have a say over what content goes out vs how many Christians, Jews or Zionists?
(I include Zionists separately, since it seems Christians can also be Zionists, as evidenced by David Cameron and Boris Johnson among others)
If you analyse everything Charlie in terms of right and left you won't get very far. As I've already said, whilst broadly centre left Charlie spares no-one. A non-controversial one:
[img] 
[/img]
@jive - you would imagine the representation would reflect society, so with Muslims being in a minority you'd expect the same of broader press ownership in the West. Given the virtually unlimited funds available to Saudis, Emiratees and Qataris they are free to buy whatever they want. Aside from Al Jazeera I would note they seem to be far more interested in airlines and property. I mean for the price of the Shard or the old Chelsea Hospital barracks they could have bought anything they want. The Qataris own PSG, you can buy a lot of French media for the cost of Zlatan's wages.
Curiouser and curiouser.
[i]"Turkish president accuses 'the West' of being behind Charlie Hebdo attacks"[/i]
@digga, nothing curious about Ergodan's rants, see comments earlier in this thread. Also how do you think all these IS fighters are getting into Syria, via unimpeded passage from Turkey who co-incidently have been buying IS oil on the cheap thus funding their operations.
@grum, describing Cameron as a worse threat the press freedom than two guys who murdered journalists just makes their argument look daft. In any case what Snowden did was illegal under UK law so Cameron was just applying the law as any UK Prime Minister would have done.
They might be stretching the point somewhat by including Cameron - however, your favourites the IDF have intentionally targeted and murdered journalists, so the criticism of Netanyahu is extremely pertinent eh?
BTW - here's the French showing their strong commitment to freedom of speech again...
Always found this Guardian article interesting; must have some substance, otherwise doubtless the CIA, FBI, NSA and their legal teams would've done their utmost to have it taken down:
[url= http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/21/government-agents-directly-involved-us-terror-plots-report?CMP=twt_fd&CMP=SOCxx2I2 ]Government Agents Directly involved in most U.S. Terror plots[/url]
"In some cases the FBI may have created terrorists out of law-abiding individuals by suggesting the idea of taking terrorist action or encouraging the target to act," the report alleges.
@grum, indeed the Israelis are down the bottom of a list for press freedom but still above Turkey. I believe some 17 journalists where listed as killed in Gaza, it was a war zone so the Western journalists stayed out of the way in safer areas, none where killed. Wearing a jacket saying Press isn't going to protect you from an airstrike.
That guy DuoDonne is a confirmed anti-Semite, Tweeting his sympathy for the terrorist was a deliberate attempt at provocation and he probably thinks it's good pr to get himself arrested. He is a comedian but is banned for performing and with good reason. He is appealing to a specific target audience which I am sure you can work out. His "salute" is widely understood to be an inverted "zeig-heil" - that's why Annelka was effectively kicked out of the UK and the club sponsor (Zoopla owned by A Jew) withdrew their sponsorship immediately independent of Annelka's fine/ban/transfer.
Must have [s]some[/s] no substance, otherwise doubtless the CIA, FBI, NSA and their legal teams would've done their utmost to have it taken down.
Muslim London coffee shop owner threatened over Je Suis Charlie sign
[url= http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/coffee-shop-boss-faces-death-threat-over-je-suis-charlie-sign-outside-brick-lane-shop-9976546.html ]story link[/url]
Dieudonné isn't banned from performing, he's due to appear at my local Zenith shortly. I hope he gets out of jail in time, he channels some of anti-western sentiment in a non-violent manner. His latest show passed the anti-Semitic test and we'll have to wait and see if a court decides his latest provocation is illegal.
Interesting @Edukator, I had read his show was banned, so he's updated it. Hopefully it will be monitored and recorded for infractions.
In other news the Turkish State News Agency has confirmed all websites showing the front page of Charlie Ebdo will be banned/blocked 😯 Not sure for how long or quite how they will achieve that, incredible this is a country that thought it could join the EU
So much for Turkey being a secular state.
Drac - ModeratorMust have [s]some[/s] no substance, otherwise doubtless the CIA, FBI, NSA and their legal teams would've done their utmost to have it taken down.
Ahem
[url= http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/29/opinion/sunday/terrorist-plots-helped-along-by-the-fbi.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 ]Terrorist plots 'helped' by FBI[/url]
Of the 22 most frightening plans for attacks since 9/11 on American soil, 14 were developed in sting operations.
(I'm not sure how they've quanitified 'fright' though)
BTW - here's the French showing their strong commitment to freedom of speech again...
Racist man that complains about racism get's done for supporting terrorists who took issue with the same issues that allowed racist man to make past racist remarks and get away with it.....what a tragedy....
AhemTerrorist plots 'helped' by FBI
F.B.I working undercover shocker.
I think there's a difference in undercover work against an indentified threat and phising for people who may, given the proper help (in these cases not unsubstantial from the FBI) try to do something.
Better the FBI than actual terrorists though, and I'm not losing any sleep over them.
I read today a thought provoking sentence;
[i]The right to life surpasses all other rights[/i]
One of the best statements I've read on this. Just unfortunate it was buried in an article about Anjem Choudhary saying that selling the comics in Britain is 'an act of war'
[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11342210/UK-shops-to-receive-Charlie-Hebdo-magazine-despite-radical-cleric-calling-it-an-act-of-war.html ]Telegraph[/url]
Sughra Ahmed, president of the Islamic Society of Britain, said freedom needs to be defended "at all costs"."We need to de-escalate the tension around all this. Those Muslims who feel offended may have a right, but in the scheme of things we should be far more offended by injustice, economic exploitation, anti-Semitism, homophobia, murder, etc," she said.
"We are not defending the new cartoon per se, but the 'all is forgiven' sentiment is important and gracious and if many of my work colleagues were shot dead, I would feel defiant and want to fight back, so I understand where this is coming from.
"The people that committed the murders in the name of Mohammed did anything but help his teachings and his cause.
"If we want religion to be taken seriously and treated as a topic of every day conversation, it can't be off limits, it will inevitably be criticised and even ridiculed. We just have to accept that as part of modern day life.
"At a time when Muslims in other parts of the world are struggling for freedom, we should understand better than anyone else the importance of free speech. Freedom is a benefit for all, and we need to defend it at all costs."
Interesting indeed @Lifer. I certainly agree that the murders don't help the teachings of Islam or its cause.
Hollande has confirmed the big aircraft carrier can (will certainly IMO) assist in action against IS. I think this shows how much the attack on France backfires, France is (was ?) one of the most pro Middle East/Arab countries in the EU.
Why would an Israeli official and not a French one be the 1st to release info to the press agencies?
[img] 
:large[/img]
Original tweet [url= https://twitter.com/AP/status/553628903861145601 ]here[/url]
We don't know, why don't you tell us rather than playing bloody guessing games?
jivehoneyjive - because Robert Murdoch had Hollande's phone tapped who in turn had their phone tapped by Mossad who in turn actually run America and the AP?
Joke... or is it... 😉
Free speech Israeli style...
OK jive at what time did the French release the news ? Given the whole incident was the subject of live rolling on site news footage why does it matter or signify anything who was first to tweet the news. Anyway why were you first to circulate a forged BBC page when only the forgers or people close to them would even know it existed.
@ edukator or anyone else French tbh - its a genuine question BTW
Why is fredom of sppech ok for Charile but not for the comedian?
Fromt he outside it strikes me as free to say what you want as long as we agree. Clearly what he says is offnive but so what?
Edukator I assume from your post you dont agree wiht his treatment so not aimed at you / a troll I am genuinely curious as to the thinking here
@ Jam bloody journalist eh getting in thew ay of the Israeli bombs and bullets .You are like one of those spoof twitter accounts from the IDF
Why is fredom of sppech ok for Charile but not for the comedian?
Because the comedian broke the law.
Also there was a certain hilarity to arresting him, as it would appear that he only likes free speech if it's a message that he agrees with - like making potentially anti-Semitic jokes.
OK jive at what time did the French release the news ?
Not sure yet... I'm off out swimming, so if you want to do the research and post it up, it'd be much appreciated
Anyway why were you first to circulate a forged BBC page when only the forgers or people close to them would even know it existed.
I wasn't... I was the 1st on the forum of course, but there's a big old world out there beyond the forum~ like much of the latest info in developing situations, twitter is where I got the link.
That BBC link was indeed a dud, but [url= https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2015/01/12/charlie-hebdo-attacks-not-so-much-a-false-flag-as-a-free-hand/ ]this:[/url]
[b]Doubt 1: The security cop who killed himself[/b]The Charlie attack began around 11.30 am (CET) on 7 January 2015
Immediately, a specialist cop with relevant experience – Helric Fredou – was assigned to the case. He had been an anti-terrorist Special Branch (SRPJ) police officer since 2011.
He worked all day assessing film, recordings, identity details. He stopped for neither lunch nor dinner, but (I’m told) did phone one family member and “express concerns” about some of the stuff he’d seen. Just after 1 am the next morning, he died from a bullet wound to the head. He had “a history of depression” the authorities quickly established. The verdict was suicide.
Just two months earlier, he’d found an immediate colleague dead in similar circumstances.The verdict was suicide.
[b]Doubt 2: The missing frames from the France 24 video of cop being ‘killed’[/b]
This clip of film was clumsily edited before publication. The missing bit in slowmo and close-up looks to me conclusive: the killer who ‘finishes off’ officer Ahmed Merabet with an AK47 from close range misses the cop, the bullet ricochets off the pavement. From that range, a successful shot to the head would’ve blown Merabet’s brains up and down the street. There is no sign of any such effect.
We’ve been told Ahmed Merabet died from that shot. He didn’t. Do we have a body? Will there be an autopsy?
[b]Doubt 3: Flak jackets on the roof.[/b]
One Paris contact says some of this film too has been edited since the incident. This person (and others on French blogs) claim they can clearly discern flak jackets on some of the observers.
That too suggests pre-warning of the attack.
[b]Doubt 4: Establishment of terrorist identity[/b]
Although I’ve tried already to establish that the two perpetrators were near brain-extinct, not even a martyr with an IQ in single figures would leave his identity card in the getaway car for the cops to find: frankly, anyone with an ounce of sense would leave all IDs at home (or destroy them) and rip all tabs out of their clothing.
[b]Doubt 5: They were already under surveillance[/b]
At the risk of pressing a tad too hard on the sarcasm pedal, having terrorists under surveillance kind of loses its attraction as a policy if they’re still free – in broad daylight, in the capital city – to mosey on downtown to the offices of the most offensive BD-mag in France, don face balaclavas, enter the wrong address, take a hostage – and then gain effortless access to the building.
There are only two conclusions possible here: either the French security services are at a level in the basement below ‘useless’, or they turned a blind eye. For reasons that both precede and follow, I favour the latter.
[b]Doubt 6: No idea of the address, but fully briefed on it being weekly editorial meeting from 11am onwards[/b]
Turning this same coin over, we are being asked to believe that two slogan-screaming idiots (who didn’t even case the joint before driving there) nevertheless had an espionage network capable of discovering the exact time of Charlie Hebdo’s weekly editorial meeting….but not which floor it took place on.
I think there’s a very good chance they were helped on the timing information.
[b]
Doubt 7: Mass rally of world ‘leaders’ in three days flat[/b]It’s obvious to most people (with the probable exception of Con Coughlin) that the Hypocrisy Happening in Paris at the weekend was – given the nature of censorship applied by these sociopaths across the planet these days – likely to result in a rush on anti-seasickness pills, what’s less obvious is how Hollande managed to round up almost every Swinging Dick on Earth to turn up that quickly.
The whole event seemed to me carefully orchestrated.
[url= http://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/police-officer-in-charlie-hebdo-investigation-shot-himself-dead-hours-after-the-attack-9972994.html ]
The Policeman investigating's death[/url]
[url= https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJEvlKKm6og ]The footage of the shooting[/url]
And the prior performance of the intelligence services, be it:
the [url=www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/21/government-agents-directly-involved-us-terror-plots-report?CMP=twt_fd&CMP=SOCxx2I2]Guardian article already mentioned regarding how Goverment agents often recruit patsies to carry out terror attacks[/url]
Or the vast network behind [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio ]Operation Gladio[/url]
All raise legitimate questions...
In France there's a word "apologie" which doesn't mean apology it means excusing/justifying/supporting. So "apologie de crime de guerre" doesn't mean you feel sorry but that you speak out in favour of the war crimes. It's illegal in France in a number of contexts including apologie de crime antisémite et du terrorisme. A court will have to decide if Dieudonné's support for the guy who killed the Jews constitutes such a crime.
My personal view is that Dieudonné gave his support to or stated that he identified with the killer, but without reference to his crimes. Unless he went further than the Je Suis... I saw. A court will decide.
As in "apologist" I guess?